This content has been marked as final. Show 16 replies
This has been covered ad nauseam here. Please do a forum search.
Camera manufacturers, Canon and Nikon in particular, perform in-camera RAW to JPEG conversions designed to generate the over-saturated, over-contrasty and over-sharpened images that appeal to most amateurs.
Their stand-alone RAW conversion software also performs the same conversion to your RAW images.
Noise is also hidden by compressing the shadows so you don't see much of the noise inherent in the image.
Adobe Camera Raw, ACR, on the other hand, comes with default settings designed to give you the most detail possible (even if this sometimes means revealing some of the noise hidden by the camera manufacturers in their RAW conversion software), as well as the most natural images.
That being said, you can calibrate your camera to ACR and come up with your own settings to produce exactly what you want, including the JPEG-look of the camera manufacturer, and save that as your profile.
The key is to learn how to use ACR properly and to calibrate your camera to ACR.
CLICK HERE for some essential reading.
The ACR defaults are nothing more than a suggested starting point.
The color temperature won't necessarily match either.
Were you shooting under fluorescent light conditions?
Thank-you. I posted this question after reading only the first page of discussion topics, and since have found and read another discussion(which you were a part of) entitled "tone changing on importing raw files" Lots of help there from everyone - thanks!
I have since done some presets in the calibration tab and so far have found pleasing results with any new files I've opened.
I didn't do anything in curves or with white balance - should i attempt presets in these as well??
I mainly shoot studio or natural light sometimes with flash. -anything else i would expect to have to adjust but am i wrong in assuming that these color presets will be helpfull even as a first step in any lighting situation??
>am i wrong in assuming that these color presets will be helpfull even as a first step in any lighting situation?
Yes, you are.
You surely won't expect a single preset for natural daylight, tungsten incandescent and fluorescent lighting, do you? :)
i don't usually adjust for these but would i not be better off using the temperature slider for these conditions?? - either with or without additional color calibration??
>but would i not be better off using the temperature slider for these conditions?
That can be saved in a preset too. That's why I mentioned it.
>The key is to learn how to use ACR properly and to calibrate your camera to ACR.
>CLICK HERE for some essential reading.
Bruce's book set the standard for ACR, but I wouldn't rush out and buy it right now, since the revised version (by Jeff Schewe) will be out soon. In the interim, online sources are your best bet.
>Camera manufacturers, Canon and Nikon in particular, perform in-camera RAW to JPEG conversions designed to generate the over-saturated, over-contrasty and over-sharpened images that appeal to most amateurs.
>Their stand-alone RAW conversion software also performs the same conversion to your RAW images.
These statements are often made without any documentation. I have compared ACR's rendering of Color Checker images with that of Nikon Capture NX, using the same raw image for both conversions. The D200 was used for the capture. With ACR, I used the default settings and the default ACR calibration settings (i.e. no ACR calibration was performed). For Nikon Capture, I used normal contrast and saturation and the default tone curve. The Imatest results show that the ACR conversion is actually more saturated, with a mean chroma (saturation) of 113.7% as compared to 106% for Nikon Capture NX. For overall color accuracy, ACR is quite competitive, and is superior to Capture NX if one does an ACR calibration. For help in interpreting the Imatest results, readers are directed to the Imatest web site.
Here is a composite of the two renderings, both in sRGB for web viewing:
And here are the Imatest plots:
>I've played with white balance and still cant seem to get a match.
Is there a setting that can do this 'jpeg match' with every image i open or what should i do???
First, I would check the white balance in the two renderings by taking pictures with a white reference point. For best results one should use a neutral light gray such as a WhiBal card, but common objects such as a white shirt will do for non-critical work. Then check the rendered light gray with the eye dropper tool. If white balance is correct, all channels (RGB) should have equal pixel values. If the white balance is off in the "as shot" ACR rendering, you can do a custom WB using the ACR white balance eyedropper.
ACR's temperature slider adjusts the white balance in the blue-yellow direction (Planckian locus) on a CIE xy chromaticity plot, whereas the tint slider adjusts for deviations in the magenta-green direction. Since you are getting a green cast, the tint might need adjusting.
If the white balance is correct and you are still getting a color cast, then you could try calibrating in ACR (critical users use the calibration as normal practice). However, as the Imatest plots show, ACR gives color accuracy similar to the camera maker's program without calibration.
>These statements are often made without any documentation.
Just plain observations any non-blind person can see.
I can walk out of the building right now and tell you that the sun is shining, without any need for any "documentation" and "no stinkin' badges".
>Just plain observations any non-blind person can see.
>I can walk out of the building right now and tell you that the sun is shining, without any need for any "documentation" and "no stinkin' badges".
Well, what hubris! I have just shown your blanket statement to be incorrect for this particular camera and software, and you come up with this bluster. Not many will be deceived by this tactic.
>I have just shown your blanket statement to be incorrect
I'm sure in your mind you have.
The sun is still shining.