Channel scale effect over saturation

Hello,
I have a .vi to acquire 8 channels, with a 6062E card and a BNC-2115 board.
For each channel, I have created a scale, so that I get physical units. Up to today, I used to read Volts, and then multiply the signal by the sensitivity and add an offset, but I want to make the conversion properly (and so, for example, I will save to disk data with channel names, units, and so on).
But, here is the part I don't understand.
If I set the slope to 1, that is, I can read the Volts, the measurement is fine. I compare it with a multimeter reading and both agree. Readings range from 1 to 5V.
So, I then set the gain to its actual value: 22,5 (physical units/volt), and no offset (y-intercept = 0). And here's the weird stuff: the reading will get saturated at a very much lower value than it should (5*22.5 = 100), it saturates when reaching 11.87.
If I set the slope to 1 again, readings match again the multimeter reading, ranging from 1 to 5V.
So, one last check: I set again the slope to 22.5, and measure also with the multimeter: the multimeter makes the same reading as always, read value will saturate at 11.87.
This value of 11.87 depends on the y-intercept I set, can't tell you right now the tries I've made but didn't just sum to the y-intercept I entered, it changed it with apparently no sense.
Please, anyone has an idea of is happening / what am I doing wrong and why?
Solved!
Go to Solution.
Attachments:
block_diagram.JPG ‏19 KB
front_panel.JPG ‏12 KB

Hello,
well, I finally solved it. Actually, I finally found what was I doing wrong.
My main error was not to carefuly read the error I mentioned above, just see the error, the code, & roughly read it.
Actually, since the Scale is done before the channel definition, MIN and MAX values correspond to Scaled Units, and not to volts. I got the error because the value entered, even in scaled units, was overrange. And as I was entering the volt corresponding values (1 to 5), these values in scaled units where really low, so it would saturate at 11.87 that corresponds to the maximum readable level adjusted by the MIN and MAX values entered.
So, finally the issue is solved. Again, thanks a lot for your time and effort, it is really interesting to have a forum like this with active people helping us newies.
Thanks.

Similar Messages

Premiere Elements saved my project with a hue/ over saturation on all my clips in the project

I'm a first time user of Premiere elements 12 and my first project was finished without a hitch but when I published the video the end result has over saturation/hue in the entire video. I go back in to see what happened to the project and when I reopened the project it seems all my clips have been altered as well. I have not touched anything in the adjust tab or applied any effects. However the thumbnails on the timeline bar under quick view have the correct colors. Does anyone know how to revert this effect, check to see if I accidentally hit something or have a possible solution?
Thanks for your help.
Ben

Chilisause
I believe that SG gave you the key to your issue when he wrote
Have you applied any effects -- including Auto Fix -- to your clips? If you open the Adjust panel, do you see a little green dot on any of hte Adjustment options, indicating that an effect has been applied? (Since the clip looks fine on your timeline but not in the Monitor panel, the indication is that you've applied an effect or adjustment.)
Pretty sure his "Auto Fix" was meant to be "Smart Fix". To prove or disprove "Smart Fix" as the factor here, please try the following quick test...
Open a new project
Go to Expert workspace Edit Menu/Preferences/General and make sure that there is a check mark next to the option
"Show all do not show again messages".
Then import from the hard drive one of these images that have developed a purple sky displayed in the Edit area monitor only.
When you drag the image to the Timeline, do you see the following pop up?
If you do not get that pop up, then end of idea. If you do, then
first put a check mark next to "Do not show again" and then click the No button.
Moving forward, you should not be getting any more purple skies unless you want them and create them
with one of Premiere Elements effects on your own.
Please let SG know if his suggestion was on target for the Smart Fix involvement in your issue.
Thanks.
ATR

Over-Saturation

I was told by a couple of pro photographers on a web site I frequent that my photos are generally over-saturated. I have PSE 10 and almost always make the following edits:
- using the Quick selection, do an Autofix, then increase the Shadows, Highlights, and Midtones to bring out more definition
- using Full, do an Auto Levels, sometimes do an Auto Color Correction (depending on how it looks), and finally do a bit of sharpening using the Unsharp Mask
Rarely do I specifically adjust (increase) the saturation. So my questions are:
1) I think I have a general idea of when photos are over-saturated, but what specifically do you look for to indicate that they are?
2) do any of the PSE edits I am doing above implicitly change the saturation? If so, how can I modify my edits so as not to over-saturate?
3) can you take a look at some of my photos and give me your opinion as to whether they are over-saturated? The first photo of the butterfly in the photostream was specifically adjusted for saturation, but most of the other ones were not.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/98772145@N05/
Thanks.

I see the same thing if I edit the example fox image in the same ways as you've specified, although this particular image doesn't need much done to it, in my opinion, and so the oversaturation is less than some others.
I think you are on the right track saying out of the Quick Fix things, because these reduce the overall dynamic range more than a little and boost the saturation slightly so the net effect is an unnatural mismatch between the overall contrast and the saturation. Normally if you reduce contrast in a scene the colors are also muted but with your multiple iterations of fixes the opposite occurs.
The other comment is that the sharpness is being applied to things that don't deserve it, mainly noise, and the way you reduce this is to up the threshold a bit to avoid sharpening areas that don't have edges. I found that on the fox picture, a threshold around 15 seemed good, which sharpens the glint in the eyes and some of the fur that is in focus, but leaves the out-of-focus noisy areas alone.
You asked what you might do different, and I have two approaches to give, none of which use Quick or Auto fixes and actually take less steps. First is to use Levels and Shadows/Highlights which are both under Enhance / Adjust Lighting. The third option in this menu is Brightness/Contrast but the fox picture was almost ok so didn't really need any of that. Here are screen shots of the menu items and the adjustments I made to your photo using them:
First I used Levels to adjust the black point to 12 which was where the histogram ran out of values at the low end, and then boosted the overall brightness using the gamma slider to where it looked ok but not overly bright. In this example I used 1.20. With a different sort of picture, you might need to move the white-point down to where the histogram ran out of values on the bright end but this picture had pure white already in it, so that wasn't necessary. The Auto Levels command actually does the black and white point adjustments but it overdoes them a little so I like using the Levels black and white point sliders to be more precise:
Next I did like how you brought out a little more detail in the highlights, so used Shadows/Highlights to compress the light values slightly, and also used the Midtone Contrast to give the textures of the image a little more pop:
None of this increased the saturation appreciably nor compressed the dynamic range so much to make things seem unnatural.
I left your sharpening except using a threshold of 15 as I stated, above. This image was quite blurry so it probably needed more sharpening attention using different radii and perhaps the other sharpening tool, but I didn't want to spend time with that since the most obvious issue at hand was oversaturation.
The second technique, which is a bit more radical but more useful in my opinion, is to open the JPG in the Camera Raw plug-in despite not being a raw format file. This has the advantage of having all the toning sliders available at once without having to go though various menus and buttons to find each small set of adjustments and also just one Auto button to click, though usually I back off most of what the Auto decided for me but it's still something quick to try at the beginning. There is also better sharpening and noise reduction.
Ok, to open a non-raw file in the Camera Raw plug-in, you can use File / Open As... and after choosing the image, set the File Type to Camera Raw, then click Open:
Here is your original image opened in Adobe Camera Raw (ACR) with all the toning adjustments at zero:
Below is how I adjusted the toning sliders. I had first clicked Auto and didn't like how it was too dark, so I only left the Blacks at +1 from that, and reset or readjusted everything else. The overall image seemed a little dark to me so I increased the Exposure by half-a-stop, but that washed out the highlights so I dialed them back by setting Highlights to -87, just so there was some detail in the chin fur and foreground rock. Finally I increased the Clarity, which inreases the contrast of the textures, and finally I added a tiny bit of Vibrance. If I had adjusted the blackopint down quite a bit, then that might have oversaturated everything, and I could have addressed that by merely setting the Vibrance or Saturation to a slightly negative value. I also like a little bit extra color in my processing, so a slight bit of added Vibrance seemed good to me. The Vibrance slider is different than Saturation in that it doesn't boost skin tones (reds/oranges/yellows) as much as the greens and blues, so it works to increase color in people pictures without overdoing their skin. I've put the original to the right on the same line so it's easier to compare:
Besides toning you can do detail adjustment, which involves sharpening and noise-reduction. Here is the face portion of the originally processed image at 100% if you click on it. The first thing you'll notice is that all the grainy noise is sharpened even in areas that are out of focus or blurred due to the left-right camera motion, and the other thing to notice is the green and mostly reddish-purple splotches of color noise that weren't quite all removed in camera:
Here are the Sharpness and Noise-Reduction settings I settled on after a few minutes:
The main thing to notice is that the only sharpened parts are the ones that have relatively sharp details, the glint in the eyes and the fur on their side of the eyes and a bit of the whiskers. The rest is mostly out of focus. For a better shot, without the camera motion, the sharpening settings might have been entirely different. The way I accomplished only sharpening the edges that where relatively sharp already and ignoring the noise and other out-of-focus areas was with the Sharpen Masking setting, which is 77 in this case. This is somewhat similar to the threshold setting of the sharpening in the regular Unsharp Mask in PSE, but it has a way to set it visually, by holding down the Alt key while sliding the Masking slider back and forth until only the bolder edges are shown:
I see in this screenshot that I had the Detail slider set to 5, which was probably better than the 25 I used in the screenshot, above. The other thing to notice is the Luminance and Color sliders in the Noise Reduction area are set to reduce the tiny specs of noise and the green/purple splotches.
One thing I need to mention about using Camera Raw is that I think in PSE10 the highest version you can update to may be ACR 6.7 which won't have the same set of toning sliders as in my example--I hacked a version of the 7.1 beta plug-in to use with it to get the new sliders, but normally you would have those available in PSE10 I don't think. You would need to use PSE11 or better yet, wait for PSE12 which comes out in another week or two.
This new method of toning and detail adjustment works ok with images one-by-one via File / Open, but it isn't that efficient ot use for many images. The best thing for that that isn't expensive Photoshop, would be to get Lightroom, which has these same adjustments but also optimized to work with dozens, hundreds, or more images from one photoshoot. The other benefit to Lightroom is that you can use a wide array of filters and brushes that are limited in the Elements-hosted version of the Camera Raw plug-in.
Remember when I said I thought the overall fox picture was too dark, well what is really wrong is the fox is too dark and I could care less about the rocks and other non-important background items. Here is a version of the same fox picture using Lightroom's radial filter to darken the surroundings so the fox is more prominent. The one without the radial filter darkening is at the right:
Lightroom is currently on sale for $129.99 and upgrades are $79.99 with a 30-day trial version available for download if you want to try it:
http://www.adobe.com/lightroom/

Over saturated and contrast with previews in Aperture 3.4.5

When I import photos from my Nikon D700 I import both RAW and JPEG with RAW as the master. The initial previews are great, but as soon as aperture updates the preview it becomes over saturated with too much contrast. I have tried post import processing with both Aperture and Camera presets with the same result. I have followed other similar threads that go into the technical details of what a preview is, this is fine, but what I want to know is what I'm doing that stops me from keeping the original good preview image. Can anyone tell me exactly where the initial preview was generated adn how to keep it?
Cheers
P.S. i have temporarily disabled this terrible change by toggling 'P'

Can anyone tell me exactly where the initial preview was generated adn how to keep it?
Haggy72,
as you have seen the many threads on previews, I am sure, you know already, that the initial preview is the preview generated by your camera. It reflects all raw processing and all effects set in your camera, but it does not show, what the unprocessed raw image is like.
Aperture will create a preview, that is showing excatly, how the raw image will look, without any edits applied. When you are using the raw as original image file, it is necessary, that the preview (and the thumbnail) will show you the raw image as it is. How else are you to know, what edits will be necessary to create the image you want?
if you want to keep the original, camera generated preview, use the jpeg as original image file. That image is a high resolution version of the preview you like.
-- Léonie

Overly saturated profiles

As I wrote in a previous thread (http://forums.adobe.com/thread/872324?tstart=30), I used DNG Profile Editor to generate dual-illuminant profiles for my Nikon D300 and D7000. To avoid red channel clipping, I was careful to expose to the left, perhaps with as much as 1/3 EV under-exposure. The resultant dual-illuminant profiles render overly saturated (and contrasty) photos. Should I expose more to the right, or is there another issue to watch out for to avoid these types of results?

eswrite wrote:
I forgot to mention that I shot the 6500K exposure(s) with the Colorchecker target under full sun (yes, evenly illuminated) at or around 5500K (according to DNG Profile Editor) -- perhaps that's the issue?
I doubt the values are an issue. That is, they all vary depending on the software product (a kelvin value is a range of colors and a pretty big range at that). YMMV so trying to hit a specific number is an exercise in frustration.

Is it possible to make an effect over all the finished film cuts etc

I have almost finished a project, i like the way it is but would like to soften the overall feel of the film.
Is there a way to place an effect over all the edits etc?
Or do i have to export the finished movie and put that to a new project sequence?
If so what is the best setting to export so that when i load back again i don't loose any quality?
Thanks Gee

Try this step by step. It will help you understand better exactly what happens when you nest a sequence inside another sequence.
•Create a new sequence (File > New > Sequence). You will get a new timeline. (Make sure you create it with the same sequence settings as your original sequence ... see FCE > Easy Setup).
•Then drag your original sequence from the Browser onto the new sequence timeline. This nests your original sequence inside the new sequence.
•Then, +in the new sequence,+ apply whatever filters/effects you want to the original sequence.
In effect, when you nest sequences you can treat the nested sequence(s) as if they were plain old clips. It's a cool trick.

Can't scale effects with image resize in Photoshop CC, why?

I'm trying to resize an image, size it down from the 600ppi I work in
to a preview 300ppi size. But I can't get any option to resize the layer
effects to work. In that little cog, in the top right, there is a menu
item Scale Effects, but it is always greyed out and unselectable.
I've tried just scaling it in different ways, percentages, the actual
size rather then the ppi. No luck. Anyone know why?
I'm desperate to get this file (which has a tonne of layer comps in it) to print.
Thanks!

Adobe hid the option in its new dialog making it inconvenient you have no idea of how it is currently set till you click on the gear to see the status of the check-mark.

Trying a simple CC Redial Blur Effect over an image !!

rHi,
I am trying a tutorial at How to create a quick and easy Light Beam Effect in Adobe After Effects - YouTube which applies the CC Redial Blur effect over an image it looks very simple and straight forward but for some reason its not working for me.
Here is the project file http://tonyalepski.heliohost.org/AE.zip
If someone can help me figure out what is the problem that will be a great help !!
Many thanks !!
Tonya

Your issue is quite simple. Tutorial author is using a PSD file with no background under the text (file with transparency) - you are using a jpg - file with gray background that is covering your rays. You have to remove background in photoshop and export it to AE without it or remove it in AE using some Keying plugins or simply masks.

Over saturated images

I recently disconnected and moved my system. When I started back up all my iphoto images were over-saturated. It also happens with some images in Safari. I had this problem when I upgraded to iphoto5, searched the discussions and found a simple fix. I can't remember what it was and can't find a solution. Does anyone have a clue?
I have calibrated my monitor and looked for the cameraRGB profile and neither have worked.
Thanks in advance.

Hi
I can sympathise with how annoying this must be - and although I haven't looked into it myself, I do recall several other posts over the last 18months or so, with the same issue.
I can't dig out the exact posts now, but maybe the following might lead somewhere?
http://webkit.org/blog/73/color-spaces/
http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=302827
http://www.gballard.net/psd/golive_pageprofile/embeddedJPEGprofiles.html
sorry I can't locate the threads I remember- I found one or two, but they were un-answered.

Over-saturated dvd burns

After my DVD is burned, the colors on most TV and computer screens, not including the one its burned from, appear over-saturated. This happens for menus and videos. The reds and blues especially are really bright. Its possible that the greys are also brighter, the images do appear very bright, except for the solid black, which does appear black.
Any thoughts on this?

"not including the one its burned from"
The fact that it doesn't look oversaturated on the monitor used in the creation process is probably a clue. Compared to "average" settings of other computer screens and TVs, it is probably set somewhat undersatured. Based on what this monitor is showing you, you then adjust color, brightness, contrast in the production process - thus ending up with video that looks too dark on any monitor that isn't set too light. :p
The only "real" way to judge color etc. would be by using a
calibrated video monitor. If there is no budget for that, the other way is by trial and error (comparing the settings of your monitor with a variety of TVs and monitors). But you should use a video monitor or at least a TV for this and not a computer monitor.

Over saturated images when monitor resumes from sleep

Lately I started to get this weird beheviour from LR 2.7. each time my monitor resumes from sleep all image colors become extremely over saturated. All other apps and computer desktop are just the same so it's only LR.
I use a wide gamut LCD (HP LP2475w) which is calibrated using iOne Display 2.
If I restart LR the problem goes away. This only started a few days ago just after I started uploading new photos taken by a new lens (Sigma 30mm).
Any ideas?
Micha

Hi
I can sympathise with how annoying this must be - and although I haven't looked into it myself, I do recall several other posts over the last 18months or so, with the same issue.
I can't dig out the exact posts now, but maybe the following might lead somewhere?
http://webkit.org/blog/73/color-spaces/
http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=302827
http://www.gballard.net/psd/golive_pageprofile/embeddedJPEGprofiles.html
sorry I can't locate the threads I remember- I found one or two, but they were un-answered.

Deskjet 1010 over saturated colors

This is my first HP printer. I have had it only a few days and am very disappointed with prints from my photographs.
The prints have over saturated colors and are too warm, resulting in a dark, muddy appearance.
For mant years, I have used Canon printers that have allowed me to adjust color balance and density.
I was surprised to that these facilities are not available with HP software.
Is there any way I can get the print quality that I want?

HI , Welcome to the HP Support Forums! I see that you're experiencing quality issues, while printing photos on your HP Deskjet 1010 Printer. I would like to assist you with this. Due to the nature of the issue, I may require more information. What operating system are you using? How to Find the Windows Edition and Version on Your Computer.What operating system are you using? Mac OS X: How Do I Find Which Mac OS X Version Is on My Computer? To see if the correct driver is installed please try: Please download and run the Print and Scan Doctor, it will likely diagnose and resolve the issue you are experiencing. Please let me know the results of the steps I have recommended. Note: The Print and Scan Doctor is for Windows Operating Systems. Do colour prints look good on regular paper?
What type of paper are you using when you're printing photos? Did you specify the Paper Type when printing, in the print settings? Note: If you aren't using HP Photo Paper, select Other Photo Paper. The printer is programmed to know HP Paper, the speed and saturation of the Ink will depend on the type of paper you're using. Therefore, if you're using none HP Paper, and the print settings are set for HP Photo Paper, you will see these results. Printing Photos- Manual Load photo paper1. Make sure the output tray is open.2. IMPORTANT: Remove all paper from the paper input tray, and then load the photo paper with side to be printed on facing up. To print a photo on photo paper1. On the File menu in your software, click Print.2.Make sure your printer is selected.3. Click the button that opens the Properties dialog box. Depending on your software application, this button might be called Properties, Options, Printer Setup, Printer Properties, Printer, or Preferences.4. Select the appropriate options.● On the Layout tab, select Portrait or Landscape orientation.● On the Paper/Quality tab, select the appropriate paper type and print quality from the Media drop-down list.● Click Advanced to select the appropriate paper size from the Paper Size drop-down list. NOTE: For maximum dpi resolution, go to the Paper/Quality tab and select Photo Paper,Best Quality from the Media drop-down list. Then go to the Advanced tab and select Yes from the Print in Max DPI drop-down list. If you want to print Max DPI in grayscale, select High Quality Grayscale from the Print in Grayscale drop-down list.5. Click OK to return to the Properties dialog box.6. Click OK, and then click Print or OK in the Print dialog box. NOTE: After the printing is finished, remove unused photo paper from the input tray. Store the photo paper so it does not start to curl, which could reduce the quality of your printout I would try the steps within this guide, Fixing Print Quality Problems. If you need further assistance, please let me know the following information above. Please respond to this post with the result of your troubleshooting. I look forward to hearing from you. Good Luck!

Over saturated Images in Safari

I'm experiencing an issue where Safari shows images optimised for the web in a very over saturated form.
It is really driving me mad!
My MackBook Pro and 23" apple LCD are both colour calibrated using the Spyder2Pro colouromitor. I use those profiles for the screens and the colours are great.
Here's my workflow:
- My camera is set to use Adobe RGB 1998 icc profile
- I take images in RAW format and import them into Aperture (ver 1.5).
- When I have made any adjustments I export them from Apertue into jpeg format
- I have set-up Aperture to use the sRGB colour space when exporting images into jpeg format from Aperture (the images will mainly be used for the web which is why I use sRGB)
- I open the images using Photoshop and use the 'optimise for web' feature to keep the file size low
- I select the option that says 'embed icc profile'
- Photoshop then embeds the sRGB icc profile in the image
If I look at the image, it looks just fine in Photoshop or any other image viewing program. If I then open it in Safari it looks way over sturated.
I have tried everything and I just can't work it out.
I've even tried setting my monitor colour space to that of sRGB to see if it makes any difference, and it doesn't.
However, if I choose NOT to embedd the icc profile in the image, then Safari opens the image and it looks just like the jpeg when I view it within Photohop or any other image veiwer.
I can view the images using Internet Explorer on a Windows PC and they appear to be fine. I guess thats because IE ignores colour profiles where Safari will use them if they exist.
It seems Safari is reading the colour profile incorrectly in the image.
Can anyone tell me whats going on?

Hi
I can sympathise with how annoying this must be - and although I haven't looked into it myself, I do recall several other posts over the last 18months or so, with the same issue.
I can't dig out the exact posts now, but maybe the following might lead somewhere?
http://webkit.org/blog/73/color-spaces/
http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=302827
http://www.gballard.net/psd/golive_pageprofile/embeddedJPEGprofiles.html
sorry I can't locate the threads I remember- I found one or two, but they were un-answered.

Photoshop over-saturating images when saving for web

I've spent most of the day recalibrating my monitor.
I now use a gamma setting of 2.2, and target white point of D65.
My color workspace is sRGB IE661966-2.1.
I'm using Photoshop CS3.
So I've tried converting an image (even though I am already working in the same color workspace) to sRGB IE661966-2.1 and when I do a Save-for-web, Adobe gives me an over-saturated image.
Now, while in Photoshop I move the save-for-web window lower so I can visually compare the image in photoshop to the one presented in the save-for-web dialog, and they are still different.
I am at loss.
I could understand if I went to another computer and viewed the image, or went to another browser and viewed the image, but even in Photoshop, I'm seeing oversaturation.
To compensate, I've been desaturating my images, but this is frustrating, as I feel it should work.
Can anyone shed some light on this matter?
I'm running OS X v. 10.4.11
a dual processor Intel dual-core 2.66GHZ zeon
2 GB RAM
Monitor is a Dell 2407WFPHC

>> I wouldn't want the other apps to assume sRGB for an untagged image, because
That's a fair opinion...[I] would want an option to set an RGB Default profile in ColorSync, though, because the 'high-gamut' monitor I had here whacked out Finder, Preview, iPhoto color, and that setting would 'fix' the problem across the Mac OS.
The last time I saw this ColorSync RGB Default option was in 10.3x
http://www.gballard.net/psd/cswfi/panthercs.jpg
But according to Apple's John Gnaegy, when I asked him WHY that setting wasn't working here:
He said, "The ColorSync panel> Default Profiles tab headline is wrong.
"I certainly understand why you would think (that ColorSync's RGB Default setting is Assigned to iPHOTO documents that do not contain embedded profiles), but that's not what happens. Untagged images are instead represented by the profile of the preferred (Default) display," said John.
It appears some people at Apple understand the issues -- default 1.8 gamma, default monitor RGB, trying to set up ColorSync option to set a Default RGB -- but it also seems like Apple is very slow and stubborn to change...

LR3: Exports are dark and over-saturated

... or: LR3 shows everything dull and to light...
I've upload an image and described my problem her:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/tcdk/4753052290/
But here it is:
I'm having some color and curve problems with my exports, it all looks to dark and to saturated when I export from Lightroom 3. So I'm trying to figure out what's happening.
Here's the setup:
Windows XP
Nvidia 8600GT graphics card
One Dell 2407WFPHC screen
One Dell 2408WFP screen (my main)
Huey Pro color calibration kit (software version 1.51)
Everything calibrated. It looks good to me when I import in lightroom (from raw from Pentax K20D, and Panasonic LX3)
Exporting to jpeg (sRGB) or tiff and viewing in anything else the colors are darker and over-saturated (tried in firefox (profile aware), Internet Explorer, irfanview and chrome). Loading the jpeg into Lightroom and comparing it to the RAW, they look the same (not dark or over-saturated).
What you see above is a screen grab, of a test chart viewed in Lightroom and IrfanView. They where just imported/loaded - nothing was done. No development settings are applied as part of my LR3 import.
The colors in lightroom 3 are dull compared to the IrfanView.
Sample rgb values:
1 red:
Lightroom 224,52,27 (not that pure)
Irfanview 254,0,0 (~pure red)
4 purple:
Lightroom: 124,1,251
irfanview: 131,0,254
9 green:
lightroom: 126,255,54 (far from pure green)
irfanview: 0,255,3 (pure green)
The red and the green are the worst - a lot more "energy" in them. So imagine the reverse process. I've a photo in Lightroom and it looks good to me. I export it and every 126,255,54 gets made into pure green. Darker and over-saturated!
I've no idea what's happning or what to do about it. I've tried everything I can think about.
I don't really think I had this issue with LR2 - not enough to notice anyway.
System info:
Lightroom version: 3.0 [677000]
Operating system: Microsoft Windows XP Professional Service Pack 3 (Build 2600)
Version: 5.1 [2600]
Application architecture: x86
System architecture: x86
Physical processor count: 2
Processor speed: 1,8 GHz
Built-in memory: 3007,1 MB
Real memory available to Lightroom: 716,8 MB
Real memory used by Lightroom: 278,4 MB (38,8%)
Virtual memory used by Lightroom: 266,7 MB
Memory cache size: 49,7 MB
System DPI setting: 96 DPI
Displays: 1) 1200x1920, 2) 1920x1200
Application folder: C:\Program Files\Adobe\Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 3
Library Path: P:\Lightroom\Lightroom 3 Catalog\Lightroom 3 Catalog\Lightroom 3 Catalog.lrcat
Settings Folder: C:\Documents and Settings\Thomas Christensen\Application Data\Adobe\Lightroom

So in my case it seems I'm better off running uncalibrated as that seems to produce something more natural across the board than when I use calibration and it goes between extremes, fine or totally wrong... I can see the images fine on my controlled environment but if you're distributing online then things don't work out at all!
This is a very common misconception. Needless to say it is wrong. the only way you can get reasonable colors on everybody else's monitors is to calibrate your display and only trust color managed apps. If you don't calibrate and don't use color managed apps, your output will basically be completely random. At least with calibration and management you will be targeting the standard (sRGB) that most monitors cluster around (that's what they were designed to), so while individual monitors will be more or less random, on average they will show what you intended. If you don't calibrate and manage you will target only your specific monitor. Since this is a wide gamut display, the average viewer (who doesn't calibrate nor color manage) will see a dull desaturated image with respect to what you see.
Bottom line: If you use a wide gamut monitor, calibrate and only trust color managed apps. If you have a normal gamut monitor, calibrate and trust color managed apps the most, but non managed apps will be OK if you use sRGB as your export space. You cannot do away with the calibration step if you care about what others will see.

Channel scale effect over saturation

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for