Can't get decent reds with digital cameras

<p>I shoot people's art work and can never get the reds right. I use a D-300, set the custom white balance using a digital gray card and studio flash (PS shows the grays in a Macbeth card to be all the same numbers for R G & B). I set the camera to neutral--although the problem shows up no matter the setting--and my screen is a hardware-calibrated NEC. But it doesn't so much matter what screen or computer I use (including the camera-back screen): All colors are quite good except reds. They are too pink or too orange, compared to the object viewed in daylight. Sometimes a deep maroon comes out brown. What Photoshop calls pure red (255, 0, 0) looks like orange to me. In fact I can't find what I would consider a real, fire engine red on the web anywhere. No matter what I do in PS, including in Camera Raw, reds are either tomato, pink or orange. Is this just a limitation of video rendering? Any help appreciated.<br>

JD</p><div></div>

<p>Hi John, what lens, or lenses do you shoot with?</p>

<p>Hmm. Thought I posted this but it didn't show up: I shot this with a Nikon 18-200 VR. Have had the problem with other lenses, however, and my old D-70 as well. Will experiment with other lenses.</p>

<p>In PS I went to Image-Adjust-Selective color (Red with come up as the default) and just moved some sliders around to taste.</p><div></div>

<p>Is this the type of red you're going for?</p>

<p>Did a hue, saturation and luminance adjust in ACR 4.6 adjusting the red slider in the HSL panel. Shooting fabric can be tricky in getting the color right especially red colors. </p><div></div>

<p>Thanks, guys. They are both somewhat better. I will fool with those controls.<br>

Do you know what I mean about a more fire engine red though?--and this pic may not be a good example, because that red, while way off--with respect to the other colors--was not really fire engine red. It seems like other colors just fall into place when I am careful about lighting balance. But reds drive me crazy. I did find some reds on the web that look pretty close and PS pegged them at about 150, 0, 0. So maybe a lightness/darkness issue to some extent. But they are still a bit orange-tomatoey (see darker parts of example image). I know red always metered funny when I shot slide film--If you metered red for mid-tone it came out overexposed.</p><div></div>

<p>Sure sounds like you have a monitor problem if you can't find what you feel is red anywhere you look. You said that even if photoshop says a red is 255,0,0 it doesn't look red, this would indicate your monitor is off. The red in your posted photo sure looks like red to me.</p>

<p>I'm with Don on this one - all your posts look perfectly "red" on my monitor.</p>

<p>What do the images print like - if ok, it looks like it may be time to upgrade your monitor.</p>

<p>Some thoughts:</p>

<p>If you're used to the "fire engine" reds of slide film then digital red can be a bit problematic.<br>

Ray's edit is more down to earth than your original. It doesn't "glow". Is it more accurate? I don't know, haven't seen that bag.<br>

PS 255 red can look a bit orange / too bright, so yes, I think I know what you mean.<br>

Color is subjective and different colors next to each other affect how we perceive them.<br>

It could be that your monitor (or simply calibration) is going belly up but somehow I feel this is more a matter of personal perception.<br>

Are you happy with your prints?</p>

<p>Looks red to me too on my calibrated LCD...</p>

<p>I've never been able to get the same reds from ACR that I get from Nikon NX/NX2. That includes using all of the beta profiles available for ACR. Perhaps it's my fault, all I know is that the Nikon software produces better reds on my calibrated Macs. I actually prefer the work flow of ACR, but I hate the reds. Suggestions? </p>

<p>John and Ray..this red wont print in CMYK, and maybe not even on a external lab. Be cautious about teh use of the hue saturation.</p>

<p>Tim, the red now look good and printable, is it the right one? maybe yes / no..but you can print it.</p>

<p>As for the limitation, i would say its a user / your camera brand *problem*, not a digital camera problem. If you can see it good in NX2 theres is NO eason why you cant get it rigth in any other raw developper, other than your own knowledge.</p>

<p>Also, in many situation like this i prefer the use of the selective color vs the hue saturation, i find it pretty fast and intuitive for many user..more like the Ligthroom color panel.</p>

 

<p>Reds are tough because digital cameras are overly IR sensitive compared to human eyes--they see reds that are too long in wavelenth for the eye to see. There is also a wide variation in how people perceive red--color blindness is a common problem, affecting roughly 10% of the population on this board. There may be the reverse problem a the other end of the spectrum, involving UV and blue light.<br>

The most practical solution may be to shoot in RAW and adjust the curves for less red and more blue, until it looks right. You need all the dynamic range possible to avoid overexposing the red channel. In theory, better filters would help, to make the camera's spectral sensitivity exactly match that of the photographer.<br>

A more difficult problem is florescence--it is well known that some minerals will take UV light and convert them to visible light--there are Natural History museums that display this phenomena. To fix this you may need to filter the light source, so the unwanted wavelengths are not converted to other colors.</p>

 

<p>You're right, Patrick, it's my lack of knowledge. I cannot address how ACR renders Canon images, only Nikon's. We also have to remember that Adobe does not copy Nikon's algorithms with their camera profiles, they only approximate them. So, if I knew how to get the same reds using ACR, I would, but I don't know. I do know that I don't have to do anything to NX/NX2 to get correct reds. ;o)</p>

<p>What are you using as a light source?<br>

<br /> Which version of ACR and Photoshop) are you using?</p>

<p>If Photoshop CS4 have you tried Adobe's beta profiles?</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I use CS 3 w/ACR 4.6.0.30. </p>

<address>IMO the answer has to do with light source and the nature of the fabric.<br /> </address> <address><br /> </address> <address>Some of the aniline dyes used on especially good wool (as in some hand-woven items like your examples) can be downright bizarre when photographed in daylight or strobe. </address> <address><br /> </address> <address>You may be happiest with tungsten light because daylight and strobe pump out a lot more UV. </address> <address><br /> </address> <address>Using a strobe or daylight, compare with and without UV FILTER on camera...might help, might not.<br /> </address> <address><br /> </address> <address>This is also a well-known problem with white clothing...it's often got "whiteners" (or its been washed with whitening detergents) that glow under strobes, making it a virtual light source rather than simple reflectant white...the well-known fix for that, if you're shooting a catalog with studio strobes, is to refit them with optional strobe tubes with UV filters. <br /> </address>

<p>Looks red to me. Eyedropper in PSP says there's not a speck of green on the image so it can't be orange. Are you sure your screen's adjusted right and/or you aren't looking at an image in absolute colorimeric or something?</p>

<p>Wow. Thanks everyone for your thoughtful comments. I am using old Paul Buff strobes, so I suppose there could be some lighting issue, esp re fabrics. I could also be a little colorblind, but when I shoot things with reds, people will often comment that everything is correct except the reds. That's on the camera back, my monitor, their monitor, etc. D300 or D70 (CCD, CMOS). I am mostly working for the web, so I don't have much to add re print color. I just shot quickie of a Macbeth color card in window light, after first doing a custom white balance. To my eye all the colors look pretty close to the card--except the red. Even when darkened a bit (spot in middle), it is just not close to the card. It is way more orange. Looks the same on the camera screen, and the D300 has a decent screen. Maybe I am crazy. Again, all comments have been greatly appreciated.</p><div></div>

<p>Given that you have a Macbeth ColorChecker, there's a simple cure for your problems: get the <a href="http://labs.adobe.com/wiki/index.php/DNG_Profiles">Adobe DNG Profile Editor</a> and feed it appropriately-lit shots of the ColorChecker. It can use those to produce a profile for your camera. This should give you reasonably accurate color rendition.</p>

<p>This is interesting and it may prove a point.<br>

IMO it's not likely that a "red" on the Macbeth ColorChecker is equivalent to "red" coming from aniline dyed, high quality wool...which "looks" red but doesn't photograph that way, even when everything else is perfect. <br>

If you're having the same problem with non-woolen reds or factory-woolen-reds, I yeild the point. <br>

By "fine wool" I'm referring to the best from New Zealand, Great Britain, and Scandanavia....although small batches of the best are also grown in the US. It's sold specifically to people who do hand-weaving, who sometimes spin their own. This stuff is almost prismatic, not at all like the wool we're used to in factory woolens.<br>

Since you're using Buffs, you do have modeling lights...you might try exposing with them alone, no flash...that'd test the tungsten idea I suggested earlier.</p>

<p>If all you have problems with are the reds, do the simplest thing first and that is use ACR's HSL panel. Concentrate on using the red hue and luminance slider. The splotch you have on your CCchart posted can easily be attained using the HSL panel. Don't use the Calibration panel sliders. They affect a wider range of colors where as HSL isolates to a specific color without affecting other colors like oranges when you want to change reds.</p>

<p>You can do this on jpeg or raw. The Calibration panel sliders won't work on jpegs.</p>

<p>The HSL panel is engineered VERY differently and for the better than any color tool you can find in Photoshop. The luminance slider retains hue without adding green when increasing luminance which has been the primary cause of orangy looking reds when increasing saturation. The saturation slider also makes reds orangish increasing saturation using Photoshop's Hue/Sat tool. The HSL panel detaches this green channel influence for attaining richness, vibrance and luminance in reds without shifting to orange.</p>

<p>You need to give this a try before you do anything else. It's the easiest solution. Try it using any number of profiles selected in the Calibration panel to get you as close as you can.</p>

<p>Pick the profile that makes everything the closest and work from there on the reds.</p>

<p>I have three suggestions:</p>

<p>(1) If you're using studio flash, try using the Daylight white balance preset or a manual setting that's a tad warmer (5500-5700K).<br>

(2) Try using the Vivid optimization preset.<br>

(3) Try underexposing slightly (during capture or during post-processing). Normally-exposed red looks a little to "cheerful" to my eyes. I like a slightly darker, more somber red.</p>

 

<p>Looks Red to me, have you thought about getting your eyes tested for color blindness? Thats why all these discussions about sharpness, the merits of blue ray DVD vs whatever, H Definition screens, HHD, Super Duper Extra High Def etc etc etc are all Bullcrap, If the Human eye had perfect vision, and Opticians the world over went Bankrupt, then there might be some point to these discussions.</p>