Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 29

Thread: Change RAW conversion workflow = better result?

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    3,644

    Default Change RAW conversion workflow = better result?

    I just changed my RAW conversion workflow, do you think the new pictures look better? Right now I still work on an uncalibrated CRT, therefore I cannot be very sure about the result. Thanks for your input.

    Old workflow - Color


    New workflow - Color


    Old workflow - bw


    New workflow - bw

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    3,644

    Default

    The problem i had was that all my converted photos with C1 + '1D portrait' profile appeal lack of contrast, washed out etc. With the new workflow, I think the contrast is better. What do you see on your monitor?

  3. #3

    Default

    Yes, definitely better. The old colour shot seems to have a yellow tint also.

  4. #4

    Default New Workflow

    Hi Tom,

    The colours are definately more vibrant and the b/w more contrast.

    Care to share what is the new workflow you are using?
    Is it applicable to Nikon DSLR also?

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Tampines
    Posts
    3,287

    Default

    I can see that the new workflow is better.

  6. #6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Long Thai Bean
    Hi Tom,

    The colours are definately more vibrant and the b/w more contrast.

    Care to share what is the new workflow you are using?
    Is it applicable to Nikon DSLR also?
    For Nikon user, do use Nikon Capture Editor. The quality is much better than C1.

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    3,644

    Default

    hey, GREAT! So my one week effort is not wasteful. Here is my new workflow.

    1. In C1, use "Adobe 1998" profile (set in the "preference...") instead of the C1 supplied profile. This is crucial coz instantly u will see the pics are more contrasty.

    2. Output working space --> AdobeRGB, necessary adjustment.

    3. In PS, convert to sRGB. Now the contrast already very good, if I feel still not good enough, will use an S-curve to boost up a bit.

    4. Other adjustment (eg, sharpening, watermark etc).

    5. For B/W, I use an adjustment layer to convert to BW.

  8. #8
    Deregistered
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    509

    Default

    Thanks for sharing Tom. I've changed the settings in C1.

  9. #9

    Default

    1 qn, your fotos are shot in adobe or sRGB?

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    3,644

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AReality
    1 qn, your fotos are shot in adobe or sRGB?
    Shot in RAW. It doesn't matter what color space in use.

  11. #11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tomshen
    I just changed my RAW conversion workflow, do you think the new pictures look better? Right now I still work on an uncalibrated CRT, therefore I cannot be very sure about the result. Thanks for your input.

    Old workflow - Color


    New workflow - Color
    Tom

    Of the colour versions: The old workflow looks like as if it was shot on Fuji Superia, while the newer one looks like Fuji Reala. In the newer workflow, the colours are more vibrant, much nicer I find, while in the older one the colours are more subdued (?).

    I am sure both workflows may be put in a switable use one day?

  12. #12

    Default

    Thanks Tom. That was another little push for me towards using RAW.

  13. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Singapore, Bedok
    Posts
    1,785

    Default

    The shade of blue in the woman's gown looks VERY different in the two workflows. So different, in fact, that i would say one of them (i don't know which one) is a distortion of reality. Pic 1 is blueish-green, pic 2 is much purer blue. Green and red are more or less ok.

    i agree the new wf looks better, but which one more accurately reflects the original colours? i don't think you want all your colours (esp blues) to come out 'wrong'.

  14. #14

    Default

    Agree. The main difference seems to be the blackpoint and yellow/blue balance.

  15. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    3,644

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ST1100
    The shade of blue in the woman's gown looks VERY different in the two workflows. So different, in fact, that i would say one of them (i don't know which one) is a distortion of reality. Pic 1 is blueish-green, pic 2 is much purer blue. Green and red are more or less ok.

    i agree the new wf looks better, but which one more accurately reflects the original colours? i don't think you want all your colours (esp blues) to come out 'wrong'.
    The newer one is more accurate. Remember don't convert to sRGB directly, otherwise would be very saturated!! Convert to aRGB first and then in PS convert to sRGB. That's what I have found after painfully thinking about a solution. The good thing is: I have RAW!! Anything can be redone with no loss. Think will retouch all my 1D shots on my site....

  16. #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    3,644

    Default

    Wait... blue channel is a bit too much, I'll do a more controlled comparisonb but, only after I calibrate my CRT first. Those of you who have calibrated CRT/LCD and C1, pls do a test and let's share the result.

  17. #17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tomshen
    The newer one is more accurate. Remember don't convert to sRGB directly, otherwise would be very saturated!! Convert to aRGB first and then in PS convert to sRGB. That's what I have found after painfully thinking about a solution. The good thing is: I have RAW!! Anything can be redone with no loss. Think will retouch all my 1D shots on my site....
    HUH? Where got such thing?

    I suggest you KISS or read more!

    Here's some good start:

    http://www.cps.canon-europe.com/arti...ours_part1.pdf
    http://www.cps.canon-europe.com/serv...es?oid=6571643
    http://www.cps.canon-europe.com/serv...es?oid=6664474
    http://www.cps.canon-europe.com/serv...es?oid=7066594
    Last edited by oeyvind; 22nd September 2004 at 02:58 AM.

  18. #18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ST1100
    The shade of blue in the woman's gown looks VERY different in the two workflows. So different, in fact, that i would say one of them (i don't know which one) is a distortion of reality. Pic 1 is blueish-green, pic 2 is much purer blue. Green and red are more or less ok.

    i agree the new wf looks better, but which one more accurately reflects the original colours? i don't think you want all your colours (esp blues) to come out 'wrong'.
    I agree. I am inclined to believe that the turquioise-blue in the first pic is the correct blue colour of the woman's gown. I have seen enough Chinese opera to know that that turquiose-blue is a very common and popular colour in opera costumes.

    I think the wrong shade of blue is the result of using the wrong profile in the RAW conversion process. Adobe RGB is a colour space and not a specific camera profile. Every camera model 'sees' colours differently and the specific camera profile tells the RAW conversion program how the colours are to be correctly interpreted as 'seen' the sensor of the respective camera. If you are interested in reproducing accurately the colours captured by your camera's specific sensor, the camera profile specific to your camera must be used in C1 or any other RAW conversion software that works with camera profiles, eg Breezebrowser.

    You should be able to get more C1 users' opinions and help on this by posting at the C1 Raw Workflow forum at;
    http://www.pictureflow.com/forum/index.php?

    That said, you could also check which blue is of the correct shade by running the RAW file through a RAW conversion software that does not rely on specific camera profile like Adobe Camera Raw in Photoshop CS.

    Also, if you do not like the profile provided by Phase One for C1, you could opt to buy a relatively inexpensive third party profile created specifically for your camera for use in C1. C1 users generally find that the camera profiles created by Magne Nilsen to be much more accurate that those provided by Phase One. I too have found this to be so after getting one for my 10D from his site (http://etcetera.cc/pub/).

  19. #19
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    South Pole with Penguin
    Posts
    5,270

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tomshen
    The newer one is more accurate.
    Since you were at the scene when the pic was taken, you should be able to tell which is more accurate, however your screen is not calibrated yet, so what u see may different from what i see.

    From what i see with my recently calibrated monitor, both colour are not accurate, and in fact the newer one is even worse. I do watch traditional chinese show and opera last time but I have never see such blue colour gown before. The blue looks too "modern" IMO. Also, the flowers are usually pink, but the newer one looks purple to me. Same for the drawings in the background too, they are purposely made to be lower in contrast, to give an effect that the building is further away, however in your newer version, the colour of the background is too strong & vibrant IMO.

    Dunno if this is better, reduce the yellow cast in hte first pic


  20. #20
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Northwest
    Posts
    5,011

    Default

    While the new work flow increased the contrast, like some other have commented I don't think the colours look natural. Look at the actress' right sleeve and see how the colour transitions from the top of the sleeve to the side. It is as if the dress material actually changed colour.

    I took your old workflow file and adjusted the levels. Here's the outcome:


    I would not say that the colours are accurate, but I would say that they look more natural to me. What do you think?

    By the way I think Wai;s version still lack enough contrast, and the yellow cast is still a little too strong.
    As complexity rises, precise statements lose meaning and meaningful statements lose precision.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •