On May 8, 2013, at 11:43 AM, Andrew Rodney <andrew@digitaldog.net> wrote:
In Adobe's way of processing raw, the idea is we are working with a negative, much as some of us did in the old analog dark room with color negs. The filter pack played a huge role in the color appearance. Nearly every neg needed a different filter pack recipe. The correct color is the color the printer desired, not necessarily the right color based on some measurement.
I've built a number of DNG Profiles for my cameras, I've yet to see a case where such a custom profile didn't produce a better appearing, more acceptable starting point for rendering then the supplied DNG profiles.
This is an excellent summary of my experience with both the intent and practice of Adobe's raw processing engine. I would only add to it that modern DSLRs are capable of more more precise, much more linear response than any type of film ever. As a result...well, if you're looking to do the same sorts of things with modern cameras as has always been done with film (and there are a great many reasons why that's what most people are most interested in doing), then Adobe's approach is probably best. But if you're looking to do that which modern cameras can that film couldn't, then Adobe's approach ties you down with all the hoary old colorimetric problems of film and prevents you from taking advantage of the new capabilities of modern cameras. Cheers, b&