This appears to me to be a white balance issue - I don't know of any camera that will properly render tungsten light scenes in auto wb mode. One should generally white balance an image before evaluating with any profile, unless the goal is to maintain a particular lighting effect.
I ran the first image thru ACR with only a wb click on the white dress and attached the result.
I am sorry, but this is not the issue. What I am reporting arises from the experience of working on hundreds, if not thousands of images with that profile. I know what WB is.
The Adobe Standard profile for the 5D Mark II is supposed to bring ACR/Lightroom close to what the camera and DPP do with the Standard Picture Style. Most other Adobe camera profiles I know including the aforementioned Neutral profile for 5D MkII do a really good job.
The 5D MkII Standard profile however over-exaggerates reds in certain situations where DPP with that Picture Style doesn't. Again, WB is not the issue here.
Adobe have made significant improvements with the Nikon D700 and D3 v2 Beta profiles and the claimed goal was to get closer to what Capture NX2 does http://forums.adobe.com/message/2681151 (Eric Chan: "... the purpose of these "Camera" profiles is to match the results from NX ..."). To me this is a sign that they are serious about it. The profile I am talking about here simply needs some more love.
Thomas Geist wrote:
The Adobe Standard profile for the 5D Mark II is supposed to bring ACR/Lightroom close to what the camera and DPP do with the Standard Picture Style.
No, actually...the Adobe Standard is designed to be as accurate as possible with regards to color rendering, not to try to match what some other software may do with color rendering. What is accurate is largely based on how certain colors are rendered-particularly X-Rite Color Checkers. The other vender matching profiles ARE designed to match the camera JPEG rendering...and actually while you say WB isn't relative, actually, it is as it relates to the Tint control. Pulling magenta from the Tint will impact the rendering of skin tone. The ideal would be to shoot a standard reference target to use as a basis for WB (and then tune it to make it look more natural under tungsten light).
Yes, and I know what WB is also. And I know that different raw converters interpret the "as shot" wb exif data differently, and therefore there is no reasonable way to compare results without an explicit wb on a neutral object in the image within each raw converter.
I believe that in order to do valid comparisons among the different raw converters one should prepare a test image including a known reference, preferably the color checker chart. The raw image can then be run thru each converter with the first step being to wb on the second brightest neutral patch, and then (and IMO only then) one can do reasonable color assessments.
Added by edit - oops, I see Jeff jumped in, sorry to be redundant.
Sorry Jeff, sloppy writing on my side. I meant "Adobe's Camera Specific Standard profile for 5D MkII". Thomas
Here is my test with 400D. First image DPP, Standard Profile. Second image ACR 5.7, Camera Standard profile. All settings default.
Note big differences in highlights overall, particulary in rendering of blown blue color I mentioned in one of my previous posts. Greens are much darker in ACR Camera Standard Profile than in DPP Standard. But skin tones are almost spot on here