DNG profiles and WB

Can a DNG profile to change the WB setting?
Mmhm maybe the video is not so clear, but the new profile canghes the WB from 4650 / 14 to 5000 / 15
Message was edited by: Marco N.

If I remember well about the WB values in ACR/LR, those numbers are related to the rendering of the image to give the correct WB "look" but aren't fixed. They can be even different from those in other raw converters.
So it seems to me the WB values can be influenced by the color profile used.
May be Jeff Schewe or someone from Adobe can give you more in-deep details about the WB rendering in ACR.
Massimo

Similar Messages

  • DNG Profiles and Camera Differences

    The primary stated reason for performing a calibration before the DPE was to account for differences between units of the same camera. With the new Adobe Standard profiles, am I correct in saying that it is no longer possible to customize the Adobe Standard profile for a specific camera, since the ACR 4.4 version is always used by DPE as the starting point for the Chart operation?
    I find that there is a marked difference between ACR 4.4 and Adobe Standard, with ACR 4.4 being much more saturated - it's not subtle - at least for my camera (Canon XSi/450D).
    Thanks,
    Selby

    Eric - thanks for the response. I was afraid that would be the answer! :-)
    Seems I'm likely asking for an enhancement based on the following:
    As I understand it, the ACR 4.4 profiles were all based on processing color checker (or other target) shots made in the lab. Then Adobe Standard profiles were built using ACR 4.4 profiles as the starting point, but applying some adjustments to deal with issues raised by users. Due to the large number of cameras supported, I am guessing that this was applied programmatically - that each camera was not reprofiled?
    So it appears that what I'm asking for is the ability to use the Chart facility in the DNG Profile Editor to use my image(s) of a Color Checker as the starting point, and then have the same changes applied that were used to build Adobe Standard. I gather that this is not possible at present.
    I don't pretend to be an expert on the internal workings of the profiles which leads me to the following question: is this reasonable and/or practical?
    BTW, I do find that Adobe Standard works better for me than either ACR 4.4 or anything I can generate with Chart. However, the insistence by those with much more experience than myself that the differences between instances of the same camera model are visible, led me to ask the question.
    Since Adobe Standard is a big improvement over ACR 4.4, I'd like to pick up those changes since I doubt I could do anywhere near as good a job trying to make the changes "manually", unless of course, it is possible to describe the adjustments needed to use the DNG Profile Editor to accomplish this (other than by eyeballing it).
    Thanks,
    Selby

  • DNG Profiles and the ACR Calibrator

    In the past the Fors ACR Calibrator (and the manual procedure conceived by Bruce Fraser) was required to account for production differences between instances of the same camera model. If I wish to use the new Adobe Standard Profiles, should I then rerun the Calibrator? I realize I will have to update the code to handle the new ACR version number - I already did this for 4.4.1.

    Thanks for the nice feedback, Bill.
    To clarify the point brought up by you and Richard: there are two basic ways to use the chart wizard feature.
    First, you can use it to build a profile optimized for one lighting condition. This is the more familiar case, esp. to those of you who have used the CR calibration scripts in the past. This mode is described in Tutorial 5, and is enabled by choosing the 'Both Color Tables' option from the popup in the Chart tab. What happens here is that a single set of color lookup table adjustments is created, which is applied regardless of the white balance of the image. You can use any illuminant when photographing the ColorChecker; doesn't have to be illuminant A or D65. Such a profile will work pretty well as long as your real images don't stray too far spectrally from the illuminant you used to shoot the CC.
    Second, you can use it to build a more general profile as described in tutorial 6, but you would need to shoot the CC in conditions as close as you can get to A and D65 for best results. (~D50 or ~D55 lighting as a substitute for D65 should work pretty well.) The DNG 1.2 profile format actually allows the two illuminants to be different than A and D65, but currently the DNG Profile Editor's chart wizard feature only supports these two.
    Bill, you should be able to shoot the checker in the manner you describe (i.e., under noon sunlight on a blue sky day, and also under the incandescent bulb) and have it work well.
    When I was testing this, I used a standard household incandescent (very close to illuminant A; I was curious and measured it with an Eye-One spectro) and then tried various flavors of daylight (including Solux bulbs, which aren't that close to D65) for the D65 "half" of the profile. The daylight portion didn't make that much difference.

  • Profile Editor and DNG Profiles - Still Beta 2?

    Are the DNG profiles and Profile Editor still at Beta 2? I am confused because the Adobe Labs DNG Profiles resources page (http://labs.adobe.com/wiki/index.php/DNG_Profiles) has not been updated since Oct 22 2008, but Lightroom 2.2 provides non-beta profiles. What is the present status?
    Thanks.

    It has been several months since I originally posted this inquiry and Thomas replied, and so I'm just checking again.
    Has there been any update to the DNG Profile Editor since Beta 2 was made available? (and, if not, is there anything you can share about what's going on with this tool?)
    I am continuing to use Beta 2 with successful results, but I am curious as to the status...
    Thanks,
    /eddie

  • DNG profiles, Calibration tab and HLS

    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?

    Andrew,
    Eric is very active in the ACR forum, including in the last 24 hours, and there's no way he'd be ignoring you if he had read this post of yours.
    My impression is that this DNG forum has been neglected if not outright abandoned.  Just look at the obsolete and mistyped "announcement" at the top of the index page.
    I would suggest posting in the ACR forum instead.
    Wo Tai Lao Le
    我太老了

  • 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 profile editor

    A couple of questions about DNG Profile Editor:
    1-I know Lab values on my ColorChecker (measured with an EyeOne 2° D50). I shooted it with a Nikon D80 and I want to tweak one of the new Camera Raw profiles to match those values or to go closer. I see that changing the base profile (popup menu in Color Tables Pane) the image appearence changes a lot but the Lab numbers readout doesn't. I followed the tutorial on the Adobe site but I can't figure out how to make the camera calibration without having a numeric value, before and after, to look at. The tutorial tells that you may 'adjust the selected color via the Hue, Saturation and Lightness slider and you will see the preview in real-time'. That's true but does it means that is a sort of 'visual calibration'? Is there a way to tweak colors by the Lab numbers in order to have the best match from original Lab values in input (on the target) and Lab values in output (in a ProPhoto rendered image)?
    2- When I create a Color Table from my ColorChecker it appears that in the Color Tables colors are already (and automatically) changed. Does it work like the ACR Calibration Scripts that way? And is it possible to change the reference Lab values (ColorCheckers are different in color values) as it was with a simple ACR script's editing?
    Giuseppe Andretta

    Eric,
    Before starting, I want to say that I had cataract surgery last month. The vision improvement was almost instantaneous and dramatic. I can now state that color differences in individuals can be much greater than expected. It is hard to express how big the difference is in my own vision, let alone between two other individuals. Any color assessment tools must accommodate numeric as well as visual comparisons. That said, the healing process has also affected how much time I can spend comfortably in front of my screen. I hope my comments will be taken constructively.
    As others have commented, I also feel that the CC24 Lab target values being used should be documented. Published values from Gretag, Lindbloom, Babbage, and others disagree. Without the target numbers it is difficult to determine accurately the calibration result.
    My first attempt seemed to go smoothly, but when I verified the results with ReadColors.jsx (my script) the numbers degraded slightly. I was using the Gretag target values, so these may not be what Adobe is using. Also, I had already calibrated ACR for my D3. The doc seemed to imply that the ACR tabs would all default to zero and that was what displayed in the Color Matrices panel. But that was not what showed in the ACR panel. So I tried again, setting all ACR sliders to zero. This calibration attempt was a disaster, numerically and visually. Now I am confused. What is the relationship between these and what are the recommended user actions? In each case, I exported the DNG profile and selected it subsequently in ACR to re-open the image.
    Next, I played with the Color Tables panel. I set a watchpoint on the blue patch. As long as I hold the eyedropper over the blue patch the Lab (and other numbers) track. But as soon as I move the mouse to the sliders, the numbers disappear. If I move the hue and saturation sliders the image and the patch sample both change. And, yes a little arrow shows in the color wheel. But after moving the eyedropper back, none of the numbers have changed. The lightness slider is even more bizarre. Obviously no arrow (z-axis) but the image brightens and darkens (OK), without any corresponding change in the patch sample (watchpoint) on the right (not OK). And again, no change in the numbers at all. It would be very helpful if the target values were shown here and if the currently selected watchpoint that would track the numeric changes. It would also be nice if the watchpoint could show the target color as well as the initial and changed image patch colors.
    I dont understand the purpose of the Tone Curves. I understand gamma and Adobe linear, but these do not correlate to the ACR tone curves. And again the image changes but the numbers do not. Since we cannot set watchpoints in the neutral patches it is very difficult to assess any changes the user might make.
    Next, I used the Chart panel to Create Color Table. When I return to the Color Tables panel, there are the 18 color (no neutral) watchpoints. I can see that blue has changed in the watch point and the arrow in the color wheel. But the numbers are still the same as before. Scrolling through the watch points I can also see that the hue and saturation sliders have changed. But the lightness slider did not change in any of the color patches. I anticipated that this would be the major improvement over the ACR sliders. Is this just not in the calibration algorithms yet?
    This is a good start, but until I know what the target values are and what I should be doing about the existing ACR slider settings, I am at a stopping point.
    Cheers, Rags :-)

  • 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.

  • I have downloaded DNG Profile Editor 1_0_4 and prepared a profile which I can not see in my Camera Raw 6.0 (I have photoshop CS5). Could you please give me an advice?

    I have downloaded DNG Profile Editor 1_0_4 and prepared a profile which I can not see in my Camera Raw 6.0 (I have photoshop CS5). Could you please give me an advice?

    Uninstall Trusteer software
    http://www.trusteer.com/support/uninstalling-rapport-mac-os-x
    Remove Sophos
    https://discussions.apple.com/message/21069437#21069437

  • Capture nx 2 sharpening and DNG profiles..

    I recently have had an (albeit quick) fiddle with nx 2 and was wondering if anyone else had noticed what I have...
    1. The sharpening in NX2 seems to yeild much nicer details and less "criss cross" artefacts.
    2. The DNG profile for nikon (in my case D3) vivid does match pretty well, but has a purple tinge to it that is horribly exaggerated if you start to process the image at all. The NX rendering seems a lot more natural, or less forced.
    Any advice appreciated. I would love to stay in Lightroom for everything, but looking at the files I may not.
    Thanks.

    ok, a little more playing and the colour noise reduction seems to play a very big part in the "poseriztion" sharpness that Lightroom is producing. If I set it to off or set lower than default (say to 10) it does help level the playing field a lot more with regards to the sharpening.

  • **-Camera Profiles and DNG Profile Editor FAQ-**

    A page containing answers to Frequently Asked Questions about Camera Profiles and the DNG Profile Editor can be found
    here

    New FAQ entries:
    What changed between beta 1 and beta 2?
    Is it safe to delete beta 1 profiles? What will happen if I do?
    I now have the beta 2 profiles and want to delete the older beta 1 profiles. How do I do this?
    Please read carefully.

  • Looking inside of DNG Camera Profiles and editing them

    For those interested in the insides of DNG Camera profiles, and how to edit them, I've written dcpTool.
    dcpTool is a compiler/decompiler for DNG camera profiles (.dcp files). dcpTool can decompile binary format DCP files into an XML format for editing with a text editor or whatever, and then compile the XML format file back into a binary DCP file, as well as extract embedded profiles from DNG files. It runs on Windows and OS X command lines, and is based on V1.2 of the DNG SDK.
    See here: http://dcptool.sourceforge.net/
    Health warning: dcpTool is a command line utility - if you're not comfortable with command line stuff, dcpTool probably won't be of any interest to you.

    Very cool, thanks for the info.

  • 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.

  • Right steps to use DNG Profile Editor and ACR

    What is the right sequence of steps to do to use properly DNG PE and ACR ?
    Must be converted the RAW in DNG directly, without open the RAW in ACR ?
    Must be opened the RAW file in ACR, reset the ACR values to zero and then convert the RAW in DNG format ?
    Must be converted the RAW file in DNG and then reset the ACR values before apply the camera recipe created ?
    thanks in advance,
    federico

    thank you Massimo,
    the procedure is clear now.
    "What is the nearest original Adobe profile that is so "equal" to the GM one you obtain?"
    what i want to say is that when i open the file raw in ACR i see some colors. when i apply the profile generated by PE, i see about the sames colors. i notice that the colors are about the same without the profile (little differences i see in the darken tones but only in the ACR graphic). this with my D700. with the D200 the differences before to apply the profile and after are strong, visible.
    Grazie Massimo,
    credo sia tutto chiaro adesso anche se mi lascia perplesso il risultato finale.
    "What is the nearest original Adobe profile that is so "equal" to the GM one you obtain?"
    quello che volevo dire è che con o senza profilo, praticamente l'immagine con la D700 varia di pochissimo (me ne accorgo solo leggendo il grafico in ACR). con la D200 invece, applicare un profilo ha un impatto molto evidente, le differenze sono marcate.
    grazie
    ps: your english is right. it is mine that does not work so well.

Maybe you are looking for

  • Mac won't open apps when I add a storage drive

    I recently moved my IMac to a new location and when I restarted it it would open one app(mail) then it would not let me close it or could I open any other apps. The app would blinkas normal but then nothing.  The app I had open was in ignore. Could n

  • Creation of new columns and reformatting of data in infocube

    Hi,   Although i got the results i wanted in my demo cube, i am not sure how it came to that.   In my flat file, i have entries of 1001 for 0D_CREDITOR, and 82004 for 0FISCPER. However in my infocube, i am seeing entries of 0000001001 for 0D_CREDITOR

  • F.27 get message no data selected

    When running F.27 , there is "no data selected". though we have configured sap13 correspondence. and maintained peridic statement in customer master data. also maintained variant for porgram RFKORD11. Is thera anythign i am missing? Do I need to main

  • CP5: Roll-over hand not appearing on button

    Ok - I have 2 different buttons and one the hand appears when the user rolls over the button and on the other it does not (even though I have the option checked in properties). The two types of buttons I have: 1. transparent button over an image 2. t

  • Less than perfect sound from my Zen

    I have been reading alot of these threads and everybody says how great and perfect their Zen sounds. Maybe i'm a little picky, but i find that mine lacks a little in the higher frequencies. I know the specs say 7,000hz to ps. I have played with all t