RAW converter D200 skin tones..

[Tedwin]

Hello

I'm trying to decide what I prefer. Photoshop ACR3.3 or NC4.4. Ideally I think I would get somewhere between the two.

Before anyone jumps in about altering the settings, thank you for that but this is colours as they come from the camera, I'm aware that NC4.4 will apply settings from in camera processing, and that ACR does its own thing. This still leaves me with these differences, just to more or less extent. The white Balance is as shot in both conversions.

I like the workflow of CS2, and its faster, but I don't think the colours are as accurate as NC4.4. I can de-saturate reds or slightly shift hue in ACR, but it never looks as close as NC4.4 and its a lot of fiddling about.

I suppose I'm asking which you prefer, and what you do about it? Do you have similar issues or am I being picky? I've come from a Fuji S3, the skin tones always just came out right from that and I'm trying to get there with the D200. Any thoughts or advice greatly appreciated.

I have often wondered why Adobe don't release pre configured settings to load into ACR to match certain cameras "looks" or is that built in to ACR already?

Thanks in advance.

Ted. (by the way, acr is the pink version)

 

[Tedwin]

Should this be in re-touching? I thought it was fairly camera specific.

 

[anotherMike]

I pretty much agree with you - Capture always (and I do mean always) seems to do the best job rendering the initial view of what I've shot in the studio correctly with regards to skin tones and the other colors in the scene (assuming of course your WB and exposure are on the money)

I will say, though, that with ACR 3.3 it's the first time that Camera Raw has gotten things mostly correct in this regard for my D100/D70 and D2X files - it's not as close as Capture, but so much closer than earlier versions of Camera Raw that I'm thinking that over time they make tweaks and things improve, even for the older cameras. And thus being you have a D200, I wonder if maybe things aren't fully tweaked yet.

(I don't yet have a D200 so can't comment on that body- just wanted to point out that in the past this exact same difference between 'initial view' and what I shot has existed in much greater magnitude with ACR with my bodies than it does with 3.3)

-m

 

[afx]

Hi,

give Bibble and RawMagick a try. Both have more realistic skin tones in my opinion.

cheers
afx

 

[cuonghuutran]

Do you have special settings for Bibble? I tried it using its default settings and much prefer NC 4.4.

Hi,

give Bibble and RawMagick a try. Both have more realistic skin
tones in my opinion.

cheers
afx

 

[srwatters]

I find that with calibration, ACR provides outstanding skin tones.



--
Scott
http://www.polodigital.net
Nikon - Nikkor - Mac

 

[Tedwin]

Did you calibrate ACR by photographing a macbeth chart then adjusting to know rgb numbers? If not, could you give me an idea of how you did it or supply a link?

Ted

 

[virtuamike]

I feel there's more flexibility in adjusting WB in Capture. The majority of the time I just set WB to the dominant light source in the shot, and then adjust temperature till I get it right (5500K in studio, 7000K outdoors in shade, 5200K outdoors in daylight, etc). I don't mess with hue unless I know that there's something that'd throw a cast on the shot.

So far I've been happy with the skin tones I've been getting.





--
Ramen is how I afford my glass
http://www.blindmike.com

 

[Tedwin]

Have downloaded bibble pro, love it. Thanks for the advice.

Is it free? It seems to be working fine, I haven't been asked for a code or anything.

Ted.

 

[srwatters]

Did you calibrate ACR by photographing a macbeth chart then
adjusting to know rgb numbers? If not, could you give me an idea of
how you did it or supply a link?

Yes, I shot a GMB color checker card. Then I ran the three separate versions of Fors' ACR calibration script; the original, the 'L' version, and the Rags script. Taking the output from each of those, I created the most pleasing values using the Read_Macbeth_Patches script concentrating on the R, G, & B patches AND the skin tones. The numbers I use aren't a secret, but may only be 'correct' with my lenses. I use the following Nikkor lenses:

AFS 28-70mm f/2.8D
AF 105mm f/2.0D DC
AFS 70-200mm f/2.8G VR
AF 180mm f/2.8D

I find that the 180 prime (which I used for the image above) gives me slightly less contrast which I like for this style of natural light headshots.

I pulled these numbers out of the XMP sidecar file used for the shot I posted. It was done at ISO 100, f/2.8, 1/160 and the WB was 6100, -23

ShadowTint> 0
RedHue> -14
RedSaturation> +27
GreenHue> -5
GreenSaturation> -8
BlueHue> +2
BlueSaturation> +3
--
Scott
http://www.polodigital.net
Nikon - Nikkor - Mac

 

[pierre1]

today in only jpeg with the SB600. Slight PP

 

[Tedwin]

From your posted pic it looks like calibration is worth the effort. I'm suprised at how large the adjustments are on your machine, just goes to show.

I'll give it a go.

Ted.

 

[Eric28757]

Glad you like it ted.

Bibble isn't free. The version you downloaded is operating in trial mode. Its fully functional for 2 weeks, and then will cease to work if you don't register it.

Eric