[argyllcms] Re: help with camera profile
- From: edmund ronald <edmundronald@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2012 11:58:43 +0200
If you *need* camera profiling for a modern camera, there is probably
something wrong with your workflow or with your camera.
My humble suggestion as a practising photographer would be to forget about
"real" camera profiling in anger unless you really MUST do it. MUST means
that you do this professionally for a manufacturer, have an older camera
that is painful to replace, or reproduce artwork, products or fashion.
A need to profiling very often leads to a need for profile editing which
opens another can of worms and necessitates very precisely calibrated
screens to be meaningful.
If you MUST do it, then I would recommend first finding a Raw converter
that plays well with user profiling, eg. some dcraw descendants such as RPP
which has Argyll embedded anyway, the horrid but extremely useful dcraw
itself, Capture One, Adobe Lightroom and Photoshop ACR and of course
Iridant's beautiful mac-only Raw Developer.
Chances are you will find decent canned profiles for your camera for all of
the above. However if your light is exceptionally strange or you camera is
whacked, there is a small cheap object made by Xrite called a Colorchecker
Passport which is a target especially designed for carrying around for
profiling on location. The advantage of this is it that it is designed to
be carried around photographed by normal unskilled human beings (I helped
specify it to that end), and also very useful for visual assessment of the
results.
And, although you will find me patronizing, all of you being technically
gifted high IQ individuals, I do reiterate that the need for camera
profiling and in particular the apparent inadequacy of a simple matrix
profile are usually signs of bad workflow or extreme expectations.
Edmund
Other related posts:
