RE: Digital Camera Profiling...Why can't we all just get along?
RE: Digital Camera Profiling...Why can't we all just get along?
- Subject: RE: Digital Camera Profiling...Why can't we all just get along?
- From: "tlianza" <email@hidden>
- Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2003 00:16:36 -0400
As a color scientist and a photographer, discussions like this certainly do
present one with a wide range of opinions. I pointed out earlier this year
that I though that profiling cameras out of a studio environment using the
techniques, algorithms and assumptions that we have at hand today will yield
images that may have better color fidelity, but may not look as good as the
competing film image from the standpoint of tone reproduction and other
subjective values.
I'd like someone on the "profile side" of the argument to show an image,
not in the studio, using a profiled workflow and the same image shot using
the standard setting that Canon, Nikon or VendorX applied to the scene.
Essentially a side by side shot. I'd like them to explain how they arrived
at the profile and what tone reproduction assumptions were made to arrive at
the profile. I have NEVER seen a situation where a profile had a tangible,
positive effect on image quality from a digital SLR camera, in the field,
and I would like to see it demonstrated. I'm not saying it can't be done, I
just haven't seen any compelling proof that it works.
I basically shoot with about six different types of film. My choice of film
is very situational. If I'm shooting in a wide dynamic range environment, I
shoot color negative. If I am shooting at either end of daylight, I use
transparency media.. If I'm shooting in mixed lighting, I use Fuji Press
800. My film testing and selection process was based upon a large sample
over a number of years and I get the "look" I want. My selection of film
type is based more upon the anticipated scenes and the equipment. For
instance, when I use a Leica Range finder, I usually will shoot negative
media because the metering on the camera is center weighted which can often
be "fooled". The Nikon F100 has a fairly sophisticated metering system, and
I'll use transparency media in that and quite consistent results. Naturally,
if I have the time, I'd use an incident meter, but very often, it is just
not convienient. In my workflow, film is a storage media. All the
"keepers" are scanned and the reproductions are made from the scanned
images.
I have been shooting with a Nikon D100 and I can really appreciate the
flexibility of ISO speed and white balance, but I can honestly say, at this
point in time, it's a whole lot harder to get a good looking image digitally
than using film. A lot of that has to with 35 years of shooting on film.
I'm looking at developing what I call "anti-profiles". These are profiles
that match the looks that I'm getting through the film-scanner path. There
are both device and media dependent and hence the "anti" prefix. The bulk
of the problem is probably handled simple tone reproduction followed by a
gentle matrix. I would call it color managed, but certainly not in the
spirit or practice of an ICC color managed workflow.
It's interesting to note that when I first got the D100, I loaded up my F100
with some transparency film and then did a dawn to dusk run of side by side
images. The film camera won hands down in terms of producing a good looking
image with minimal tweaking throughout the test. The auto white balance in
the D100 demonstrated why that's a feature better left turned off. After a
few months and a few thousand frames, I find that I keep the white balance
on Daylight when I'm in daylight, and tungsten, when I'm shooting in the
theater. I use a warming filter in most situations and I get the
reproduction that I like, with the possible exception of the subjective tone
reproduction aspects.
Finally, I aggree with Andrew R. that we need much faster preview of raw
images and tools to manage them. A couple of months ago, I processed five
rolls of E6, selected the images I wanted scanned from the dry film on the
light table and scanned about 10 images, in less time than it took to
preview and select some images from a half a gig of NEF files (about 50
frames) . I think a little practice would have made that process quicker,
but it is still very painful.
Tom Lianza
Technical Director
Sequel Imaging Inc.
25 Nashua Rd.
Londonderry, NH 03053
email@hidden
_______________________________________________
colorsync-users mailing list | email@hidden
Help/Unsubscribe/Archives:
http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/colorsync-users
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.