Creating profiles for special illuminants in DNG Profile Editor

I have successfully used the DNG Profile Editor with images of the ColorChecker Passport to create simple dcp profiles for daylight and tungsten illumination. I have obtained very satisfactory profiles using both a single image and the "both color tables" option, as well as two images (one tungsten and one daylight) and the "dual illuminant" method.
Now I wish to construct separate profiles for use with unusual light sources: fluorescent lights and white LED lights. Can some one tell me how this is best done using the DNG Profile Editor.
Appreciate any suggestions.
Mike.

When there are two illuminants in a profile ACR will interpolate an effective profile based on how far the actual image WB is from one of the illuminants in the dual profile. For example if the profile is using the 2650K (Tungsten) and 6500K (hazy sunight) as the two illuminants and your images is taken in direct sunlight with a WB of 5000K then the profile will be more the D65 profile but a little bit of the redder A profile mixed in. This allows the dual profile to be used for any lighting with a Temperature between A and D65 that also has a Tint number close to or a little above zero. An A/D65 dual profile fails for fluorescent lighting because the Tint number is quite a bit different than either the A or D65 Tint numbers.
To your question, for a single illuminant profile, you should use the Both Color Tables option so that no matter what WB your photo has, the profile used will be the same. This makes the illuminant A and D65 irrelevant because any interpolation between the two illuminants would result in the same profile numbers.
However, I also think that the dual illuminant numbers are not necessarily hard-coded to A and D65, at least not when you use the CCPP plug-in for LR to create the profile, but are actually whatever your photos WB numbers are, so you can make dual-illuminant profiles for other pairs of lighting, such as fluorescent and daylight or fluorescent and incandescent, or even sunlight and shade, depending on what mixed lighting you have at your location and time of day.
An easy way to test this would be to make a dual profile, one DNG being fluorescent and one being your blue LEDs (two sources far away from A or D65), then also create two single profiles, one for each of those same two lighting sources. Test the dual-illuminant profile with the fluorescent CCPP image, and then switch the profile to the single illuminant fluorescent one and see if anything looks different. Do the same test with the blue-LED CCPP image with dual and single blue-LED profiles.
If the look of the image is the same when using a dual profile where one end is the same as the single profile both tested with the actual CCPP image that was used to make the profile or one end of the profile, then the illuminant numbers in the dual profile change to whatever the DNGs illuminants were. However, if the look changes between the dual profile and the single profile when applied to one of the dual-profiles image's WB then the illuminant numbers must be fixed to A and D65, and so any dual profiles are useless if the two illuminants do not match A and D65.
If your experiment fails using the DNGPE, then try it using the CCPP software and the LR plug-in.

Similar Messages

What is the correct icc profile for jpegs extracted from DNGs?

Are they always sRGB, or always something else? do they need an icc-profile assigned for colors to be interpreted properly? is the correct profile available as metadata that could be read using exiftool or such?

Profile/color space can be anything - there is a DNG tag called "PreviewColorSpace" that allows for:
0 = Unknown
1 = Gray Gamma 2.2
2 = sRGB
3 = Adobe RGB
4 = ProPhoto RGB
Good practice would be to attach an ICC profile to the preview, but I don't think there's any requirement to do so.
Sandy

Creating hotkeys for special characters in textedit

Hello,
I'm trying to type my maths HW on my mac on textedit or word 2008. I'm trying to type the Z (integer symbol). Now I have found that in Special Characters in textedit but I cannot add a hot key to it for frequent use. In word 2008 I didn't find it, although I could paste it from textedit. What's the way out?

Hello,
I'm trying to type my maths HW on my mac on textedit or word 2008. I'm trying to type the Z (integer symbol). Now I have found that in Special Characters in textedit but I cannot add a hot key to it for frequent use. In word 2008 I didn't find it, although I could paste it from textedit. What's the way out?

How to create an Action Profile for a Survey

Hi
Can you please help me with the steps to create an Action Profile for a Survey. Eg. If the user creates a like Lead / Service, Action profile assigned to the Transaction type has to trigger the Survey.
Thx

Hi Kalees,
Survey is nothing but a Questioner that is Represent the Feedback for a Particular Transaction.
Controlling Survey by a Action Profile is possible to some Extent indirectly.
One way of Controlling the Survey Execution based on System Status
Go To:Customer Relationship Management>Transactions>Settings for Activities>Questionnaires>Define Determination Criteria for Questionnaires Define a Criteria Set for a Particular Status,Here what ever Status Assigned are Responsible for the Survey Form to Appear in that Transaction Type at that Particular Status.
In Define Determination for Questionnaires: Business Activity:assign the Criteria Set that you have Created to your Survey Form
Go To:Customer Relationship Management>Transactions>Basic Settings>Status Management>Change Status Profile for User Status The Status Profile that you are using Ensure that the System Statuses are Assigned to a User Status on which you want the Survey Determination to Happen.
Direct Action Trigger for Survy Form is not Possible
This is one way to Control the Transaction Type Status and in mean you shall indirectly get Control over the Survey Form
Hope it Answers your Queries..
Thanks and Regards,
RK.

DNG profile management

Is it possible to create and use a shoot-specific custom DNG profile to process a set of images for a given shoot, and then archive that DNG profile for safekeeping but removed from view of Lightroom's Camera Calibration panel, without compromising Lightroom's ability to still work with that shoot's images - say, to make further develop refinements, virtual copy variations, prints, etc.?
Asked slightly differently, when in Lightroom's Camera Calibration panel you select a specific DNG profile to apply to a given raw image, does the profile data from within that DNG profile become image-specific metadata of the target image and get stored along with the rest of the image-specific metadata in the Lightroom catalog itself (and subsequently in the DNG raw image file when I save the Lightroom data to that image file)? Or, instead, is only the IDENTITY of the selected DNG profile saved as image-specific metadata, with the DNG profile itself needing to remain "installed" in order to carry out any future Lightroom work on that raw image?
Using the X-Rite ColorChecker Passport in conjunction with Lightroom, it is quite easy to imagine creating custom DNG profiles specific to a given shoot's unique lighting conditions. Creating DNG profiles specific to a given shoot, the collection of shoot-specific DNG profiles for a given camera body could grow to be quite large over time, making it tedious to wade through that collection in Lightroom's Camera Calibration panel to select the particular profile for the shoot being processed. X-Rite makes the "DNG Profile Manager" available to registered users of the ColorChecker Passport to assist with this very problem. It's great that this utility allows us to "Disable" DNG profiles, allowing us to keep our Lightroom Camera Calibration "Profile" menu manageable. But, if you use the X-Rite DNG Profile Manager to do this, does "disabling" a given DNG profile interfere with any further work in Lightroom on images for which that given DNG profile has ALREADY been applied?
PLEASE do not speculate on this response. If you do not know for certain, please allow someone who does (an Adobe engineer, perhaps?) to enlighten us.
Thanks in advance,
/eddie

Thank you to those who have offered responses.
Please do not get confused. As the most recent response clarifies, this is not about storing profiles within original raw files, or the differences between DNG files and original raw files. In fact, at it essence, my real concern is not even about DNG files at all, really, although it includes them by association.
My original question can really be answered in consideration of Lightroom alone: When a custom DNG profile is selected for an image by using the Camera Calibration panel of Lightroom's Develop module, does Lightroom itself internalize that DNG profile selection by recording into the Lightroom metadata database only the IDENTITY of that DNG profile assignment, or the actual DNG profile data contained within that DNG profile? If Lightroom records into the Lightroom database only the identity of the assigned DNG profile, then Lightroom would of course need to go back into that DNG profile later for the actual DNG profile data in order to do any subsequent development processing of the image for which that DNG profile was assigned. If, however, selection of a DNG profile using the Camera Calibration panel of Lightroom's Develop module causes Lightroom to record into the Lightroom database the actual DNG profile data contained within the selected DNG profile, then Lightroom would have no need to go back into that DNG profile later for the profile data, and the DNG profile itself could be safely "un-installed" ("Disabled" by the X-Rite DNG Profile Manager) without adversely affecting Lightroom's ability to properly process that image using the selected DNG profile's information. DNG image files themselves are not even really involved in determining the answer at this level.
The interplay with the associated raw image's DNG image file occurs when Lightroom-maintained metadata for the image is saved out into the DNG image file itself, either automatically or manually, and, yes, I was being very specific to discuss DNG raw image files in that context. I understand from the response provided by "ssprengel" that saving the actual DNG profile data out into the associated DNG image file only happens when using "Update DNG Metadata & Preview" and does not happen through the more common routes of automatically or manually saving image metadata back to the DNG image file. Why this more robust ("complete"?) level of image metadata preservation out to the DNG image file only occurs through a more obscure mechanism is a mystery to me, but that is not the topic of this discussion.
So, my real question really still remains. Combining the ideas from both of the paragraphs above, if Lightroom only saves DNG profile data out to the associated DNG image file using this more obscure mechanism, then does that mean that Lightroom does not normally retain the DNG profile data within the Lightroom database at all -- that it really only retains the identity of the selected DNG profile, and that only when this obscure mechanism is explicitly invoked does Lightroom deem it appropriate to actually read the profile data out of the selected DNG profile and pass that profile data along to the associated DNG image file, and that even then Lightroom itself does not retain that profile data internally? If this is the case, then the DNG profile cannot be "Disabled" without adversely affecting normal Lightroom processing of the associated image [by "adversely", I mean without having Lightroom revert to the Adobe Standard profile or any other unintended side effects]. However, if Lightroom actually does retain this profile data internally upon original DNG profile selection, even if it doesn't bother to save it to the associated DNG image file except through the use of the obscure function, then it would be safe to "Disable" the DNG profile after initial profile selection and not interfere with Lightroom's normal ability to process the associated image using that profile.
Taking the obscure function awareness into account, I guess this now has the possibility of making this subject much more complex. If Lightroom does not store DNG profile data within the Lightroom database (which would require continued availability of the DNG profile for processing associated images), BUT Lightroom provides this obscure mechanism for "forcing" save of assigned DNG profile data out to the associated DNG image file, then what happens when the DNG profile is "Disabled" and Lightroom goes to process that image? Does it look into the associated DNG image file to determine if actual DNG profile data has been saved there and go ahead and use it if it exists? Or does Lightroom ignore DNG profile data saved to a DNG image file in all contexts, and unconditionally always require the assigned DNG profile to remain available in order to carry out normal Lightroom development or rendering processing of the associated image?
This is admittedly a lot of words to discuss a simple desire: I want to shoot with shoot-specific DNG profiles, assign them to the shoot's images and develop them, and then archive off ("Disable") the DNG profiles from that shoot so that my Camera Calibration "Profile" listbox does not become unmanageable. Period. If I absolutely must go back and re-Enable a specific DNG profile later to make a print of one of those images a year from now, then I guess that's what I have to do, but that seems a real shame when all other image-assigned "edits" store those "edits" as image-specific metadata, and profile assignment is just another "edit" (although saving the profile data, rather than just the profile identity, may not be included in this "edit"). Whatever works out to be the simplest, most straightforward course to accomplish my objective is what I need to do. Ideally, that would be painless if Lightroom records into the Lightroom database the actual DNG profile data when the profile is assigned to an image using the Camera Calibration panel's Profile selector.

DNG profiles, Calibration tab vs. HLS

Cross post (asked on the DNG forum but there isn’t much activity so forgive me)
X-Rite and Adobe have provisions for creating custom DNG profiles. DataColor just announced a product that appears to operate like these two but instead of making DNG profiles (or as we had in the old days, altering the Calibration Tab), updates the HSL controls. My understanding is that DNG profiles and the Calibration tab operate in a different order of the processing, prior to all the sliders above them. My understanding is there are benefits for doing this but I’d like to know more about this. The question is, what are the practical implications of “calibrating” via a target that affects HSL sliders instead of producing a DNG profile, or at the very least, altering the calibration sliders? Eric you out there bud?

thedigitaldog wrote:
The question is, what are the practical implications of “calibrating” via a target that affects HSL sliders instead of producing a DNG profile, or at the very least, altering the calibration sliders? Eric you out there bud?
I'm not Eric (not sure he would want to respond to this question) but I'll take a stab...first off, let me state that I haven't personally tested either the SyderCHECKR PRO color target or the software. I've only watched the video and read the user manual. But I do have some issues regarding usability and the "practical implications" of using the HSL Sliders vs a DNG profile.
There is one major implication–the SpyderCheckr produces a preset using the HSL adjustments rather than a DNG profile. I have no understanding (and haven't heard the rational) why Datacolor chose a Lightroom or Camera Raw preset instead of a DNG profile. But the first problem with creating "presets" is Lightroom and Camera Raw don't share "presets". So, unlike a DNG profile which will work in both Lightroom AND Camera Raw, the Spyder solution is application specific. The other major issue is that presets are not easily transportable compared to DNG profiles which actually get imbedded in a raw file. I have no reason to suspect that the HSL adjustments of Lightroom and Camera Raw CAN'T handle the color corrections needed for calibration, but the fact that the calibration depends on a "presets" limits its usefulness.
What is also not mentioned in the videos nor the manual is what the user is supposed to do regarding the starting DNG profile. Does Datacolor suggest using Adobe Standard or some other DNG profile? I ask because the HSL calibration applied as a preset depends upon the DNG profile used to create the color sample file and adding a calibration on top of an existing DNG profile seems to complicate the whole calibration process. When using DNG profiles, it's pretty straightforward what the DNG profile creation is actually doing. Adding an HSL adjustment on top of an existing DNG profile adds complexity to the process and reduces the portability of the camera calibration.
The documentation seems to imply that both DNG Profile Editor and X-Rite's Passport solution somehow limits the end user's ability to make further adjustments. I think this is false...while you can't currently edit the resulting Passport generated DNG profile in X-Rite's software, you can indeed edit the resulting Passport generated DNG profile in Adobe's free DNG Profile Editor. You can edit the preset that SpyderCheckr creates in either Lightroom or Camera Raw, but you are editing an absolute preset that applies HSL adjustments requiring the saving out of a new subset of HSL adjustments-and again presets are not interchangeable between Lightroom and Camera Raw. I see this as a very limiting factor.
In principal, I encourage the development of more and better solutions for both Lightroom and Camera Raw. Whether or not the HSL calibration approach is superior to the DNG profile calibration approach, I really wonder whether or not HSL is a better solution than the DNG profile approach. It seems to me that Adobe (and Thomas Knoll and Eric Chan) have spent a lot of time and effort to develop an open solution to camera calibration that the SpyderCHECKR approach is ignoring. Personally, I would have encouraged the option to create either a DNG profile _OR_ an HSL calibration preset. I think it's a mistake to ignore the DNG profile approach.

Creation of order information profile for COID Transaction

Hi PP Friends,
Could anybody tell me the procedure to creation a Order iformation profile to use in COID tranaction, I need to create a profile for the object Material.
I have created but not showing in drop dowin of COID transaction. It look I missed some where.
Pl give me the solution for my issue of any body knows.
regards,
Purna

You can use transaction COISN
(Following taken from IDES help )
Define Profile for Order Information System
     In this step you can define overall profiles for the order information
     system.
     The overall profile controls
     o   what information is displayed in the order information system
     o   the layout of the information.
     An overall profile contains a number of individual profiles. Each
     individual profile contains parameters for the object overview list and
     the object detail list.
     In the overall profile you define the following:
     o   which objects are to be read from the database
     o   which objects are to be displayed in the list
     o   up to which object the objects are to be expanded in the overview.
     Activities
     Define which objects you want to display in the object overview.
Using Production Order Information System Profiles
The objects selected and the layout of the screen can be determined by an overall profile defined in the initial screen of the production order information system. The overall profile embodies various subordinated single profiles.
An overall profile can be assigned the following specifications:
u2022 A variant which can be used to suppress selection criteria
u2022 Which objects to read from the database
u2022 Which of these objects are to be displayed in the list
u2022 The object up to which objects are to be expanded on the object overview
u2022 Single profiles for all objects
A single profile is made up of sets of parameters. The first set of parameters applies to both the object overview and the object detail list. The other sets of parameters are subprofiles that apply only to the object detail lists. A profile controls the following aspects of the information system display:
u2022 Fields displayed in both object overview and object detail list
u2022 Subprofile defining the fields to be displayed in the object detail list
u2022 Specifications on how the list is formatted with respect to column width, field grouping,
   format of the values displayed
u2022 Sort criteria
u2022 Subprofile sort specification for the object detail list
u2022 Grouping criteria
u2022 Subprofile field grouping for the object detail list
u2022 User filters
u2022 Filter criteria to be used for selecting objectsu2014defined as a report variant for each set
of criteria
u2022 Status filtersu2014objects that are status controlled can be filtered according to a selection
profile

Validation for Project defination and project profile

Hello,
I have to create validation for Project Definition and Project Profile.User requirement is when the project (Exp: Z/0120) is creating with project profile Exp: Z0001_Z system should allow , If user is trying to select other than this profile system has to give the error.
I tried below validation but it is not working:
Prerequisite - PROJ-PSPID = 'Z'
Check - PROJ-PROFL = Z0001_Z
Kindly any suggest how can i give the validation for the same.
Regards,
Lakshmi.
Message was edited by: Mohamed Rafi - Many threads available on this topic search for those.

Hi,
Have you tried to save the project? Because validation rule will call at time of saving the Project.
I have created the same but for start with 'U'
When I create project and at time of saving, validation rule will call and system throw error if I don't create project start with 'U'.
Now If I am creating here, start with 'J'. System is throwing error as per validation rule.
Also Pl check if you have assigned same correct rule on project profile.
Regards
Shishir

Need profile for Nikon D5000

I have a Nikon D5000. I need the profile for both the zoom-normal and zoom telephoto lenses for use in the lens correction filter. Where can I find them. The camera does not appear in the drop down menu within the filter.

I use windows 7 pro 64bit.
The lenses are:
DX 18-55
DX 55-200
CAmera is Nikon d5000
I use Photoshop CC.
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2014 12:02:39 -0700
From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Need profile for Nikon D5000
    Re: Need profile for Nikon D5000
    created by R_Kelly in Photoshop for Beginners - View the full discussion
Hi,
What version of photoshop and operating system are you using?
Which lenses are they?
     Please note that the Adobe Forums do not accept email attachments. If you want to embed a screen image in your message please visit the thread in the forum to embed the image at http://forums.adobe.com/message/6345077#6345077
     Replies to this message go to everyone subscribed to this thread, not directly to the person who posted the message. To post a reply, either reply to this email or visit the message page: http://forums.adobe.com/message/6345077#6345077
     To unsubscribe from this thread, please visit the message page at http://forums.adobe.com/message/6345077#6345077. In the Actions box on the right, click the Stop Email Notifications link.
           Start a new discussion in Photoshop for Beginners at Adobe Community
For more information about maintaining your forum email notifications please go to http://forums.adobe.com/thread/416458?tstart=0.

Rounding Profile for Sales Order Quantity

Hi ALl,
we want to set up sales order such that order can be logged in for min. qty of 100 and further in multiples of 50 . So we created a rounding profile in PP->MRP->planning->lot size calculation. But the profile created here is not available for selection in material master sales org. 1 view.
Where do we need to maintaion this rounding profile in order to be able to select in sales 1 view of material master.
Prashant

firstly, setup the field Rounding permitted of item category you used in S/O.
secondly, setup the field RoundingProfile in material master data.
thirdly, check the value in transaction OWD1, Maintain Control Profiles for Quantity Optimizng, Assign Control Profiles.

Error in activating status profile for SVT

Hi,
I've been trying to activate status profile EHS_SO for SVT in REACH compliance version 2.0 . But I am stuck.
When I save a sales order, a message-'Error when activating status 0001 for status profile EHS_SO in order XXXXXX' has come up. My IMG settings are as follows:
Sales documentr: No existing status profile used
Status profile: EHS_SO added with status SD
Environment parameter:SVT_SO_PROFILE: EHS_SO
SVT_SO_STATUS: 0001 used
Activate Status profile: STUCK (can't figure out the object type for VBP object type category)
Does anyone know?

Hello Bomi,
Please see SAP note # 1111196. It talks about Status profile for sales order and status profile for production orders for online check for SVT.
May be useful to you.
Regards,
Niraj

Icc profiles for printing?

Convert from Windows!
Have a Epson Stylus 2200 photo printer. Need to load icc profiles from Ilford.com for the Galeria printing papers. Need some guidance in loading these icc profiles.
Thanks!

Any help on this topic. Is there a default place to put icc profiles for a printer. EPSON profiles show up when I print. Just need to find out where I place the ilford profiles for this printer.
Thanks,
Kevin

Importance of precise colour temperature when creating dual-illuminant DNG profile

I own an X-Rite ColorChecker Passport and would like to use it to create a dual-illuminant profile for my camera (and every lens combination) to use in LightRoom.
After extensive research I have a few lingering questions:
1)      How important is it to nail the colour temperature. Do you *absolutely have to* photograph the ColorChecker under Illuminant A and D65, respectively, down to the last Kelvin?
2)      If I don’t nail it down that precisely, will the resulting profile be any less accurate?
3)      If getting the respective colour temperatures exactly right is indeed that important, is it OK to use 2 diffused and gelled speedlites with Lee/Rosco color correcting gels to illuminate the Colorchecker? (The Lee / Rosco gels do not have the exact CTO gel for the 2850K specified in the DNG specification for Illuminant A, but it gets close)
4)      If it will really aid profile accuracy, how does one get hold of reliable/certified light bulbs that produce the required colour temperatures? (I’m in the UK)
Your advice will be greatly appreciated.

The exact color temperatures (in Kelvin) are not that important within the standard daylight range (above 4000 K), because large number changes in color temperature actually represent small differences as far as camera color profiles go.
What is more important (rather than the exact number) is the spectral characteristics of the illumination. This isn't easy to characterize for the end user, but you can think of it in terms of bulb type. Most compact fluorescents are spectrally very different from actual daylight (even if the bulb is indicated as being "full spectrum"), for instance. My recommendation is to create a profile for the type of lighting you will be under, rather than trying to match the exact numbers.

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..

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

Creating profiles for special illuminants in DNG Profile Editor

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for