[argyllcms] Re: help with camera profile

  • From: Stephen T <stwebvanuatu@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: "argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Sun, 5 Aug 2012 05:26:04 -0700 (PDT)

Iliah,

I think making reliable custom ICC camera profiles is beyond the capabilities 
of most photographers. For them, it may be easier to get satisfactory colour 
with DNG profiles.

When profiling digital cameras the general reference is the CIE Standard 
Observer. Camera profiling is an engineering problem and Argyll CMS colprof is 
an engineering solution. Art comes later in the work flow. A colour blind 
person can make an accurate input device profile!


I don't love Adobe. What I meant is that Adobe have professionals who 
understand digital imaging and colour science better than myself and most other 
Argyll CMS users. They have designed DNG profiles to be practical and 
satisfactory for most photographers. At first I was sceptical, but I have seen 
that DNG profiles seem to work OK (subjective evaluation). I will do some 
quantitative evaluations later and I publish the results on the web.


Yes, processing of digital raw photos can involve strong manipulation. So let's 
give up and go back to shooting film? I rather trust 
evidence, not ideology, and so I will continue experimenting, learning and 
sharing my findings. I make large photographic prints (RA-4 process) of my 
favourite photos and check they are not "technically ruined".

Stephen.



________________________________
 From: Iliah Borg <ib@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
Sent: Friday, 3 August 2012 10:58 PM
Subject: [argyllcms] Re: help with camera profile
 
>  tools for highlight recovery

Yes, let's add extrapolation to interpolation; let's say all is OK when image 
is technically ruined.

> Adobe lightroom and DNG profiles seem to be a satisfactory solution for the 
> majority of digital photographers. We like to think we can do better with 
> other software and by making our own profiles but first ask yourself two 
> questions:
> 1) Are you as clever as the people in Adobe?
> 2) Do you have the resources that Adobe has?

Of course you understand that Adobe are serving the market, and that does not 
mean they are serving any particular photographer, or any particular need. 
Adobe are a market-driven company. When it comes to Adobe resources, one of 
their most valuable resources is Dave Coffin and his free open-source dcraw 
converter.

Being a clever engineer does not mean being a photographer or any visual person 
for that matter, it just means being a clever engineer. Experienced engineers 
killed Kodak.

From the engineering point of view both DNG and DCP approaches address past, 
not future.

> DNG is, I think, open-source.

DNG is a box containing the data; what matters is - can you understand that 
data? DNG specs explicitly allow undisclosed tags.

--
Iliah Borg
ib@xxxxxxxxxxx

Other related posts: