Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/11/08
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Alastair, actually there's a clue in your response. "I often went to bed happy and woke up miserable as all the images I'd printed would look "cast" in the morning". You very likely viewed the print (or monitor) under different lighting conditions. Unless you have a calibrated viewing light (area) colour is always going to be subjective and influenced by outside factors. Pardon me if I'm stating the bleeding obvious. Interesting point that I hadn't considered before is that digital capture is more like colour neg regarding subjective colour, although probably more tranny like regarding exposure? Now regarding Tina's samples, Tina has sampled the white sail area in each, setting that as nearly pure white, that is the three channels each close to the maximum value. Those values being equal or close, there is little or no colour cast in the highlights. Ideally you could perform the same channel neutralising for the black point and mid grey (if you can select a mid grey point in the file). I agree, regarding the colour temperature of the samples. To my eye, the acr version is warmer (appears more yellow) and the Phase One cooler (more bluish). My view would be that correcting either to taste would not be difficult. Not at all surprising that each prog has interpreted the file differently. Really I think that the major difference is in saturation. On my (calibrated) monitor the Phase One example appears over saturated. More importantly, as Tina said, I think both progs have done a creditable job and produced very usable files that can be adjusted, just as any image with good tonal range and resolution can be. There is a whole other thread probably regarding the bit depth of those DNGs. It makes a big difference very likely, when you start messing with the tonal range. Cheers I love Photoshop Hoppy -----Original Message----- From: lug-bounces+hoppyman=bigpond.net.au@leica-users.org [mailto:lug-bounces+hoppyman=bigpond.net.au@leica-users.org] On Behalf Of Alastair Firkin Sent: Thursday, 9 November 2006 14:47 To: Leica Users Group Subject: RE: [Leica] Capture One with M8 > Tina, that's an informative sample. Both seem to have done a creditable > job, on casual observation. The capture one example is > clearly more saturated. The white point that you have set in each is very > close to the other, that is, little apparent cast. The acr > example looks actually to be a more pleasing (natural?) rendition to me. > For me, the ACR seems an attractive option in that there is > great integration for photoshop users. I have no experience with any other > however. > Thanks so much for sharing all of this stuff. Many LUG members are > learning a great deal from your posts so far. > Cheers > Hoppy Colour is a bugger: I have struggled for YEARS in the darkroom. One man's balance is anothers disaster. I often went to bed happy and woke up miserable as all the images I'd printed would look "cast" in the morning light. Its the same with digital: here the capture one image looks warm to me like afternoon light and the ACR is colder more middayish. Both are real only on the monitor and may not reflect reality at all!!! Cheers _______________________________________________ Leica Users Group. See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information