Adobe DNG Profile Editor

Has there been any update to this beyond that in 2008 found on Adobe Labs? (I want to try using it to calibrate ACR for my camera with a shot of a MacBeth Color Chart.)
To be more precise about this, I currently use ACR Calibrator to calibrate ACR for my Canon 1Ds II. I now see there is beta 3 of Adobe DNG Profile Editor but note that it utilises a small subset of the GMB Digital Colorchecker SG target chart.
ACR Calibrator seems to produce quite different results from Adobe DNG Profile Editor. I have followed the steps below when using the latter.
Download DNG Profile Editor and drag to Applications
Launch Photoshop and open the raw file of your macbeth target.
In camera raw, place all settings to zero, curve to linear and turn off any sharpening etc. Click Save Image, choose dng as the file format and save it.
Launch DNG Profile Editor.
File / Open DNG File and choose the dng file you saved previously.
Select the chart tab in DNG Profile Editor.
Move the colored circles to the center of the matching colored corner square in your raw file
Click Create Color Table.
Choose File/Export <Camera> profile... Give it a name and save.
Exit DNG Profile Editor.
Re-launch photoshop and open a raw file. In Camera Raw, on the calibration tab, you should now see the profile you just saved.

ssprengel wrote:
I don't know of any other references or CC Passport numbers other than what Google can come up with. Babelcolor has some standard-deviation of spectrum numbers for a sampling of 20 charts done in 2006 and also some worst-color vs average-color visual comparisons to get an idea of how variable charts or at least their measurements can be. Somewhere it says the me4asurements were done of the standard and also the minichart, mixed together, I assume. I don't know if there is a list of the raw data or not.
To understand the source of the variation you really need to see multiple measurements with the same instrument, with different instruments, and of different charts from different manufacturing runs and different ages and measured in different temperatures and humidities, otherwise it's not easy to say whether the variations we're seeing between the CC standard and the CC passport in the article are within the normal variations or not or if they represent a significant difference not explained by normal variations.
Yes, I know the Babelcolor data and I have already included them in the study.
Obviously I do not have the opportunity to have the information to get an overview of the real things, but by analyzing various measurements I saw that Myers had to be the closest to official data of the CC Passport and instead is the more distant. Hence my doubts about the measurement.
Thanks anyway.
Marco

Similar Messages

Adobe DNG profile editor bug w/ GH2 files where aspect ratio is not 4:3

Hi,
posting here as Adobe DNG subforum is essentially dead
Panasonic GH2, select aspect ratio 3:2, get .RW2 raw file, convert it to .DNG using Adobe DNG converter (6.4.0.121 beta), try to open w/ Adobe DNG profile editor (1.0.0.39 beta 2) -> error message "DNG Profile Editor could not open the selected image. Note that the selected image must be a valid DNG color image".
XRite software has no issues to process the same .DNG file (converted from the original .RW2 w/ 3:2 aspect ratio).

Eric - just make it easier for you to reproduce the bug - here is the original .RW2 file (certainly ignore the quality of colorchecker shot in terms of how the target is lit, etc - it was not to make a profile actually - it was to illustrate the bug in question) = http://www.box.net/shared/f419prmuo2 ... and I am uploading the converted .DNG file too just in case = http://www.box.net/shared/gy5o9zzi57

DNG Profile Editor "base profile" question.

I'm profiling a Canon 5D3 with both the Adobe DNG Profile Editor and the Xrite ColorChecker software. It's been about 3 years since I last profiled a camera, so I'm re-doing the learning curve. My question now is how and why the DNG Profile editor depends on a "base profile?" Specifically, why does the DNG PE Chart Wizard generate different results depending on what base profile is used.
I see in the documentation that "all color adjustments made in the DNG Profile Editor are defined relative to a base profile." I understand that logic when making a custom profile via manual tweaks. You have to have a starting point. But I don't understand that logic when using the Chart Wizard. I expected the Chart Wizard to arrive at the same pre-defined target point regardless of the starting point. It does not seem to do that.
I discovered the difference by using an apparently bad workflow. I shot my colorchecker chart, converted the CR2 to DNG and brought it into Photoshop via ACR to inspect. That stored "Adobe Standard" as the base profile in the DNG.
Then I fed this DNG to the DNG PE Chart Wizard and generated a profile. I opened the image in ACR and applied "My Profile", which became the base profile in the DNG file. I thought I did something wrong, so I ran the same DNG through the Chart Wizard again and generated "My Second Profile." That version looked very strange, so I did it again and made "My Third Profile."
Now I have three profiles. My First Profile was made from Adobe Standard base. My Second Profile was made from My First Profile base. My Third Profile was made from My Second Profile base. Each iteration becomes more strange (bad), so this is clearly not the proper workflow. But what is? What base profile should be selected for Chart Wizard and why does it matter?
Being curious, I did the same exercise using the Xrite ColorChecker software. That software generates the same result, regardless of what base profile is stored in the DNG files. I'm not sure I like the results, but at least they are consistent.

DNG Profile Editor lets you define color edits (in the first tab) using a set of color control points. These control points in turn define a color lookup table used to perform the color correction when processing a (raw) image.
When you use a Base Profile, the resulting color table in the final profile is a combination of the base profile's color table, plus the color table defined by any edits that you've added in the first tab (using the Chart Wizard counts as adding edits to that first tab).
The reason you can get different and less smooth results if you apply the Chart Wizard iteratively is because you are applying lookup table after lookup table. The current color table-building method used by DNG PE has some limitations regarding smoothness of color profiles if two color control points are placed too closely (this can happen with the Chart Wizard, or if you specify two points manually that are close to each other). These problems can become more noticeable if you apply the DNG PE iteratively.

DNG profile editor : where can we find a link for downloading an updated version (for Mac OS 10.9)

The links I found here (http://www.adobe.com/downloads/updates.html) are both for Windows, althought one is named "MacIntosh".
The beta version seems to have problems on Mac OS 10.9 (it is impossible to quit the application).

Adobe - DNG Profile Editor : For Macintosh : DNG Profile Editor 1.0.4

Documentation for DNG Profile Editor??

Hi. I am looking for the tutorial and documentation on Adobe DNG Profile Editor (v 1.0.0.39 beta 2). I assume this is the latest release, but if not, I would appreciate a link to the latest. I tried downloading documentation and tutorial from the following link, but the site never comes up.
http://labs.adobe.com/wiki/index.php/DNG_Profiles
I'd like to build some profiles for my 5DmkII and studio lighting situations, specifically for portrait / skin tone type work. Suggestions welcome.
Thanks,
Lou Dina

In the past I did some research in these fields and I want to share the fruit of that work (but English language is a problem).
> There can be Variations Among cameras.
I have analyzed two sets of cameras, two Canon 40D and two 400D illuminated by Solux Daylight 4700K bulbs.
The first test was done with a 400mm. Unfortunately, very little movement of the lens at f/5.6 (a mistake) has darkened the upper rows of ColorChecker and I had to correct them with the brush of ACR Exposure (the worst intervention reaches 0.17). After this intervention the cameras differ by an average error of delta E 2000 0.30 and a maximum of 0.75.
Link: http://www.boscarol.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=58&t=321
The second test was done with a Canon 400D and a Canon Rebel XTi. In theory, the same model but for different markets.
Here the things were particularly interesting because:
- the cameras could be build from different processes due to different market areas
- the cameras were put on the market in 2006, and were produced with the technology of almost five years ago
- the cameras belonged to the entry level market segment, the techniques of production could be consistent with this low target
All these factors could lead really to differences in behavior. The results were an average error of 0.65 and a maximum of 1.26.
Link: http://www.gialandra.it/blog/files/343e438a6021337b5fdffb2cfbe0f08b-0.html
And probably if these tests had been made in laboratory the differences were even smaller.
I concluded that the differences in the behavior are all to prove.
On the Internet I found nothing of scientific.
> There are subtle Also Variations Among Conditions lighting, as well as chart shooting conditions (Exactly how the light is falling on the chart, the angle at Which you photograph the chart, etc.)..
These are the most important points. If the chart shooting conditions are a bit easier to control with geometry, get a light with a spectral power distribution right it is very difficult (and I suspect that even Adobe has not a decent D65 simulator). To obtain a light close to illuminant D50 I use 4700K Daylight Solux bulbs without glass diffuser. In front to the lamps I mounted a shape ring protection with a hole less than two centimeter (to avoid protection I have tried the black back version of the Solux bulbs but they do not have the correct spectral power distribution). Bulbs are powered by an adjustable power supply. Using the spectrometer as a feedback I can reach a CRI of 97.
It seems to me that even the not winter sunlight when the atmosphere is really clear is close to the D50, but I've never had a chance to measure it. In this condition the problems of non-uniform illumination do not exist, but be careful with the camera and target angles because the light is even more violent, the target should be perfectly at 45 degrees and the sensor should be parallel to the target.
Finally to have a more homogeneous illumination and all other problems I use only the mini format of the ColorChecker.
> There Are Also Among Variations lenses (eg, spectral transmission of Canon 50 f/1.4 is Not the same as Canon 180 f/3.5 macro, But They Are close).
I have studied the effect of five very different lenses in type, brand, cost, etc.. The spectral transmittance of the lens was so different to cause a shift of the white balance of 450K. On films this would lead to very different results, on digital system instead the human visual system is not able to appreciate differencies (worst deltaE 2000 is 1)
Link: http://www.photoactivity.com/Pagine/Articoli/052ResaCromaticaObiettivi/Resa_cromatica_degl i_obiettivi_ENG.asp
For my studies and my experience at this moment I think the best way to find the faithfull to the scene with a safe semi-universal profile is using the calibration sliders in D50 condition. From the linked experience below this gives faithfull from tungsten light (2600K) to above 10000K, of course this last only in daylight.
Link: http://www.photoactivity.com/Pagine/Articoli/023%20Calibratori%20al%20sole/Calibratori%20a l%20sole_en.asp
In this context I still use the script of Tindemans but it is time (many years now) that Adobe produces his matrices tweaker (XRite Passport stresses the matrices as far as possible before creating some sort of table)
I hope that I'm not boring
Ciao
Marco

DNG Profile Editor vs. Adobe Standard

I'm working in PS CS3, I shoot in Leaf 11.2 and process my files in Camera Raw 4.6. I've mostly be unhappy with the color differences between PS and Leaf. The adobe standard profile brings me close, but not enough.
I've attempted to shoot a color checker and use the DNG Profile Editor, but the profile created seems overly saturated, and gets me further from my goal of matching what I see in Leaf. Where am I going wrong? I imagined Profile Editor would be much more precise.
All comments/suggestions are welcomed
Thanks.

The short answer is the Leaf rendering is not "accurate" (a.k.a. "precise") by design. It is designed to look good, which is different. Attempting to build a very accurate profile using the chart feature of the profile editor will build a profile that is closer to being accurate, which is wrong direction if you are trying to match the Leaf rendering.
Start with the Adobe Standard profile and apply manual edits from there to move it closer to the Leaf rendering.

DNG Profile Editor: Can't create profile from JPG file

Guys, could you tell me why DNG Profile Editor fails to create color table using 4 colored circles ? It says "Unable to check white balance using gray patches. Please use the four color circles to identify the four corner patches of the chart and try again" even though I places four circles properly (it works with DNG files shot with my Nikon D700).
I created this DNG file from JPG file by opening it in Camera Raw plugin and saving as DNG file. Original JPG was shot on camera of Samsun Galaxy S phone. I know I'm crazy but I want to have color profile for it All patches are properly exposed after slight correction of Exposure slider in Camera Raw.
I'm using latest beta3 build
Here is link to DNG and JPG file I'm trying to use
http://www.box.net/shared/4v2rzlzjfp
Thanks!

If you convert your JPG to a DNG can you change the profile to the one you computed from the other JPG you converted to a DNG?
Profiles are not for JPGs. Profiles are for RAW files that ACR supports. You can't (easily/ever) get a RAW file from your Galaxy S and Adobe doesn’t' support that RAW format even if you could.
To see if your profiling is working, you can used the ColorCheck module from a trial version of Imatest that you download from www.imatest.com and look at the color-error.
You can also try the Read_Color_CC24.jsx script from Rags-Gardner:
http://www.rags-int-inc.com/PhotoTechStuff/ColorCalibration/

Questions about DNG Profile Editor recipe code

I have been playing around with DNG Profile Editor. With a text editor I made the following recipe:
I have some questions:
1. Right now I have my control points at 60 saturation. Will using two points for each color (say 70 and 40) make my changes more consistent across darker and lighter shades of the specific color?
2. Does DNG Profile editor respect HueLow and HueHigh, are they just placeholder numbers, or are they ignored if two points are close to each other?
3. What does FeatherAdjust do? I'm guessing it controls the rate of drop off of the corrections. Is the value respected by DNG Profile editor when it creates a profile?
Thanks for your time and attention, -Bruce.

1. For now DNG-only. Here's why:
http://labs.adobe.com/wiki/index.php/DNG_Profiles_FAQ#PEOnlyDNG
http://labs.adobe.com/wiki/index.php/DNG_Profiles_FAQ#WhyNameDNGPE
http://labs.adobe.com/wiki/index.php/DNG_Profiles_FAQ#WhyPESeparate
2. Standalone for now. See above links for why.
3. Use the 'Preview Color Changes' option in the Options menu.
4. You can use 'Apply Raw Adjustments' in the Options menu to see your raw adjustments. This is __not__ recommended for building a general-purpose profile because you are then optimizing a profile with specific image adjustments in mind, rather than building a profile based more on the inherent camera characteristics.
5. True, that is a limitation of this implementation.
6. I am not sure what you mean. The Chart Wizard automatically optimizes the color patches in a test shot based on reference values for many physical charts, which is more practically useful than the numbers printed on the reference card that comes with the chart.
7. Make sure you avoid color casts in the bottom row. The PE is picky about making sure your gray patches are relatively neutral. It is an attempt to help you get a better profile.
8. Use 'Show Affected Colors' from the Options menu.
You may wish to read this page carefully and thoroughly:
documentation
It is the reference online documentation for the DNG Profile Editor and a few of the things you wish to do, such as preview all color changes, apply raw adjustments, and visualize the extent of each color adjustment, are all documented there.

What kind of DNG file for DNG profile editor ?

Can somebody help me??? I have a problem to use DNG profile:
I am user of Fujifilm S5Pro, which has RAF file (=raw). The ACR (start from version 3...) and DNG understand my RAF files very well. But DNG profile editor dose not want to open it, even if Adobe DNG Converter 4.5 converts it to DNG file. My workflow is:
Launch Adobe DNG Converter.exe, => convert RAF to DNG (tryed different settings);
Launch DNG profile editor, => trying to open DNG file => have error???
May be I'm doing in a wrong way? Please advise me.

I tried to do the same on other PC with Vista (fully English). Also update DNG converter up to 4.6. And no success... :-(.
Every time I have the same error: "DNG Profile Editor could not open the selected image. Note that the selected image must be a valid DNG color image."
I could not understand... where is a bug.
Moreover, I took NEF from Nikon D80 and CR2 from Canon 20D and converted them to DNGs by converter 4.6. DNG Profile Editor did not want to open them on both Windows Vista and XP, and made the same error.
Do I really do wrong things? I'm completely lost
Thanks in advance,
Slava

About to use DNG Profile editor

I've had my Colorchecker for a few weeks, and I finally have time to set up my profiles for LR 3.4. In reading the DNG Profile editor tutorial page (http://labs.adobe.com/wiki/index.php/DNG_Profiles:Editor), I have a few questions:
1) If I use Tutorial 5, I am guessing I will have to create a profile for each lighting/WB condition, i.e., one for Tungsten, one for Fluorescent, one for sunny, one for overcast, one for flash, etc... Is that correct? Is there an advantage to doing this vs. going for the dual-illuminant approach explained in Tutorial 6?
2) In Tutorial 6, for the dual illuminant profiles, it states that one of the reference shots should be taken at 6500K. I'm not quite sure how to achieve this, since daylight and flash, to semi-constant WB sources I can easily achieve, are around 5000-5600K.
3) Should I (in LR) White-balance the Colorchecker reference shots, then convert to DNG, prior to bringing the DNG file into DNG Profile editor? Or is it preferable to WB as explained in Tutorial 1, step 3?
4) Finally, it's somewhat unclear how I bring the profiles into LR for use during the Import or Develop phases. Tutorial 1, step 9 mentions a "CameraProfiles directory" for ACR and LR, so I'm guessing I need to go digging through the Adobe folders to locate this directory and place/save my profiles there?

eswrite wrote:
1) If I use Tutorial 5, I am guessing I will have to create a profile for each lighting/WB condition, i.e., one for Tungsten, one for Fluorescent, one for sunny, one for overcast, one for flash, etc... Is that correct?
If you want a broad purpose DNG profile then yes, doing a dual illuminate profile is useful. Shoot a target under tungsten and under daylight and make the dual illuminate profile. There's no real reason you need to spawn off a bunch of other profiles for only slightly different light. The dual illuminate will handle cloudy or overcast just fine. If you also shoot with special lighting sources like fluorescent (which doesn't have a complete spectrum) or other non-standard lighting sources then do a profile for those special conditions. If you are creating a profile specifically for studio flash, you can get by doing only a single illuminate profile for the strobes...but in that case, the profile won't be as accurate if you also try to use it under tungsten–which would be the reason to do a dual illuminate profile.
As far as the D65 color temp, the closer you can get to it the better, but D55 should work fine. The key is to make sure it's evenly lit. The big difference between D65/D50/D55 is the relative amount of the blue light components-all three will be fairly close. Tungsten however has vastly less blue which can impact the sensor's spectral response–which is why the dual illuminate is suggested.
Once you do the CC shot, don't bother with tone/color corrections in ACR before converting to DNG. They won't have a material impact on the profile creation. The CC shot MUST be evenly lit and of an optimal exposure...
As far as where the profile goes, it depends on the system. Once you've created the profile, PE should default to the correct location, otherwise state your system and we can tell you where to put them.

Creative use of CC calibraton in the DNG Profile Editor

The DNG Profile Editor can be used to create profiles that mimic film looks.
I think right now it is manual trial & error process involving changes in hue, saturation and lightness, but it could be theoretically achieved with Color Checker calibration working in reversed order.
- Photograph the CC using your favorite film
- If B&W, develop in your favorite developer
- Scan the film
- Use the scan in the DNG Profile Editor as target values
The current DNG Profile Editor obviously does not allow that, it would require adding a new tab and clone the CC calibration feature and alter it to use the photographed values as target values as opposed to internal values.
I don't know if it would be worth the effort, but I thing the idea is worth of sharing.
By the way, unless I'm doing something wrong, the saturation slides don't seem to go 0%, so creation of B&W profiles is not possible.

Good idea. Yes, I've posted an example on my Flickr.
I chose a picture with good reds and yellows. There are four images in the set:
1. The original, untouched image. This is using the new Adobe Standard beta profile, brought into Lightroom with all default settings, including linear tone curve, no exposure or color adjustments, white balance "as shot", etc. For reference.
2. The image with my test profile applied, but no further adjustment.
3. My original attempt at the image, using the "old fashioned" pre-DNG-profiles raw processing method, for reference. The yellows are orangeish, which isn't that objectionable but also isn't accurate. The reds are weaker than I would like.
4. The "final" image, with my test profile plus additional tweaks -- white balance, tone curve for contrast, crushing out the blacks a bit more, etc. Two or three minutes of total processing, versus quite a bit more for the previous attempt with no "special" profile. The reds and yellows are perfect.
The Flickr set:
http://flickr.com/photos/100mph/sets/72157606547890574/
This was just a first, pretty quick attempt at playing with the DNG Profile Editor. I'm sure it can be tweaked more and even more can be accomplished.
[Edit: note: I changed the "upload date" on the test images so they wouldn't stay at the top of my Flickr page. Ignore the 2007 date, it doesn't mean anything.]

Camera Calibration in ACR & DNG Profile Editor

I am having the hardest time figuring out how to use the camera profiles generated with DNG Profile Editor in Camera Raw.
I am using Photoshop CS4 in Windows 7. I have generated the .dcp file with DNG Profile Editor and saved it in the folder: Program Files/Adobe/Photoshop CS4/Presets/Camera Profiles.
This is about as far as I've gotten. I have not been able use this profile in ACR under the Camera Calibration Tab. I have been lead to believe that is would show up automatically. I have not found any video tutorials related to ACR and installing Camera Profiles. They all seem to relate to Lightroom.
Any help would be greatly appreciated.

If you would like to look or copy profiles manually (for example you have received a profile made by someone else; for Windows7 you should be able to see where the Profiles are stored by searching for *.dcp (meaning any file with the extension .dcp)
That will show you where the Adobe supplied profiles are located. You can copy your custom profiles to the sub-folder of your camera type in the Camera folder.The other folder you see is where the Adobe Standard profiles live.
If you cannot see the programdata folder (and that is the case by default) you can make all hidden files visible:
(this from Windows Help, just search for show hidden files)
Computer>Organize>Folder and search options>View. In Advanced settings check the radio button Show hidden files, folders, and drives and then OK
Now you should see the programdata folder visible under your system (C:) folder
I hope that helps.

Camera Profiles and DNG Profile Editor

I saw the lightroom 2.0 eseminar and the presenter mentioned Camera Profiles and the DNG Profile Editor. All I see is ACR4.4 and 4.3. The the FAQ page says I need ACR4.5 and I can't find it and haven't gotten any update notice. Should I just wait for an update or forget it?
Don

>I have CS4. Will this overwrite ACR 5.1 in CS4?
If you have CS4, you should update to ACR 5.2. If you install 4.6, you will break your CS4 install. Either just run the Adobe updater app, or go to http://www.adobe.com/support/downloads/new.jsp to download it. DNG converter is a separate download. Both camera RAW and NDG converter contain the final release version of the new profiles. DNG profile editor can still be downloaded from Adobe Labs: http://labs.adobe.com/wiki/index.php/DNG_Profiles. There is also a profiles download there that you don't need if you install DNG converter 5.2.

Camera Profiles and DNG Profile Editor beta 2 now available

Hi everyone,
Beta 2 of the camera profiles and DNG Profile Editor are now available. Please visit here and enjoy:
http://labs.adobe.com/wiki/index.php/DNG_Profiles
I hope to have more detailed release notes/changes for you soon. You are welcome to ask questions, but please note that it may take a while for me to respond.
Eric

Eric,
I followed very carefully your instructions for installing the new beta2 profiles and deleting the beta1 profiles, but have the same problems as many others. I'd like to provide a bit more information. I'm running Windows Vista Home Premium and have installed Photoshop CS4, updated with ACR5.1 and Lightroom 2.1 final release. As others have described, the default for all of my images was set to one of the Camera profiles (Canon faithful beta1), but now the profile name in Lightroom is blank. I tried looking at the other profiles and it does indeed appear that the beta2 profile is being used, but if I then reset the image it now shows ACR4.4, whereas the image had been imported with the camera profile as default. Also, if I open an image in ACR5.1 that was specified to use the same camera profile, it now shows ACR4.4 and it is not using the beta2 profile of what I had been using, I can see this by selecting the other profiles. Going back to Lightoom, I guess I could select all my images and select the Canon faithful beta2 profile, but then the mark shows up bottom right of the image showing that they have all been edited/modified, is there anyway to get all my images using the profile I was using but the beta2 version, without this happening and how about new imports?
Thanks, David.

How to make dual illuminant profile in DNG profile editor?

I have just started working with the DNG Profile Editor. In another discussion I commented on the clarity of the instructions provided by the tutorial. I had no difficulty creating a single illuminant profile using the X-Rite color checker passport. But when it came to producing a dual illuminant profile, following the instructions exactly, I was stymied.
1. Open dng image of Color Checker photographed in 6500K illumination.
2. Open dng image of Color Checker photographed in 2850K illumination.
3. Select Chart tab in editor.
At this point one is instructed to "Click the 6500 K-lit ColorChecker image window to select it."
But the 2850K lit image (last loaded) has replaced the 6500K image window (at step 2) and I can find no way to reopen the 6500 K lit image window in order to proceed to the next step.
As a matter of interest, why do these instructions suggest setting the pop-up window in the Chart Pane to "6500K only" and then create color table with first image. Thereafter select second image, set pop-up window to "2850K only" and create color table. I seems to me that, having loaded two images (even if I can only see the second image loaded) one should choose "both color tables" and then create color table. In fact I have tried this and it does produce a profile, but I have no way of determining if it is a correct dual illuminant profile.
Please help.

2. HYPERLINK "/people/MadManChan2000"MadManChan2000,
Oct 21, 2013 9:09 AM in reply to blumesan
Note that the "Both color tables" option always creates a single-illuminant profile. The "Both color tables" option means that the computed color corrections will be applied to both color tables (i.e., the color table for the first calibration illuminant, which is usually Standard Light A, and also the color table for the second calibration illuminant, which is usually D65).
After playing around with the Profile Editor for a while, and examining the results with dcpTool, I now understand (I hope) what Eric is saying. In his language a single-illuminant profile is one created from a single dng image using the "both color tables" option (without regard to the illuminant used to capture that image.) When one does this (using Adobe Standard as the base profile) an examination of the resulting profile with dcpTool shows the following:
Two illluminants are identified: 17 (Std A) and 21 (D65).
Color Matrix 1 & 2; Forward Matrix 1 & 2; Hue Sat Delta Tables 1 & 2.
Which certainly gives the impression of a dual illuminant profile to novices like myself. My guess is that the PE software itself applies a default assumption of these two illuminants, corrects the image for each illuminant and constructs two color tables, one for each illluminant. When used, the profile will interpolate between the two tables based on the white balance of the image being edited.
If this is indeed correct it makes me wonder in what way does such a profile differ from a dual illuminant profile created from two dng images, each captured under a different illuminant (2800K & 6500K) as described in Tutorial #6 of the PE instructions. These instructions contain the following description of such a dual illuminant profile: "The result is a single profile that performs well under a wide range of illuminants instead of a single fixed illuminant." Which really make me scratch my head. Should one conclude from this that a single illuminant profile (created using the "both color tables" option) will perform less well under a range of illuminants? Will it perform well only under a narrow range of illuminants centered around the illuminant used to capture the single image?
As a footnote, it is worth remarking that I (and perhaps others) have been confused by examining profiles created by the XRite software when using only a single dng image. Examining such a profile with dcpTool one sees the following structure:
One illuminant only #23 (D50)
A single Color Matrix table.
A single Hue Sat Delta Table.
Thus one comes to expect this structure in a single illuminant profile.
I would be very happy to see Eric's comments..

Adobe DNG Profile Editor

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for