Redness in faces help

[Sivadi]

Really you need a faster lens, find a closer position where you can use an 85mm 1.4 equivalent (2 stops), and a full frame sensor (another 2 stops) to collect more colour data in the camera up so you have more dynamic range to work with.

I've seen a lot of stupid reasons given as to why full frame is better, but telling someone they need a full frame sensor to collect more colour data to correct redness in faces is by far the most stupid reason I've seen yet.

It’s not just the face, the reds are blocking up in the jacket as well. The whole look of the image is what you get when there’s not enough bit depth, stretched to far.

 

[TTphotos]

The OM-1 picture modes are more saturated compared to the Adobe profiles. I like Natural, not because it's in anyway natural but I like the colours. The OM-1 Natural is more like Adobe Vivid. Try Muted or even Portrait for your case.

I didn't read through the entire string, but my guess is a color profile other than Natural is being used. The photos look like Vivid was used .... and maybe Keep Warm Color is still turned on.

It's certain that Vivid picture mode would oversaturate skin tones, but I've found the Natural mode is still not really appropriate and still too red and contrasty for people, just like what OP has found. This why they made Portrait picture mode available in the camera.

 

[Bobapingu]

The OM-1 picture modes are more saturated compared to the Adobe profiles. I like Natural, not because it's in anyway natural but I like the colours. The OM-1 Natural is more like Adobe Vivid. Try Muted or even Portrait for your case.

I didn't read through the entire string, but my guess is a color profile other than Natural is being used. The photos look like Vivid was used .... and maybe Keep Warm Color is still turned on.

It's certain that Vivid picture mode would oversaturate skin tones, but I've found the Natural mode is still not really appropriate and still too red and contrasty for people, just like what OP has found. This why they made Portrait picture mode available in the camera.

I never use i-Enhance but just yesterday I used it for a flower shot that I wanted to look impressive. The palm of my hand was in shot. It looked remarkably red. I wonder if the OP used i-Enhance or Vivid?

 

[Photongraphy]

These pictures have very saturated colors, that can be changed in different ways: in-camera profile, pp-tweaks, and maybe changing color space to sRGB to prevent display-errors. All these options can be fit in OPs tight workflow to make things look more natural (and better to my personal taste).

But the elephant in the room is: the camera didn't make up the reds in the jockey's faces. They were there. The client doesn't like it (and I can see why), but no setting or other camera will make them go away. Only careful retouching in post can solve this.

 

[Jaded Snapper]

It certainly looks like sorting the the profiling would be a quick fix of most of the problem. However…

Taking a photo, then throwing away most of the captured data (using jpg instead of RAW as the base to start from), and using blunderbuss editing of the image (editing the whole, rather than the problematic parts) will result in compromises. I’d suggest having a look at the workflow and seeing if RAW and some kind of AI enhanced selection of problem areas could be incorporated. Nowadays computers are powerful enough to be pretty quick on RAW files.

 

[knickerhawk]

My workflow is very straight forward. Because of time constants I have to shoot jpeg. I just take it into photoshop 2024, adjust exposure and sometimes shadows if needed, sometimes a little tweek in the sharpness and that's it. I have 15 mins max after each race to select an image, add titles, print a3 and then mount and frame. After that pick two more images, resize all of them. then send them out via ftp and what's app.

Simply you’re running up against physics, at ISO 640 you’ve only got 8 stops of dynamic range to work with on those M43 sensors to capture a 16 stop scene. This looks like there’s not enough data being collected on the red spectrum because it’s a cloudy blue day and it’s being stretched and blocking up.

Really you need a faster lens, find a closer position where you can use an 85mm 1.4 equivalent (2 stops), and a full frame sensor (another 2 stops) to collect more colour data in the camera up so you have more dynamic range to work with. Remember if you can get 4 stops, that 16 times the amount of colour information. Then the tone curves on the colour channels will be smoother and not block up.

There's a lot wrong with your explanation, but a picture is better than a 1000 words (or in your case, a couple of paragraphs). Below I've overlaid crops from the SOOC JPEGs from the OM1 DPR Studio Scene. The outside parts of the color patches are from the ISO 200 JPEG, the circles inside the color patches are from the ISO 3200 JPEG. The only thing I've done is added a really tiny curve adjustment to equalize lightness between the two, so that we're looking at the color differences you assert must be there and inevitable because of, well..."physics".


OM1 JPEGs from DPR Studio Scene. Outside part of patches=ISO 200 shot; Inside circles=ISO 3200 shot

The difference in noise (which, indeed, has a lot to do with "physics") can be detected, but where are the color differences that you claim must flow from the lowered DR, reduced "color data," etc.???

But let's not stop there. Maybe it's really all about the sensor size disadvantage of the OM1 vs fullframe solutions you indicate will prevent the color clipping visible in the OP's shots. And let's really disadvantage the OM1 by comparing the OM1 at ISO 800 vs the fullframe competition at ISO 100. Surely "physics" will dictate a huge difference in color rendering of the reds, right??? Check it out:

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/im...1&x=-0.04048165630161083&y=0.6674152928188222

 

[embie2]

So ? He blushes during a strenuous exercise, what's the problem ?

If it was blue...than (he) would have a problem ;-)

IMO (!) , if you hadn't mention this, nobody would have made a problem of this.

And, my experience says...red is a damn difficult colour in digital photography.

Like this shot a lot !

 

[Regor250]

Truth be told, the OP has a wee bit of a GAS outbreak I think. His gear list includes Fuji X-H2S, X-H2, G9ii, OM-1ii and is in the process of getting a Z8, which of course will solve all his color issues. This is one way to justify buying into the new system I suppose. Whatever makes him happy, life is short don't need justification, money will do, but I don't think he was seeking an actual solution (contrary to what he asked) but rather is seeking a re-affirmation of his intent stated in another thread. What he wants to hear is you should try Nikon, it handles reds much better, there you go I said it. I wish the OP success in his quest to find a system that he likes, sincerely.

--
Roger

 

[Sivadi]

I never use i-Enhance but just yesterday I used it for a flower shot that I wanted to look impressive. The palm of my hand was in shot. It looked remarkably red. I wonder if the OP used i-Enhance or Vivid?

I-enhance is wildly unpredictable. It increases saturation of certain colours only when it sees a high enough percentage of them in the frame. So, you can take a shot and get one result, then adjust your framing slightly so there is more or less of a certain colour in the frame, and you will get a different result.