Here is what it's looks like converted with a matrix only color profile, then exported to sRGB:
View attachment d2e75f53ce6d459cae447c04b496b8dc.jpg
With color patches (from 11*11px average):
View attachment 04e3f9975636407ea40e0a24d3f4a98e.jpg
link to full resolution :
https://ibb.co/JkYpfLy
Do that again and put in the Lab values.
Here it is:
https://ibb.co/7tP6Tkq
The hue angle shifts in the darker of the skin sample pairs are towards yellow, not green.
That could be due to the lighting. I don't find them offensive. Are you sure you're color-normal?
Jim
Not affended at all.
My professional activities include training, with a vast majority of male worker, so this is something I'm precautious with.
(When you realize your trainee cannot read your graph...
)
Yup.
Yes, I'm am color normal. I was checked several times, including for my former work, it was mandatory for some of my activities.
In this particular example, it may be the lighting. Too many unknowns.
Like I said, this example is used as an illustration only.
The reason I asked is that I would not consider the darker skin samples to be greenish, and it they don't measure greenish. In fact, they are within the range of hue angles that I measured with my i1Pro3:
What is puzzling me is that I noticed such shift in a vast majority of my shots. With direct sunlight, in the shadow, in extrior, in interior, with flash...
No problem!
What I dislike the most in this illustration and looks like what I get in many, many, of my shots is the color variations in the area around her mouth. Especially the small area below her inferior lips.
In that particular example, it may be lighting, light reflexion on something in the scene...who knows!
But I get similar things very often, including shots taken in a quite color neutral environment.
For exemple, I shot the baptism of my niece. The civil ceremony was in interior, white walls, white ceiling, grey floor, white furniture. The lighting was natural light, cloudy day, through large bay windows. People were wearing white, black, blue, etc. I will focus on people wearing neutrals. With them, I have that kind of shift on their skin.
Also, to make things clear: what I find 'unatural' is the variation of color. Should the overall color be 'too red', 'too green', 'too yellow' or whatsoever, that would very easy to fix. No matter if it's 'accurate' or not, that's a matter of 'preferred colors' here for me. I'm sure there are skin tones with similar hues to the 'shadow' areas on my illustration, like your bring evidence of.
But if we go back to less subjective things, Lumariver says the patch F2 and E8 ar 'off' compared to other skin tones patches in terms of hue. The software gives LCh errors. Before correction by LUT, F2 is off by about -1.7° and E8 by about -2.5°. On the other hand, I8 is off by about +0.7°. I don't know if this is significant or not. If this can be cause by target error or operator error, or not. You feedback on this would be welcome!
What I can say is that I reshot the target many times under daylight, with different configurations (direct sunlight, shadow and cloudy day), with 'Model color inconcistency' checked when applicable. The reading are very, very close from one shot to another. Only a few tenth of degree of difference, if any.
I also shot the target under halogen
avec les moyens du bord. So just at home with halogen buld (rated for 2700K) on the ceiling. I surrounded the target with panels covered by dark grey blanket, as well as the floor and some furniture (the well and ceiling are white) to prevent indesirable reflections...
I get the same thing, but exacerbated a lot.
F2 hue read -3.5° off for example. E8 -4.5°. On he other hand, I8 reads +0.5°.
None of the CCSG patches matches my children skin complexion. Compared to F2 patch for example, their skin is more on the yellow side, less saturated and much more lighter.
