29 Replies Latest reply on Apr 11, 2010 9:39 AM by tereza29a

    Histogram inconsistencies with Camera profiles - Camera Raw

    AndyAndy128 Level 1

      Hi,

      I've been going nuts with this issue for a year now since Adobe released the camera profiles for Camera Raw. Something tells me this shouldn't be happening.

      Well exposed pictures taken with the D300 show an inconsistent histogram in camera raw when using the Adobe camera profiles for the D300.

      This is a shame because I prefer the colour rendering of the camera profiles to that of the adobe standard profile.

      This is the problem:

      With the D300 I get a correct histogram in Camera Raw only if I choose the ACR 4.4 or the Adobe Standard profile. By correct I mean with black and white points filled to the edge of the histogram.

      If I choose the camera neutral, standard, portrait or vivid suddenly there's an empty area in the histogram's blacks. Effectively the black point has been shifted quite a bit and I need to push up the slider for blacks up to 30 or so to get the black point back to the right place. While with Adobe standard the blacks are correct at 0 or so. Check out the pics here below.

      Is this normal behaviour, or is there something wrong in my settings?

       

      Adobe Standard histogram.jpg

      Camera Standard histogram.jpg

        • 1. Re: Histogram inconsistencies with Camera profiles - Camera Raw
          MadManChan2000 Adobe Employee

          Regardless of how the histogram looks, how do the resulting __images__ look?

           

          I've been going nuts with this issue for a year now since Adobe released the

          camera profiles for Camera Raw. Something tells me this shouldn't be

          happening.

          Well exposed pictures taken with the D300 show an inconsistent histogram in

          camera raw when using the Adobe camera profiles for the D300.

          This is a shame because I prefer the colour rendering of the camera profiles

          to that of the adobe standard profile.

           

          • 2. Re: Histogram inconsistencies with Camera profiles - Camera Raw
            Bill_Janes Level 2

            The Camera Standard and Adobe Standard have different tonal response curves. Shown below are the TRCs for the Nikon D3 rendered into ProPhotoGRB with the Camera Standard and Adobe Standard calibration curves, with other values left at default. In particular, the Black level was lett at the default value of 5. The TRCs for your D300 are likely similar. Many users think that the default of 5 is too high, but the user can easily establish a custom default. The Camera Standard produces lighter values in the deep shadows as shown in the graph and your histograms. Which TRC is preferable depends on the scene and personal preferences.

             

            TRCs.gif

             

            As discussed by Karl Lang in his excellent white paper, there is no one correct rendering.

             

            http://wwwimages.adobe.com/www.adobe.com/products/photoshop/family/prophotographer/pdfs/ps cs3_renderprint.pdf

             

            If you expose to the right so that the highlights are just short of the right end of the histogram, the left end point of the histogram will be determined  by the dynamic range of the scene and the tone curve used for the rendering. In a low dynamic range scene, the left of the histogram will be to the right, and with a high dynamic range scene, the left of the histogram will be to the left.

             

            The Camera Standard TRC would be more appropriate for a high dynamic range scene, since it leaves more room for deep shadows, while the Adobe Standard TRC would be more appropriate for a lower dyanmic range scene. It is not possible for a given tone curve to produce a "correct" histogram for all scenes. The photographer must use judgement and make these adjustments.

            • 3. Re: Histogram inconsistencies with Camera profiles - Camera Raw
              tereza29a Level 1

              it doesn't matter how profiles look because they are just somehow averaged profil

              es for most cameras. even if you have camera in raw database, each camera is different due manufacturing

              deviance.

               

              if you want best results, buy colorchecker http://www.xrite.com/product_overview.aspx?ID=824

               

              install dng profile editor and calibrate your camera. if you print, you have to buy calibration colormeter for you screen as well.

               

              then a nd only then you get exact color.

               

              anything you open in acr default setting is crewed up and don't match reality. like birghtness and contrast +50. also medium contrast curve.

               

              you have study/observe histogram+picture and made adjustments accordingly. doesn't matter what default setting "says".

              • 4. Re: Histogram inconsistencies with Camera profiles - Camera Raw
                Peter DL Level 1

                >> ... I get a correct histogram in Camera Raw only if I choose the ACR 4.4 or the Adobe Standard profile. By correct I mean with black and white points filled to the edge of the histogram.

                If I choose the camera neutral, standard, portrait or vivid suddenly there's an empty area in the histogram's blacks. Effectively the black point has been shifted quite a bit .... <<

                 

                Described effect still looks a bit strong to me,
                although Bill's explanation is spot on.

                 

                How is the difference between the profiles and histograms when you set the output profile to ProPhoto RGB - in order to exclude most of possible saturation clipping ?

                 

                What happens when Blacks, Brightness & Contrast are set to zero (parametric curve & point curve linear) - which should strip the tone curve from any profile (afaik) ? Exposure, Recovery any Fill Light to be zero as per facory defaults as well.

                 

                Peter

                 

                --

                • 5. Re: Histogram inconsistencies with Camera profiles - Camera Raw
                  tereza29a Level 1

                  you guys seem to be pretty confused about reading of histogram. i don't know what means "correct" histrogram

                  . are you telling me that you are trying to fill up whole dynamic range by moving black and white point?

                  if there is no pure black/white in picture, then there cannot be utilizied full dynamic range (0-256) of histogram.

                   

                  open camera profiles in dng profile editor and you will see what tone curves have been applied to particular profile.

                   

                  if you set everything to zero. you get accurate lienar output of camera sensor. that is how i calibrate my camera with ACR. once you use camera raw defaults and use camera profiles. you will most likely get color shifts and artifacts.

                   

                  if you want to accurate/realistic output you have to calibrate your camera by colorchecker (i presume you have calibrated display as well). as I have seen in other threads. most problems are with proprietary RAW formats from Nikon/Canon (especially encrypted Nikon RAW files). I use DNG on Pentax and have no problems.

                  • 6. Re: Histogram inconsistencies with Camera profiles - Camera Raw
                    Level 4

                    tereza29a wrote:

                     

                    … seem to be pretty confused about reading of histogram…

                     

                    Yes, it has been my experience that a lot of people are.  They seem to attribute to it functions, magical properties and regulatory powers it doesn't have.

                    • 7. Re: Histogram inconsistencies with Camera profiles - Camera Raw
                      tereza29a Level 1

                      2 tai lao: if only basic misunderstanding of histogram.

                       

                      most people also believe in magic "powers" of post-processing programs so that they don't need to know most basics and core skills to photography. I don't see many snappers at "perfect" light conditions, but I have seen many to start just about I am done when "perfection" is gone.

                       

                      I hate to say guys, but once you screw up exposure and composition. no program can fix.

                      • 8. Re: Histogram inconsistencies with Camera profiles - Camera Raw
                        Bill_Janes Level 2

                        tereza29a wrote:

                        if you set everything to zero. you get accurate lienar output of camera sensor. that is how i calibrate my camera with ACR. once you use camera raw defaults and use camera profiles. you will most likely get color shifts and artifacts.

                         

                        if you want to accurate/realistic output you have to calibrate your camera by colorchecker (i presume you have calibrated display as well). as I have seen in other threads. most problems are with proprietary RAW formats from Nikon/Canon (especially encrypted Nikon RAW files). I use DNG on Pentax and have no problems.

                        If you want to get the camera sensor values (which are linear), you have to use a program that outputs the raw data such as Iris or DCRaw. ACR always needs a camera profile to convert the sensor RGB values to a defined working space such as ProPhotoRGB. The working space is gamma encoded, not linear. If you want scene referred data you can use the method outlined on the ICC web site:

                         

                        http://www.color.org/scene-referred.xalter

                         

                        Doug Kerr gives a good summary of how the sensor values are rendered into the working color space. Since no sensor satisfies the Luther-Ives conditions, real world cameras will have metameric errors which no profile can correct. I find the Adobe profiles for Nikon cameras to be excellent, but one can always use the DNG editor to customize the existing profiles for your own camera.

                         

                        http://dougkerr.net/pumpkin/articles/Sensor_Colorimetry.pdf

                        • 9. Re: Histogram inconsistencies with Camera profiles - Camera Raw
                          tereza29a Level 1

                          2 bill_janes: thanks for info. i used to use ufRAW, which is based on dcraw anyway i believe. it just gets really weird results sometimes. and open source community has got even more problems with proprietary formats than windows clickers.

                           

                          i guess you won't use complex calculation in the field. i set aRGB in camera, adjust a profile which will "exactly" match adobe histogram. all i need to know, camera histogram match (in field) = ACR match (at home). once you get correct exposure you can play with rest of stuff like advanced color profiles in any post-processing program. that is my simply strategy. otherwise, i wouldn't even bother about something like that. most people don't even need that anyway. unless you wish to print out pictures.

                           

                          i don't have nikon camera nor canon (used to have eos 400d without problems with ACR) so i cannot say what should go wrong. all i know that most problems are between chair and keyboard.

                          • 10. Re: Histogram inconsistencies with Camera profiles - Camera Raw
                            Peter DL Level 1

                            Tereza29a wrote:
                            >>
                            you guys seem to be pretty confused about reading of histogram. <<

                            LOL.
                            Actually I’m undecided if your comments are better to be ignored because revealing a basic lack of understanding, or, if this could still be an interesting discussion (although the OP seems to have left).

                            >>i don't know what means "correct" histrogram.<<

                            "Correct" in the sense of comprehensible means to understand the parameters ruling the mapping of 3D colors to a 2D histogram. Ever heard about saturation clipping ?

                            >> are you telling me that you are trying to fill up whole dynamic range by moving black and white point? if there is no pure black/white in picture, then there cannot be utilizied full dynamic range (0-256) of histogram.<<

                            Scene DR can at times easily exceed the output dynamic range of any monitor or print. Then, best possible tone mapping and a most pleasing rendition (if there is something like this) are of course also dependant on the absolute luminosity of input vs output. For the purpose of simplification: in many cases – not all ! – the favorable approach is to stretch the histogram over the full range by setting blacks and white accordingly.

                            >>open camera profiles in dng profile editor and you will see what tone curves have been applied to particular profile.<<

                            Nope - you won’t see the de facto applied tone curve in the Curve tab of the DNG profile editor. It just allows you to apply relative changes a.) to the Base profile, or b.) to camera raw defaults, or, to set the profile tone curve to "linear".

                            >>if you set everything to zero. you get accurate lienar output of camera sensor. that is how i calibrate my camera with ACR. once you use camera raw defaults and use camera profiles. you will most likely get color shifts and artifacts.<<

                            Yes and No. The profile built by the chart wizard always refers to the linear state - independent from any tone curve adjustment applied, whether in the profile editor or in camera raw. The tone curve and possible saturation shifts resulting thereof come later on, on the top.

                            >>most people also believe in magic "powers" of post-processing programs so that they don't need to know most basics and core skills to photography. I don't see many snappers at "perfect" light conditions, but I have seen many to start just about I am done when "perfection" is gone. I hate to say guys, but once you screw up exposure and composition. no program can fix.<<

                            Deep wisdom. Not sure how it refers to the topic discussed here.

                            >>i set aRGB in camera, adjust a profile which will "exactly" match adobe histogram. all i need to know, camera histogram match (in field) = ACR match (at home). <<

                            Opps.
                            Good luck then.

                            Peter

                            --

                            • 11. Re: Histogram inconsistencies with Camera profiles - Camera Raw
                              tereza29a Level 1

                              I would be more than happy if  you enlighten me by your wisdom about histograms. if you share same wisdom like most people of  this thread I'm not too convinced by your understanding of core  skills.

                               

                              I don't know what you need correct histogram in ACR? I don't carry laptot with ACR in the field nor I have time to play around when I take pictures. If you don't know what your camera does and how you set your camera that RAW previews are "same" like output. Then perhaps there is again some problem in the very beginning and no "mighty" sw can fix it.

                               

                              Remapping black and white points is result of "i have been there photography" and incorrect exposure. Never had problem to set white or black point. Always problem with lack of DR of digital cameras. Perhaps some problems with right time and right place? If you screw up exposure, nothing can fix it. which is same result like above by. you get only color shifts and muted colors + artifacts.

                               

                              Applied curve can be easily revealed in ACR after you have generated profiles in DNG Profile Editor based on embedded profile from camera.

                               

                              How deep wisdom refers to this thread. That is why you never get to next level. Because most people of this thread seems to have basic misunderstanding of core skills necessary to photography. I would suggest you guys, go to shop and buy good old film camera with full manual setup and learn basic. Forget fancy auto focus, auto exposure, auto this, auto that.

                               

                              That is whole problem to the "issue" of this thread.

                               

                              Despite you are taunting of these primitive "calibration" techniques. They work well and I don't have problems with post-processing. So I wonder what or who should be wrong ;-)

                              • 12. Re: Histogram inconsistencies with Camera profiles - Camera Raw
                                Bill_Janes Level 2

                                tereza29a wrote:

                                I don't know what you need correct histogram in ACR? I don't carry laptot with ACR in the field nor I have time to play around when I take pictures. If you don't know what your camera does and how you set your camera that RAW previews are "same" like output. Then perhaps there is again some problem in the very beginning and no "mighty" sw can fix it.

                                 

                                Remapping black and white points is result of "i have been there photography" and incorrect exposure. Never had problem to set white or black point. Always problem with lack of DR of digital cameras. Perhaps some problems with right time and right place? If you screw up exposure, nothing can fix it. which is same result like above by. you get only color shifts and muted colors + artifacts.

                                 

                                With the camera histogram, we are mainly interested in placing the highlights just short of clipping so as to obtain maximal signal:noise. If the shadows are still clipped with this exposure, the dynamic range of the camera has been exceeded and you could lower the lighting ratio or bracket and use HDR or blending. If the highlights in the image are near white, then the white point in ACR is likely near what it should be. If the highlights are gray, then you have to bring them down with negative exposure. If the scene dynamic range is less than that of the camera, then the black point will likely need to be lowered.

                                 

                                If you look at the interview with Thomas Knoll (the author of Photoshop and ACR) in the ACR tutorial downloadable from the Luminous Landscape site, you would learn that when editing an image, Thomas first sets the black and white points.

                                • 13. Re: Histogram inconsistencies with Camera profiles - Camera Raw
                                  tereza29a Level 1

                                  Bill_Janes wrote:

                                   

                                   

                                  With the camera histogram, we are mainly interested in placing the highlights just short of clipping so as to obtain maximal signal:noise. If the shadows are still clipped with this exposure, the dynamic range of the camera has been exceeded and you could lower the lighting ratio or bracket and use HDR or blending. If the highlights in the image are near white, then the white point in ACR is likely near what it should be. If the highlights are gray, then you have to bring them down with negative exposure. If the scene dynamic range is less than that of the camera, then the black point will likely need to be lowered.

                                   

                                  If you look at the interview with Thomas Knoll (the author of Photoshop and ACR) in the ACR tutorial downloadable from the Luminous Landscape site, you would learn that when editing an image, Thomas first sets the black and white points.

                                  That is finally some good answer. Most important part of digital photography, maximising SNR. In other words, get as much light as possible on a sensor to reduce chroma/luma noise. Unfortunatelly, there is little catch to your claim. camera/acr histogram refleclects about 5 stops DR. RAW has got about 7-8stops DR. That is why I have written that you have to know your camera and calibrate it (either mentally or visually). Usually, you get +0.6 and -2.0 extra what you cannot see, but you must know what you camera is capable of. Then just play with exposure/recovery and so on. HDR is an other misunderstood thing by most snappers. If they cannot exposure right, they use HDR. HDR has became occult lately.

                                   

                                  I don't read manuals hence they are full of misconcepts made by amateurs. I expose right, thus don't need to set black/white point. Unless, I screw up exposure like happened when I started with "I have been there photography". I do landscape/sport so I could be wrong in white/black point remapping. But, I believe that correct light is must for any photography scenario.

                                   

                                  I believe that correct exposure is most powerfull technique that all competent snapper MUST know. Then all SW packages are irrelevant. Unless, you are pro a need to print stuff out.

                                  • 14. Re: Histogram inconsistencies with Camera profiles - Camera Raw
                                    tereza29a Level 1

                                    Bill, there is also one more catch I forgot to mention. I presume that all know that what you

                                    see in camera RAW histogram is JUST preview based on actual setting of camera. Thus, if you have incorrect setting you will get incorrect preview and it will result in incorrect exposure. If you want correct exposure, you have to start with correct white balance. If you expose in auto at 5600K and actual scene is 9000K. you get clipping like hell and you won't even know it until you start to wonder in RAW convertor.

                                     

                                    It seems to me that most people have misunderstanding of this concept which results in "problems". As I have already written, it seems to me an issue from very beginning capturing process, not issue of Photoshop, Capture 1, ACR, LIghtroom and so on.

                                    • 15. Re: Histogram inconsistencies with Camera profiles - Camera Raw
                                      Bill_Janes Level 2

                                      tereza29a wrote:

                                       

                                      Bill, there is also one more catch I forgot to mention. I presume that all know that what you

                                      see in camera RAW histogram is JUST preview based on actual setting of camera. Thus, if you have incorrect setting you will get incorrect preview and it will result in incorrect exposure. If you want correct exposure, you have to start with correct white balance. If you expose in auto at 5600K and actual scene is 9000K. you get clipping like hell and you won't even know it until you start to wonder in RAW convertor.

                                       

                                      It seems to me that most people have misunderstanding of this concept which results in "problems". As I have already written, it seems to me an issue from very beginning capturing process, not issue of Photoshop, Capture 1, ACR, LIghtroom and so on.

                                      You raise a few good points, but your posts contain many inaccuracies. The only camera setting that ACR reads from the metadata and uses for processing is white balance. The other camera settings are ignored. The raw file reflects the light that fell on the sensor, and this is not affected by the white balance setting on the camera, and the WB setting is merely stored as a tag in the raw filed and applied by the raw converter. Any clipping would occur during the conversion process and not at the level of the sensor. Furthermore, you can apply any WB you want in post processing, and the camera WB setting is not critical, since it can be over ridden and corrected in processing.

                                       

                                      You state that if you expose correctly, the black point does not need to be set, but this is not correct. For example, here is a snap shot taken from an airplane window. Exposure is correct for the highlights, but the image has very low contrast and a short tonal scale. The black point needs to be set at a rather high level.

                                       

                                      MiamiACR.png

                                      • 16. Re: Histogram inconsistencies with Camera profiles - Camera Raw
                                        tereza29a Level 1

                                        Bill_Janes wrote:

                                         

                                        You raise a few good points, but your posts contain many inaccuracies. The only camera setting that ACR reads from the metadata and uses for processing is white balance. The other camera settings are ignored. The raw file reflects the light that fell on the sensor, and this is not affected by the white balance setting on the camera, and the WB setting is merely stored as a tag in the raw filed and applied by the raw converter. Any clipping would occur during the conversion process and not at the level of the sensor. Furthermore, you can apply any WB you want in post processing, and the camera WB setting is not critical, since it can be over ridden and corrected in processing.

                                         

                                        You state that if you expose correctly, the black point does not need to be set, but this is not correct. For example, here is a snap shot taken from an airplane window. Exposure is correct for the highlights, but the image has very low contrast and a short tonal scale. The black point needs to be set at a rather high level.

                                         

                                        MiamiACR.png

                                        It seems to me that we each talk about something else. I don't know how about you, but I have no comfort of any RAW converter in the field. All I have left is my skills, experience and camera histogram. So for me, it is crucial to understand camera histogram properly so that I can expose correctly. In other words, if you have improper setting of camera, you get improper preview of camera histogram and result is screwed up exposure as I have already written. And it is also crucial for me that camera histogram (preview) matches ACR histogram (as closely as possible).

                                         

                                        Camera WB is not crucial for you maybe, but if you expose and set white balance manually (with help of white/grey/black card) you wonder how wrong you can be. It is again all based on your experience and basic understanding how digital tech works. Strenght/weakness of auto WB and so on and most importantly how easily you get fooled by your own brain/sight since what you see is what you never get thanks to unique powers of brain and human sight.

                                         

                                        picture from jet...basically, you have answered yourself. flat pictures with no contrast are result of "i have been there" photography at incorrect light condition. I have got some pictures like that as well. Pictures taken at harsh daylight condition. Then you need set black point and result is low quality, muted output with artifacts and hellish noise which cannot be fixed by any SW. I prefer patience/right light condition/less time in front of computer rather than poor picture and waste of time in front of computer.

                                         

                                        I wonder why you even waste time by taking pictures like that in RAW. I don't think you would want to print out picture like that. How do you know it is daylight WB? It seems correctly exposed at this setting, but correct WB maybe something like shade/cloudy and you are off clipping. Furthermore, I wonder why the hell you use ProPhoto RGB@8bit. You knock huge color space to level of sRGB. How the hell you can decide where to move black/white point if you have already "stretched" histogram by contrast and brightness slider. You cannot ever match camera/ACR/color profiles.

                                        • 17. Re: Histogram inconsistencies with Camera profiles - Camera Raw
                                          Bill_Janes Level 2

                                          >tereza29a wrote:

                                           

                                           

                                          >picture from jet...basically, you have answered yourself. flat pictures with no contrast are result of "i have been there" photography at incorrect light >condition. I have got some pictures like that as well. Pictures taken at harsh daylight condition. Then you need set black point and result is low quality, >muted output with artifacts and hellish noise which cannot be fixed by any SW. I prefer patience/right light condition/less time in front of computer rather >than poor picture and waste of time in front of computer.

                                           

                                          Again, you raise some valid concerns but miss the point. You seem to think that if you expose "correctly" it will not be necessary to set the white and black points, but your assertion is demonstrably false as shown in the example below. In the example below, noise certainly is not "hellish"

                                           

                                          >I wonder why you even waste time by taking pictures like that in RAW. I don't think you would want to print out picture like that. How do you know it is >daylight WB? It seems correctly exposed at this setting, but correct WB maybe something like shade/cloudy and you are off clipping. Furthermore, I >wonder why the hell you use ProPhoto RGB@8bit. You knock huge color space to level of sRGB. How the hell you can decide where to move >black/white point if you have already "stretched" histogram by contrast and brightness slider. You cannot ever match camera/ACR/color profiles.

                                           

                                          That is because I take all my pictures in raw. 8 bit Prophoto makes little sense, but the point was to demonstrate a low contrast scene and the setting was sticky from a previous image. Raw does allow adjustment of white balance and editing in a high bit space. The use of 8 bit in ProPhotoRGB could result in posterization, but would not affect the range of colors. Again, any clipping with white balance would be in the rendered file, but the NEF would not be affected. The brightness and contrast were left at the ACR defaults. Setting then to zero results in a flat and unattractive image.

                                           

                                          This brain hemorrhage is a typical short scale image. It could have been exposed more to the right and the midtones taken down with the exposure control, but with the low noise of the D3, good results may be obtained with the current exposure. As it is, I did use +0.7 EV exposure compensation in the camera. Nonetheless, the quarter tones are too dark and need to be lightened. The three quarter tones are too light and the image appears washed out. Setting the white and black points dramatically improves the image as shown in the second screen shot below. There is no way that these results could have been obtained by controlling exposure in the camera. You need to read about basic controls in ACR.

                                           

                                          BrainACR1.png

                                           

                                          BrainACR3.png

                                          • 18. Re: Histogram inconsistencies with Camera profiles - Camera Raw
                                            Peter DL Level 1

                                            Bill, - I truly admire your patience.

                                             

                                             

                                            & Best regards, Peter

                                             

                                            --

                                            • 19. Re: Histogram inconsistencies with Camera profiles - Camera Raw
                                              tereza29a Level 1

                                              Nice pic of brain Bill. Still, I would  take it without any harsh light and rather use longer exposure with tripod. You can see some sort of light source in left bottom part of brain. I assume it was a flash gun or above by lamp. Then you may get much better result ;-)

                                               

                                              I put some links of images to explain my point since we still talk about something else. (cannot insert pics via adobe).

                                               

                                              http://hajes.org/img/acr/cairngorn.jpg

                                               

                                              Brilliant example of screwed up "I have been there" photography. Exposed not very well and at worst light possible. Must go there once again and fix my incompetence.

                                               

                                              http://hajes.org/img/acr/cairngorn2.jpg

                                               

                                              somehow "fixed" previous image. just for fun and learn PS CS4.

                                               

                                              http://hajes.org/img/acr/hrad.jpg

                                               

                                              overexposed image at first glance by untrained eye.

                                               

                                              http://hajes.org/img/acr/hrad2.jpg

                                               

                                              same image with 1EV extra without of any detail loss. miracle of digital sensors.

                                               

                                              http://hajes.org/img/acr/hrad3.jpg

                                               

                                              final image. it is just for web, so no bother about burned sky...

                                               

                                              http://hajes.org/img/acr/tunka.jpg

                                               

                                              again, overexposed image at first glance by  untrained eye. we don't care about clipped shell in the left middle of image. it is not main interest of pic...

                                               

                                              http://hajes.org/img/acr/tunka2.jpg

                                               

                                              ..and we again get 0.50EV extra which corrects clipping.

                                               

                                              In case some will wonder about weird setting of ACR. It is just for web and I still don't know all tricks of PS. Furthermore, I prefer to spend time in nature rather than in front of computer.

                                               

                                               

                                               

                                               

                                              • 20. Re: Histogram inconsistencies with Camera profiles - Camera Raw
                                                Level 4

                                                tereza29a wrote:

                                                 

                                                …cannot insert pics via adobe…

                                                 

                                                 

                                                Yes, you can.

                                                 

                                                Use the camera icon in the formatting bar of the Reply Editor that appears when you click on the Reply button.

                                                 

                                                Don't use email to contribute to this forum.

                                                • 21. Re: Histogram inconsistencies with Camera profiles - Camera Raw
                                                  tereza29a Level 1

                                                  Unfortunatelly, "insert image" in reply form doesn't work in either Firefox or IE8 under Vista 64bits.

                                                  I presume it is common problem with 64b MS systems. I have to try Linux or 32b system if does that help.

                                                   

                                                  I believe picture links are same, except you don't have previews. If you are scared from viruses and harm codes. Then protect your computer ;-)

                                                  • 23. Re: Histogram inconsistencies with Camera profiles - Camera Raw
                                                    Level 4

                                                    tereza29a wrote:

                                                     

                                                    I believe picture links are same…

                                                     

                                                    No, they are not.  With embedded images one doesn't waste time going to a different web site.  Additionally, seeing the thumbnail is usually more than enough, at least it allows you to decide whether you want to invest time and effort in seeing the original or not.

                                                     

                                                     

                                                    tereza29a wrote:

                                                     

                                                    …If you are scared from viruses and harm codes. Then protect your computer…

                                                     

                                                    That's an unappealing controlling attitude you display, but no, I'm not "scared" of anything.  I use Macs  .

                                                     

                                                    I'm just not interested in clicking on all those links one by one. 

                                                     

                                                     

                                                     

                                                    Wo Tai Lao Le

                                                    我太老了

                                                    • 24. Re: Histogram inconsistencies with Camera profiles - Camera Raw
                                                      Bill_Janes Level 2

                                                      tereza29a wrote:

                                                       

                                                      Unfortunatelly, "insert image" in reply form doesn't work in either Firefox or IE8 under Vista 64bits.

                                                      I presume it is common problem with 64b MS systems. I have to try Linux or 32b system if does that help.

                                                       

                                                      I believe picture links are same, except you don't have previews. If you are scared from viruses and harm codes. Then protect your computer ;-)

                                                      Insert image works fine with my Windows7 64 bit computer using Firefox 3.6.3. I'm using the Home Premium version with the Aqua interface. No need to get a Mac even though it is a very nice computer and superior to Windows in some ways, but you do pay a premium. Vista was a dud and you should upgrade to Win 7.

                                                      • 25. Re: Histogram inconsistencies with Camera profiles - Camera Raw
                                                        tereza29a Level 1

                                                        Tai Lao wrote:

                                                         

                                                        Get a Mac. 

                                                         

                                                         


                                                        Mac is not different from Linux. You can do almost anything and nothing. SInce Apple started to use Intel CPU, it is not different from normal PC and pay 200% premium is not for me ;-) I prefer to build custom beast and degrade it by MS products. It, of course, depends on work you do on your computer. I don't think so Mac can handle CAD/CAM SW. Unfortunatelly, as Linux, all is made for Windows.

                                                        • 26. Re: Histogram inconsistencies with Camera profiles - Camera Raw
                                                          tereza29a Level 1

                                                          Tai Lao wrote:

                                                           

                                                           

                                                          No, they are not.  With embedded images one doesn't waste time going to a different web site.  Additionally, seeing the thumbnail is usually more than enough, at least it allows you to decide whether you want to invest time and effort in seeing the original or not.

                                                           

                                                           

                                                           

                                                           

                                                           

                                                          Wo Tai Lao Le

                                                          我太老了

                                                          I don't see any difference. You click you get. Exactly same like in  there. Except you don't see preview.

                                                           

                                                          Tai Lao wrote:

                                                           

                                                          That's an unappealing controlling attitude you display, but no, I'm not "scared" of anything.  I use Macs  .

                                                           

                                                          I'm just not interested in clicking on all those links one by one. 

                                                           

                                                           

                                                           

                                                           

                                                          Wo Tai Lao Le

                                                          我太老了

                                                          You have been disseased by laziness, very common dissease of western countries. Linux has no viruses as well since Open Source guys are able to write "perfect" code. That is something Microsoft struggles to do from very beginning and they still not get it right since era of DOS.

                                                          • 27. Re: Histogram inconsistencies with Camera profiles - Camera Raw
                                                            tereza29a Level 1

                                                            Bill_Janes wrote:

                                                            Insert image works fine with my Windows7 64 bit computer using Firefox 3.6.3. I'm using the Home Premium version with the Aqua interface. No need to get a Mac even though it is a very nice computer and superior to Windows in some ways, but you do pay a premium. Vista was a dud and you should upgrade to Win 7.

                                                            Win7 = Vista SP1. No need to upgrade and pay again for rubbish MS products. It is enough I have been forced to use this system by laptop manufacturer. It is more likely problem of rubbish Alienware drivers. Obsolete drivers and no interest of manufacturer to upgrade them. Unfotunatelly, I have no time for desktop PC. Only mobile power at the moment.

                                                            • 28. Re: Histogram inconsistencies with Camera profiles - Camera Raw
                                                              Bill_Janes Level 2

                                                              Nice pic of brain Bill. Still, I would   take it without any harsh light and rather use longer exposure with  tripod. You can see some sort of light source in left bottom part of  brain. I assume it was a flash gun or above by lamp. Then you may get  much better result ;-)

                                                               

                                                              Thanks. The shot was taken using the Nikon R1C1 closeup flash unit using the diffusers to help eliminate glare. With such specular sources, one must adjust the light sources carefully to avoid glare, but the only sure way to eliminate the glare is to use crossed polarizing filters. Still, the subject is short scale and one must set the white and black points.

                                                               

                                                              Now, to discuss your posted shots. If anything, your posts confirm my initial assertion, since you are correcting post processing and not by changing exposure in the camera. The corrected images are from the same raw expsosures with postprocessing. By the way, if you post your screen shots as PNG, you will eliminate the artifacts around the text.

                                                               

                                                               

                                                              I put some links of  images to explain my point since we still talk about something else.  (cannot insert pics via adobe).

                                                               

                                                              http://hajes.org/img/acr/cairngorn.jpg

                                                               

                                                              Brilliant example of screwed up "I have  been there" photography. Exposed not very well and at worst light  possible. Must go there once again and fix my incompetence.

                                                               

                                                              http://hajes.org/img/acr/cairngorn2.jpg

                                                               

                                                              Cairngorn is short scale because of atmospheric haze. There is no way to correct that with in camera exposure, but you could have exposed more to the right. Nonetheless, you have captured the whole dynamic range of the scene and exposing to the right would only improve the signal:noise. You had to use the exposure and black slider to set the white and black points, which only confirms what I said in my previious posts.

                                                               

                                                              somehow "fixed" previous image. just for  fun and learn PS CS4.

                                                               

                                                              http://hajes.org/img/acr/hrad.jpg

                                                               

                                                              overexposed image at first glance by  untrained eye.

                                                               

                                                              Hrad is a high dynamic range scene with blown highlights. Your use of the exposure control to bring down the highlights darkens the rest of the image to an undesirable degree. It would have been better to use recovery to tame the highlights. A better approach might be to deveolp for the highlights and shadows separtely and merge the results as shown below. Again the correction is in postprocessing. There would be no way to do that with a camera exposure. The use of +1EV in ACR in HRAD3 only worsens the highlight clipping.


                                                              http://imagingpro.wordpress.com/2008/12/03/expanding-the-dynamic-range-of-a-single-raw-fil e/

                                                               

                                                              http://hajes.org/img/acr/hrad2.jpg

                                                               

                                                              same image with 1EV extra without of any  detail loss. miracle of digital sensors.

                                                               

                                                              http://hajes.org/img/acr/hrad3.jpg

                                                               

                                                              final image. it is just for web, so no  bother about burned sky...

                                                               

                                                               

                                                               

                                                              http://hajes.org/img/acr/tunka.jpg

                                                               

                                                              again, overexposed image at first glance  by  untrained eye. we don't care about clipped shell in the left middle  of image. it is not main interest of pic...

                                                               

                                                              http://hajes.org/img/acr/tunka2.jpg

                                                               

                                                              ..and we again get 0.50EV extra which  corrects clipping.

                                                               

                                                              I don't see any evidence of overexposure. The highlights are well short of clipping and the shot is grossly underexposed--not exposed sufficiently to the right. Nonetheless, the full dynamic range of the short scale scene has been captured and the shadows are well above clipping.

                                                               

                                                              In case some will wonder  about weird setting of ACR. It is just for web and I still don't know  all tricks of PS. Furthermore, I prefer to spend time in nature rather  than in front of computer.

                                                               

                                                              The settings of ACR are indeed wierd. Thomas Knoll recommends setting the highlights with the expsoure slider and the midtones with brightness. An alternative way of doing this, introduced with Lightroom, would be to set the midtones with exposure and control the highlights with recovery. A black point setting would likely be required as well. Again, no way to do that with an in camera expsoure, validating my previous assertion.

                                                              • 29. Re: Histogram inconsistencies with Camera profiles - Camera Raw
                                                                tereza29a Level 1

                                                                Bill_Janes wrote:

                                                                 

                                                                http://hajes.org/img/acr/cairngorn.jpg

                                                                 

                                                                Cairngorn is short scale because of atmospheric haze. There is no way to correct that with in camera exposure, but you could have exposed more to the right. Nonetheless, you have captured the whole dynamic range of the scene and exposing to the right would only improve the signal:noise. You had to use the exposure and black slider to set the white and black points, which only confirms what I said in my previious posts.

                                                                 

                                                                somehow "fixed" previous image. just for  fun and learn PS CS4.

                                                                 

                                                                http://hajes.org/img/acr/hrad.jpg

                                                                 

                                                                overexposed image at first glance by  untrained eye.

                                                                 

                                                                I could not go further to the right since detail in car park would be overexposed (it is already overexposed) it is been taken at wrong time. To correct it, you have to be there at  about 19:00 GMT at september.

                                                                 

                                                                Bill_Janes wrote:

                                                                 

                                                                http://hajes.org/img/acr/hrad.jpg

                                                                 

                                                                overexposed image at first glance by  untrained eye.

                                                                 

                                                                Hrad is a high dynamic range scene with blown highlights. Your use of the exposure control to bring down the highlights darkens the rest of the image to an undesirable degree. It would have been better to use recovery to tame the highlights. A better approach might be to deveolp for the highlights and shadows separtely and merge the results as shown below. Again the correction is in postprocessing. There would be no way to do that with a camera exposure. The use of +1EV in ACR in HRAD3 only worsens the highlight clipping.

                                                                 

                                                                http://imagingpro.wordpress.com/2008/12/03/expanding-the-dynamic-range-of-a-sing le-raw-file/

                                                                 

                                                                http://hajes.org/img/acr/hrad2.jpg

                                                                 

                                                                same image with 1EV extra without of any  detail loss. miracle of digital sensors.

                                                                 

                                                                http://hajes.org/img/acr/hrad3.jpg

                                                                 

                                                                final image. it is just for web, so no  bother about burned sky...

                                                                 

                                                                Bill, exposure control were used there to demonstrate what you can  get from RAW file since we all know that RAW contains analogue data of  each pixel with floating point like voltage, luma, chroma and so on. I  don't exactly know what is there. All I need to know is what I can  recover from that file. You can see what you can get from RAW and still  have detail in overexposed image at first glance. You can see there is zero setting in ACR. It is almost what you have in RAW. That is all I need  to know before further steps are decided.

                                                                 

                                                                Bill_Janes wrote:

                                                                 

                                                                 

                                                                 

                                                                http://hajes.org/img/acr/tunka.jpg

                                                                 

                                                                again, overexposed image at first glance  by  untrained eye. we don't care about clipped shell in the left middle  of image. it is not main interest of pic...

                                                                 

                                                                http://hajes.org/img/acr/tunka2.jpg

                                                                 

                                                                ..and we again get 0.50EV extra which  corrects clipping.

                                                                 

                                                                I don't see any evidence of overexposure. The highlights are well short of clipping and the shot is grossly underexposed--not exposed sufficiently to the right. Nonetheless, the full dynamic range of the short scale scene has been captured and the shadows are well above clipping.

                                                                 

                                                                if you check image over again, you can see clipped shell right on the left edge (in the middle) of picture. If you expose more to the right, you get blown out all pure whites even more. Still, you can fix it later on.

                                                                 

                                                                I don't use PNG because this format is bigger than JPEG and I believe you can still recognize what you need to read. Unfortunatelly, Scotland is end of world and despite UK is pretending to be very civilised, internet connection is on same level as tropical islands. Even so called 3rd world countries have faster connectivity, especially on upload side.

                                                                 

                                                                Exposure control of camera is no different from RAW converter, you just recalculate output of analogue data if there is any. But, unfortunatelly you cannot recalculate something what is not there.

                                                                 

                                                                And most important thing is that photography is art of light/emotions. So question is what is your picture trying to say to its viewer. Blown piece of sky should be hope and contrast to the dark scary parts of picture.