Absolutely none. All the diff left in them is due to lighting conditions stability not quite observed at IR.classiccameras wrote:Do you have a preference on the 3 pictures.
DPR say A57 RAW images are best in class?
Forum rules
No more than three images or three external links allowed in any post or reply. Please trim quotations and do not include images in quotes unless essential.
No more than three images or three external links allowed in any post or reply. Please trim quotations and do not include images in quotes unless essential.
-
- Viceroy
- Posts: 1198
- Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 7:41 pm
Re: DPR say A57 RAW images are best in class?
- bfitzgerald
- Subsuming Vortex of Brilliance
- Posts: 3996
- Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 10:48 pm
Re: DPR say A57 RAW images are best in class?
Studio scenes are not always the best for subjective colour taste. There is also a very personal/subjective side to image hues/tones/colours. Even minor variations can be quite obvious to some people, to others not so much.
DK is probably right in the Nikon's, at least the more recent ones are giving quite a bit more exposure lifting mid tones more than other makers. I still found the green hues a bit odd for scenic work, and the skin tones were more of a yellow hue than a pink (Canon skin tone) look. D90 was a bit better than the D7000 IMO tones wise, part of that might be exposure or a variation even minor in hues/contrast etc.
Pentax typically are more contrasty and saturated even in raw (can work well for some subjects, not so well for others) WB shifts are more notable with Pentax too (strong magenta even in jpegs) Though ACR has a strong magenta shift for the Km5d too. You can correct this/adjust it.
Olympus are quite popular for colour tonality, so are Fuji who IMO have the best of all the makers. Some other smaller brands Samsung are strong on contrast and their compacts are very pumped, Ricoh are a bit different again found their images have an entirely different look.
Km5d still ranks high for me for people subjects, A200 was quite good too (A100 was a bit bland here) A57 seems pretty good so far but I will have to use it more. I do think there is more to this than suggesting all makers are close, those minor hues/saturation variations can be distinctive and appealing/unappealing to people. Looking at recent images from the D800 v the 5dMkIII, there is quite an obvious difference "off the bat" between the 2, some of it probably WB variations..but the Canon people shots look quite a lot better to my eyes. Lenses also a factor here but how much well that's again open to a lengthy debate
DK is probably right in the Nikon's, at least the more recent ones are giving quite a bit more exposure lifting mid tones more than other makers. I still found the green hues a bit odd for scenic work, and the skin tones were more of a yellow hue than a pink (Canon skin tone) look. D90 was a bit better than the D7000 IMO tones wise, part of that might be exposure or a variation even minor in hues/contrast etc.
Pentax typically are more contrasty and saturated even in raw (can work well for some subjects, not so well for others) WB shifts are more notable with Pentax too (strong magenta even in jpegs) Though ACR has a strong magenta shift for the Km5d too. You can correct this/adjust it.
Olympus are quite popular for colour tonality, so are Fuji who IMO have the best of all the makers. Some other smaller brands Samsung are strong on contrast and their compacts are very pumped, Ricoh are a bit different again found their images have an entirely different look.
Km5d still ranks high for me for people subjects, A200 was quite good too (A100 was a bit bland here) A57 seems pretty good so far but I will have to use it more. I do think there is more to this than suggesting all makers are close, those minor hues/saturation variations can be distinctive and appealing/unappealing to people. Looking at recent images from the D800 v the 5dMkIII, there is quite an obvious difference "off the bat" between the 2, some of it probably WB variations..but the Canon people shots look quite a lot better to my eyes. Lenses also a factor here but how much well that's again open to a lengthy debate
-
- Viceroy
- Posts: 1198
- Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 7:41 pm
Re: DPR say A57 RAW images are best in class?
That's all snake oil, Barry.bfitzgerald wrote:Studio scenes are not always the best for subjective colour taste. There is also a very personal/subjective side to image hues/tones/colours. Even minor variations can be quite obvious to some people, to others not so much.
Once colour is profiled, tone curves matched, the results from all decent modern cams are indistinguishable. The cases of real difference are limited to the WB extremes. And that artificial studio light is much harder for good matching than some natural light; and if they match under that strongly coloured studio lighting the IR uses, it means that under better light the match is only better.
And btw, tone curve matching is more important to the colour reproduction than the exact colour profiling is. More specifically, the exact hues/saturations are not very important as long as the real hue differences are resolved by the system, i.e. differing hues at the input are translated into different hues in the output image.
- Greg Beetham
- Tower of Babel
- Posts: 6117
- Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 3:25 pm
- Location: Townsville, Qld. Australia
- Contact:
Re: DPR say A57 RAW images are best in class?
I couldn't see much if any difference between the three images in the colours and I went scrolling back and fourth heaps of times comparing lots of different red areas. I was expecting to see at least some small difference.
I remember when Henry posted quite a few photos taken with the 60D and remember thinking the colour tones didn't look bad to my eye maybe a tad oversaturated perhaps but I couldn't see anything obviously peculiar looking, and the photos were quite decently sharp as well.
I guess you would have to be able to compare the photos with the real thing or take similar shots in the wild with the three different brands and then compare.
Greg
I remember when Henry posted quite a few photos taken with the 60D and remember thinking the colour tones didn't look bad to my eye maybe a tad oversaturated perhaps but I couldn't see anything obviously peculiar looking, and the photos were quite decently sharp as well.
I guess you would have to be able to compare the photos with the real thing or take similar shots in the wild with the three different brands and then compare.
Greg
- bfitzgerald
- Subsuming Vortex of Brilliance
- Posts: 3996
- Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 10:48 pm
Re: DPR say A57 RAW images are best in class?
I don't think it's snake oil just personal preference. Matching images is fine but how difficult is that going to be for workflow?
Some people will notice differences in hues more than others.
Some people will notice differences in hues more than others.
-
- Viceroy
- Posts: 1198
- Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 7:41 pm
Re: DPR say A57 RAW images are best in class?
Barry, it's not about matching the images. Once the tonal (luminance) response was matched by tone curve adjustments, the colours matched automatically.
- bfitzgerald
- Subsuming Vortex of Brilliance
- Posts: 3996
- Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 10:48 pm
Re: DPR say A57 RAW images are best in class?
I'm not seeing this in the real world I can see notable differences in tonality between makers and models.
-
- Viceroy
- Posts: 1198
- Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 7:41 pm
Re: DPR say A57 RAW images are best in class?
Sure, but that's only because the tone curves and colour profiles are not calibrated to the same standard.bfitzgerald wrote:I'm not seeing this in the real world I can see notable differences in tonality between makers and models.
Once calibrated, all modern large-sensor cams deliver virtually indistinguishable images from their raw data.
I have presented the real samples proving so. If you don't agree, you are welcome to try proving otherwise with some samples and/or with any other relevant data. (Good luck at that )
- bfitzgerald
- Subsuming Vortex of Brilliance
- Posts: 3996
- Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 10:48 pm
Re: DPR say A57 RAW images are best in class?
From a practical perspective ie field use we can have all the debate in the world about raw data, but it's what turns up on the table that counts for most users.
For compacts, most don't even shoot raw so it becomes a moot point.
For compacts, most don't even shoot raw so it becomes a moot point.
-
- Viceroy
- Posts: 1198
- Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 7:41 pm
Re: DPR say A57 RAW images are best in class?
But then you are talking JPEG, Barry.
And in that case there's not much choice beyond Olympus. And I don't really mean their candy-colours - that I don't like at all. I talk more of their auto WB consistency and the ability to use up most of their limited raw DR into a JPEG of rather nice tonality.
And in that case there's not much choice beyond Olympus. And I don't really mean their candy-colours - that I don't like at all. I talk more of their auto WB consistency and the ability to use up most of their limited raw DR into a JPEG of rather nice tonality.
- Greg Beetham
- Tower of Babel
- Posts: 6117
- Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 3:25 pm
- Location: Townsville, Qld. Australia
- Contact:
Re: DPR say A57 RAW images are best in class?
Agorabasta I’ve seen some unusual results with processing what I guess were Nikon raw files (don’t think it was from a camera jpeg), resulting in a slightly greenish/lemon yellow toned skin, and I think it was done in LR. Are the default settings no good for Nikon raw files? And what should one do to fix it?
It wasn’t as if I was seeing it (the one I’m thinking of mostly) only on my screen, others saw it too, and to top it off the person involved wasn't a novice, that one just slipped under the radar.
I don’t think it would be correct to just blame the camera of course but wouldn’t one expect LR to be able to convert Nikon raw files and get a better result than that?
I guess there is always the possibility of OS and system compatibility problems, LR might handle files differently on different systems maybe.
Greg
It wasn’t as if I was seeing it (the one I’m thinking of mostly) only on my screen, others saw it too, and to top it off the person involved wasn't a novice, that one just slipped under the radar.
I don’t think it would be correct to just blame the camera of course but wouldn’t one expect LR to be able to convert Nikon raw files and get a better result than that?
I guess there is always the possibility of OS and system compatibility problems, LR might handle files differently on different systems maybe.
Greg
-
- Viceroy
- Posts: 1198
- Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 7:41 pm
Re: DPR say A57 RAW images are best in class?
Default and camera-specific profiles supplied with Lr used to be very bad; they are better now for the more recent bodies.Greg Beetham wrote:Are the default settings no good for Nikon raw files? And what should one do to fix it?
And, more importantly, the CFA responses of the modern bodies from all manufacturers have really become very close, if not identical, since about 2009. So a colour profile recipe prepared for one camera may now be used to create profiles even for the bodies from another manufacturer. The recipe I'm talking about contains corrections applied over colour matrix specific to a given body; as the recipe is applied over the matrix profile of a given body, a new profile may be created for that body. (Matrix profile is a set of RGB multipliers for the raw channel data at a few WB presets.)
In my example above in the thread I used a recipe made for a77/Nex7 to create profiles for D7000/7D. And the profiles worked like native.
But it doesn't work like that for the older bodies. E.g. the Nikon D90 requires a very different recipe to apply over its matrix to get the similar results.
And the older Nikon bodies, especially the cheaper ones, did really have their raw mutilated in preprocessing beyond profile-correction possibility; it resulted in greenish sky highlights and blocked black shadows.
I have actually described a procedure of profile/recipe creation in an older thread here - http://www.photoclubalpha.com/forum/vie ... f=6&t=5018
- Greg Beetham
- Tower of Babel
- Posts: 6117
- Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 3:25 pm
- Location: Townsville, Qld. Australia
- Contact:
Re: DPR say A57 RAW images are best in class?
Thanks agorabasta, I am sort of getting interested in raw conversion arw-dng-psd-jpg now as a way of preserving 16bit colour right up to the last moment before converting to 8bit jpeg (usually only if I get interested in a particular photo of mine and want a jpeg). I noticed there were some (camera or colour space?) profiles in the editor too, on one of the tabbed pages behind the slider sections (Elements 9), but I really have not much of an idea about which one would be best or to just leave it on the default, it’s not something I’ve ever dabbled with much.
Greg
ps I'll have a look at that link shortly (I'll probably struggle), processing raw is new ground for me.
Greg
ps I'll have a look at that link shortly (I'll probably struggle), processing raw is new ground for me.
-
- Viceroy
- Posts: 1198
- Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 7:41 pm
Re: DPR say A57 RAW images are best in class?
At the very least, you know whom to blame for that, as long as I'm still hereGreg Beetham wrote:(I'll probably struggle)
- Greg Beetham
- Tower of Babel
- Posts: 6117
- Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 3:25 pm
- Location: Townsville, Qld. Australia
- Contact:
Re: DPR say A57 RAW images are best in class?
Yep, it was as I thought, most of it went through to the keeper.agorabasta wrote:At the very least, you know whom to blame for that, as long as I'm still hereGreg Beetham wrote:(I'll probably struggle)
Greg
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 70 guests