Tim_Lookingbill Posted October 29, 2008 Share Posted October 29, 2008 I gave it go comparing dcRAW-X with Raw Developer's Linear Unprocessed setting and I'm left scratching my head. Apparently dcRAW-X either has a completely different color table profile for the Sigma raw format or it truly is pulling all source color rendering tables/matrices and delivering exact RGB ratios straight off the sensor. Raw Developer is applying the default color profile because changing from it's default ICC version to Extended Gamut slightly changed the preview even with Disable Processing checked which is suppose to turn off all color management. I got two completely different renderings as posted below. All I did on both was apply curves which I've included in the screencapture. As you can see my dcRAW-X doesn't look anywhere near Luis's. In fact I kind of like mine better. It looks more real. Just used dcRAW-X's default settings, applied Linear ProPhoto RGB and converted to regular 1.8 ProPhotoRGB which gave the same rendering editing in curves only I could get better control of black point roll off. It was a tight fit placing edit nodes in the shadow areas to the point it was taking to long making adjustments using curves without converting. The same was done with Raw Developer. And I'll also include an edited ACR 3.7 version which I didn't spend a lot of time on.<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim_Lookingbill Posted October 29, 2008 Share Posted October 29, 2008 Now Raw Developer's version...<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim_Lookingbill Posted October 29, 2008 Share Posted October 29, 2008 And ACR's straight rendering...<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luis-a-guevara Posted October 30, 2008 Author Share Posted October 30, 2008 Luis version with no curves applied ( But converted to sRGB for Internet display) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luis-a-guevara Posted October 30, 2008 Author Share Posted October 30, 2008 <P>Tim , I dont know the inner workings of the Mac version of DCRAW , that is very elemental as interfaces go ,however the Windows version provides abundant processing options and information.</P><BR> <P>In case it helps you figure out the answer to your questions here is some info:</P><BR> <img src="http://www.guillermoluijk.com/tutorial/dcraw/dcraw8.82.gif"><BR> <P> I have not been able to reach the developer of DCRAW-X , perhaps you have more luck and I have plenty of my own questions for him , if you do.</P> <BR> I like the way you work. Very methodical and keeping good records. Your results are very interesting and look close to my image , but they do look flatter , with less detail and tonality in the highlights and shadows </P><BR> <P> Your image :</P> <img src="http://static.photo.net/attachments/bboard/00R/00RKJe-83705684.jpg"><BR> <P>My Image:</P> <img src="http://www.sigmacumlaude.com/for%20forum/IMG30989FinalCropped%20W%20logo%20.jpg"><BR> Again , it is very hard to compare images processed in different computers with different Displays and Display profiles. It is even harder , and perhaps futile to attempt to do so across the internet. My monitor is calibrated using Pantone Colorvision Spider hardware calibrator. <BR><P>I have the original Profile and the Color Vision generated profiles and if I switch between them , I do see a difference, and I will provide a link for a Q.T.Video that I made to illustrate this point. Luis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim_Lookingbill Posted October 30, 2008 Share Posted October 30, 2008 So what did you do different from my simple approach? Did you change dcRAW-X defaults? Could you post the slider adjustment numbers so we can all understand what's going on here. Something isn't adding up, Luis. As you can see from my first image just using the default settings and assigning Linear ProPhoto RGB made the narrow tree trunk with the sunlit highlight positioned below the flowers a strong magenta color instead of the putty color in yours. This can only be achieved with a color table/matrix number adjustment. Adjusting color temp/white balance sliders alone from the 5 raw converters I've dealt with can't correct for this much of a color error. And in your version you adjusted the white balance toward cyanish/blue which would make the magenta tree highlight worse. I don't see any other slider in dcRAW-X that can correct this type of color error since there's no preview to work from in this simple app. How many trial and error conversion sessions did you have to go through just using the color temp sliders before you arrived at the results seen in your final posted image? And I hope you don't think I'm badgering you on this. I want to learn just as much as the next fella'. But I've been down this investigatory road before "hound-dogging" similar long threads in the past for several years where someone comes up with a new and unusual approach to image processing that looks quite promising benefiting the photography and digital imaging community by offering a better mousetrap and finding it was all a waste of time because all information wasn't disclosed. I mean I can't even use dcRAW-X because it doesn't support my Pentax K100D PEF's so it's already useless to me, but you seem to be on to something significant, but as Fran pointed out you seem to not be totally upfront with us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim_Lookingbill Posted October 30, 2008 Share Posted October 30, 2008 Dang it! I didn't update the page before my last post so you already answered some of my questions. Computer platforms and display calibration doesn't have anything to do with this since there was no physical editing by eye of your image. But now that you indicated you've been using a Window's version with an "abundance of processing options" this is the rub I've been looking for in this discussion. Another waste of time going down another rabbit hole. It would've been nice to know this from the start. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luis-a-guevara Posted October 30, 2008 Author Share Posted October 30, 2008 <P><i>...........Raw Developer is applying the default color profile because changing from it's default ICC version to Extended Gamut slightly changed the preview even with Disable Processing checked which is suppose to turn off all color management................. ..........Computer platforms and display calibration doesn't have anything to do with this since there was no physical editing by eye of your image......... .........But now that you indicated you've been using a Window's version with an "abundance of processing options" this is the rub I've been looking for in this discussion...........</P></i> <BR> <P>Tim , you are not making sense. You got confused somewhere. I do not use RAW DEVELOPER and I am not familiar with its options. I use DCRAW-X that is, as its X in the name indicates , a Mac OSX only application that I use on my Mac on OSX Leopard as I indicated previously. It is not sufficient to select a wider gamut profile , you have to CHANGE ITS GAMA TO 1.0 as indicated at the beginning. If you dont , you'll remain at Gamma 1.8.<BR> The "abundance of processing options of Windows version of DCRAW" (notice the absence of "X" ) was only posted for your benefit, since you are interested on its inner workings, and is a screen shot picked up from the internet .<BR> I am more interested in its PRACTICAL working and that will not work if you don't follow the recipe; first you do a lineal conversion to 16 Bit PSD in DCRAW-X , then in Photoshop you change the color settings for the file to a CUSTOM PROFILE OF GAMMA 1.0, then you do whatever you think is needed in terms of reinstating some of the things that the Linear Converter removed ,such as SHARPENING etc., then Convert the file to sRGB ,and save it as JPG with an embedded sRGB profile. <BR><P>Make sure that your Monitor is calibrated to sRGB standard of Gamma 1.8 ,White point D65.<P><div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim_Lookingbill Posted October 30, 2008 Share Posted October 30, 2008 The standard gamma of sRGB according to microsoft and HP, the inventors of this color space, is 2.2. But it doesn't matter what gamma a display is calibrated at, color managed apps compensate the gamma of images that are assigned or tagged with the color space they were created in. Again this is not the issue and I am not confused. The Raw Developer ICC profile comment was to illustrate the NO PROCESSING linear results obtained and compared to dcRAW-X's results. I never said you used Raw Developer. My point was to show dcRAW-X clearly delivering different linear unprocessed data from the same raw file than Raw Developer's unprocessed setting. I did change the wider gamut profile (ProPhoto RGB) to a linear 1.0 gamma version creating it in Photoshop's Custom RGB menu in Color Settings. I assigned this 1.0 gamma version to both the Raw Developer and dcRAW-X linear versions when first opened in Photoshop and both needed a strong curve to correct for lack of contrast as illustrated in my post. We must not be speaking the same language cuz something is getting misread here. Again I'm asking what were your dcRAW-X settings used for your version of this image? When you say lineal conversion in dcRAW-X do you set its Brightness slider to 1 instead of the default 5 or do you leave all sliders at default? I don't know how I can make myself more clear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim_Lookingbill Posted October 30, 2008 Share Posted October 30, 2008 OK, cross post again. Didn't see the added dcRAW-X screen capture. Those are my settings as well, but we both got different results. I give up I don't know what's going on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim_Lookingbill Posted October 30, 2008 Share Posted October 30, 2008 One thought occurred to me as to the cause of the differences we're getting. Data that influences color results may be being stripped from the .x3f file during either download and/or during the unzipping of the file. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim_Lookingbill Posted October 30, 2008 Share Posted October 30, 2008 I get this error message when first dragging the .X3F file onto dcRAW-X icon and I don't know what it means.<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luis-a-guevara Posted October 30, 2008 Author Share Posted October 30, 2008 You have two dialog boxes shown in there . The bottom one is telling you that you have not selected a folder to receive the output. That is strange because DCRAW-x will retain the last one used . the other dialog box is because this is an application that originated as a Window /Lunix and in its Mac incarnation ,requires you to Drag the RAW File into the specified place in the dialog box. It will not work by dragging a file on top of the application and that message will pop up. Tim , I will try to make a Quick Time video showing the process from the beginning to the end.You are right about the sRGB Gamma 2.2 . Typo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blumesan Posted October 30, 2008 Share Posted October 30, 2008 Luis, A quick question from an interested observer who has used dcraw. You mention several times that you process the raw file with dcraw to obtain a PSD file. How is this possible. The options (shown in the screen capture above) are only TIFF and PPM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luis-a-guevara Posted October 30, 2008 Author Share Posted October 30, 2008 <p>Hi Mike. It seems that you missed a link to an image showing the output preferences , here it goes again:</p><BR> <img src="http://static.photo.net/attachments/bboard/00R/00RKiq-83869784.jpg"> <BR><p>Welcome to this discussion . Luis</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luis-a-guevara Posted October 30, 2008 Author Share Posted October 30, 2008 <p>Hi Tim ,Mike and everybody . I did create a small Quick Time Movie , that I hope you will be able to see directly here :</p> <p>Please excuse all the deficiencies of it , but I am very tired.Here it goes:</p> <p> </p> <p><img src="http://www.sigmacumlaude.com/video.gif" width="70" height="70" /><a href="http://www.sigmacumlaude.com/Lineal%20process.mov">Lineal processing Video</a></p> <p> </p> <p>Hope you like it and that it helps.Luis</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frans_waterlander Posted October 30, 2008 Share Posted October 30, 2008 Luis, I'd really appreciate if you would react to my posts above. Given the dramatic differences between what you show as normally processed and linearly processes images the question still stands: which of your processes is out of control to cause such differences? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luis-a-guevara Posted October 30, 2008 Author Share Posted October 30, 2008 Franz , watch the movie please. Maybe the answers are already there.Luis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blumesan Posted October 30, 2008 Share Posted October 30, 2008 Luis, Thanks for the response. I am running Windows O/S and execute dcraw from the command line interface (no GUI such as you have shown for the Mac). The output options are (as far as I know) just those specified in the screen capture of the command line posted above (i.e. TIFF or PPM). Is there an additional, undocumented, parameter that will cause output file to be PSD? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luis-a-guevara Posted October 30, 2008 Author Share Posted October 30, 2008 Not that I know Mike . It is weird that each platform have advantages over the other one. The windows version has a lot more control through all those Parameters , but the Mac version offers a more practical PSD output. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roger_smith4 Posted October 30, 2008 Share Posted October 30, 2008 I wanted to keep up with this thread but have been busy. Attached is my version using the original raw file and only processing it with Lightroom (not "linear" or otherwise special). It looks different than what Luis did but is hopefully better than the ACR conversions above and retained some of the delicacy in the flower while keeping the overall look of the plants realistic.<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luis-a-guevara Posted October 30, 2008 Author Share Posted October 30, 2008 Excellent work Roger . Lightroom is my software of choice for managing my files and it does an excellent work indeed , but don't get confused , it is not Lightroom being better or ACR being worse , because Lightroom is based on ACR just like Photoshop is. The difference is that you seem to know how to use it well. Your non lineal image is closer to my Lineal one than what I got in Lightroom myself. Congratulations! By the way your Liza and Adam's Wedding Gallery is the MOST PERFECTLY NEUTRAL COLOR BALANCED IMAGES I HAVE EVER SEEN.! Please don't miss the video I posted a bit earlier . Luis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frans_waterlander Posted October 30, 2008 Share Posted October 30, 2008 Luis, No, the video didn't help at all. My issue is not with any of the details of your processes, but is much more basic than that and centers around your side-by-side examples in the 8th post of this thread. As I've already stated before, there must be something fundamentally wrong with your "normal" process, your linear process or both. It is extremenly hard if not impossible for me to believe that those radically different examples represent the results of correctly executed "normal" and linear processes. I would expect a way more subtle, way less dramatic difference, which makes me believe that something is out of whack here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luis-a-guevara Posted October 30, 2008 Author Share Posted October 30, 2008 <p>OK Franz lets try this other movie just for you :</p> <p><img src="http://www.sigmacumlaude.com/video.gif" width="70" height="70" /><a href="http://www.sigmacumlaude.com/Franz1.mov">Color Matching the 2 images , intro</a></p> <p> </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frans_waterlander Posted October 30, 2008 Share Posted October 30, 2008 Luis, Your video stops after a few seconds and I can't get it to work again. Why don't you comment in a few words why those two radically different images correctly represent normal and linear processing? As I have said before it looks to me like your normal process or your linear process or both are severely flawed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now