Confused Somewhat by DXO Mark Numbers and Still Lifes from Imaging Resource

Started Oct 9, 2012 | Discussions thread
PhotoKhan Forum Pro • Posts: 10,346
Re: Confused Somewhat by DXO Mark Numbers and Still Lifes from Imaging Resource

David Franklin wrote:

PhotoKhan wrote:

David Franklin wrote:

nor raw file out of Lighroom /.../ will be color-precise enough to satisfy many high-precision needs

I am always interested in anything relating to color, possibly the single most demanding vector in digital photography. I especially value insights from experienced users like yourself.

Given the fact that, in Lightroom, Hue, Saturation and Luminance are adjustable on 3 primary, 3 additive secondary and 2 additive tertiary colors in a scale from -100 to + 100 for each item in each color and that it works well with color reference tools like ColorChecker Passport can you please expand on that assertion?



PK, well it just comes down to the best workflow for you. Let me explain. I want a 16 bit Tiff or PS file as my working file-type because that's the best platform for the later uses for which my work is made and gives me the best flexibility for further processing.
So I typically find one most representative raw file in any particular grouping by subject, and use tools, like those you mentioned in Lightroom, to get as close as possible to the most difficult target color in the image with the raw conversion. When I'm done, I have the "recipe" to set the "development" parameters for the rest of the shots in the same series, so I am not trying to process each and every shot differently - a waste of time considering the problems I will discuss next. The resulting file will almost always be spot on for one color. However, the rest of the colors in the image, equally or more important in total than the single most dominant color I converted the raw file to match, are rarely, if ever, satisfactory. For those additional colors, selections need to be made. Sometimes, those selections are very very complex (think tonal transitions) and sometimes pretty simple, but they have to be made to be able to then correct all the "secondary colors." And, sometimes, even the "main" color for which the original raw conversion recipe was intended to match, will look different, shot-to-shot in the same series. Why? Because the same color, lit at any different angle, with any different colored light source (here I mean identically specified lamp-to-lamp and reflector-to-reflector variations), with any different contrast (think broad indirect to tight focused direct lighting sources), can and will definitely look different, not only in saturation and brightness, but also in hue, than did that color in the first "recipe" conversion. Given all of the above, and because I don't want to spend my time twice  creating very very careful calibrated colors, once in Lightroom and then again in Photoshop - which I will have to use anyway - I just leave the lion's share of color work to Photoshop, one file at a time. And using Photoshop's tools, which I find quite easy to use and effective, I can get the client's job done thoroughly and well. Regards,David  

Sorry for the late reply David. I browsed quickly through yours the other day but decided I needed more time to fully understand the most appreciated input.

Me too, I also produce in Tiff-16, ProPhoto RGB files out of the original RAW, as I feel those are the ones that guarantee me the maximum flexibility for the present and future end uses of the images.

...But from your previously reply I inferred you were referring to a specific disadvantage of LR against PS for accurate color rendition ("nor raw file out of Lightroom or a camera maker's raw software, will be color-precise enough to satisfy many high-precision needs").

However, from the expanded considerations above I don't see a specific limitation deriving from LR.

The referenced minute inconsistencies from file to file you mentioned are exogenous to the PP line, as they are originated during capture, itself.

You will have to deal with those minute discrepancies individually in LR much in the same way as you'll have to do it using PS. will then just be a personal preference and not an LR color rendition limitation.

Am I correct or do you have other insights into LRs color management?

Once again, thank you for your time and effort.


-- hide signature --

“Loose praise may feed my ego but constructive criticism advances my skills”
(PBase Supporter)

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow