Re: SOS: profiling a Nikon
Re: SOS: profiling a Nikon
- Subject: Re: SOS: profiling a Nikon
- From: Andrew Rodney <email@hidden>
- Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 18:07:09 -0600
- Thread-topic: SOS: profiling a Nikon
Title: Re: SOS: profiling a Nikon
On 10/1/05 1:06 PM, "eugene appert" wrote:
This notion of “rendering” is only one more nail in the cross for those of us trying to swim straight in a sea of ever increasing automation, cryptic algorithms and subprograms. To continue the analogy given in the text you referred me to, if I were shooting film I would be using Kodak EPN, no boosting, saturating or warming, a neutral, impartial repro film.
Right, but a RAW file has no real color to speak of. So think of it as a process that allows you to pop in EPN, or Velvia or whatever you want. Or better, think of RAW as a color neg. The color is something you really only see when you print it and that rendering is based on the filter pack you pick. We might both have the same color neg and based on how we feel we should render the image, we might both use different filter packs to produce the color we want.
So as not to get caught up in language, and to make sure that I am understanding correctly I will include the “rendering” you speak of in the larger set of RAW conversion settings, and place it with all other factors affecting the placement of file data as it moves from linear raw to a gamma encoded profiled file format.
Adobe Camera RAW lets you do that by saving out any number of saved settings you want. Any tweak you make to any slider is just an adjustment to the rendering. Just like applying a slightly different filter pack.
I could remove the effect of this rendering if I took charge of the RAW conversion myself via Nikon Capture however it sounds as though Nikon Capture/Editor is a RAW converter much like Camera Raw, storing and assigning a default generic profile and then taking charge of an unavoidable conversion to a pre-selected RGB workspace, which means I would have to surrender the use of custom profiles.
The problem with thinking about default renderings is it’s just a starting point someone provided. You may or may not like it but you can roll your own. Going back to the color printing analogy, a filter pack in the enlarger from the last user could be a default and it might produce a decent print. But you’ll probably want to change it and make a new default. Assuming you had a lot of negs that were very similar, you could use that for all your printing. Camera RAW doesn’t use profiles (at least not ICC profiles or anything you can get to). But that’s deeper in the process. A profile doesn’t ensure a rendering that you’ll like (how are the settings in the converter set?). Once you produce a color appearance you like, the encoding is where it is placed into a color space like sRGB or Adobe RGB (1998).
Is there no way to convert an NEF to TIF without converting the file data to yield the colours of an independent RGB workspace?
RAW is a Grayscale file, it doesn’t even contain anything we could call an image. Once the image is rendered, you encode it into a color space. That color space might be that from a camera profile. That is, instead of a conversion into a working space, you’ve got the data in a capture color space. Camera RAW does all it’s work prior to final encoding in a linear encoded gamma (1.0) in ProPhoto RGB.
Andrew
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Colorsync-users mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden