Adobe Lightroom Beta with reddish color cast?

[zetablues]

Hi all!
Loaded the same untouched ERF-file into Lightroom (left) and into Epson RAW-Plugin PS CS2 (right):
Click me!
Any ideas?
Thx

 

[jlw]

You usually get somewhat different results when converting the same file with ANY two raw-conversion programs, because they have different defaults.

If you don't like Lightroom's conversions, what you may want to do is switch to the Develop pane and scroll down the palette stack until you get to Camera Calibration (the last one.) This will give you access to some sliders you can use to fine-tune the conversion. Presumably the intent is that eventually you'll be able to save your own settings as a profile, the way you can in Adobe Camera Raw, but that feature appears to be among the missing ones from the Lightroom beta (and remember, it IS a beta!) so far.

 

[sockdaddy]

wow, those are quite a bit different in color, aren't they?

this probably has something to do with the Beta nature of Lightroom. it may not be using the same interpretation of the RAW files... what happens when you color correct and/or adjust levels, etc.?

 

[tetrisattack]

It could be that the software just sucks at converting (relatively obscure) Epson raw files, but I'm willing to bet that it's a color space issue. One of the programs might be respecting the color profile of your monitor, the other using its own. I'd poke around in the adobe software and see if you can choose the working color profile.

 

[zetablues]

Thanks to all!
First of all I thougt that I have to adjust the color management of Lightroom, but there aren't those settings in the program.
Ok, also I can adjust the camera calibration in Lightroom to match the view in Epson RAW-plugin. But both programs should show the same "view" at default settings? Ok, Lightroom is Beta. I think the RAW-plugin by the original developer and manufacturer of the in camera processing software is the reference, isn't it? But Lightroom suits me ("poor man's aperture" - Beta version), so I have to adjust the camera calibration once.
Thanks again

 

[jlw]

But both programs should show the same "view" at default settings?

Not necessarily. The whole point of raw formats is that the raw file is a "digital negative" that can be "printed" in different ways depending on how you want your photo to look.

Different labs, or different human printers, might interpret how to print your negative in different ways, depending on what they think will look best; for example, in color printing it's almost impossible to both flesh tones and neutral gray tones to be exactly correct, so one printer might try to get the gray tones perfectly neutral while letting the skin tones drift a bit, while another might go for appealing-looking skin tones even if it meant having a bit of color cast in the grays. Neither approach is "wrong," it's just a question of which matches your intentions.

Likewise, the same raw file can be converted in various ways. The different software manufacturers choose their default settings based on what they think makes a good pictures, but this is very much a matter of taste and no two photographers will make exactly the same choice! This is why it's good to be able to make your own calibrations and save them as presets.

I think the RAW-plugin by the original developer and manufacturer of the in camera processing software is the reference, isn't it?

Only if that's what you like. But they also provide lots of conversion controls in the raw plug-in, so that you will have lots of options to make it work the way you want.

 

[zetablues]

jlw, you're right, this "philosophy" is logic.
Absolutely seen the digital "negativ" is b/w (the sensor cannot "see" colors).
Everything else are demosaicing (one red, two greens for the human eye, one blue), color interpolating ... and the taste of the photographer ...
...
My taste is: white clouds in the blue sky around noon are "white" 😉
So I'm preferring Epson RAW-plugin resp. accordingly have to adjust Lightroom.
Cheers

 

[zetablues]

All-Clear!

All-Clear!

I figured the following out:

BOTH programs have the correct/same color calibration.

Lightroom "just" has a little "Beta bug" (?) -> it indicates different WB values "as shot".
Huh?

So I have not much to fiddle around color settings, tone curves etc., only have to equal the numerical WB values to get exactly matching views of the pic in both programs.
🙂

Thanks again to all!
Cheers

 

[jlw]

Good catch! Be sure to report it on the Lightroom bug-reports forum (there's a link under the application's Help menu.)

 

[zetablues]

Thx, jlw!
Also I figured out:
Lightroom indicates weird WB values. Plus: generally the "as shot" and "auto" WB values there are identical.
Look at the pics:

Lightroom WB as shot
Lightroom WB auto
Epson RAW-Plugin WB as shot
Epson RAW-Plugin WB auto

It seems that Lightroom cannot handle the ERF-files correctly.
I think this isn't - as I said - just a "little" bug.
Regards

edit:
It seems that Lightroom "identifies" the yellow leaves as tungsten lightsource?