Is camera calibration still a thing?

[nvmnmghia]

I see some guides use Adobe DNG Profile Editor to create a profile for a camera:

- Shot a ColorChecker at sunlight in RAW

- Feed the image to the software, then it creates a Camera Raw Profile for the sensor

- Later, the profile should be applied for ALL images taken with the camera, regardless of the light condition

From what I know, this profile is DCP, and is different from the XMP profile aka "preset".

Is this method valid, and still used today? If not, what is the preferred way to calibrate? I doubt it because the software hasn't received any update since 2012.

 

[Tom Axford]

I see some guides use Adobe DNG Profile Editor to create a profile for a camera:

- Shot a ColorChecker at sunlight in RAW

- Feed the image to the software, then it creates a Camera Raw Profile for the sensor

- Later, the profile should be applied for ALL images taken with the camera, regardless of the light condition

From what I know, this profile is DCP, and is different from the XMP profile aka "preset".

Is this method valid, and still used today? If not, what is the preferred way to calibrate? I doubt it because the software hasn't received any update since 2012.

This is not something a beginner (or, for that matter, the very great majority of photographers) needs to worry about.

If you want a technical discussion of this subject, try asking in the Photographic Science and Technology forum.

 

[D Cox]

I use dcp profiles made with the program for the Color Checker. A very straightforward process.

Recently I've been re-processing the raw files that I shot ten years ago with the NEX-5N. The improvement in colour quality is considerable.

I also use profiles for my current cameras. The difference here is less -- I think manufacturers' profiles are better now than they were ten years ago.

But I'm still keeping the raw files in case I want to re-visit some in another ten years.

I'm not sure which programs can accept profiles when converting raw files. Adobe Camera Raw is the obvious one, but there are others.

Don Cox

 

[nvmnmghia]

I use dcp profiles made with the program for the Color Checker. A very straightforward process.

Recently I've been re-processing the raw files that I shot ten years ago with the NEX-5N. The improvement in colour quality is considerable.

I also use profiles for my current cameras. The difference here is less -- I think manufacturers' profiles are better now than they were ten years ago.

But I'm still keeping the raw files in case I want to re-visit some in another ten years.

I'm not sure which programs can accept profiles when converting raw files. Adobe Camera Raw is the obvious one, but there are others.

Don Cox

What is "the program" you mentioned, Camera Raw or DNG Profile Editor?

When you revisit a RAW file you shot from earlier, I think the improvement is more related to the algorithm (demosaicing) of ACR, and less related to DNG Profile Creator.

 

[lehill]

I see some guides use Adobe DNG Profile Editor to create a profile for a camera:

I only scanned through the Adobe DNG Profile Editor instructions. It looks like it can modify an existing DNG Color Profile (DCP file) and save it with a different name. ColorChecker creates a DCP file from scratch using an image of the ColorChecker color patches.

- Shot a ColorChecker at sunlight in RAW

- Feed the image to the software, then it creates a Camera Raw Profile for the sensor

- Later, the profile should be applied for ALL images taken with the camera, regardless of the light condition

I don't think the above is correct. The manual for the ColorChecker Camera Calibration software says:

"Photographing a ColorChecker Classic is the first step in attaining consistent, predictable color. Photograph it in the same lighting as your images; then open it in your photo processing software for a built-in point of color reference to help with color correction. With the included ColorChecker Passport application, you can also build DNG profiles for Lightroom, Photoshop and Photoshop Elements."
[Emphasis is mine]

The ColorChecker software can also create something called a Dual Illuminate DNG profile that uses two images of the ColorChecker taken under two different lighting sources (eg, direct sunlight or tungsten). I've never tried it. The manual says:

"For example, if you’re a wedding photographer who regularly photographs events in the big church downtown, you can create a profile that includes the lighting in the church, plus daylight conditions in the garden outside. This adaptive profile will work well in both settings, as well as a variety of other lighting conditions, so you can concentrate on getting fabulous photos of the wedding couple."

The manual is not clear what "...as well as a variety of other lighting conditions..." means.

From what I know, this profile is DCP, and is different from the XMP profile aka "preset".

In Adobe Camera Raw, the Adobe Standard, Camera Standard, Camera Neutral and other camera profiles are also DCP files that Adobe has created for a particular camera for the convenience of the user. AFAIK, these profiles are supposed to match the Creative Style/Picture Control/Picture Styles/etc settings in your camera.

Is this method valid, and still used today? If not, what is the preferred way to calibrate? I doubt it because the software hasn't received any update since 2012.

I'm imagining things like the ColorChecker are very important for color consistency in big shoots/video productions where many different cameras and lenses are in use.

For us "normal folks", of course, it's just as valid as Adobe creating "Adobe Standard" DCP files for our cameras. It doesn't seem like very many normal folks use a ColorChecker or even know about it. I had a US$100 credit at a camera store so I bought one. I use it because it makes my photos look pretty and saves me time in post-processing. I don't have to fool around with color adjustments so much.

--
Lance H

 

[robgendreau]

I see some guides use Adobe DNG Profile Editor to create a profile for a camera:

- Shot a ColorChecker at sunlight in RAW

- Feed the image to the software, then it creates a Camera Raw Profile for the sensor

- Later, the profile should be applied for ALL images taken with the camera, regardless of the light condition

As others have explained, that's not necessarily so. See the dual illuminant description. And you may want to use a different profile. Accurate color isn't always what we want; maybe monochrome, maybe the camera's Vivid, etc. I use LrC to set mine by default, but that's just a starting point

From what I know, this profile is DCP, and is different from the XMP profile aka "preset".

A profile is not a preset. A preset can contain a profile, but they are different. Adobe has some built in ones for all images, some designed to look like your camera manufacturer's profiles. And this isn't the only type of profile; others are created from LUTs for example.

Is this method valid, and still used today? If not, what is the preferred way to calibrate? I doubt it because the software hasn't received any update since 2012.

Yes it's valid. Yes it's used. Whether you need it, hard to say. I have used some cameras where the corrections are quite large; others where the difference is insignificant. If you do product photography, might be essential to use them. Street monochrome, not so much.

And BTW, Xrite's software is at version 2.2.0, released in Sept 2020. You're probably referring to Adobe's software (yeah, many wish they'd update that. But I rarely use it; the Xrite software and using it with Lr or Ps is just so much easier and quicker.

 

[Mark S Abeln]

I see some guides use Adobe DNG Profile Editor to create a profile for a camera:

- Shot a ColorChecker at sunlight in RAW

- Feed the image to the software, then it creates a Camera Raw Profile for the sensor

- Later, the profile should be applied for ALL images taken with the camera, regardless of the light condition

From what I know, this profile is DCP, and is different from the XMP profile aka "preset".

Is this method valid, and still used today? If not, what is the preferred way to calibrate? I doubt it because the software hasn't received any update since 2012.

Yes, camera calibration is still a thing. Every new camera must be calibrated by the manufacturer and by raw processor makers.

But this is not really a *camera* calibration, but rather a calibration of a camera with specific light sources. Every light source leads to a different calibration with each camera.

However, light sources that approximate a black body radiation profile—which includes sunlight, skylight, incandescent lights, and even flashes—all have similar calibrations, and so you just need two widely-separated black body sources, like incandescent and skylight, to get a good calibration for all intermediate sources.

I wouldn't bother with calibrating daylight, but what's really important, if you want good color, is to calibrate those light sources which have non-flat spectra, such as LED lights and gas discharge lamps such as fluorescent bulbs.

The company that makes the ColorChecker has up-to-date software, if you so desire:

https://www.xrite.com/service-support/downloads/c/colorchecker_camera_calibration_v2_2_0

This is a free and open source calibrator, which is considerably more powerful:

http://www.argyllcms.com

And there are paid apps as well. However, really good profiles don't necessarily use a ColorChecker target, but instead allow you to use a wider variety of actual color samples, but you need a colorimeter to measure the values; if you do use a ColorChecker, it helps of you actually measure the colors of the squares with a colorimeter.

The best profiles are made by spectrometry, but this is rather involved, difficult, and potentially expensive.

One practical note: if you don't manually apply a neutral white balance to your photos, then the quality of the profile doesn't matter.

--
http://therefractedlight.blogspot.com