Sony RAW Color issues...PLEASE HELP

[Verto]

I'm a canon user and always used canon software before which I loved and NEVER had this problem. I'm now using Photoshop CS6 and I'm going nuts. I open a RAW file, edit it, save it, and when I post it on my site, ipad 3, or any place else the image looks different. I'm not getting consistent shadows, colors, or contrast. This is a big problem because I have no control over my final image. Any help would be great. Thank you.
--
http://www.miltonphotography.com

 

[Mark_McD]

I'm guessing this is your first time working in raw. Most browsers can't handle any ICC other than sRGB, my guess is that you're shooting in AdobeRGB or a similarly wide-gamut color-space, then posting online and wondering why the colors look so different.

Change your color-space when you output to jpeg to sRGB and you won't have any of the issues, all colors should be managed better. Another thing to note is that not all browsers properly handle ICC profiles either, but by far sRGB is the color-space whereby if it is at all managed, it will support sRGB.

Another thing to note is that if your monitor is not calibrated, you will find huge deviation between your photos on one computer and on another. Of course, even if you calibrate, it's not to say that everyone viewing it has calibrated viewing conditions.

--
-mark

http://www.flickr.com/photos/mark_mcd/

 

[Verto]

I shoot in raw all the time, it's just that the canon software was idiot proof I guess. There's so many settings in photoshop I'm lost. You wouldn't know where I can find detail instructions do you? Thanks.
--
http://www.miltonphotography.com

 

[Mark_McD]

When you save a photo, it will allow you to change the color-space, it will have say proPhotoRGB, sRGB and adobeRGB, you want to select sRGB for things posted on the net.

--
-mark

http://www.flickr.com/photos/mark_mcd/

 

[Kriekira]

You might try Lightroom or Aperture instead of PS. The RAW workflow is built into the product, and works well. They are designed from the ground up to convert, store, manage, develop, and publish (as in print or create a file to share with other programs) RAW digital camera files. Additionally, each features a loss-less RAW workflow: your original files are never altered, and can always be re-developed, etc.

 

[D Cox]

I shoot in raw all the time, it's just that the canon software was idiot proof I guess. There's so many settings in photoshop I'm lost. You wouldn't know where I can find detail instructions do you? Thanks.
--

The book "Adobe Photoshop for Photographers" by Martin Evening is very clear and quite complete. Recommended.

 

[Slynky]

For me, LR export results are always different than what I see inside LR. Not the case with PS, though.

Until last year, I was a PS-only user and when I "Saved for Web and Devices", there was very little difference in what I saw in PS and what came out as a JPG. then I got LR (for the non-destructive editing and cataloging features). But I noticed right away that what I saw in LR was very different from what I exported out of LR.

The first thing I did was change my default viewer to get rid of that crapy MS Photo viewer (and set JPGs to be viewed with IE instead). But the colors and contrast were still too much from what I saw in LR.

So I used asked for (and received some help) by posting on the NAPP site (part of the membership benefits). But the end analysis wasn't very helpful...somewhat but not as good as I had hoped.

So, I've given up. I do all my "developing" in LR now and any printing is fine. BUT, if I export for a website, I usually go into Develop settings and drop the saturation 10 points (and sometimes, even Vibrance by 5 points or so).

One would think working in color space sRGB and exporting the same would yield the same exact result...
--

A veteran is someone who, at one point in their life, wrote a blank check made payable to their country for an amount of "up to and including my life".

(...from the generation that still uses capital letters and punctuation...)

 

[uhligfd]

Are your various platforms, computer monitors etc color calibrated?

If not, then each will give you its own biased view and that is what you should expect. Confusion, flavor of the day images ...

 

[pede59]

+1
I used to work with PSE. If you shoot mainly raw i think LR is way better.

You might try Lightroom or Aperture instead of PS. The RAW workflow is built into the product, and works well. They are designed from the ground up to convert, store, manage, develop, and publish (as in print or create a file to share with other programs) RAW digital camera files. Additionally, each features a loss-less RAW workflow: your original files are never altered, and can always be re-developed, etc.

 

[RussellInCincinnati]

Here's a $170 dollar monitor calibration tool that will work fine, the discontinued Xrite i1 display whatever. e.bay item number 180876141005

Am not endorsing that particular e.bay vendor, it's just an example of the item. And am not saying that a hardware monitor calibration, or this exact calibration tool, is essential. This is just an example of a super direct path to decent monitor calibration.

If the problem is not serious enough to warrant spending $170 dollars to fix it, then it's not a serious problem. The money must be there, both because the original poster is a professional, and we are on a forum where the camera costs $500 dollars plus.

With a calibrated monitor, all the original poster's color matching problems involving a terribly different display in photo editing software versus the on the web, etc will probably go away. As long as their photo editing software is set up to save (export) JPEGs with the sRGB colorspace.

Used to have some trouble with Picture Window Pro photo editor until I discovered that it was set to use some color profile for the display while editing, that the Windows operating system was already using. I.e. the color profile was "being used twice" and that messed things up. Set PWpro to not use any color profile for the monitor and all went well.

 

[Slynky]

My monitor is calibrated.

But, were it not, that would not be the problem. To be clear...

If I look at an image INSIDE LR and then export it to JPG and look at it on the SAME monitor (calibrated or not), it is more saturated and more contrasty.

Are your various platforms, computer monitors etc color calibrated?

If not, then each will give you its own biased view and that is what you should expect. Confusion, flavor of the day images ...

--

A veteran is someone who, at one point in their life, wrote a blank check made payable to their country for an amount of "up to and including my life".

(...from the generation that still uses capital letters and punctuation...)

 

[Erik Magnuson]

My monitor is calibrated.

But, were it not, that would not be the problem. To be clear...

If I look at an image INSIDE LR and then export it to JPG and look at it on the SAME monitor (calibrated or not), it is more saturated and more contrasty.

Look at it using what software? Just because your monitor is calibrated does not mean that all image viewers use the monitor profile, e.g.
http://www.gballard.net/psd/go_live_page_profile/embeddedJPEGprofiles.html

--
Erik

 

[Bill1000Evening]

Speaking of monitor calibration, I run Lr on my laptop and I work in Raw. The laptop is a high-end Dell xps, and I would really like to be sure it is calibrated properly - but - can you use a calibration device with a laptop? I have hesitated to spring for a calibration device because I am unsure that I can use it with my Dell. The laptop has a calibration proceedure that I use, and the prints I make seem to match what I see on the monitor nicely, but - anyone have any experience with monitor calibration devices on a laptop?

 

[teseg]

I use RAW Therapee... Open sourced and free. And am happy with the result. But it is the only RAW converter I've used so may be missing out on what could be.

 

[uhligfd]

I use the Datacolor Spyder and it works consistently across most all platforms, from MACbook Airs ,Pros, workstations, tablets etc etc.

No worries. And you can send your developed pics to labs and the prints will look like you intended.

 

[Slynky]

As stated above, I initially relied on the MS picture viewer (default, I believe). I changed it to be IE instead (figuring anyone looking at my online photos would be using a browser).

What disturbs me is that I could output a JPG (for screen and devices) from PS and there was no real varience in the two photos (the image inside PS and the resulting JPG image viewed outside PS) but there is a big difference when I do the same thing in LR.

My monitor is calibrated.

But, were it not, that would not be the problem. To be clear...

If I look at an image INSIDE LR and then export it to JPG and look at it on the SAME monitor (calibrated or not), it is more saturated and more contrasty.

Look at it using what software? Just because your monitor is calibrated does not mean that all image viewers use the monitor profile, e.g.
http://www.gballard.net/psd/go_live_page_profile/embeddedJPEGprofiles.html

--
Erik

--

A veteran is someone who, at one point in their life, wrote a blank check made payable to their country for an amount of "up to and including my life".

(...from the generation that still uses capital letters and punctuation...)

 

[Tomasin]

I feel your pain. In my case it was aggravated because I got a wide gamut monitor, so everything looked ultrasaturated...

Finally I solved it (sort of). Always save jpg in sRGB and check it with color corrected apps (i.e. Firefox so you can see how most of the people will see it)

 

[Tomasin]

IE is not color corrected, so it's not using your monitor profile.

Use Firefox instead, there is a way to color correct it so it will use your monitor profile.
And the result should be the same as in LR

 

[flint-hill]

Hardware monitor calibration works the same on laptops as it does on computers with detached montiors. All that's required is that the software delivered with the colorimeter support the operating system/version on your computer.

I use a Spyder3 which works fine. I don't know that it's any better than colorimeters from other manufacturers.

--
NEX-5N gallery: http://www.flickr.com/photos/flint-hill/sets/72157628112096830/

 

[Verto]

Thank you for all the replys. This is NOT a monitor calibration issue, since images look different depending on what software is opening the file, MS veiwer, photoshop, firefox, IE, etc. I don't know what canon software did by default with my raw files that photoshop isn't. That's the only thing i miss from my canon camera is the great software tool.
--
http://www.miltonphotography.com