lightdreamer Posted July 6, 2009 Share #21 Posted July 6, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) I have done a very quick conversion with rawtherapee... http://wstar.dyndns.org/oep/etc/images/L1000132_1240x.jpg no color adjustments done, but concerning noise rawtherapee made a good job I think. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted July 6, 2009 Posted July 6, 2009 Hi lightdreamer, Take a look here 'Reference' RAW Conversion. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
ammitsboel Posted July 6, 2009 Share #22 Posted July 6, 2009 Anyway, I hear what you're saying But it should do no harm at all to attach a ColorMatch or sRGB profile to a JPEG (other than file size). I agree, though, FireFox's colour management is apparently not very good yet. Well, it does! What makes it even more weird is that every viewer that I've seen apart from photoshop shows colours differently when you attach the profile. The the viewer will try to convert what is believed to be sRGB(the attached profile), to the monitor profile. As you might have guesses this is less of a problem in windows since the default monitor profile IS sRGB. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie Roberts Posted July 6, 2009 Share #23 Posted July 6, 2009 Well, it does!What makes it even more weird is that every viewer that I've seen apart from photoshop shows colours differently when you attach the profile, as the the viewer will try to convert what is believed to be sRGB(the attached profile), to the monitor profile. As you might have guesses this is less of a problem in windows since the default monitor profile IS sRGB. {snipped} Well, I don't know about the Mac, but I definitely see the same colour in Photoshop, C1 and Breezebrowser on Windows (always have). In other words, colour-managed applications all show the same colours... My EIZO monitor is calibrated and profiled, so the monitor is not running sRGB--that's for sure. Only the browsers seem to mess things up, which is disheartening in the least That's ok--I usually don't post with a profile attached because IE doesn't understand it anyway! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ghammer Posted July 6, 2009 Share #24 Posted July 6, 2009 What do you think about this one? 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/89971-reference-raw-conversion/?do=findComment&comment=955024'>More sharing options...
ammitsboel Posted July 6, 2009 Share #25 Posted July 6, 2009 Well, I don't know about the Mac, but I definitely see the same colour in Photoshop, C1 and Breezebrowser on Windows (always have). In other words, colour-managed applications all show the same colours... snip :-) Only the browsers seem to mess things up, which is disheartening in the least That's ok--I usually don't post with a profile attached because IE doesn't understand it anyway! Then why do you see the same in IE as in fax and image viewer in windows? H Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie Roberts Posted July 6, 2009 Share #26 Posted July 6, 2009 I have done a very quick conversion with rawtherapee... http://wstar.dyndns.org/oep/etc/images/L1000132_1240x.jpg no color adjustments done, but concerning noise rawtherapee made a good job I think. Not bad, but there's still a lot of chroma noise there and the skin looks very mushy. I think C1 defaults do a better job. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ammitsboel Posted July 6, 2009 Share #27 Posted July 6, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) Hi Jamie, here's one of your first try without a profile: 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/89971-reference-raw-conversion/?do=findComment&comment=955030'>More sharing options...
Jamie Roberts Posted July 6, 2009 Share #28 Posted July 6, 2009 Then why do you see the same in IE as in fax and image viewer in windows? H LOL!! Because neither of them are colour managed!! EDIT: and you're right--the one you reposted from C1 looks better without the profile. Still dunno why.. since Firefox is supposed to use the profile like PS would Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie Roberts Posted July 6, 2009 Share #29 Posted July 6, 2009 What do you think about this one? Interesting... nice detail and noise management, but the colour shifts a lot in places and her face looks too dark and cyan for me, while her arm shifts from magenta to cyan. Was this a Lightroom conversion? Or is the browser playing tricks on me again? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lightdreamer Posted July 6, 2009 Share #30 Posted July 6, 2009 Not bad, but there's still a lot of chroma noise there and the skin looks very mushy. I think C1 defaults do a better job. No color adjustments done, because I am at my uncalibrated Notebook now. The Notebook has very oversatureted colors by default. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie Roberts Posted July 6, 2009 Share #31 Posted July 6, 2009 No color adjustments done, because I am at my uncalibrated Notebook now. The Notebook has very oversatureted colors by default. Yeah--I was talking about noise adjustments though, not colour adjustments Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ammitsboel Posted July 6, 2009 Share #32 Posted July 6, 2009 LOL!! Because neither of them are colour managed!! EDIT: and you're right--the one you reposted from C1 looks better without the profile. Still dunno why.. since Firefox is supposed to use the profile like PS would It says in writing that version 2 is color managed?? Have you tested IE 7 and 8? I have not yet. I'm picking on it because I've seen odd reds in the image and fax viewer too, when profile was attached. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ptarmigan Posted July 6, 2009 Author Share #33 Posted July 6, 2009 Well guys, this is very interesting and it's proving that my PP skills are somewhat lacking. There is some good stuff here. Here is one I made earlier....... 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/89971-reference-raw-conversion/?do=findComment&comment=955049'>More sharing options...
ghammer Posted July 6, 2009 Share #34 Posted July 6, 2009 Interesting... nice detail and noise management, but the colour shifts a lot in places and her face looks too dark and cyan for me, while her arm shifts from magenta to cyan. Was this a Lightroom conversion? Or is the browser playing tricks on me again? No cyan on my browser (Firefox). The conversion was done with UFRaw. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
microview Posted July 6, 2009 Share #35 Posted July 6, 2009 Here is one I made earlier....... It's getting to look like a classic oil portrait. At least we all agree about the cropping. The real problems are the book pages. The sleeve on the left can be helped by magnetic lassoo+curves adjustment. Later: Sorry. Upload looks dead and cold as compared with my Mac screen version! 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/89971-reference-raw-conversion/?do=findComment&comment=955066'>More sharing options...
Jamie Roberts Posted July 6, 2009 Share #36 Posted July 6, 2009 It says in writing that version 2 is color managed??Have you tested IE 7 and 8? I have not yet. I'm picking on it because I've seen odd reds in the image and fax viewer too, when profile was attached. I've tested IE 7 and IE 8. Neither are color managed--IE has never had colour management. Windows image and fax viewer is supposed to be colour managed, but in my experience it only has limited profile support (v2 ICC only and then very very problematic). So I count it among 'non-colour managed apps). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie Roberts Posted July 6, 2009 Share #37 Posted July 6, 2009 No cyan on my browser (Firefox). The conversion was done with UFRaw. Comments weren't based on Firefox (though I see it there); I loaded it into Photoshop Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvBilly Posted July 7, 2009 Share #38 Posted July 7, 2009 I picked up a D-Lux4 a couple of weeks ago, the day before I left for a short vacation in Amsterdam. This is my first camera that supports RAW files, and I've been spending the past week playing with the RAW files in Photoshop CS4 (Mac). I tried C1 which came with the camera, as well as SilkyPix. Neither of them are anywhere as flexible as I've found with the RAW file editor built into Photoshop. I can burn and dodge now!!! Anyway, I'm astounded at what can be done with RAW files in the current version of PS CS4. I took your DNG into Photoshop's RAW editor, fixed the white balance, fixed the exposure, and removed all the noise reduction and detail enhancement. I did NOT do any burning or dodging, and I used no recovery at all. The book pages, by the way, are not clipped out, except the bottom of one page. In Photoshop itself, I used Noise Ninja to get rid of the massive chroma noise, and a little of the luminance noise. I did NOT overly resharpen the picture, even her eyes. This picture just didn't strike me as wanting to be particularly sharp... The resolution is all there, just no extra edginess added. If I were doing this for one of my pictures, I would also take some time to fix up the ASA 3200 sensor noise (fixed pattern noise) in the back wall. Hope you like it. It took about 10 minutes of playing. Billy 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/89971-reference-raw-conversion/?do=findComment&comment=955118'>More sharing options...
Jamie Roberts Posted July 7, 2009 Share #39 Posted July 7, 2009 {Snipped|In Photoshop itself, I used Noise Ninja to get rid of the massive chroma noise, and a little of the luminance noise. I did NOT overly resharpen the picture, even her eyes. This picture just didn't strike me as wanting to be particularly sharp... The resolution is all there, just no extra edginess added. If I were doing this for one of my pictures, I would also take some time to fix up the ASA 3200 sensor noise (fixed pattern noise) in the back wall. {snipped} It's quite good on noise and tonal balance, but very smooth on detail--the skin looks "poreless" (and--the signature of ACR / Lightroom--skin is much too magenta for me, especially if this was further processed in Photoshop). I was surprised by this, but I find C1 does a better job of managing high-iso noise that Noise Ninja does (it doesn't overdo it, in general). The whiteness of the pages are still a distraction even if they're not clipped in rendering. Vignetting them down seems to work, though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ptarmigan Posted July 7, 2009 Author Share #40 Posted July 7, 2009 Jamie Any comment on my last conversion #33 above? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.