Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] Shadow color shifts [was5D II pattern noise problem]

Subject: Re: [OM] Shadow color shifts [was5D II pattern noise problem]
From: "C.H.Ling" <ch_photo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2009 20:56:53 +0800
As I have mentioned different people has different acceptance standard and 
it related to how they use their camera. BTW, I don't see any problem in 
color accuracy when pushing with DPP, the problem is I can't do it with 5D 
II at low ISO due to pattern noise. I don't see ACR provide better color but 
I use "Faithful" instead of "Standard" Canyon color mode.

C.H.Ling

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Moose"

My conclusions?

1. It's foolish to expect recovered shadows to be as color and luminance
accurate as if they were mid-tones. The technology just doesn't support
it. HDR image file formats use floating point decimal numbers. If future
cameras adopt a floating point RAW format, this would be different. For
now, we have to develop shooting techniques to accommodate these
limitations of our cameras to our photographic purposes.

2. There probably isn't a programming error in ACR. It just doesn't know
as much about particular sensor systems as do the manufacturers.

3. I may try using DPP for images where I care about color accuracy and
must pull shadows up a lot. On the other hand, the default color results
I get from ACR on normal 5D RAW files look more color accurate to me
than the defaults from DPP and ACR gives me more and more useful
controls. So I'll stick with ACR for most work.

Remember, most of my shooting is of natural subjects, where there is no
absolute measure of color accuracy. In many cases, the shadows in the
subject are dark enough that my own eyes are running mostly on B&W
cones, so even if I had perfect color memory, I might not know what
color those shadows 'really' were.

4. While all this is interesting to me in a theoretical way and I've
learned a lot that may help inform my image creation and processing, I
don't see how it has had a practical effect on the vast majority of the
images I've processed. Even where it may have, I'm not sure how I could
tell.

So I take a sunset shot with underexposed foreground, pull it up and get
some magenta shift. There's a lot of magenta in the shadow areas of
sunset scenes as I see them with my eyes. How can I tell the difference?
Why should I care? If it looks right to eyes that have seen many
thousands of sunsets, why worry? It it looks too magenta, I can just
pull magenta saturation down a bit. There really is no absolute in most
photographs.

Moose

-- 
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz