Question about dng profiles

Question for Eric or his coworkers ...
Is there some limitation regarding size of LUT in the a dng profile? Biggest profiles produced by Adobe have 90x16x16. For profiles made with my program I'm using bigger LUT (120x16x61), in order to reduce slight banding issues and improve precision in shadows. I posted some of those profiles on CHDK forum when people were asking about them, and lately, I posted a profile for Canon 40D because Noel wasn't satisfied with sky saturation using Camera Standard
I'm asking this because ACR 6.5rc1 crashed 3 or 4 times so far, reporting an error, so I returned version 6.4. Also, ACR 6.5 published a day or two ago had some problems with screen refreshing after zooming a cropped image (so I reverted to 6.4 again). All previous versions were working flawlessly
I'm using Windows XP 32 bit, computer has 4 GB RAM

I suppose it's not because of profile, as I didn't have any problems until ACR 65rc1, but just want to make sure
If it is, I can make smaller one for you (just it would be slightly less accurate)
About refreshing problem (6.5 release), I opened a group of raws from 400D. First one had a crop made previously. When I zoomed it, nothing happened (I think I was using Ctrl, as I wasn't in a zoom pane, but I'm not sure). Then selected the second photo and returned to the first one. It appeared zoomed now. Strange.
Edit: tried editing some older Canon SX110 raws (dng) with ACR 6.5 again. Selected a group of about 100 photos, selected all of them, zoomed all of them at the same location to correct a bad pixel on some photos with spot removal tool. After correcting 10-15 photos, I got an error "The operation could not be completed". If I close error message, the same error window reopens again ...

Similar Messages

  • Questions about DNG Profile Editor recipe code

    I have been playing around with DNG Profile Editor. With a text editor I made the following recipe:
    I have some questions:
    1. Right now I have my control points at 60 saturation. Will using two points for each color (say 70 and 40) make my changes more consistent across darker and lighter shades of the specific color?
    2. Does DNG Profile editor respect HueLow and HueHigh, are they just placeholder numbers, or are they ignored if two points are close to each other?
    3. What does FeatherAdjust do? I'm guessing it controls the rate of drop off of the corrections. Is the value respected by DNG Profile editor when it creates a profile?
    Thanks for your time and attention,     -Bruce.

    1. For now DNG-only. Here's why:
    http://labs.adobe.com/wiki/index.php/DNG_Profiles_FAQ#PEOnlyDNG
    http://labs.adobe.com/wiki/index.php/DNG_Profiles_FAQ#WhyNameDNGPE
    http://labs.adobe.com/wiki/index.php/DNG_Profiles_FAQ#WhyPESeparate
    2. Standalone for now. See above links for why.
    3. Use the 'Preview Color Changes' option in the Options menu.
    4. You can use 'Apply Raw Adjustments' in the Options menu to see your raw adjustments. This is __not__ recommended for building a general-purpose profile because you are then optimizing a profile with specific image adjustments in mind, rather than building a profile based more on the inherent camera characteristics.
    5. True, that is a limitation of this implementation.
    6. I am not sure what you mean. The Chart Wizard automatically optimizes the color patches in a test shot based on reference values for many physical charts, which is more practically useful than the numbers printed on the reference card that comes with the chart.
    7. Make sure you avoid color casts in the bottom row. The PE is picky about making sure your gray patches are relatively neutral. It is an attempt to help you get a better profile.
    8. Use 'Show Affected Colors' from the Options menu.
    You may wish to read this page carefully and thoroughly:
    documentation
    It is the reference online documentation for the DNG Profile Editor and a few of the things you wish to do, such as preview all color changes, apply raw adjustments, and visualize the extent of each color adjustment, are all documented there.

  • Generic questions about CMYK profiles and proofing

    I just read a big book about color management and am trying to make it happen but it seems that in real life I can't get good results.
    I have my scanner profiled and it produces aRGB docs.
    All good and fine. The images look good on the monitor (which also is profiled.)
    Now these images I place inside InDesign as aRGB.
    And at some point comes the time for soft proofing.
    So I start experimenting with different CMYK profiles.
    First question: Should I already do a CMYK conversion for my images in Photoshop or is it ok to do it in InDesign when exporting to PDF?
    Coated Fogra27/39, ISO Coated v2 and Euroscale Coated v2 seem to change the colors only slightly.
    But when I turn on "Simulate Paper Color" all hell breaks loose. The paper color seems to be always a cold horrible grey and the image is darkened and dulled. It looks like in need of serious color correction.
    And further how do these generic profiles know about my paper color anyway?
    So maybe this feature should only be used if the profile is custom made for a specific printer and paper.
    Second question: has anyone succesfully used the simulation of paper color with a custom made profile?
    But it seems that custom profiles are something I can only use at home because the printing service providers seem to be quite unaware of profiling their machines for a specific paper (or profiling it at all).
    They tell me to send a "pure" CMYK file without any profiles. But that is impossible because to transform an RGB in CMYK one MUST use a profile.
    Third question: Which kind of profile should I use when I am instructed to provide a profile-less CMYK document?
    And finally what is the purpose of proofing in the first place if I don't know exactly the profile created for the combination of the output machine and output paper? This issue becomes clearer when using (slightly) colored paper.
    - Rami Ojares

    >First question: Should I already do a CMYK conversion for my images in Photoshop or is it ok to do it in InDesign when exporting to PDF?
    You can save the conversion until you make the PDF if you like, especially if you don't know the correct profile in advance, but you lose the ability to fine-tune and individual image.
    >But when I turn on "Simulate Paper Color" all hell breaks loose. The paper color seems to be always a cold horrible grey and the image is darkened and dulled. It looks like in need of serious color correction.
    I think this is mostly a case of your eye accommodating to the brightness of the screen. I'm not sure how to avoid this, and I generally don't use the simulate paper color. Comparing my screen to the real printed output without the simulation seems pretty close. Even a generic profile makes an assumption about the color of the paper stock, but a custom profile would be more accurate.
    >Third question: Which kind of profile should I use when I am instructed to provide a profile-less CMYK document?
    As you already said, you can't do the conversion without knowing the profile. What they are asking is that you don't embed that profile when you do the conversion to PDF. This means they can use a file prepared for the wrong profile and not risk further conversion at the RIP which would create rich blacks from you 100% K elements (type), but the colors wouldn't be 100% correct unless the profile you chose for conversion originally matched the press.
    Generic profiles are a quasi-standard that most presses can match, but may not be able to produce quite as wide a color gamut as a custom profile, but many presses don't have a custom profile available. You should ask for a "contract proof" to check the color before the press runs, and if possible go to the printer for the make-ready and check the color on the press before the whole run is printed. There is a LOT of color control available to a skilled press operator, and expect some variation through the run.
    Peter

  • Some questions about DNG PE

    With a good calibration in 5000K lightning condition I have tweaked my 4.4 profile to match the ideal color value (read by spectrophotometer) of my CC so that the final average error is near DE2000 one.
    1. Is a good idea report this calibration setting in Color Matrices pane *before* create the two color table with chart wizard?
    2. Indeed my intent is to leave to profile the first management of the tone mapping like in the early version of ACR, because I don't understand the new Adobe approch. Why tweak only hue and saturation?
    3. Is it different starting from the 4.4 profile or from AS profile in DNG PE?
    4. What tollerance I have in lightning condition for the targets capture? For example, I shot the targets in 3200K and 6000K condition, is this a problem for the final result?
    Thank you and sorry for my English
    Marco

    > With a good calibration in 5000K lightning condition I
    > have tweaked my 4.4 profile to match the ideal color value
    > (read by spectrophotometer) of my CC so that the final
    > average error is near DE2000 one.
    > 1. Is a good idea report this calibration setting in Color
    > Matrices pane *before* create the two color table with
    > chart wizard?
    Yes.
    > 2. Indeed my intent is to leave to profile the first
    > management of the tone mapping like in the early version
    > of ACR, because I don't understand the new Adobe approch.
    > Why tweak only hue and saturation?
    You can tweak hue, saturation, and value (lightness). However, the lookup tables are only indexed by hue and saturation. This makes the LUT essentially 2.5D (indexed by 2 dimensions, and each table entry has 3 components).
    The new approach explained in DNG 1.2 (and implemented starting in Camera Raw 4.5 and Lightroom 2.2) is a proper superset of the earlier approach. That is, everything you could do before can also be done with the new approach; plus there are things you can do with the new approach (such as saturation-dependent hue twists) that could not be done with the old approach.
    > 3. Is it different starting from the 4.4 profile or from
    > AS profile in DNG PE?
    When defining your own color adjustments manually, yes, it matters which base profile you start from.
    When you are using the Chart Wizard, it does not matter which base profile you start from.
    > 4. What tollerance I have in lightning condition for the
    > targets capture? For example, I shot the targets in 3200K
    > and 6000K condition, is this a problem for the final
    > result?
    I would not worry about the 6000 K end; with 3200 K you may notice a bit more discrepancy since small changes in color temperature at the low end of the scale can account for larger color shifts.

  • Question about .DNG...

    The DNG format is basically a RAW format, right? So when i shoot in RAW (in Nikon, it's called .NEF), there is no processing of the image "in camera", like:
    - sharpening
    - noise reduction
    - white balance
    When i import the photos (converted to .DNG) into LR, some settings are made automatically:
    - Sharpening: 25
    - Color noise reduction: 25
    - Brightness: 50
    - Contrast: 25
    If these settings were set to "0", that would make the photo purely untouched, right? A pure RAW file with no adjustments. I'm assuming these settings are set to make the photo more pleasing "out of the box". Am i right?
    Also, my Nikon D50 has excellent in-camera noise reduction when i shoot in .jpg. Is LW's noise reduction slider linked to the excellent D50 noise reduction? Or is LR simply applying it's own noise reduction? I'm assuming (and hoping) that it's using the D50's noise reduction because 1) there are only 2 sliders for noise reduction, and 2) the noise reduction is extremely fast!
    Thanks for all your help!
    John

    John you pretty much have it. Though I would not count on any companies
    products trying to apply sharpening or anything else so that it matched what
    the in camera version did. For one thing companies like Adobe may not have
    access to how that is done. Second of all there are better ways of doing all
    of that. The processing capabilities of cameras are very limited. They have
    to be in order to shoot pictures and get them done so you can shoot another
    one. If you had powerful in camera processing with sophiticated routines you
    would end up shooting a picture and then 10 minutes later to was finally
    written to the card with all of the processing done. Cameras while a distant
    cousin to computers are not computers.
    In fact based on what I have seen for things like in camera sharpening, etc.
    you are much better off turning all of that off or shoot raw so that your
    images aren't affected and doing the job right in LR or Photoshop. You can
    always do a better job and with a lot more control.
    Also, right now the noise reduction and sharpening in LR just plain sucks.
    So these things do need to be done in Photoshop and noise reduction needs a
    third party plug-in because the noise reduction even in Photoshop sucks.
    As for what Andrew said about Meta-Data. Adobe does know which cameras have
    things that get lost going from the camera RAW format to DNG format. Adobe
    needs to publish this information so that we know. The longer Adobe keeps
    things like this in the dark the longer it will take for DNG to be fully
    accepted. It comes across as Adobe hidding something very bad, otherwise
    they would spell it out.
    As for RAW files being digital negatives well that make more sense than
    anything else. Digital cameras will never have a true negative option RAW is
    it. As for DNG being the envelope your negatives and prints come back to you
    in. Well, maybe but that isn't how 99.99% of people look at it and comments
    like those from Andrew only serve to confuse people because now people will
    read what he said and then think DNG files aren't RAW files and they are.
    For some reason people like to pick nits instead of just answering the
    question using the information and terms that the rest of the world uses and
    understands. There is no need to confuse and it doesn't matter what DNG
    technically is for the consumer and photography worlds it is Adobe's open
    standard RAW format.
    Robert

  • Questions About DNG

    1) Is the Current DNG 5.5 only useable in CS4?
    2) I notice that support for cameras is shown for both RAW and DNG. Since DNG is supposed to be universal, what is the down side of using DNG to run raw files from cameras such as the Canon 7D? Should I be using DNG 5.5 on CS3 for this camera? An earlier one?
    3) What would be the observable differences between a supported and non-supported when converting to DNG?
    Message was edited by: Hudechrome

    1) Is the Current DNG 5.5 only useable in CS4?
    The DNG converter is a stand-alone program, i.e. it is running without CS, LR or Bridge. 5.5 is the version of the program code (click on About in the dialog). The "usability" is determined rather by the version of the DNG format: older versions of CS do not support features, which have been introduced in newer DNG format versions.
    The DNG format can be selected in the DNG converter dialog: Change Preferences -> Compatibility.
    As the Canon7D does not require any new features, the resulting DNG file can be used in CS3 or even in CS2, even if the conversion specifies a higher DNG version.
    3) What would be the observable differences between a supported and non-supported when converting to DNG?
    If the DNG converter does not support a camera, it will not process the file. The speciality in this particular case is, that the 7D is not mentioned as "supported", because the support is preliminary.
    It's file extension is supported but the 7D is not. Therefore conversions are possible
    The file name extention is irrelevant. All newer Canon raw files have the extention CR2; that does not mean, that the camera is supported by ACR or the DNG converter.
    We are seeing a magenta cast to clipped highlights from the 7D in ACR
    Try reducing "Blacks".
    the files from the 7D appear noisy, even the iSO 200 files
    The 7D is about as noisy as the 50D at low ISOs, and less noise from 1600. However, all copies exhibit a vertical banding. It depends on the copy, at which intensity and how strong it appears. I have not seen it with ISO higher than 400, and it occurs usually in the 9th and 10th stop of the dynamic range, i.e. you have to increase the intensity a lot (exposure, brightness, fill light) in order to see it (and blacks = 0).
    Here are two samples for the banding, 100% crops:
    Gabor

  • Question about DNG converter in Bridge CS4

    Hello,
    I just installed Photoshop CS4, When I updated, it downloaded a hefty update (199 megs), so my setup now is:
    Win XP pro
    Bridge 3.0.0.464
    Camera RAW 5.7
    Photoshop CS4 11.0.2
    My Camera is a Panasonic Lumix FZ150 ( 2011 vintage)
    I have downloaded the Adobe DNG converter 6.6.0.261
    Every thing seems to be working fine so far, except:
    In Bridge when I "get Photos from Camera" the DNG conversion doesn't work. When I use the standalone converter it works fine.
    From reading past material on this forum I am assuming this is due to the fact that Bridge is older than my camera, and doesn't recognize the format.
    The questions:
    1. Does Bridge have its own built in DNG converter that is not upgradeable separately?
    2. If 1 is correct, is there a way to point Bridge to the location of the standalone converter so the work flow can be optimized.
    3. Since Bridge is not doing the conversion, but only importing the files, does the "Apply metadata" section of that window actually do anything? Should I bother to fill in any of those boxes?
    Thanks for any help.

    I posted a similar question quite a while ago, and what I learned was that Bridge has a DNG converter built in, but it's using ACR to read the file before it can convert. So you need ACR support for your camera.
    AFAIK there's no way to point Bridge to a standalone DNG converter.
    I suggested an updateable DNG converter plugin for Bridge, don't know why nobody listened...I thought it was an excellent idea
    As for the metadata, you just have to try. I don't know if it can write metadata when it can't read the file.

  • Nexus 6004: Question about port-profile type port-channel

    I'm setting up a new deployment of Nexus 6004 switches and want to utilize port-profiles as much as possible to simplify management down the road.
    All uplinks to other switches, routers and firewalls will be connected using VPC:s. On the port-channels (vpc) the only thing that will change over time is the allowed vlans.
    It seems that port-profiles of the type port-channel does not behave in the same way as those with type ethernet, at least not when adding vlans.
    If I modify the port-profile using "switchport trunk allowed vlan add XXX" it will delete the previous config and only retain "switchport trunk allowed vlan add XXX", and not merge it with the previous config as is expected. 
    Question: Is this a bug or is it working as intended?
    RH_N6K4_01(config-sync)# switch-profile rh
    Switch-Profile started, Profile ID is 1
    RH_N6K4_01(config-sync-sp)# port-profile type port-channel FIREWALL-UPLINK
    RH_N6K4_01(config-sync-port-prof)# switchport trunk allowed vlan 3
    RH_N6K4_01(config-sync-port-prof)# verify 
    Verification Successful
    RH_N6K4_01(config-sync-sp)# commit
    Verification successful...
    Proceeding to apply configuration. This might take a while depending on amount of configuration in buffer.
    Please avoid other configuration changes during this time.
    Commit Successful
    RH_N6K4_01(config-sync)# show port-profile 
    SHOW PORT_PROFILE
    port-profile FIREWALL-UPLINK
     type: Port-channel
     description: 
     status: enabled
     max-ports: 512
     inherit: 
     config attributes:
      switchport mode trunk
      switchport trunk allowed vlan 3
     evaluated config attributes:
      switchport mode trunk
      switchport trunk allowed vlan 3
     assigned interfaces:
    ===================================
    RH_N6K4_01(config-sync-sp)# port-profile type port-channel FIREWALL-UPLINK
    RH_N6K4_01(config-sync-port-prof)# switchport trunk allowed vlan add 84
    RH_N6K4_01(config-sync-port-prof)# verify 
    Verification Successful
    RH_N6K4_01(config-sync-sp)# commit 
    Verification successful...
    Proceeding to apply configuration. This might take a while depending on amount of configuration in buffer.
    Please avoid other configuration changes during this time.
    Commit Successful
    RH_N6K4_01(config-sync)# show port-profile 
    SHOW PORT_PROFILE
    port-profile FIREWALL-UPLINK
     type: Port-channel
     description: 
     status: enabled
     max-ports: 512
     inherit: 
     config attributes:
      switchport mode trunk
      switchport trunk allowed vlan add 84
     evaluated config attributes:
      switchport mode trunk
      switchport trunk allowed vlan add 84
     assigned interfaces:
    Expected behavior here would be "switchport trunk allowed vlan 3,84". This only occurs when using "port-profile type port-channel" not when using "port-profile type ethernet"

    <> is template syntax and is generally the type of object a container holds..   So it is defining that the MSGQUEUE type is a deque holding struct_buffer*'s.

  • Question about Canon Profiles

    Someone explain canons profiles, like for example its not infront of me I am at work but let's say Luster paper canons ICC profile there is a 1/2 or a 2 I think it is what is the difference  between the two?

    I don't understand what you are really asking for?  Do you want the raw data that is in the profiles or do you want what they do?
    Canon has very strict specifications on how it's paper and inks are made. They can then write certain specific instructions for it's printers to follow to make a good print. This is why it is always better to stick with Canon paper and inks. Just less problems. However ther are some other paper makers, Red River for one, that do great job, too. On inks, stay with Canon.
    If you are wanting the actual code that Canon usues, I don't think Canon will be willing to share that with you.
    EOS 1Ds Mk III, EOS 1D Mk IV EF 50mm f1.2 L, EF 24-70mm f2.8 L,
    EF 70-200mm f2.8 L IS II, Sigma 120-300mm f2.8 EX APO
    Photoshop CS6, ACR 8.7, Lightroom 5.7

  • HT1725 It says I need to answer questions about my profile even though I got my pass word right but I forgot my answers to the questions

    Help

    Welcome to the Apple Community.
    Start here, and reset your security questions, you will receive an email to your rescue address, use the link in the email and reset your security questions.
    If that doesn't help or you don't have a rescue address, you might try contacting Apple throughiTunes Store Support

  • 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 :-)

  • **-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.

  • DNG Profile Editor - questions about

    0) Thank to Eric Chan for your work on this. Until now I used the Camera Calibration process through Photoshop and Camera Calibration table. But I see this as a big progress.
    1) Will it stay only DNG editor or it will be also for raw pictures without a necessity to convert them to dng?
    2) Will it be only stand alone aplication or as well a part of the LR?
    3) Now I can switched off and on one color change (by the left mark in the Color List Box). Could it be possible to switch off and on the whole Color List Box to see all done changes?
    4) I have red your comment that this tool doesn't work with lightness, only hue and saturation. But if I want to work on a specific picture (i.e. a man wearing a red sweater), it will be fine to have it in the brightness close to an end picture. Will it be possible to open a picture not only with WB, but also with exposure, blacks and other basic development setting?
    5) Under the eye drop tool, I can see numbers of "initial" or "starting" color. But I can't see the numbers of changed color. It would be fine if I know the new numbers to see how close I am to them. It would be fine if the number over the color List Box will be also for starting color and also for end colors.
    And one little proposal: if the color will not change, show in Color List Box only the starting (left) half of a color. Than I can simply see that I didn't set a new color or the color stay exactly the same (it is only a question if exactly the same or very close to the same).
    6) It could be, that I will not use the exact color checker table for what you did process on the tab Chart. But many of color checker are delivered with exact numbers and picture on a cd, so it will be fine if I could open this "master" picture of a checker producer in a right panel under the Color List Box and simply take from it the end colors. First go to the main picture on left, choose the "initial color" and then simply go to this "master" picture in right and take the "end color". What do you think about this?
    7) If I work on the tab Chart, I get the error window "not neutral gray patches, row 4 culumn 1". But if I move the circle to row 4 culumn 2 it works fine. Is there any difference or problem?
    8) And last: how far is acting the shift of color. It will not work only for the one color but close surroundings will be also efeccted. How smal or large is the surroundings? E.g. if we take 360 degres for hue.
    Tom

    1. For now DNG-only. Here's why:
    http://labs.adobe.com/wiki/index.php/DNG_Profiles_FAQ#PEOnlyDNG
    http://labs.adobe.com/wiki/index.php/DNG_Profiles_FAQ#WhyNameDNGPE
    http://labs.adobe.com/wiki/index.php/DNG_Profiles_FAQ#WhyPESeparate
    2. Standalone for now. See above links for why.
    3. Use the 'Preview Color Changes' option in the Options menu.
    4. You can use 'Apply Raw Adjustments' in the Options menu to see your raw adjustments. This is __not__ recommended for building a general-purpose profile because you are then optimizing a profile with specific image adjustments in mind, rather than building a profile based more on the inherent camera characteristics.
    5. True, that is a limitation of this implementation.
    6. I am not sure what you mean. The Chart Wizard automatically optimizes the color patches in a test shot based on reference values for many physical charts, which is more practically useful than the numbers printed on the reference card that comes with the chart.
    7. Make sure you avoid color casts in the bottom row. The PE is picky about making sure your gray patches are relatively neutral. It is an attempt to help you get a better profile.
    8. Use 'Show Affected Colors' from the Options menu.
    You may wish to read this page carefully and thoroughly:
    documentation
    It is the reference online documentation for the DNG Profile Editor and a few of the things you wish to do, such as preview all color changes, apply raw adjustments, and visualize the extent of each color adjustment, are all documented there.

  • DNG Profile Editor "base profile" question.

    I'm profiling a Canon 5D3 with both the Adobe DNG Profile Editor and the Xrite ColorChecker software. It's been about 3 years since I last profiled a camera, so I'm re-doing the learning curve. My question now is how and why the DNG Profile editor depends on a "base profile?" Specifically, why does the DNG PE Chart Wizard generate different results depending on what base profile is used.
    I see in the documentation that "all color adjustments made in the DNG Profile Editor are defined relative to a base profile." I understand that logic when making a custom profile via manual tweaks. You have to have a starting point. But I don't understand that logic when using the Chart Wizard. I expected the Chart Wizard to arrive at the same pre-defined target point regardless of the starting point. It does not seem to do that.
    I discovered the difference by using an apparently bad workflow. I shot my colorchecker chart, converted the CR2 to DNG and brought it into Photoshop via ACR to inspect. That stored "Adobe Standard" as the base profile in the DNG.
    Then I fed this DNG to the DNG PE Chart Wizard and generated a profile. I opened the image in ACR and applied "My Profile", which became the base profile in the DNG file. I thought I did something wrong, so I ran the same DNG through the Chart Wizard again and generated "My Second Profile." That version looked very strange, so I did it again and made "My Third Profile."
    Now I have three profiles. My First Profile was made from Adobe Standard base. My Second Profile was made from My First Profile base. My Third Profile was made from My Second Profile base. Each iteration becomes more strange (bad), so this is clearly not the proper workflow. But what is? What base profile should be selected for Chart Wizard and why does it matter?
    Being curious, I did the same exercise using the Xrite ColorChecker software. That software generates the same result, regardless of what base profile is stored in the DNG files. I'm not sure I like the results, but at least they are consistent.

    DNG Profile Editor lets you define color edits (in the first tab) using a set of color control points.  These control points in turn define a color lookup table used to perform the color correction when processing a (raw) image.
    When you use a Base Profile, the resulting color table in the final profile is a combination of the base profile's color table, plus the color table defined by any edits that you've added in the first tab (using the Chart Wizard counts as adding edits to that first tab).
    The reason you can get different and less smooth results if you apply the Chart Wizard iteratively is because you are applying lookup table after lookup table.  The current color table-building method used by DNG PE has some limitations regarding smoothness of color profiles if two color control points are placed too closely (this can happen with the Chart Wizard, or if you specify two points manually that are close to each other).  These problems can become more noticeable if you apply the DNG PE iteratively.

  • About to use DNG Profile editor

    I've had my Colorchecker for a few weeks, and I finally have time to set up my profiles for LR 3.4. In reading the DNG Profile editor tutorial page (http://labs.adobe.com/wiki/index.php/DNG_Profiles:Editor), I have a few questions:
    1) If I use Tutorial 5, I am guessing I will have to create a profile for each lighting/WB condition, i.e., one for Tungsten, one for Fluorescent, one for sunny, one for overcast, one for flash, etc... Is that correct? Is there an advantage to doing this vs. going for the dual-illuminant approach explained in Tutorial 6?
    2) In Tutorial 6, for the dual illuminant profiles, it states that one of the reference shots should be taken at 6500K. I'm not quite sure how to achieve this, since daylight and flash, to semi-constant WB sources I can easily achieve, are around 5000-5600K.
    3) Should I (in LR) White-balance the Colorchecker reference shots, then convert to DNG, prior to bringing the DNG file into DNG Profile editor? Or is it preferable to WB as explained in Tutorial 1, step 3?
    4) Finally, it's somewhat unclear how I bring the profiles into LR for use during the Import or Develop phases. Tutorial 1, step 9 mentions a "CameraProfiles directory" for ACR and LR, so I'm guessing I need to go digging through the Adobe folders to locate this directory and place/save my profiles there?

    eswrite wrote:
    1) If I use Tutorial 5, I am guessing I will have to create a profile for each lighting/WB condition, i.e., one for Tungsten, one for Fluorescent, one for sunny, one for overcast, one for flash, etc... Is that correct?
    If you want a broad purpose DNG profile then yes, doing a dual illuminate profile is useful. Shoot a target under tungsten and under daylight and make the dual illuminate profile. There's no real reason you need to spawn off a bunch of other profiles for only slightly different light. The dual illuminate will handle cloudy or overcast just fine. If you also shoot with special lighting sources like fluorescent (which doesn't have a complete spectrum) or other non-standard lighting sources then do a profile for those special conditions. If you are creating a profile specifically for studio flash, you can get by doing only a single illuminate profile for the strobes...but in that case, the profile won't be as accurate if you also try to use it under tungsten–which would be the reason to do a dual illuminate profile.
    As far as the D65 color temp, the closer you can get to it the better, but D55 should work fine. The key is to make sure it's evenly lit. The big difference between D65/D50/D55 is the relative amount of the blue light components-all three will be fairly close. Tungsten however has vastly less blue which can impact the sensor's spectral response–which is why the dual illuminate is suggested.
    Once you do the CC shot, don't bother with tone/color corrections in ACR before converting to DNG. They won't have a material impact on the profile creation. The CC shot MUST be evenly lit and of an optimal exposure...
    As far as where the profile goes, it depends on the system. Once you've created the profile, PE should default to the correct location, otherwise state your system and we can tell you where to put them.

Maybe you are looking for