BlueBomberTurbo Offline Upload & Sell: Off
|
ajamils wrote:
Since Sony specifically mentioned "Improved skin tones" in their promo video for A7rIII, I am hoping that's the case because that was one of the reasons I sold A7rII. I mostly shoot jpegs and I was never happy with the skin colors product by that camera. Even in RAW I had to do a lot of PP to get them right.
On the other hand the pictures that I've seen from A9 seem to indicate that Sony has definitely improved their color science and jpeg engine. If there is further improvement to the in A7rIII then it would be great!
This will be JPG only. RAW is at the mercy of software conversion, not capture quality. If Sony had a usable RAW converter, then you could blame/praise them for the cameras' colors, as they would be specifically what the manufacturer intends their RAWs to look like. And even then, RAWs have a ridiculously large amount of flexibility (limited only by noise/DR), so you could just use one of the now-many RAW converters out there to get what look you prefer.
BokehBeauty wrote:
If it is so easy to profile a camera, why is it that we see very few natural skin tone portraits. The Sony FE image thread has more than 2500 pages, very very few are portraits, and I could find only 1..2 hand full of portraits with NATURAL and PLEASANT skin tones. Many others almost call for a Liver cancer therapy. I don’t count the portraits of models with layers of make-up. And there are regularly contributions from skilled photographer here, which discuss the Sony issue.
I came from Minolta 7D to Sony A700 and after the pleasant Minolta colors the Sony skin tones and greens (correctable) were a nightmare. Now I have a RX1RII and even with this beauty I need much PP time to get the skin tones pleasant....Show more →
There are at least a few reasons I can think of:
1. People don't know about it. All these reviews that praise colors of different cameras, and people buying the cameras for either what comes out of the cameras' JPGs or Lightroom profiles.
2. People don't want to spend additional money on profiling software and charts.
3. People think it's a complex process.
I remember not liking the color much on my first camera that shot RAW (Nikon D90), and I got started with color profiling even back then. I was glad I did with my next camera, the D7000, as the colors from Adobe looked closer to a Fuji film simulation than anything that could be considered "Standard". Things eased up a bit with my next D7100 and D750, but as usual, they still benefited from extra help. Moved on to Sony (NEX-6 -> A6000 -> A6300), and wow. The quality of the profiles plummeted. I was absolutely glad I knew how to profile, so I wouldn't be stuck with the horrible colors Adobe offered.
|