Daran
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 p.3 #6 · Skin tones updates on A7V or A7rV? | |
ruthenium wrote:
There's another factor that complicates comparisons - different lenses. In real life, for example, a Sony body with a Sony lens isn't going to produce a raw file truly equivalent to one from a medium format camera system, even when we do our best to satisfy all the technical conditions of photographic equivalence.
Not sure I follow. The lenses may have different coatings, which would require a correspondingly different profile to compensate. But it can be compensated by the profile. So what do you think can't be equalized?
At the end of the above technical exercise, we shall return to the reality of 99% photographers (1) using different lenses, and (2) using the pre-defined color profiles in the applications of their choice for post-processing.
I don't know about the percentage number, but yes, even the above average folks posting on this forum appear to mostly stick with default profiles or use the same profiles for multiple optical configurations. Like you with those "leaf" profiles, where changing the lens or the camera will of course strongly affect the result as the "unspecific" profile doesn't compensate.
The typical common advice is to use custom profiles. But, what is the problem with the profiles available in Lightroom, Capture One, DxO Photolab, etc.?
There a lot of variables affecting a profile:
- target light
- sensor sensitivity (includes the sensor stack)
- lens profile (compensate the coating)
- handling of limitations (e.g. clipping vs degradation near the gamut limits)
- optionally baked in "beautification"
Depending on who produces the profile and for what purpose, the results may vary quite noticeably, even if there is not "beautification". But if a RAW developer (or a photographer) puts in the effort, they can be made produce indistinguishable color results from different cameras and lenses. The isn't usually the case though. Recently there Adobe came up with profiles for the A1ii, which produced very different images from those for the A1i, even though both cameras use identical sensors and RAW formats and the lens used for testing was also the same. That tells you that even within that single RAW developer manufacturer (or at least for this one) there are inconsistencies as to how they generate their profiles.
Perhaps the best practical alternative to custom profiles is to use a relatively flat profile available (when available) from Lightroom, Capture One, etc., as the starting point for post-processing.
In my profession (printing) it is normal and expected that profiles are recombined. So even in the simplest cases your input comes with a profile and you apply another on top of it to match it to process colors, which are specific for the medium you print on. I do not understand why RAW developers do not do the same: so have separate profiles for lenses, sensors and optional ones for any "beautification". That way all your lenses would produce very nearly identical results and your "leaf" thingy would work the same with all of them and with all cameras, too. Anyway, I'm rambling...
The last practical point is about WB. This is of personal interest, and I would be interested in opinions. I have come across this suggestion from professional experienced photographers to avoid Auto-WB, and use Daylight in the settings. Obviously, this is a subject on its own. But, I think there might be something wise about this approach. We cannot really trust Auto-WB, so what's the point of using it, when too often Auto-WB needs to be corrected in post anyways?
The difference is one of convenience. For daytime wildlife stuff I use daytime WB and correct that only when necessary in post. This allows me to see in camera the original colors (sunset produces reddish whites). For artificial light I sometimes use AutoWB for about the same reason, as the uncorrected colors tend to be so far off that you would not wana use them like that. In that scenario I usually capture or adjust WB in post for only one of the images and then apply that to the whole set. Ultimately only the value set in post is relevant for the final result.
|
...
