My extensive experience with creating ICC profiles over the years for my Betterlight Scan Back is that they are only really applicable for a controlled studio scenario where achieving color match is required, for me it was for art reproductions. On the other hand DNG profiles as Andrew mentioned are much more applicable for day to day digital capture. _______________________________________ Steven Kornreich steve@kuau.com http://www.kuau.com On Feb 14, 2013, at 6:51 PM, Andrew Rodney <andrew@digitaldog.net> wrote:
On Feb 14, 2013, at 2:59 PM, José Ángel Bueno García <jbueno61@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 3:33 PM, Scott Martin <scott@on-sight.com> wrote:
The Colorchecker Passport is Xrite's camera profiling solution and it's a *DNG profiling solution* that only works with Adobe's RAW engine.
Actally I just learned today that Iridient Developer, formally Raw Developer (a favorite of mine) can accept DNG or ICC camera profiles. I'm discussing with the author the implications of trying to use both types of profile and how we might see if one is indeed 'better' than the other. Much of this ends up being subjective but it would be intresting to develop a set of tests whereby photographers could load their raws into ID, then comment on just the role of the profiles on their images.
What I will say is my experience in building ICC camera profiles has been hit or miss over the years. My experience making DNG profiles is they are very easy to build (not fussy about lighting) and have always provided as good or better color appearance compared to the 'canned' DNG profiles for my Canon cameras.
Andrew Rodney http://www.digitaldog.net/ _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Colorsync-users mailing list (Colorsync-users@lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/colorsync-users/steve%40kuau.com
This email sent to steve@kuau.com