DP1, DP2 & DP3 color rendition: same or different? The truth revealed :)

Started Mar 29, 2013 | Discussions
vbd70
OP vbd70 Veteran Member • Posts: 5,817
Re: DP1, DP2 & DP3 color rendition: Heated Issue?

Gary Dean Mercer Clark wrote:

vI think it was a very revealing test.  I think you did a very good job. I don't recall any controversy in the Sony forum about color accuracy between all its plethora of 16.1 mp Nex cameras.  Each camera performs differently, each newer generation shows improvement and better color accuracy. So if I'm to understand this---we expect Sigma to revamp the DP1M and DP2M cameras to have the exact color calibration as the newer generation DP3M? and in addition Sigma should do extensive costly firmware updates of the DP1M and DP2M to bring them up to the color accuracy of its newest generation DP3M?

So I should post in the Sony forum and complain that Sony isn't doing anything to improve its older model"s color accuracy and expect a new firmware update to bring all the older models in line exactly with the newest model because these camera have the same sensor etc?  Is this a realistic expectation of a camera manufacturer?

Seems to me that that the lesson here is that if you are going to be out shooting with all three cameras hanging around your neck--you better do a custom white balance.

When shooting wedding with different camera models in the same brand---I always did a custom white balance.  Saves headaches later.

Each model is clearly an improvement over the earlier one in the auto balance performance---I can see a difference between each camera release based on the color charts that you shot. Its good to know that there are difference in performance using Auto WB between the three cameras.

Not sure how heated this issue is or how big a controversy this really is, but I appreciate your hard work and write up!

Gary Dean Mercer Clark

-- hide signature --

Gary Dean Mercer Clark

Hello Gary,

thank you for your reply, I am glad you found the article interesting

About your point: well, to me there is a very important difference between what you say about the Sony Nex evolution of cameras and the DP Merrill family.

I agree that we cannot expect older models to perform as good as new ones, of course. However, I  think that with the Merrill this is not the case: the DP1M & DP2M have been announced the same day, they are not one the evolution of the other; the DP3M, while announced later, supposedly and according to Sigma has the same innards as the other two, with a different lens (and now we know it evidently also sports different FW tweaks).

What I mean is, the DP2M is not the evolution of the DP1M and the DP3M the evolution of the DP2M; they are side-developed models, two of which released the same day - very different than the differences in Nex models, which are indeed evolutions one of the other, developed and released with (very) different features in very different times.

More, being everything that came out from my test fixable by matter of tweaking WB computations, I am pretty sure that Sigma can do it in a very very short time and dedicating very little resources to it. Basically, to simplify the issue, all they need to do change some numbers in their WB computation tables in FW...

Best,

Vieri

-- hide signature --

equipment in profile
Vieri Bottazzini Fine Art Photography
http://www.vieribottazzini.com
My Newsletter:
http://eepurl.com/s1Sjb
portfolios:
http://www.madshutter.com
my blog
http://madshutter.blogspot.com
Facebook galleries:
https://www.facebook.com/vierimadshutter

 vbd70's gear list:vbd70's gear list
Panasonic LX100 Leica SL (Typ 601) Voigtlander 12mm F5.6 Ultra Wide Heliar Voigtlander 15mm F4.5 Super Wide Heliar Leica SL 24-90mm F2.8-4 +3 more
(unknown member) Senior Member • Posts: 1,857
Thank you..but (?)

Thanks for the nice test Vieri.

Seems you made everybody happy: the ones claiming that there IS an improvement of colors (using WB settings) and the ones who say, the RAWs don't show significant differences (manual WB)

But i'm wondering if the DP3m solves "all" skintone problems of DP1m and DP2m, just because the WB settings are better?
If there are just little differences in the RAW, it should be possible to get the same colors and skintones with the DP1m and DP2m.

I'm still looking forward to a "non-scientific" real world outdoor portrait with all three cameras, taken at the same time.
Maceo

vbd70
OP vbd70 Veteran Member • Posts: 5,817
Re: Thank you..but (?)

maceoQ wrote:

Thanks for the nice test Vieri.

Seems you made everybody happy: the ones claiming that there IS an improvement of colors (using WB settings) and the ones who say, the RAWs don't show significant differences (manual WB)

But i'm wondering if the DP3m solves "all" skintone problems of DP1m and DP2m, just because the WB settings are better?
If there are just little differences in the RAW, it should be possible to get the same colors and skintones with the DP1m and DP2m.

I'm still looking forward to a "non-scientific" real world outdoor portrait with all three cameras, taken at the same time.
Maceo

Hello Maceo,

well, the reason why everyone is happy is that everyone was basing their claims on different assumptions to prove different conclusions... which everyone could do, while at the same time conflicting with everyone starting from different assumptions I guess this is why a good ol' controlled test helps.

Thing is, you can certainly - with different amounts of tweaking - bring two DP files to look the same. The thing is, SPP is not the friendliest piece of software to do so, and some of these tweaking need then to be done in PS or similar, where they involve playing with single colour channel hue/saturations, which in turn is not your average user would do. SPP custom WB brings things close enough, except for reds / pinks: this unfortunately IMHO would still make a portrait look different if shot with the DP3M...

Best,

Vieri

-- hide signature --

equipment in profile
Vieri Bottazzini Fine Art Photography
http://www.vieribottazzini.com
My Newsletter:
http://eepurl.com/s1Sjb
portfolios:
http://www.madshutter.com
my blog
http://madshutter.blogspot.com
Facebook galleries:
https://www.facebook.com/vierimadshutter

 vbd70's gear list:vbd70's gear list
Panasonic LX100 Leica SL (Typ 601) Voigtlander 12mm F5.6 Ultra Wide Heliar Voigtlander 15mm F4.5 Super Wide Heliar Leica SL 24-90mm F2.8-4 +3 more
BobNL Veteran Member • Posts: 5,084
Re: DP1, DP2 & DP3 color rendition: same or different? The truth revealed :)

Thanks. It basically confirms my own findings but this time in even more controlled light. Now the question of course what conclusion to take from the results, they might vary wildly again

One more thing; I saw you did the test at iso100. As the native/base/standard/default iso of the Merrill sensor is supposedly iso200 this might influence the result. One of the channels could be clipped early/earlier. Something to keep in mind when making conclusions.

-- hide signature --

Bob van Ooik
V-studio
----------------------------------------------
http://vstudio-magazine.de/
http://www.x3magazine.com/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bobnl/

 BobNL's gear list:BobNL's gear list
Sigma DP1 Sigma DP1 Merrill Sigma DP3 Merrill Sigma dp1 Quattro Sigma SD14 +9 more
SandyF Forum Pro • Posts: 14,941
Re: production dates and link: BobNL's white balance
1

Vieri, minor point for the record. The DP2Merrill was produced and released first; I have an 'early' one purchased in August 2012. The DP1Merrill came out some significant time afterwards. And of course the DP3Merrill was released recently.
As to any production differences ('innards') among them, other than the lens, really no one outside of Sigma/Foveon knows.

I note too that your test was done with one white balance..... as to how they differ in auto white balance, that's another issue. BobNL's studies have shown that white balance is significant. I'll try to find and link his thread.

Here's the article, I'll try to find the dpreview thread too

http://x3magazine.com/2013/02/26/not-all-white-balances-are-created-equal/

added: here's the dpreview discussion thread

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/50938980

Best regards, Sandy
http://www.pbase.com/sandyfleischman (archival)
http://www.flickr.com/photos/sandyfleischmann (current)

 SandyF's gear list:SandyF's gear list
Sigma DP2 Sigma DP1 Sigma DP1 Merrill Sigma DP2 Merrill Sigma DP3 Merrill +7 more
(unknown member) Contributing Member • Posts: 659
The truth?

Quote:

'To sum things up, it is clear to me that Sigma changed the colour output of the DP3 Merrill noticeably when using IN CAMERA WB and WB presets. When using CUSTOM WB in Sigma Photo Pro 5.5.1, on the other hand, the output of the three Merrills is much closer to one other: so much so that most users wouldn't notice any differences at all, and that whatever differences there are can be fixed easily enough in post-processing if one so wish.'

Not so. Your test shows the AWB behaviour of the three DPM under one defined and rather narrow condition - flash, studio, same shutter speed / aperture etc.

AWB is basically an algorithm which tries to determine the correct WB by identifying a 'neutral or white' reference point under a very large range of lighting conditions.

You can't really conclude anything from your controlled tests using flash light for other (and much more common) 'natural' lighting conditions , I'm afraid.

You mention it yourself:

'while I only tested Flash WB preset under controlled conditions, casual use of the Merrills today leads me to assume this to be a general behaviour for all presets'.

Framkly, that's a bit too much 'casual' and 'assume' for my taste - most definitely not what I would dare call the truth.

By the way:  I very much applaud the effort you have put into your tests and I actually very much like your photography - but coming from a scientific background I'm very careful when it comes to truth.

Personally, I'm looking forward to the next firmware upate of the DP2M

vbd70
OP vbd70 Veteran Member • Posts: 5,817
Re: production dates and link: BobNL's white balance

SandyF wrote:

Vieri, minor point for the record. The DP2Merrill was produced and released first; I have an 'early' one purchased in August 2012. The DP1Merrill came out some significant time afterwards. And of course the DP3Merrill was released recently.
As to any production differences ('innards') among them, other than the lens, really no one outside of Sigma/Foveon knows.

I note too that your test was done with one white balance..... as to how they differ in auto white balance, that's another issue. BobNL's studies have shown that white balance is significant. I'll try to find and link his thread.

Here's the article, I'll try to find the dpreview thread too

http://x3magazine.com/2013/02/26/not-all-white-balances-are-created-equal/

added: here's the dpreview discussion thread

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/50938980

Best regards, Sandy
http://www.pbase.com/sandyfleischman (archival)
http://www.flickr.com/photos/sandyfleischmann (current)

Hey Sandy,

as far as I know, BOTH DP1 and DP2 Merrill were announced on DPReview February 8, 2012. Which one reached the dealers first, that I don't know - but announcement date is definitely the same.

See HERE for the DP1M and HERE for the DP2M announces here on DPR.

About WB, my test was aimed at seeing if there were any differences between the DP1, DP2 and DP3 Merrill, not at proving anything absolute about the colour rendition of any of these three cameras. Therefore, I thought using Auto WB, Flash WB and Custom WB were enough to see whether there were in fact differences or not. Of course, it is possible that - say - under incandescent WB there are NO differences at all between all cameras, but something tells me that this is not very likely.

Best,

Vieri

-- hide signature --

equipment in profile
Vieri Bottazzini Fine Art Photography
http://www.vieribottazzini.com
My Newsletter:
http://eepurl.com/s1Sjb
portfolios:
http://www.madshutter.com
my blog
http://madshutter.blogspot.com
Facebook galleries:
https://www.facebook.com/vierimadshutter

 vbd70's gear list:vbd70's gear list
Panasonic LX100 Leica SL (Typ 601) Voigtlander 12mm F5.6 Ultra Wide Heliar Voigtlander 15mm F4.5 Super Wide Heliar Leica SL 24-90mm F2.8-4 +3 more
vbd70
OP vbd70 Veteran Member • Posts: 5,817
Re: The truth?
1

mroy wrote:

Quote:

'To sum things up, it is clear to me that Sigma changed the colour output of the DP3 Merrill noticeably when using IN CAMERA WB and WB presets. When using CUSTOM WB in Sigma Photo Pro 5.5.1, on the other hand, the output of the three Merrills is much closer to one other: so much so that most users wouldn't notice any differences at all, and that whatever differences there are can be fixed easily enough in post-processing if one so wish.'

Not so. Your test shows the AWB behaviour of the three DPM under one defined and rather narrow condition - flash, studio, same shutter speed / aperture etc.

AWB is basically an algorithm which tries to determine the correct WB by identifying a 'neutral or white' reference point under a very large range of lighting conditions.

You can't really conclude anything from your controlled tests using flash light for other (and much more common) 'natural' lighting conditions , I'm afraid.

You mention it yourself:

'while I only tested Flash WB preset under controlled conditions, casual use of the Merrills today leads me to assume this to be a general behaviour for all presets'.

Framkly, that's a bit too much 'casual' and 'assume' for my taste - most definitely not what I would dare call the truth.

By the way:  I very much applaud the effort you have put into your tests and I actually very much like your photography - but coming from a scientific background I'm very careful when it comes to truth.

Personally, I'm looking forward to the next firmware upate of the DP2M

mroy,

indeed, the truth about the assumption I set out to prove.

My test was aimed at seeing if there were any differences between the DP1, DP2 and DP3 Merrill, not at proving anything absolute about the colour rendition of any of these three cameras.

As a scientist, you should know that one way to prove an assumption is to build a test case; I did so using Auto WB, Flash WB and Custom WB, which IMHO were enough to see whether there were in fact differences or not between the rendition of these three cameras. There are.

Of course, it is possible that - say - under incandescent WB there are NO differences at all between the cameras, but something tells me that this is not very likely. As a scientist, you are familiar with Ockham's razor of course. So: I proved that there are in fact differences under three different WB; my eyes (even without a thorough test), tells me that there are differences even under other WB in casual shooting - where casual means "real world", no charts - so I assume that these differences that I proved true under three particular conditions, if seen under the naked eye under other conditions, would be there under these conditions as well. More, one of the WB I used is CUSTOM WB, which should theoretically output the best results (and it does, though there are still differences). Not perfect science, but close enough for me; especially seeing the argument we are talking about - are the cameras in fact different - which is trivial compared to, say, the rigour one needs to test nuclear fission Relax, the colour output of the cameras IS different; I accept this, after my little experiment, and will do so unless you prove me otherwise... you, of curse, can believe whatever you want, not a problem for me.

Oh by the way, you are of course aware that it would be practically impossible to prove my starting assumption under ALL possible lights and WB combination ever present anywhere on Earth, don't you agree...? Unless you have infinite time and resources, that is.

Best,

Vieri

-- hide signature --

equipment in profile
Vieri Bottazzini Fine Art Photography
http://www.vieribottazzini.com
My Newsletter:
http://eepurl.com/s1Sjb
portfolios:
http://www.madshutter.com
my blog
http://madshutter.blogspot.com
Facebook galleries:
https://www.facebook.com/vierimadshutter

 vbd70's gear list:vbd70's gear list
Panasonic LX100 Leica SL (Typ 601) Voigtlander 12mm F5.6 Ultra Wide Heliar Voigtlander 15mm F4.5 Super Wide Heliar Leica SL 24-90mm F2.8-4 +3 more
vbd70
OP vbd70 Veteran Member • Posts: 5,817
Re: DP1, DP2 & DP3 color rendition: same or different? The truth revealed :)
2

BobNL wrote:

Thanks. It basically confirms my own findings but this time in even more controlled light. Now the question of course what conclusion to take from the results, they might vary wildly again

One more thing; I saw you did the test at iso100. As the native/base/standard/default iso of the Merrill sensor is supposedly iso200 this might influence the result. One of the channels could be clipped early/earlier. Something to keep in mind when making conclusions.

-- hide signature --

Bob van Ooik
V-studio
----------------------------------------------
http://vstudio-magazine.de/
http://www.x3magazine.com/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bobnl/

Hello Bob,

sure thing, you are welcome!

Ah, conclusions - well, I know what I aimed for (are the cameras' colours different?) and I know what I take out of my experiment (yes they are - and their exposure is different too). Besides that, everyone is free to take whatever they want, I  just wanted to provide the community with a service and some raw data for y'all to to interpret...

Thanks again, best

Vieri

-- hide signature --

equipment in profile
Vieri Bottazzini Fine Art Photography
http://www.vieribottazzini.com
My Newsletter:
http://eepurl.com/s1Sjb
portfolios:
http://www.madshutter.com
my blog
http://madshutter.blogspot.com
Facebook galleries:
https://www.facebook.com/vierimadshutter

 vbd70's gear list:vbd70's gear list
Panasonic LX100 Leica SL (Typ 601) Voigtlander 12mm F5.6 Ultra Wide Heliar Voigtlander 15mm F4.5 Super Wide Heliar Leica SL 24-90mm F2.8-4 +3 more
(unknown member) Contributing Member • Posts: 659
Just a couple (or more) points

vbd70 wrote:

mroy wrote:

Quote:

'To sum things up, it is clear to me that Sigma changed the colour output of the DP3 Merrill noticeably when using IN CAMERA WB and WB presets. When using CUSTOM WB in Sigma Photo Pro 5.5.1, on the other hand, the output of the three Merrills is much closer to one other: so much so that most users wouldn't notice any differences at all, and that whatever differences there are can be fixed easily enough in post-processing if one so wish.'

Not so. Your test shows the AWB behaviour of the three DPM under one defined and rather narrow condition - flash, studio, same shutter speed / aperture etc.

AWB is basically an algorithm which tries to determine the correct WB by identifying a 'neutral or white' reference point under a very large range of lighting conditions.

You can't really conclude anything from your controlled tests using flash light for other (and much more common) 'natural' lighting conditions , I'm afraid.

You mention it yourself:

'while I only tested Flash WB preset under controlled conditions, casual use of the Merrills today leads me to assume this to be a general behaviour for all presets'.

Framkly, that's a bit too much 'casual' and 'assume' for my taste - most definitely not what I would dare call the truth.

By the way:  I very much applaud the effort you have put into your tests and I actually very much like your photography - but coming from a scientific background I'm very careful when it comes to truth.

Personally, I'm looking forward to the next firmware upate of the DP2M

mroy,

indeed, the truth about the assumption I set out to prove.

My test was aimed at seeing if there were any differences between the DP1, DP2 and DP3 Merrill, not at proving anything absolute about the colour rendition of any of these three cameras.

As a scientist, you should know that one way to prove an assumption is to build a test case; I did so using Auto WB, Flash WB and Custom WB, which IMHO were enough to see whether there were in fact differences or not between the rendition of these three cameras. There are.

Indeed there are: between your three DPM and in this particular test.

Of course, it is possible that - say - under incandescent WB there are NO differences at all between the cameras, but something tells me that this is not very likely. As a scientist, you are familiar with Ockham's razor of course.

Ockham's razor, or in short: 'amongst competing hypotheses to explain a certain fact, one should favour the hypothesis which makes the fewest assumptions' is not a valid principle to determine scientific truth.

So: I proved that there are in fact differences under three different WB; my eyes (even without a thorough test), tells me that there are differences even under other WB in casual shooting - where casual means "real world", no charts - so I assume that these differences that I proved true under three particular conditions, if seen under the naked eye under other conditions, would be there under these conditions as well. More, one of the WB I used is CUSTOM WB, which should theoretically output the best results (and it does, though there are still differences).

Custom WB does not automatically output the best result - all it does is adjust WB to match the white / grey of the referent.

Not perfect science, but close enough for me; especially seeing the argument we are talking about - are the cameras in fact different - which is trivial compared to, say, the rigour one needs to test nuclear fission Relax, the colour output of the cameras IS different; I accept this, after my little experiment, and will do so unless you prove me otherwise... you, of curse, can believe whatever you want, not a problem for me.

Fair enough - especially since I only have the DP2M.

And my experience with the DP2M, since August last year and hundreds and hundreds of pictures: colours with the DP2M are not an issue at all for me.

H Bowman for instance will disagree - but that's fine. I don't claim that what I see has to be true for everybody, especially when it comes to colour.

Oh by the way, you are of course aware that it would be practically impossible to prove my starting assumption under ALL possible lights and WB combination ever present anywhere on Earth, don't you agree...? Unless you have infinite time and resources, that is.

Exactly - which is why I was pointing out the rather bold use of truth (as in 'the truth revealed').

Best,

Vieri

All in the spirit of that most elusive goal: truth

And, although I'm in danger of repeating myself: I enjoy your photography!

vbd70
OP vbd70 Veteran Member • Posts: 5,817
Re: Just a couple (or more) points

mroy wrote:

mroy,

indeed, the truth about the assumption I set out to prove.

My test was aimed at seeing if there were any differences between the DP1, DP2 and DP3 Merrill, not at proving anything absolute about the colour rendition of any of these three cameras.

As a scientist, you should know that one way to prove an assumption is to build a test case; I did so using Auto WB, Flash WB and Custom WB, which IMHO were enough to see whether there were in fact differences or not between the rendition of these three cameras. There are.

Indeed there are: between your three DPM and in this particular test.

Exactly, which I and probably the 99% of people here will take as enough proof even without testing any combination of every DP1, DP2 and DP3 on the planet under every possible conditions

Of course, it is possible that - say - under incandescent WB there are NO differences at all between the cameras, but something tells me that this is not very likely. As a scientist, you are familiar with Ockham's razor of course.

Ockham's razor, or in short: 'amongst competing hypotheses to explain a certain fact, one should favour the hypothesis which makes the fewest assumptions' is not a valid principle to determine scientific truth.

No, but when the level of certainty required is as low as what we need here, Ockham's razor helps

By the way, assuming the existence of manufacturing tolerances, even if Sigma AIMED at producing EXACTLY EQUAL cameras, that would be impossible in practice. So there, I proved my point: the colours of the DP1, DP2 and DP3 differ, even if by the slightest...

So: I proved that there are in fact differences under three different WB; my eyes (even without a thorough test), tells me that there are differences even under other WB in casual shooting - where casual means "real world", no charts - so I assume that these differences that I proved true under three particular conditions, if seen under the naked eye under other conditions, would be there under these conditions as well. More, one of the WB I used is CUSTOM WB, which should theoretically output the best results (and it does, though there are still differences).

Custom WB does not automatically output the best result - all it does is adjust WB to match the white / grey of the referent.

Saying the best results, of course, I meant the best results for the purpose of the test. But of course you knew that

Not perfect science, but close enough for me; especially seeing the argument we are talking about - are the cameras in fact different - which is trivial compared to, say, the rigour one needs to test nuclear fission Relax, the colour output of the cameras IS different; I accept this, after my little experiment, and will do so unless you prove me otherwise... you, of curse, can believe whatever you want, not a problem for me.

Fair enough - especially since I only have the DP2M.

And my experience with the DP2M, since August last year and hundreds and hundreds of pictures: colours with the DP2M are not an issue at all for me.

H Bowman for instance will disagree - but that's fine. I don't claim that what I see has to be true for everybody, especially when it comes to colour.

You see, the point of my test was exactly that: silencing a lot of the noise about this issue, and a lot of the "my eyes are better than yours" kindergarten talks. Let's say that my little experiment is more than scientific enough and produce more than enough truth when compared to that...

By the way, in a way this is all moot if you talk about absolute colour rendition, not camera-relative one as we did so far. Talking absolute colour rendition, to me the thing is very simple: with adequate PP skills, you can turn the colours of any file pretty much any way you please. Certain cameras make it easier to get from A to B than others, but if you can drive, you will get there eventually.

Oh by the way, you are of course aware that it would be practically impossible to prove my starting assumption under ALL possible lights and WB combination ever present anywhere on Earth, don't you agree...? Unless you have infinite time and resources, that is.

Exactly - which is why I was pointing out the rather bold use of truth (as in 'the truth revealed').

Ah now we are talking philosophy, not science. But let's get back to science: let's say that I state the truth IS that the DP1, DP2 and DP3 Merrill output different colours under same shooting conditions. Just prove me wrong: it's way easier for you to find that one case that disproves the theory, than it is for me to prove it valid in all cases, so you shall thank me, you have the easy job

Best,

Vieri

All in the spirit of that most elusive goal: truth

And in the spirit of intellectual exchanges, which I find a lot more stimulating than truth - which, unless we agree on the meaning of the word first, doesn't even exist as a quantity per se.

And, although I'm in danger of repeating myself: I enjoy your photography!

Hey, thank you so very much! At the end, this is all that matters...

Best,

Vieri

-- hide signature --

equipment in profile
Vieri Bottazzini Fine Art Photography
http://www.vieribottazzini.com
My Newsletter:
http://eepurl.com/s1Sjb
portfolios:
http://www.madshutter.com
my blog
http://madshutter.blogspot.com
Facebook galleries:
https://www.facebook.com/vierimadshutter

 vbd70's gear list:vbd70's gear list
Panasonic LX100 Leica SL (Typ 601) Voigtlander 12mm F5.6 Ultra Wide Heliar Voigtlander 15mm F4.5 Super Wide Heliar Leica SL 24-90mm F2.8-4 +3 more
(unknown member) Contributing Member • Posts: 659
One last point and one more remark

vbd70 wrote:

mroy wrote:

mroy,

indeed, the truth about the assumption I set out to prove.

My test was aimed at seeing if there were any differences between the DP1, DP2 and DP3 Merrill, not at proving anything absolute about the colour rendition of any of these three cameras.

As a scientist, you should know that one way to prove an assumption is to build a test case; I did so using Auto WB, Flash WB and Custom WB, which IMHO were enough to see whether there were in fact differences or not between the rendition of these three cameras. There are.

Indeed there are: between your three DPM and in this particular test.

Exactly, which I and probably the 99% of people here will take as enough proof even without testing any combination of every DP1, DP2 and DP3 on the planet under every possible conditions

Of course, it is possible that - say - under incandescent WB there are NO differences at all between the cameras, but something tells me that this is not very likely. As a scientist, you are familiar with Ockham's razor of course.

Ockham's razor, or in short: 'amongst competing hypotheses to explain a certain fact, one should favour the hypothesis which makes the fewest assumptions' is not a valid principle to determine scientific truth.

No, but when the level of certainty required is as low as what we need here, Ockham's razor helps

By the way, assuming the existence of manufacturing tolerances, even if Sigma AIMED at producing EXACTLY EQUAL cameras, that would be impossible in practice. So there, I proved my point: the colours of the DP1, DP2 and DP3 differ, even if by the slightest...

That's a very good point: tolerances.

Manufacturing tolerances, appreciation tolerances, colour perception tolerances - I could go on.

So: I proved that there are in fact differences under three different WB; my eyes (even without a thorough test), tells me that there are differences even under other WB in casual shooting - where casual means "real world", no charts - so I assume that these differences that I proved true under three particular conditions, if seen under the naked eye under other conditions, would be there under these conditions as well. More, one of the WB I used is CUSTOM WB, which should theoretically output the best results (and it does, though there are still differences).

Custom WB does not automatically output the best result - all it does is adjust WB to match the white / grey of the referent.

Saying the best results, of course, I meant the best results for the purpose of the test. But of course you knew that

Not perfect science, but close enough for me; especially seeing the argument we are talking about - are the cameras in fact different - which is trivial compared to, say, the rigour one needs to test nuclear fission Relax, the colour output of the cameras IS different; I accept this, after my little experiment, and will do so unless you prove me otherwise... you, of curse, can believe whatever you want, not a problem for me.

Fair enough - especially since I only have the DP2M.

And my experience with the DP2M, since August last year and hundreds and hundreds of pictures: colours with the DP2M are not an issue at all for me.

H Bowman for instance will disagree - but that's fine. I don't claim that what I see has to be true for everybody, especially when it comes to colour.

You see, the point of my test was exactly that: silencing a lot of the noise about this issue, and a lot of the "my eyes are better than yours" kindergarten talks. Let's say that my little experiment is more than scientific enough and produce more than enough truth when compared to that...

I couldn't agree more:

By the way, in a way this is all moot if you talk about absolute colour rendition, not camera-relative one as we did so far. Talking absolute colour rendition, to me the thing is very simple: with adequate PP skills, you can turn the colours of any file pretty much any way you please. Certain cameras make it easier to get from A to B than others, but if you can drive, you will get there eventually.

Oh by the way, you are of course aware that it would be practically impossible to prove my starting assumption under ALL possible lights and WB combination ever present anywhere on Earth, don't you agree...? Unless you have infinite time and resources, that is.

Exactly - which is why I was pointing out the rather bold use of truth (as in 'the truth revealed').

Ah now we are talking philosophy, not science. But let's get back to science: let's say that I state the truth IS that the DP1, DP2 and DP3 Merrill output different colours under same shooting conditions. Just prove me wrong: it's way easier for you to find that one case that disproves the theory, than it is for me to prove it valid in all cases, so you shall thank me, you have the easy job

Best,

Vieri

All in the spirit of that most elusive goal: truth

And in the spirit of intellectual exchanges, which I find a lot more stimulating than truth - which, unless we agree on the meaning of the word first, doesn't even exist as a quantity per se.

And, although I'm in danger of repeating myself: I enjoy your photography!

Hey, thank you so very much! At the end, this is all that matters...

Best,

Vieri

Cheers

Michael

vbd70
OP vbd70 Veteran Member • Posts: 5,817
Re: One last point and one more remark

mroy wrote:

That's a very good point: tolerances.

Manufacturing tolerances, appreciation tolerances, colour perception tolerances - I could go on.

...tolerance on the fora is the only thing missing here

So: I proved that there are in fact differences under three different WB; my eyes (even without a thorough test), tells me that there are differences even under other WB in casual shooting - where casual means "real world", no charts - so I assume that these differences that I proved true under three particular conditions, if seen under the naked eye under other conditions, would be there under these conditions as well. More, one of the WB I used is CUSTOM WB, which should theoretically output the best results (and it does, though there are still differences).

Custom WB does not automatically output the best result - all it does is adjust WB to match the white / grey of the referent.

Saying the best results, of course, I meant the best results for the purpose of the test. But of course you knew that

Not perfect science, but close enough for me; especially seeing the argument we are talking about - are the cameras in fact different - which is trivial compared to, say, the rigour one needs to test nuclear fission Relax, the colour output of the cameras IS different; I accept this, after my little experiment, and will do so unless you prove me otherwise... you, of curse, can believe whatever you want, not a problem for me.

Fair enough - especially since I only have the DP2M.

And my experience with the DP2M, since August last year and hundreds and hundreds of pictures: colours with the DP2M are not an issue at all for me.

H Bowman for instance will disagree - but that's fine. I don't claim that what I see has to be true for everybody, especially when it comes to colour.

You see, the point of my test was exactly that: silencing a lot of the noise about this issue, and a lot of the "my eyes are better than yours" kindergarten talks. Let's say that my little experiment is more than scientific enough and produce more than enough truth when compared to that...

I couldn't agree more:

By the way, in a way this is all moot if you talk about absolute colour rendition, not camera-relative one as we did so far. Talking absolute colour rendition, to me the thing is very simple: with adequate PP skills, you can turn the colours of any file pretty much any way you please. Certain cameras make it easier to get from A to B than others, but if you can drive, you will get there eventually.

Oh by the way, you are of course aware that it would be practically impossible to prove my starting assumption under ALL possible lights and WB combination ever present anywhere on Earth, don't you agree...? Unless you have infinite time and resources, that is.

Exactly - which is why I was pointing out the rather bold use of truth (as in 'the truth revealed').

Ah now we are talking philosophy, not science. But let's get back to science: let's say that I state the truth IS that the DP1, DP2 and DP3 Merrill output different colours under same shooting conditions. Just prove me wrong: it's way easier for you to find that one case that disproves the theory, than it is for me to prove it valid in all cases, so you shall thank me, you have the easy job

Best,

Vieri

All in the spirit of that most elusive goal: truth

And in the spirit of intellectual exchanges, which I find a lot more stimulating than truth - which, unless we agree on the meaning of the word first, doesn't even exist as a quantity per se.

And, although I'm in danger of repeating myself: I enjoy your photography!

Hey, thank you so very much! At the end, this is all that matters...

Best,

Vieri

Cheers

Michael

Cheers,

Vieri

-- hide signature --

equipment in profile
Vieri Bottazzini Fine Art Photography
http://www.vieribottazzini.com
My Newsletter:
http://eepurl.com/s1Sjb
portfolios:
http://www.madshutter.com
my blog
http://madshutter.blogspot.com
Facebook galleries:
https://www.facebook.com/vierimadshutter

 vbd70's gear list:vbd70's gear list
Panasonic LX100 Leica SL (Typ 601) Voigtlander 12mm F5.6 Ultra Wide Heliar Voigtlander 15mm F4.5 Super Wide Heliar Leica SL 24-90mm F2.8-4 +3 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads