Nikon RAW conversions are driving me crazy.

Question

Ever since upgrading to 10.4.8 and Aperture 1.5 all of my RAW files are displaying in a very unpleasent manner. Depending on the camera the effect is different but still way off from my previous tests in June. I do realize that Aperture ignores all of the in camera settings when processing the RAW files but the difference between in camera produced jpgs and RAWs are now crazy. The worst being from my D2Hs. Those RAWs actually look like an Adobe 1998 color space image being displayed in an sRGB context. This is now a big problem.
Apple has been working on it for over a week, does anyone out there have work arounds, presets, whatever that will give me decent default results for Nikon D2H, D2X, and D200 RAW files. D2H being the worst off right now.
Thanks
RB

Answer 1

Thinking more about the issue you are experiencing, I
am curious to know how your D2X (or D2H) is
configured, relative to the following settings:
* Color Space (sRGB or Adobe RGB); defaults to sRGB.
[The D2H may not have a separate setting for
this; instead it may be combined with the Color
Mode.]
Color Mode (Type I, II or III); defaults to Type I.
Tone Compensation (Auto, Normal or predefined
curve); defaults to Auto.
I ask because a photo's resultant colors -- and
perhaps the perceived white balance -- can be
considerably different depending on the
aforementioned settings. And the defaults are
definitely NOT what I would use, particularly for
RAW.
In any case, after reading (and re-reading) the D2X
manual, perusing web sites, etc., etc., I have found
the following settings to be optimal for a RAW
workflow:
* Color Space: Adobe RGB. (The default -- sRGB --
has a smaller gamut than Adobe RGB.)
* Color Mode: II. (The default -- type I -- is for
portrait shots. Type III is for landscapes. Type II
-- only available when utilizing Adobe RGB for the
colorspace -- is suited for a RAW workflow. Type I
and III both affect color saturation and/or tone,
while type II does not, AFAIK.)
* Tone Compensation: Normal. (The default -- "Auto"
-- allows the camera to make changes to the tones in
an image, and said changes can be different from
shot-to-shot...even for the same scene.)
Bottom line, Nikon's defaults -- color space sRGB,
color mode I and auto tone compensation -- can have a
significant impact on color saturation, tone/hue,
etc. And, while I would certainly like to hear
others' opinions, I definitely do not recommend
Nikon's defaults.
As for Aperture, it does properly recognize the white
balance setting for a given image. However, I do not
believe that Aperture compensates for -- or even
recognizes -- the "Color Mode" and "Tone
Compensation" settings. This would also explain why
folks sometimes see different results in Aperture vs.
Nikon's Capture NX, for a given image.
Anyone else?
MacBook Pro
17" 2.16; PowerMac G5 Dual 2.7   Mac OS X
(10.4.8)   Camera: Nikon D2X
I think that I mentioned this before but here goes again:
D2H Color mode 1, Normal contrast, sRGB, preset WB with 5500K lights.
The corrections to get the RAW to where it should be based on known shooting conditions, comparison to the in camera JPG, and comparison to the way Nikon capture processes the RAW file are massive. Not just a little. It litterally is like taking an Adobe RGB color space image, removing the profile info, sticking an sRGB profile tag on it, opening it in PS and then making the corrections to how it should look with known reference points of lighting temp, camera WB, etc.
RB