Reading mode: Light Dark

Seller's regret, (5D switch) would appreciate advice...

Go to last post
It never seems to matter to Jono what camera he's using - the images all end up having the same sort of look.

Personally, I never really care about "accurate" colour. If you shoot raw you can choose any colour appearance you like in post. Obviously there are minor differences in colour treatment between brands and models and this will make a difference if you are shooting to a particular brief but for normal amateur work I reckon getting exposure and midtone contrast and brightness is far more important that fiddling with the subtleties of precise colour matching. Lots of people love velvia and its colour rendition is terrible!
Big Ga said:
Now please bear in mind that relative to the knowledgeable people
on this forum, I'm a colour calibration newbie. Also, I've never
owned a Kodak DSLR, but I do use Oly ones that use Kodak CCDs. But
.....

I did spend some time getting hold of both Canon and Nikon files -
RAW and converted TIFF - just to see what it was like working on
them. One batch of 1DS files was from someone I know who was VERY
unhappy on her wedding shots because the colours were so way off
what she knew they really were like on the day.

Bottom line is that IMHO, if you shoot RAW and don't use in camera
processing, you really do need to learn a whole new way of colour
balancing your images. The very flat drab out of camera images
can't always be easily tweaked to just give more punch. Do this and
if one colour looks right, others have gone WAY off.
This is not to say it can't be done. It can. But I tell you what,
now I know what I'm looking for, if I'm in a wedding fair or
something and I look at other photographers photos, you can tell
those that have Canon and shoot RAW but do the PP themselves.

I don't think you're seeing things. You just need to find out how
to get the images back to how you want them to look. When you find
out .... let me know ... the 5D looks like a great camera and I
could really use something with usable ISO4000 :-)

I've often wondered if Kodak did indeed spend a lot of R&D in
getting their sensors to produce the colours they do, or was it
more luck than judgment?

Cheers

Gareth
Click to expand...
--
Galleries and website: http://www.whisperingcat.co.uk/mainindex.htm
 
Hi David

Not sure why mine always look the same (but I think they probably do). The only certainty is that it is not the result of much effort and knowledge!

As for accurate colour balance - it seems to me that it's only achievable in even lighting anyway, it always makes me smile when people talk of 'correct' white balance - if there's a shadow anywhere, then there isn't going to be a perfect answer. Or do they mean that they want their whites white (in that lovely soft evening light!).

If you are taking pictures of pictures, or product shots, then there may be an 'answer' but it still depends on the light source to some extent.

How's the family? Still shy?

good luck anyway, I hope that all's well.
--
Jono Slack
http://www.slack.co.uk
 
Jono Slack said:
Well, I can't argue - I only once owned a Canon digital (G2 I
think) I had it for about a month, couldn't handle the colours and
got rid of it - but I can't beleive that they're just wrong, and
that everyone puts up with it!
Click to expand...
Dunno. I'd have thought that Canon would do internal processing to get the JPGs looking right. Test reviews I've seen show the colours being pretty accurate. I'm talking RAW mind. And to clarify, I'm not saying that the cameras will always produce 'wrong' looking colours, just that you've somtimes got to work to get them. Maybe its a lot to do with the profile of the RAW convertor?

I will add that its not just me that's noticed the issues with the Canons. Maybe I and the others have just not unchecked the 'give corps like complexion' box ?
Jono Slack said:
I almost never increase the
saturation - I have the camera set to low contrast, and I virtually
never fiddle with the colours.
honest guv!
Click to expand...
Hmmm...... yea right :-)

But .... I've taken a leaf out of your book in that case and I'm about to post a 'death' entry into the challenge that I've deliberatley NOT done ANY colour fiddling to.

See you there!

G.
 
Jono Slack said:
Hi David
Not sure why mine always look the same (but I think they probably
do). The only certainty is that it is not the result of much effort
and knowledge!
Click to expand...
But you know how you want it to come out and fiddle it accordingly ;-)
Jono Slack said:
As for accurate colour balance - it seems to me that it's only
achievable in even lighting anyway, it always makes me smile when
people talk of 'correct' white balance - if there's a shadow
anywhere, then there isn't going to be a perfect answer. Or do they
mean that they want their whites white (in that lovely soft evening
light!).
Click to expand...
You don't even need that evening light...just slide that colour temp slider a little!
Jono Slack said:
If you are taking pictures of pictures, or product shots, then
there may be an 'answer' but it still depends on the light source
to some extent.

How's the family? Still shy?
Click to expand...
I think today's the due date but no sign of anything happening yet. Midwife said on Friday that it was +1 or -1 (can't remember which) from the launch position.
Jono Slack said:
good luck anyway, I hope that all's well.
--
Jono Slack
http://www.slack.co.uk
Click to expand...
--
Galleries and website: http://www.whisperingcat.co.uk/mainindex.htm
 
DMillier said:
Personally, I never really care about "accurate" colour. If you
shoot raw you can choose any colour appearance you like in post.
Obviously there are minor differences in colour treatment between
brands and models and this will make a difference if you are
shooting to a particular brief but for normal amateur work I reckon
getting exposure and midtone contrast and brightness is far more
important that fiddling with the subtleties of precise colour
matching. Lots of people love velvia and its colour rendition is
terrible!
Click to expand...
I'm going to bow out at this point as I may very well start showing my ignorance in post processing, however I am 100% positive that I'm not the only one who is having 'issues' with the colour of certain cameras when shooting RAW. And I'm not talking about 'minor differences in colour treatment', I'm talking about enough innacuracies in skin tones to cause people to look dead in wedding photos and for customers clothes they spent a long time choosing for their event come out looking different enough for them to complain.

Now I see great shots coming from Canons as well, but I'm suspecting that these get sent off to labs who have experience in PPing them. The 'normal' user runs into problems. To me this says that you have to work harder/smarter than one might expect to get acceptable results. Some other cameras don't give you the same problems (although they have issues in other areas ;-)

G.
 
I don't take pictures of people so I wouldn't know!
Big Ga said:
DMillier said:
Personally, I never really care about "accurate" colour. If you
shoot raw you can choose any colour appearance you like in post.
Obviously there are minor differences in colour treatment between
brands and models and this will make a difference if you are
shooting to a particular brief but for normal amateur work I reckon
getting exposure and midtone contrast and brightness is far more
important that fiddling with the subtleties of precise colour
matching. Lots of people love velvia and its colour rendition is
terrible!
Click to expand...
I'm going to bow out at this point as I may very well start showing
my ignorance in post processing, however I am 100% positive that
I'm not the only one who is having 'issues' with the colour of
certain cameras when shooting RAW. And I'm not talking about 'minor
differences in colour treatment', I'm talking about enough
innacuracies in skin tones to cause people to look dead in wedding
photos and for customers clothes they spent a long time choosing
for their event come out looking different enough for them to
complain.
Now I see great shots coming from Canons as well, but I'm
suspecting that these get sent off to labs who have experience in
PPing them. The 'normal' user runs into problems. To me this says
that you have to work harder/smarter than one might expect to get
acceptable results. Some other cameras don't give you the same
problems (although they have issues in other areas ;-)

G.
Click to expand...
--
Galleries and website: http://www.whisperingcat.co.uk/mainindex.htm
 
bill vann said:
hi david

i did look at melanie's site.

would you clarify what she does. you mention C1 and Magne profile
and afterwards mention she simply opens them in ACR
Click to expand...
I don't use any of those profiles. I shoot RAW, Adobe RGB. I open them in ACR and tweak the shadows and highlights there. Sometimes I adjust the contrast and slightly up the saturation there as well.
If the White Balance needs tweaking, I do it in ACR.
Then to photoshop for levels while in 16 bit mode. Save as tiff.
For web presentation I do something like this:
http://www.caughtintimephotography.com/10D_WorkFlow.html
bill vann said:
to clarify is it ACR utilizing a workflow includin C1 and Magne,
i'm just a bit confused here

fwiw i just got a 5D and am learning it remembering that i had to
learn the Kodak, and I am starting to get what i want.

kindly

b
Click to expand...
--
The 5D was made in heaven - Canon is just the sub-contractor!



http://www.caughtintimephotography.com
http://www.pbase.com/melaniekipp
 
Thanks for all the replies (and to the informative sub-discussion that followed my original question. I was off line for couple of days. Took many shots. Tried to follow your advice.

First, as someone pointed out, my "concern" was not about color accuracy, but about the Kodak Look. The Canon pictures looked quit dull. I tried to play with Picture Styles but the differences did not compensate for my worry. I also tried the old "slide" trick of under-exposing to get more saturation. Trick worked a little but the price in terms of artifacts was high. I looked at pictures which some of you recommended and I thank all and Malenie in particular. I liked Malenie's pictures very much, but I didn't find them technically to lack the Canon (vs. Kodak) look. I wonder if the answer to my worry can be addressed using a different Raw converter? My other camera is the Epson R-D1. The pictures of the Epson look OK using ACR and look great using Epson's own Raw converter, the difference is substantia. I am never able to get in my prints using ACR the look I am getting using Epson's Raw converterl. Is there any alternative Raw converter that people can recommend for the Canon which results in different characteristics of the picture?

My worries: skin tones: Cannot get close to the Kodak look- skin look redish with the canon and hence pale even with darker complexion.If I try to WB I get a wierd greenish pigments in the skin which make it look lack of life. WIth the Kodak I was able to get well the brownish tones of skin.

Pictures in a direct sunlight are uncomparable to the striking look of the Kodak. It must be me, but I really cannot get any better so far with the 5D.

And a concluding remark: if you are using the Kodak and you are not under a professional pressure to upgrade then think twice- unless you are a color management expert, you might regret getting rid of the Kodak.
 
Jono Slack said:
First of all, the Kodak Dslrs don't use Kodak sensors! (strange but
true, they use fill factory sensors).
Click to expand...
To clarify, Fill Factory simply built the sensor to KODAK's OEM specs. No doubt it was done based on cost. Considering what I have read about the Kodak larger sensors, Fill Factory did a very good job. Unfortunately/fortunately, depending on your point of view, the design itself is all Kodak as many of the issues we see in the SLRn, are also in the Kodak sensors sensors.

All the best.
Rick

We all know what it can't do. Show me what you can do with it.
 
I used to make an action in PS CS2 to correct for the greenish tint in the shadow of Kodak skin tone files. I later discover it is much easier just to do custom WB then add a warming filter such as Tiffen 812. The result is perfect skin tone. I do not have Canon 5D, but I think adding some sort of warming filter will save much work later in post processing.

Also, if you want to get more punchier look try to make an action with a tweak in "Selective color" in PS. I also recommend Nik Color Efex filter plug in.
Kind regard.
Sam H.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top