Jamie Roberts Posted January 16, 2009 Share #41 Posted January 16, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) Here are some sample processed using various profiles and one using C1-4. All settings other than profiles were left at default. {snipped} John, the problem with leaving the settings at default is that the shot is underexposed, and colour will shift with exposure. As it is, in the C1 shot for example, there's just way too much cyan in the skin due to the exposure, so the person looks a bit, um, cyanotic The others aren't much better for overall skin tone. You don't need a RAW file to fix any of them either; you can do it in PS, but it's faster if you do it in the converter. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 16, 2009 Posted January 16, 2009 Hi Jamie Roberts, Take a look here Ok I am getting a little frustrated!. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
barjohn Posted January 16, 2009 Share #42 Posted January 16, 2009 Well, that C1 image was done with C! 4.6 so I'm not sure I can agree with you. I will acknowledge that at times C1 produces the better image. For some reason it doesn't with this one. But that is too much of a PITA to have to do with every shot. First try in C1, then LR or some other developer. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie Roberts Posted January 16, 2009 Share #43 Posted January 16, 2009 Well, that C1 image was done with C! 4.6 so I'm not sure I can agree with you. I will acknowledge that at times C1 produces the better image. For some reason it doesn't with this one. But that is too much of a PITA to have to do with every shot. First try in C1, then LR or some other developer. My point is that none of them are good as far as skin goes. You need to get the exposure right in the camera--or adjust it in post. I'm not denying that as you've posted it out of C1 it looks bad. It does If you want to post the raw I'll be happy to show you what I mean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
barjohn Posted January 16, 2009 Share #44 Posted January 16, 2009 Jamie, I know that you are very knowledgeable on color profiles but what you are saying doesn't make sense to me. Here are the original full image first no tweaks ACR 3.6, then + .5EV ACR 3.6, then +1 EV ACR 3.6, then +1 EV and Camera Std and C! 4.6 with + 1EV. Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/74206-ok-i-am-getting-a-little-frustrated/?do=findComment&comment=779528'>More sharing options...
doug_m Posted January 16, 2009 Share #45 Posted January 16, 2009 I'm not a professional but here is an example of what I believe are good skin tones taken with the M8 and 50 Lux ASPH. And I am hardly an expert at digital processing. This is my 2 1/2 y/o granddaughter taken at F1.4 and ISO 160 with window light only. If I can take and process this photo the OP, who does great pro work, should not be having the problems he describes. I still wonder if there something basic wrong with his camera or settings. Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/74206-ok-i-am-getting-a-little-frustrated/?do=findComment&comment=779533'>More sharing options...
doug_m Posted January 16, 2009 Share #46 Posted January 16, 2009 Oops, I meant to post this one as my example as I forgot the sRGB application in the prior post. Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/74206-ok-i-am-getting-a-little-frustrated/?do=findComment&comment=779539'>More sharing options...
AlanG Posted January 16, 2009 Share #47 Posted January 16, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) Barjohn, this image is just flat. Exposure is OK. The white point and black point need to be moved in on the Levels. I try to look at the levels on every image I adjust - as your eyes can get accommodated to flat images. But there is a magenta twinge under the eyes, on the lips and in the cheeks that seems kind of off. You'd probably need to make a RAW profile to compensate for that as it is tricky to do at this point. But that may open another can of worms. This may be what Charles is seeing too. Here is your ACR 3.6 image that I adjusted along with the original. I am not at my office, so I am not working on a color calibrated system. Thus I'd be hesitant to really commit to the color. But I think you see what is going on. Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/74206-ok-i-am-getting-a-little-frustrated/?do=findComment&comment=779541'>More sharing options...
barjohn Posted January 16, 2009 Share #48 Posted January 16, 2009 I appreciate the try Alan but none of them look right to me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted January 16, 2009 Share #49 Posted January 16, 2009 I appreciate the try Alan but none of them look right to me. I didn't think it looked right either, just better. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mweiner Posted January 16, 2009 Share #50 Posted January 16, 2009 Jamie, when you use C1 for skin tones, what camera profile(s) do you use. I am still using your JHR_v1.icm and JHR_v1_low_sat.icm which you so kindly made available long ago -- even before the UV-IR filters were available I like the results I get from these, but I'm still hoping for the post UV-IR filter versions you were trying to find time to do -- or whatever you'd recommend. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie Roberts Posted January 16, 2009 Share #51 Posted January 16, 2009 Jamie, when you use C1 for skin tones, what camera profile(s) do you use. I am still using your JHR_v1.icm and JHR_v1_low_sat.icm which you so kindly made available long ago -- even before the UV-IR filters were available I like the results I get from these, but I'm still hoping for the post UV-IR filter versions you were trying to find time to do -- or whatever you'd recommend. Well to tell you the truth with the IR filters in place I use the C1 IR filter profile (I wonder if that's what's going on with the OP?)--not the generic one! I've been working on new profile tweaks, which I wanted to do when C1 Pro came out, but everytime lately I get them ready C1 releases a new version and I need to do it again --or at least test again. @ John--exposure and contrast affect colour as much as innate colorimetric interpretation of the sensor from the RAW converter (or editor). So when you underexpose or when the lighting is flat (Allen's points are well-taken) you also affect the colour. Now--skin tones are tricky and I'm not going to get into a whole lesson on them here, but suffice to say that to get great skin you need great light--not many digicams deliver good colour on skin in crappy light (and film was more or less the same or, arguably, more finicky, hence light control=colour control on film in a lot of ways). I'll post a tweak of your C1 JPEG, but it would be much better to get your RAW file. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Luis D Posted January 16, 2009 Share #52 Posted January 16, 2009 Well thank you everybody! Sorry there seems to be some question of me being a 'troll' or that somehow I am not the 'real' Charles Ommanney (very lame for a serious forum) If you knew more about this forum you will say very tame, not lame However, you come new here saying Just over a month ago I bought a new M8.2 for behind the scenes work coming up next week with Barack Obama. Well I have just about tried everything I can to get a good file out of this camera! Even bought a brand new 28 and a Leica IR/Cut filter and still the color has this AWFUL magenta cast - people faces look PURPLE! but you do not show any example of this problem. Surely as a pro of your claim you must know how to adjust colour balance in post as good or better than anybody of us here, then save as new default. You do not say the skins are bad in one kind of light and how can be skintones purple in all kinds of light? Maybe you have a defective camera, nobody has suggest that yet. I think if faces are purple in every shot, and you have the filters and all proper settings, and you tried different developers/profiles, then what is left is your M8 is malfunctioned. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie Roberts Posted January 16, 2009 Share #53 Posted January 16, 2009 {Snipped}Surely as a pro of your claim you must know how to adjust colour balance in post as good or better than anybody of us here, then save as new default. You do not say the skins are bad in one kind of light and how can be skintones purple in all kinds of light? Maybe you have a defective camera, nobody has suggest that yet. I think if faces are purple in every shot, and you have the filters and all proper settings, and you tried different developers/profiles, then what is left is your M8 is malfunctioned. Luis--I think what you are trying to say is that if, as a seasoned pro, the OP has adjusted everything he can think of, and the results are still not good, then the M8 must be defective. That could be true in this case. However, in my own experience, every time I switch digicam brands I need about 6 months to really see what it can do, and how it performs in different contexts. And colour on CCD cameras is, in general, pretty different from CMOS cameras, because, again, contrast tends to shift colour. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
barjohn Posted January 16, 2009 Share #54 Posted January 16, 2009 Jamie, Is contrast actually shifting the color, i.e. changing its frequency, sort of a frequency shift or just our perception of the color as darker colors have more black added in and light areas more white. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hans Roggen Posted January 16, 2009 Share #55 Posted January 16, 2009 Hi Charles, I've been struggeling to the point of getting frustrated with the M8 reds in the beginning. I made my own custom settings in ACR and since then lips and skin look natural again. Now it's just a matter of applying a preset in the ACR menu. I'd be happy to mail them to you if you send me a message here or through my website. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie Roberts Posted January 16, 2009 Share #56 Posted January 16, 2009 @ John--contrast actually affects a colour's saturation, so yes--it appears lighter or darker but that also shifts the hue of things. Typically, in digicams, when you expose to hold highlights (when they're important that is) you end up with caucasian skin sitting between the mid-to-lower quartertone region and looking way too magenta and cyan. Coupled with the inherent linearity of digital, when you correct for bad light quality or colour, you blow the highlights on the skin before acheiving the luminosity you need. It's very difficult, which is why so many photographers still use studio light or add light to a situation they can control (it's why I use bounced flash more than one might think, for example). Film did not have / does not have these same characteritics, though of course it's even more critical to match the colour temperature for skin tones. And even on film, exposure affects contrast / saturation which affects colour. @ Hans--I'll send you a msg but it's interesting to see that you "cracked" LR for reds Occasionally I'm somewhere where all they have is PS or LightRoom Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Luis D Posted January 16, 2009 Share #57 Posted January 16, 2009 Luis--I think what you are trying to say is that if, as a seasoned pro, the OP has adjusted everything he can think of, and the results are still not good, then the M8 must be defective. That could be true in this case. However, in my own experience, every time I switch digicam brands I need about 6 months to really see what it can do, and how it performs in different contexts. And colour on CCD cameras is, in general, pretty different from CMOS cameras, because, again, contrast tends to shift colour. I believe you are speaking of colour cast and finetuning skin tone, but the OP has called skin tones "PURPLE". That suggests it is more than typical between one and another brand or CCD and CMOS. Again, if he only would put up a couple of DNGs we could see better what he means, and maybe someone like you could actually help him out. It is odd that in his magazine there is no expert who can help too. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie Roberts Posted January 16, 2009 Share #58 Posted January 16, 2009 {snipped} It is odd that in his magazine there is no expert who can help too. Well, Leica-produced DNGs aren't exactly common in the wild It doesn't surprise me that there would be a learning curve to get stuff like skin tweaked in ACR or LR... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie Roberts Posted January 16, 2009 Share #59 Posted January 16, 2009 Ok, so John kindly sent me the DNG for the file, and I'm uploading the result from a moment's play in C1 4.6. The profile is the M8 IR filter profile. First, all the caveats about posting this in a browser, mac vs windows gamma, etc... so YMMV. To my eyes, it looks more red in my Windows IE browser than it does in PS. I know what I'm measuring so I know how this would print (or become the basis for a print), and I think it would print quite well given the limitations of the original. Some C1 processing notes. This took me a few seconds only: --+1.05 EC --inverted s-curve to lower contrast but preserve midtones (when printing, I counteract this a bit) --black point and white point set for shadows and highlights --white balance set for 4150, 4 --I'm holding highlights here so skin could be even lighter. That's where PS comes in (or where supplemental light would have helped on the capture). That's it... The WB was set of skin samples to balance the overall yellow and magenta in the baby's skin (which is pretty typical of babies). You could go a wee bit more yellow or magenta either way and call it an interpretation. I don't think you can get too much better without going back to the capture and the light C1 4.6 tweaked output: Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! To show without holding highlights (letting some of them blow). I like this one better, but would usually get here in post to hold the material (wedding dresses, you know ): BTW--here's the original, to show how far we've come: Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! To show without holding highlights (letting some of them blow). I like this one better, but would usually get here in post to hold the material (wedding dresses, you know ): BTW--here's the original, to show how far we've come: ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/74206-ok-i-am-getting-a-little-frustrated/?do=findComment&comment=780216'>More sharing options...
Guest Luis D Posted January 16, 2009 Share #60 Posted January 16, 2009 Well, Leica-produced DNGs aren't exactly common in the wild It doesn't surprise me that there would be a learning curve to get stuff like skin tweaked in ACR or LR... But I still find hard to believe in Newsweek magazine office there is nobody who is enough expert with digital workflow that can adjust the colour. Also I find strange that he is having problem with such severity on M8.2. I can believe with old firmware on some M8 of last year, it can be possible to have bizarre colour what is not able to fix by mortal human but not from late firmware or M8.2 to have PURPLE skin. I still have to believe it is a defect of some type. Either of ways, someone who is a professional photojournalist with credentials of Newsweek magazine and has at his disposal their staff of workflow experts, I would believe even if he cannot figure how to correct it himself (or decide if it is a defective camera) he would know enough to offer to provide a DNG for someone to help. Something is fishy. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.