Re: Photodesk: Assign or Convert?
Re: Photodesk: Assign or Convert?
- Subject: Re: Photodesk: Assign or Convert?
- From: Bob Smith <email@hidden>
- Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2003 16:11:48 -0500
On Monday, June 30, 2003, at 03:13 PM, James B. Reswick, Jr. wrote:
I envisioned my input workflow as: raw file from camera to PhotoDesk,
linearize and gray balance from standard gray card with PhotoDesk,
save file...assigning ColorEyes input profile, convert to chosen
workspace (not necessarily AdobeRGB). Does this seem like a
reasonable workflow?
If PhotoDesk would only assign the workspace profile, then I could
scrape it of and assign my ColorEyes profile after the fact, and
proceed from there.
I'm not a big fan of input profiles. I've tried numerous times with
different software packages and have never found it to be worth the
hassle for my particular work flow. No matter how good the input
profile I still seem to want to edit the images to at least some minor
degree. As long as I'm editing anyway the small gains (if any) of a
profiled camera are pretty much meaningless. I say this just for "full
disclosure" so you'll know where my answers are coming from.
PhotoDesk includes a linear processing option which was included
specifically for those who wish to build their own profiles. If you
want to profile truly raw data that's what you need to do. I don't
know ColorEyes and whether or not it can profile linear data. Some
packages can, some can't. Once PhotoDesk (or any other raw processing
software) converts the linear raw data into something even vaguely like
a more typical RGB space, it has to be based on some definition of RGB.
I don't think there is such a thing as gamma corrected, bayer pattern
processed data that's still undefined or raw RGB. Some definition of
RGB had to be used in the calculation. PhotoDesk is just letting you
pick which one you want to use. Based on your description of what
ColorEyes recommends (I've never done this), it sounds like you ought
to process into Adobe RGB in PhotoDesk and profile that image. You'll
have to be sure that you always process to the same "look" setting in
PhotoDesk. The latest PhotoDesk (3.1) includes several new ones for a
few more choices of basic contrast/saturation of the images. Then on
all subsequent images, also process into Adobe RGB in PhotoDesk because
that's what you just profiled.... Kodak's method of processing to Adobe
RGB... and then Assign, don't convert to the ColorEyes profile and
continue from there. The whole idea that you need to profile the Kodak
processing into Adobe RGB means that you don't think Kodak's processing
is perfect (who's is?). In theory the ColorEyes profile when assigned
would compensate for those imperfections.
Please let me know your experiences and I may revisit profiling of
these cameras. By the way... have you tried PhotoDesk 3.1? It
substantially improves color accuracy on the 14n. With the latest
firmware and PhotoDesk 3.1 I think Kodak is producing some of the best
right out of the camera images they've ever done. More contrast and
saturated colors. While tools like what Adobe Camera Raw has for
adjusting color/contrast would be better, if you add the Kodak's custom
looks package you get a wide assortment of preset processing recipes to
choose from; one of which is bound to be reasonably close to your
particular aims for a given image.
Bob Smith
_______________________________________________
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.