Are the M8 in-camera profiles better than those of C1?

[Alberti]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Are the M8 in-camera profiles better than those of C1?

I think so. The new AWB certainly gives a good portrait in a directly generated JPG in the M8, while the file opened in C1 gets the colors all over the place.

The two pictures I add show that the color of the second, C1 processed picture, just shows too much artificial light. In C1, the colors tend to be over-emphasized. I have also noted that a photo taken in the Leica has another color temperature than one selected in C1 (take daylight).

What is your opinion?

The following remark triggered me to pose this question. The “shmalzy colors in C1” as Hel-Stampes says http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/764199-post25.html

 

While Leica progressed very much in color rendering in complex and mixed situations, Phase One looks like a laggard.

 

Being nasty: Is it time Leica comes out with an own PP RAW developer? Often we don’t need the sharpening anyway. I also read in the article on the S2 shooting session in LFI 1/2009 that Grischek used Aperture and not C1 – ‘the profiles didn’t exist yet’; and with that large sensor he doesn’t need that extra sharpness C1 brings.

 

alberti

[ammitsboel]

IMO several cameras shows a good starting point with their in camera processing.

This is by looking at the files directly from the DMR, M8 and 5D and through C1, Flexcolor, Phocus, ACR, LR, Raw Developer, Aperture and various DCRAW solutions including script only versions.

 

The "default" in each RAW software might look worse when compared to the file directly from the camera and one needs to spend some time to figure out something that really works. But in return you get more control in the RAW software and the resolution is often better in the RAW software though. Maybe we have come to expect that the images will automaticly get better by using RAW software, while this is certainly not the case?

 

So you win some and loose some... hehe

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[Alberti]

IMO several cameras shows a good starting point with their in camera processing.

This is by looking at the files directly from the DMR, M8 and 5D and through C1, Flexcolor, Phocus, ACR, LR, Raw Developer, Aperture and various DCRAW solutions including script only versions.

 

The "default" in each RAW software might look worse when compared to the file directly from the camera and one needs to spend some time to figure out something that really works. But in return you get more control in the RAW software and the resolution is often better in the RAW software though. Maybe we have come to expect that the images will automaticly get better by using RAW software, while this is certainly not the case?

 

So you win some and loose some... hehe

True, in a sense. differences exist. To be exploited.

 

But still I have seen often big differneces between M8 direct and C1 postprocessed. Mostly I opt for the more lively ones of C1 (I ask my wife as judge).

But in fact it is less neutral on more than one occasion.

That makes me a bit angry. Why can't C1 first of all stick to the M8 native registration?

Maybe this question should be put on the Phase One site

 

Anyway, Grischek mentions in his processing S2 and his using Aperture (with the benefit that this now reveals the original colorspace (!!!).

alberti