Skip navigation
RASouthworth
RASouthworth
Currently Being Moderated

Vignetting problems with the 16-85VR profile

May 28, 2010 7:22 PM

I recently downloaded the 16-85VR and 55-200VR profiles for use with my D300.  I initially tested them on a brick wall at the focal length extremes, and all worked well.  However further testing with the 16-85VR profile at intermediate values (I used 35 and 50) demonstrated vignetting over-correction; with the vignette slider at the default of 100 the image edges and corners were much too bright.  Bringing the slider down to approximately 20 gave acceptable results.  The geometric and CA corrections appeared ok at all focal lengths.  There were no observed problems with the 55-200VR profile.

 

I would ask whomever created the 16-85VR profile to re-check at the intermediate values and see if they can reproduce my results.  Again, it appeared to me only the vignetting correction was faulty.  The problem occurred both in ACR 6.1 and in Photoshop CS5.  I have attached a screenshot showing the problem.  The original .nef can be downloaded from http://rgbaustin.com/S10_5685.zip.

 

 

DoubleVig.jpg

 

Richard Southworth

2280 Views   25 Replies   Latest reply: MadManChan2000, Jul 6, 2010 9:13 AM
 
Replies
  • Lee Jay-7OQGJF
    Currently Being Moderated
    1. Lee Jay-7OQGJF,
    May 28, 2010 7:38 PM   in reply to RASouthworth
    Report

    Just to be sure, you have all the manual corrections off, right?


     
    |
    Mark as:
  • RASouthworth
    Currently Being Moderated
    2. RASouthworth,
    May 29, 2010 6:00 AM   in reply to Lee Jay-7OQGJF
    Report

    Yes.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • RASouthworth
    Currently Being Moderated
    3. RASouthworth,
    May 29, 2010 6:33 AM   in reply to RASouthworth
    Report

    Shot the proverbial brick wall at 42mm this morning, vignetting problem easier to see (slider set to default 100).  Again with control set at about 20 the wall looks ok.

     

    Adobe or profile creator, please get this fixed, this is otherwise a very useful profile.

     

    Richard Southworth

     

     

    BrickWall.JPG

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Lee Jay-7OQGJF
    Currently Being Moderated
    4. Lee Jay-7OQGJF,
    May 29, 2010 9:17 AM   in reply to RASouthworth
    Report

    Wait - where did you get this profile?  It doesn't say "Adobe" on your screen shot and I don't see it as an Adobe-supplied profile.

     

    EDIT:  Sorry, I'm a little slow.  I didn't see, "I would ask whomever created the 16-85VR profile to re-check at the intermediate values and see if they can reproduce my results" the first time through.

     

    I think this type of situation is pretty easy to create if you aren't somewhat careful with your lighting when you take the shots.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • RASouthworth
    Currently Being Moderated
    5. RASouthworth,
    May 29, 2010 12:36 PM   in reply to Lee Jay-7OQGJF
    Report

    Lee Jay,

     

    I think it is a profile problem, EXCEPT a member of the ACR forum had no problems using the profile on one of my images.  Here is the raw file for the brick wall shot if you're interested in trying it:

     

    http://rgbaustin.com/S10_5842.zip

     

    Richard Southworth

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Jeff Schewe
    Currently Being Moderated
    6. Jeff Schewe,
    May 29, 2010 2:15 PM   in reply to RASouthworth
    Report

    There's definitely something off about the profile. I can use it in Photoshop CS5's Lens Correction and if I right click I can see the various F/stops and zooms and focus distance used. But, it's clearly doing an over correction with vignetting.

     

    When I try to use the profile in Camera Raw, the vignetting is really screwed up...the profile name is also garbage. So, this is a profile that needs to be fixed or removed...

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • RASouthworth
    Currently Being Moderated
    7. RASouthworth,
    May 30, 2010 8:20 AM   in reply to Jeff Schewe
    Report

    Jeff,

     

    Thanks for the confirmation.  There is still some mystery left, I wonder if there is an internal problem with vignetting, I see a lesser degree of over correction with the 55-200VR lens.  And I have re-downloaded both profiles, using them with vignetting set at zero, seem to do a good job at distortion and CA correction.  Also I have no profile name corruption.

     

    A member of the ACR forum was able to use the 16-85VR profile successfully on one of my images, with the vignette slider at default.  So perhaps there is some sort of configuration interaction.  Hope Adobe gets it sorted out soon, very nice function to have in ACR.

     

    Richard Southworth

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • phototrek
    Currently Being Moderated
    8. phototrek,
    May 30, 2010 4:38 PM   in reply to RASouthworth
    Report

    Maybe the original profile was created by someone with a lens filter on, which thus enhanced vignetting?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • MadManChan2000
    Currently Being Moderated
    9. MadManChan2000,
    May 31, 2010 7:46 PM   in reply to phototrek
    Report

    There is a possibility that the image sets used to create the profile did not place the patches of the chart close enough to the corners of the frame. If that is true, then that could result in overcorrection of vignetting at wider apertures.

     

    (At shorter focal lengths, the vignette falloff can be steeper in the corners, so it's important to get patches close to the corners. There is also a known limitation in ALPC regarding vignette overcorrection and this is an area for improvement.)

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Yammer P
    Currently Being Moderated
    10. Yammer P,
    May 31, 2010 11:24 PM   in reply to RASouthworth
    Report

    RASouthworth wrote:

     

    A member of the ACR forum was able to use the 16-85VR profile successfully on one of my images, with the vignette slider at default.  So perhaps there is some sort of configuration interaction.  Hope Adobe gets it sorted out soon, very nice function to have in ACR.

    That was me. Yesterday, I worked on a 6-shot pano with a 16-85mm and noticed that the vignette correction had indeed over compensated, and needed the effect reducing to 60. So, I can confirm that the profile does sometimes get it wrong for me too.

     

    However, that doesn't explain how the same raw file can be over-compensated on one computer and not on another. That IS very strange.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Dorin Nicolaescu-Musteață
    Currently Being Moderated
    11. Dorin Nicolaescu-Musteață,
    Jun 1, 2010 1:36 AM   in reply to Yammer P
    Report

    However, that doesn't explain how the same raw file can be over-compensated on one computer and not on another. That IS very strange.

    I shouldn't be, if you have a shot with the same focal length, focus position and aperture. But can you be sure the two shots on different computers had identical settings?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Yammer P
    Currently Being Moderated
    12. Yammer P,
    Jun 1, 2010 2:59 AM   in reply to Dorin Nicolaescu-Musteață
    Report

    dorin_nicolaescu wrote:

     

    But can you be sure the two shots on different computers had identical settings?

    Not obviously 100% sure, but I think we both reset to camera raw defaults before applying lens correction.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Dorin Nicolaescu-Musteață
    Currently Being Moderated
    13. Dorin Nicolaescu-Musteață,
    Jun 1, 2010 3:03 AM   in reply to Yammer P
    Report

    ... but I think we both reset to camera raw defaults before applying lens correction.

    I mean in-camera settings (focal length, focus position and aperture), not Camera Raw settings.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Yammer P
    Currently Being Moderated
    14. Yammer P,
    Jun 1, 2010 3:05 AM   in reply to Dorin Nicolaescu-Musteață
    Report

    It's the same photo; same raw file.


     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Kaffeesegler
    Currently Being Moderated
    15. Kaffeesegler,
    Jun 18, 2010 5:12 AM   in reply to Yammer P
    Report

    Downloaded the CS5 trial just to get access to the profiles. Saved the one for the Nikon 16-85 for my use in LR3.

     

    Works well, but I have the same vignetting problems - so I've set the vignetting slider almost to 0.

     

    I started profiling the lens / D300 myself but ran into too many problems, I would need at least one day to make it perfect. So I'm hoping for a better version from Adobe (I would even pay for it).

     

    Regards, Detlef

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • simonsaith
    Currently Being Moderated
    16. simonsaith,
    Jun 18, 2010 10:04 PM   in reply to MadManChan2000
    Report

    >There is a possibility that the image sets used to create the profile did not place the patches of the chart close enough to the corners of the frame. If >that is true, then that could result in overcorrection of vignetting at wider apertures.

     

    >(At shorter focal lengths, the vignette falloff can be steeper in the corners, so it's important to get patches close to the corners. There is also a known >limitation in ALPC regarding vignette overcorrection and this is an area for improvement.)

     

    Yes. In order to get consistent good quality lens profiles, it is critical to position the patches of the chart as close to the edges to the image frame as possible (while still without having the patches being clipped by the image frame) and keep a consistent lighting between the 9 image shots.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Oleg_Z
    Currently Being Moderated
    17. Oleg_Z,
    Jun 21, 2010 6:41 PM   in reply to RASouthworth
    Report

    I noticed that this profile works fine in Adobe Camera Raw, but has way too much vignatting correction if you choose lens filter in

    CS5. Looks like a bug in Lens Correction. Try to save profile locally and use in Camera Raw.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • simonsaith
    Currently Being Moderated
    18. simonsaith,
    Jun 21, 2010 6:55 PM   in reply to Oleg_Z
    Report

    If what you said is true, then it is a totally different issue now. The best place to do vignette correction is in the raw color space, period. With raw, one still have access to the raw sensor color data. The vignette correction here is exact. With the LC filter in PS CS5, we have to guess the sensor reponse curve (gamma), the correction is approximate.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Oleg_Z
    Currently Being Moderated
    19. Oleg_Z,
    Jun 21, 2010 8:59 PM   in reply to simonsaith
    Report

    S10_5842-Camera-Raw.jpg

    The same image processed in Camera Raw. Looks good to me

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • RASouthworth
    Currently Being Moderated
    20. RASouthworth,
    Jun 30, 2010 1:02 PM   in reply to Oleg_Z
    Report

    Just returned from an Italian vacation, with several hundred 16-85VR images.  Before running them thru ACR I checked for any new profiles available for the 16-85VR, found one that is labeled for the D90 but obviously works ok on the D300.  It has many more data points than the one labeled for the D300, and the vignetting seems to work well at all focal lengths.  I'll begin using it extensively and will report back if any issues.

     

    Richard Southworth

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Yammer P
    Currently Being Moderated
    21. Yammer P,
    Jun 30, 2010 4:44 PM   in reply to RASouthworth
    Report

    Yes, I've been using that one too. It's quite a lot different in terms of distortion and vignetting - not as extreme.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Yammer P
    Currently Being Moderated
    22. Yammer P,
    Jun 30, 2010 11:33 PM   in reply to Yammer P
    Report

    ...although I should mention that it still seems to over compensate for vignette a bit.


     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Kaffeesegler
    Currently Being Moderated
    23. Kaffeesegler,
    Jul 6, 2010 8:42 AM   in reply to RASouthworth
    Report

    How do you apply a D90 profile to a RAW file with embedded information that it was captured by a D300? The D90 file is in my downloaded profiles folder, but in LR3s develop modul  I'm only able to see the D300 profiles (developing a D300 picture).

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Yammer P
    Currently Being Moderated
    24. Yammer P,
    Jul 6, 2010 8:56 AM   in reply to Kaffeesegler
    Report

    I'n not using Lightroom, I'm using Camera Raw with my D300. It's possible that Lightroom is camera-specific in offering profiles. If there's no way around this, you may be able to edit the xml using a text editor, or a multi-editor, like RJ Texted, and replace all occurences of D90 with D300.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • MadManChan2000
    Currently Being Moderated
    25. MadManChan2000,
    Jul 6, 2010 9:13 AM   in reply to Kaffeesegler
    Report

    CR/LR will show you all raw-based lens profiles when you are processing raw images (not just the ones created by your camera model, like the D300).Is the D90 profile you're trying to use created from JPEG or from raw?

     
    |
    Mark as:
Actions

More Like This

  • Retrieving data ...

Bookmarked By (0)

Answers + Points = Status

  • 10 points awarded for Correct Answers
  • 5 points awarded for Helpful Answers
  • 10,000+ points
  • 1,001-10,000 points
  • 501-1,000 points
  • 5-500 points