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.

Similar Messages

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...

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.

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.

Images in video become over saturated when exported

When I export the project as an AVI the images in the video become over saturated, ie the skin tone of people becomes bright orange in some cases. Is there a setting to prevent this happening?

andrew
Grand ideas or major duds...let us try the two different tests to see if we can pin point where the issue originates and its cause....
You may want to work from a copy of the problematic project....See File Menu/Save A Copy)
Open your existing project (the one that is yielding your DV AVI 4:3 @ 29.97 interlaced frames per second, and displaying with color issues).
But, do not export this project's Timeline using Publish+Share/Computer/AVI with Presets = DV NTSC Standard as you have been doing, assumed
with no export settings customization under the Advanced Button of the preset.
1. Go to Expert workspace File Menu/Project Archiver and its Archive and Copy options. Project Archive the project with the Copy option. This will result in a "Copied....Folder" saved to the computer hard at the location that you designated. Open the "Copied....Folder" to see copies of the source media that went into the project. These copies will represent all the source media that went into Project Assets whether they were used on the Timeline or not. Open each to determine if there is any color issues with any.
on to second test....
2. Go to Timeline Menu and select and click on Delete Rendered Files to do just that. Next, render the Timeline content by pressing the Enter key of the computer main keyboard. All video previews generated from Timeline rendering of a SD project are DV AVI files, be the files being previewed photos or videos.
Next, go to the Adobe Premiere Elements Preview Files Folder (by default in Windows' Document/Adobe/Premiere Elements/12.0) and open that folder. Play back the preview files there to determine if they have color flaws.
Please let us know the outcome.
Thanks.
ATR

Images viewed in elements organiser appear over saturated compared with acr or editor

Hi,
I've been struggling with this for some time now. When veiwing images in elements organiser (10) the images have started appearing more saturated than in either adobe camera raw or photoshop elements editor window. They used to always match. I've tried reseting all the colour presets, I've tried changing every setting I can find in acr and I've resorted to a full re-install of elements (including deleting the presets). None of thise have solved the problem.
I'm pretty sure it is the organiser view which is over saturated rather than acr / photoshop which is washed out as, although mostly quite subtle, sometimes the colours are pushed much too far. (I'm only describing it as saturation as that's how it looks - I couldn't say for sure that it is acutally a saturation setting rather than some other colour setting which is causing the issue).
Every so often organiser updates it's images as I veiw them to match acr but I've not noticed any one reason why that happens - and if I shut organser down and restart it's back to over saturation again.
Any suggestions would be greatfully recieved,
Stuart Martindale

Ken,
Thanks for getting back to me. You're right - it would seem that if I have every thing set to always optimize for computer screens then everything looks the same. Ideally I wouldn't have that set though - the photos are all taken with adobe RGB colour space and we are more given to big prints than sharing on screen.
This never used to be a problem and I've always previously optimised for printing. The pictures are definitley adobe RGB and checking in canon DPP the raw veiw there is the same as ACR so it is the initial organizer colouring which is at fault. I would rather use optimize for printing as we tend to make big prints from our photos rather than sharing electronic albums. Following the suggestion I've done some more playing with settings and found the following situations:
1) If opening organizer when set to optimize for printing the image opens with the wrong colouring. Changing to optimze for screen and update thumbnial and the colouring corrects. Changing back to optimize for printing update thumbnail and any subsequent changes and the colouring stays correct.
2) If opening organizer when set to optimize for computer screens orgainzer opens showing the right colouring. Chaning to optimize for printing and update thumbnail causes the colouring the change. Changing back to optimize for screen and the image corrects it's self. Changing back to optimize for printing and any subsequent changes and the colouring stays correct.
So in summary the first thumbnail viewing optimized for printing is over satuarated / vivid. Changing colourspace away and back seems to correct the problem.
If the colouring is correct for one photo it will update to be correct for any other images viewed.
If there is a way to make optimized for printing photos display correctly on first opening that would be great.

MacPro early 2008+8800GT+EFI 1.3, images over saturated?

Hello!
I just installed the new EFI 1.3 + Aperture 2.1. I have the feeling that the images edited with Aperture 1.5 look now over-saturated (still using Raw 1.1).
Maybe it is just my feeling...did you notice that??
Max

maxcasal wrote:
Hello!
I just installed the new EFI 1.3 + Aperture 2.1. I have the feeling that the images edited with Aperture 1.5 look now over-saturated (still using Raw 1.1).
Maybe it is just my feeling...did you notice that??
hi, max
I think you're seeing the new RAW processing engine in Aperture 2 which is more precise than the earlier versions of it which were a little more saturated with a color shift.
victor

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.

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.

Canon 5DIII conversion of ProRGB or Adobe RGB to sRGB over-saturation

I shot a Canon 5DII in raw for three years & posted a lot of my work on the web. I did PP on the image with a calibrated monitor. I would make initial adjustments in LR4 & further develop the raw file in PS. When generating a copy to post on the web, I would convert to sRGB & imbed the color profile when generating the web-ready jpg file. The image was slightly different when viewing in Firefox (it reads the embedded color profile) vs. viewing in Internet Explorer or Google Chrome browsers. But it was not a significant difference.
With my new 5DIII, when using the same PP methods & conversion, there is a huge difference depending on the browser. Firefox renders just a bit flat, but generally in the ball park of what I set the image color at. In IE & Chrome, the reds are really over saturated & the blues are somewhat so. I'm embarrassed to post anything with the fear that someone will look at them with one of those two browsers.
Has anyone else run into this issue when upgrading to the 5D3? Way over-saturated colors in certain browsers for sRGB jpg files?
Here's an example I posted on the Nature Photographer's Network site: http://www.naturephotographers.net/imagecritique/largephoto.cgi?ref=195761&w=i
If you view it in different browsers, you'll see the big difference. Thanks for any help or advice.

The manufacturer’s profile may or may not be quite correct. If you are doing photography that others pay for the results from, then you should invest in a hardware calibrator to make sure things are as correct as possible when viewed or printed elsewhere.
One of the Spyder series is what I see many people using. I see others mention the iOne/EyeOne and a few Colormunki, with some people also needing printer calibration be handled by their calibrator for added expense. If you are sending out your prints, only, or people are ordering them, online, then that is not a concern, but getting accurate color on your monitor is, and being able to trust that the colors you’re seeing in your color-managed products like Photoshop and Lightroom will carry over to clients viewing sRGB JPGs on their cheap monitors, and also carry over to offsite prints, is a concern.
The initial problem description of colors becoming oversaturated suggests a problem with your monitor’s color profile not matching what it actually is displaying, as well as a problem with some non-color-managed applications showing weird things, and perhaps a problem with the output profile from LR or PS not being set and embedded as sRGB.
Setting your monitor to the manufacturer’s profile is a good first step as long as your monitor, itself, using the on-screen-menus of the monitor is set to the proper mode that matches what your profile is doing. Maybe this is a Native mode, not a User or sRGB mode. Some manufacturer’s monitor profiles are actually incompatible with LR and cause problems, though, which is another reason to create your own custom profile.
The reviews I see for your particular monitor say it is very bright. Are you using it at maximum brightness when you are editing? A hardware calibration process usually also has a step or two where you set your monitor to an ok contrast and brightness setting, rather than maxed out. Is your room lighting (ambient lighting) very bright or normal overhead office fluorescents or very dark.

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

Imported Stills are Over-saturated

We're using PPro CS4 on a 64-bit Vista machine. We've imported video into our timeline and it looks fine. However, when we import the JPEGs we made in Photoshop CS4, they come in much more saturated than they show in Bridge. We've checked in Camera RAW and there are no adjustments being made to the JPEGs. We made the JPEGs color space to be sRGB. Two questions:
1. What color space does PPro use?
2. What is causing the over-saturation and what can we do to solve it besides manually adjusting each image within PPro?

This is likely because Bridge is Color Managed, while PrPro is not. The color space should be Adobe RGB (1998). What is the Color Space of the JPEG's?
Also, instead of JPEG's, have you considered keeping your still images in .PSD? I only use JPEG for delivery to Web clients, and never for Video, but then I am old-school, and all of my work is in Camera RAW to PSD, so just keep things in that format. Also, if you started with JPEG, and then did a Save_As JPEG, you HAVE recompressed the data, and this is seldom a good thing.
Good luck,
Hunt

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/

Greens from my Nikon D800 are way over saturated and too bluish 14 bit NEF

Greens from my Nikon D800 are way over saturated and too bluish 14 bit NEF uncompressed files. I have no problem with raw files from other cameras is there a setting I am missing somewhere?

Hi,
I have been shooting my D800 for over a year now, and I have not observed what you are discussing, particularly in outdoor, natural light situations.
I have downloaded your NEF, and imported it into Aperture (3.4.5). I notice two things right away: 1) you are using Uncompressed NEF, 14 bit recording; and 2) you seem to have a custom White Balance. The former should be of no matter, but would be interested if you have been able to discern any advantage over Lossless Compression, 14 bit?
However, the important concern is with the Custom White Balance impact on the rendering of NEFs in RAW in Aperture. I am planning to do a study of this, and am wondering if you could test your resutls in similar shots with Auto White Balance rather than any preset (yours or the camera standard presets)?
I by practice only shoot Auto White Balance (and RAW), but recently I have found benefit to using a preset WB when shooting video since that result will not be modifiable later on the computer. After doing this, I have sometimes forgotten to reset the WB to Auto before again shooting stills in RAW, and the resulting difference vs once reset has been curious.
While it is well known that Picture Controls when used and shooting RAW will likely result in wide differences between the Camera Preview and Aperture's first rendering, I am less certain what the dynamics of White Balance settings and first rendering in Aperture.
Thanks for the test image and chance to discuss this.
Ernie

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

Over saturated images

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for