RNI 5--different looks from different cameras?

I downloaded the free demo of RNI 5 for Lightroom classic. I used four different cameras (Fuji X100V, Olympus E-M5iii, Panasonic G9, and Canon 5D [original version]) to take a photo of a color checker chart. All in the same light using the same field of view. All taken at exactly the same time. White balance set the same in Lightroom. Imported without any presets applied.

When I apply one of the RNI 5 simulations--say, Kodak Portra 400--to each of the images, the resulting image from each camera looks quite a bit different than the image from other cameras (see below). I guess I would have expected that Kodak Portra 400 simulation would give similar (perhaps not exactly the same) results across cameras.

Is this normal? Am I missing something?


Fuji X100V RNI 5 Kodak Portra 400


Panasonic G9 RNI 5 Kodak Portra 400

Xbot said:

I downloaded the free demo of RNI 5 for Lightroom classic. I used four different cameras (Fuji X100V, Olympus E-M5iii, Panasonic G9, and Canon 5D [original version]) to take a photo of a color checker chart. All in the same light using the same field of view. All taken at exactly the same time. White balance set the same in Lightroom. Imported without any presets applied.

When I apply one of the RNI 5 simulations--say, Kodak Portra 400--to each of the images, the resulting image from each camera looks quite a bit different than the image from other cameras (see below). I guess I would have expected that Kodak Portra 400 simulation would give similar (perhaps not exactly the same) results across cameras.

Is this normal? Am I missing something?

Click to expand...

I'm not familiar with RNI 5, but let's take a step back and ask more basic questions. First, if you take your four different raw files and have "[w]hite balance set the same in Lightroom" but do not apply an RNI 5 preset, do all four look the same? If not, then why would you expect them to look the same after applying a preset?

Second, what do you mean "White balance set the same in Lightroom"? Are you setting Lightroom to the same numbers for Temp and Tint, or using Lightroom's White Balance Selector (dropper) on the same area of the same gray patch, or what?

Third and more basically, why would you expect four such different cameras to produce the same color and lightness? Have you made custom camera profiles for each one using the same software and settings? Or are you using "Adobe Standard" for each one in Lightroom, or what?

NAwlins Contrarian said:

NAwlins Contrarian said:

I downloaded the free demo of RNI 5 for Lightroom classic. I used four different cameras (Fuji X100V, Olympus E-M5iii, Panasonic G9, and Canon 5D [original version]) to take a photo of a color checker chart. All in the same light using the same field of view. All taken at exactly the same time. White balance set the same in Lightroom. Imported without any presets applied.

When I apply one of the RNI 5 simulations--say, Kodak Portra 400--to each of the images, the resulting image from each camera looks quite a bit different than the image from other cameras (see below). I guess I would have expected that Kodak Portra 400 simulation would give similar (perhaps not exactly the same) results across cameras.

Is this normal? Am I missing something?

Click to expand...

I'm not familiar with RNI 5, but let's take a step back and ask more basic questions. First, if you take your four different raw files and have "[w]hite balance set the same in Lightroom" but do not apply an RNI 5 preset, do all four look the same? If not, then why would you expect them to look the same after applying a preset?

Second, what do you mean "White balance set the same in Lightroom"? Are you setting Lightroom to the same numbers for Temp and Tint, or using Lightroom's White Balance Selector (dropper) on the same area of the same gray patch, or what?

Third and more basically, why would you expect four such different cameras to produce the same color and lightness? Have you made custom camera profiles for each one using the same software and settings? Or are you using "Adobe Standard" for each one in Lightroom, or what?

Click to expand...

Thanks for your response. I think I can chalk this up to knowing less than I realized. I didn't expect identical responses, but at first the differences were greater than I expected. I didn't expect identical responses because I'm aware that different cameras can render raws a bit differently (at least, I think). But, I did expect some degree of similarity because the RNI presets make use of the camera profiles themselves. So, I was assuming that would 'correct' for the differences between cameras.

Second, I also didn't realize how important it was to use the WB selector. I was indeed punching in the same WB numbers. But, I got better results by using the WB dropper on a gray part of the color checker. I did this after I heard from RNI support. This was their recommendation, and indeed it helped a great deal. I still dont' know why punching in the same WB numbers didn't work as well. This, again, clearly shows my ignorance.

Finally, after doing this, the preset did give results that were closer to one another. Interestingly, the X100V and G9 looked nearly identical, and the EM5iii and 5D looked very similar to one another. But, the latter two cameras both were 'redder' compared to the previous two cameras.

Xbot said:

Thanks for your response.

Click to expand...

You're welcome.

Xbot said:

I think I can chalk this up to knowing less than I realized.

Click to expand...

We've all been there!

Xbot said:

I didn't expect identical responses because I'm aware that different cameras can render raws a bit differently (at least, I think). But, I did expect some degree of similarity because the RNI presets make use of the camera profiles themselves. So, I was assuming that would 'correct' for the differences between cameras.

Click to expand...

Camera profiles can only do so much. The different sensors' differing color filters, properties of converting light into electrical charge, and analog-to-digital conversion--often plus some kind of in-camera tweaking even to 'raw' files--result in real differences.

Xbot said:

Second, I also didn't realize how important it was to use the WB selector. I was indeed punching in the same WB numbers. But, I got better results by using the WB dropper on a gray part of the color checker. I did this after I heard from RNI support. This was their recommendation, and indeed it helped a great deal. I still dont' know why punching in the same WB numbers didn't work as well.

Click to expand...

White balance is one of the most important--but sometimes under-appreciated and/or misunderstood--factors affecting overall look. You can't rely on the raw converter white-balance numbers. If you use a large enough sampling dropper (in some software its size is adjustable) and you have a large enough, homogeneous enough, neutral enough area to sample, then that's often a better approach, at least as a starting point.

As for the numbers, try this: open the same raw file in two or three different raw converters, set the white balance to 'as shot', and note what numbers the raw converter reports for white balance. I bet they're all different.

Xbot said:

Finally, after doing this, the preset did give results that were closer to one another. Interestingly, the X100V and G9 looked nearly identical, and the EM5iii and 5D looked very similar to one another. But, the latter two cameras both were 'redder' compared to the previous two cameras.

Click to expand...

Again, I'd expect cameras to differ somewhat. But also, that's not a regular ColorChecker you're using (see, e.g., https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ColorChecker), and even a regular ColorChecker doesn't have a truly neutral tile for white-balancing. My ColorChecker Passport has two white-balance tiles on the side opposite the ColorChecker. If you use something like that and white-balance off one of the tiles intended for that purpose, you should get pretty close. If you do that and have a set of good custom camera profiles, you should get very close.