celluloidprop
Well-known
too long a title - the full parenthetical is (or why am I so bad at color in LR4)
Downloaded RPP tonight after looking at another thread and seeing its K64 simulation - I've never understood why Color Efex Pro and LR presets make Kodachrome so bleeding garish. RPP appears to be the only software that gets the Kodachrome look right in my mind - rich, but far from saturated-beyond-Velvia.
I've always had trouble with color in Lightroom - especially in 4 where changing the curve from linear to medium contrast makes a huge change. I got Color Efex Pro 4 because monkeying with some of the contrast and film profiles has gotten me closer to what I want. But I still generally found (particularly with X100 files) that images were either way too rich and contrasty or they appeared to have a fog over them.
So, on to the image - X100 @ 800 ISO of my housemate looking annoyed that I have the camera out again. I've reworked this a number of times because I love the expression on her face.
So, first: LR4 with only slight sharpening and lens profile correction, into Color Efex Pro with Provia 100, soft contrast and pro contrast monkeyed with. It's still too warm, I think, but it gets cool too fast:
LR4 into Color Efex Pro by celluloidpropaganda, on Flickr
Second: RAF file opened with RPP, I let it take care of exposure, sharpness was at 12 and local contrast at 5-10 (just ballparking with these numbers, I couldn't find much info on the sharpness and contrast sliders), K64 profile plus 20 saturation. This gets much closer to what I think of when I think Kodachrome people photography, ala post-war fashion. Flattering for skin tones, colors are excellent without being grayed out or harsh.
RPP K64 by celluloidpropaganda, on Flickr
Third: RAF file as above, but then I imported to LR4 and into Color Efex Pro - monkeyed again with soft contrast and pro contrast functions, and the Provia 100 film simulation with opacity down to ~25 just to warm it up a hair (which is odd, I know, Provia for warming a file up).
This gets much closer to what I've been trying to find in the original file.
RPP K64 + Color Efex Pro 4 by celluloidpropaganda, on Flickr
I guess I'm wondering if I'm doomed to going LR4>RPP>Color Efex Pro for color files that really make me happy, or if I'm just missing out on something in Lightroom that would get me in the ballpark easier.
Downloaded RPP tonight after looking at another thread and seeing its K64 simulation - I've never understood why Color Efex Pro and LR presets make Kodachrome so bleeding garish. RPP appears to be the only software that gets the Kodachrome look right in my mind - rich, but far from saturated-beyond-Velvia.
I've always had trouble with color in Lightroom - especially in 4 where changing the curve from linear to medium contrast makes a huge change. I got Color Efex Pro 4 because monkeying with some of the contrast and film profiles has gotten me closer to what I want. But I still generally found (particularly with X100 files) that images were either way too rich and contrasty or they appeared to have a fog over them.
So, on to the image - X100 @ 800 ISO of my housemate looking annoyed that I have the camera out again. I've reworked this a number of times because I love the expression on her face.
So, first: LR4 with only slight sharpening and lens profile correction, into Color Efex Pro with Provia 100, soft contrast and pro contrast monkeyed with. It's still too warm, I think, but it gets cool too fast:
LR4 into Color Efex Pro by celluloidpropaganda, on Flickr
Second: RAF file opened with RPP, I let it take care of exposure, sharpness was at 12 and local contrast at 5-10 (just ballparking with these numbers, I couldn't find much info on the sharpness and contrast sliders), K64 profile plus 20 saturation. This gets much closer to what I think of when I think Kodachrome people photography, ala post-war fashion. Flattering for skin tones, colors are excellent without being grayed out or harsh.
RPP K64 by celluloidpropaganda, on Flickr
Third: RAF file as above, but then I imported to LR4 and into Color Efex Pro - monkeyed again with soft contrast and pro contrast functions, and the Provia 100 film simulation with opacity down to ~25 just to warm it up a hair (which is odd, I know, Provia for warming a file up).
This gets much closer to what I've been trying to find in the original file.
RPP K64 + Color Efex Pro 4 by celluloidpropaganda, on Flickr
I guess I'm wondering if I'm doomed to going LR4>RPP>Color Efex Pro for color files that really make me happy, or if I'm just missing out on something in Lightroom that would get me in the ballpark easier.
noimmunity
scratch my niche
In RPP, try upping the local contrast to 15, and adding +0.02 in the cold/warm filter.
Note that RPP is a converter, not a full-fledged processing software. For many photos (out of the M8), RPP will be enough, but it is quite normal to have to go through an additional stage after RPP.
BTW, I too love the RPP K64 simulation, perfect for files from the M8.
Note that RPP is a converter, not a full-fledged processing software. For many photos (out of the M8), RPP will be enough, but it is quite normal to have to go through an additional stage after RPP.
BTW, I too love the RPP K64 simulation, perfect for files from the M8.
healyzh
Well-known
Not what you want to hear, but give "Capture One" from "Phase One" a try. I'm finally getting colour images from my Nikon D300 that I'm happy with, and the images from my Leica M9 are even better than with Adobe Camera RAW.
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
I don't think there's one 'best' raw processor. I've found some cameras do better with one, some with another.
The Nikon D70 did best with Capture One. Nikon Capture gave good color but was not as good as C1, and was a pain to use. Adobe software was ok, but not great, especially for skintones.
The Kodak 14n did best with Adobe Camera Raw (LR wasn't made when I had the 14n). C1 doesn't support this camera, and Kodak's raw converter was HORRID. Terrible image quality. Adobe did very well though.
The Canon 5DmkII that I now use works great with Adobe Lightroom or Photoshop. Canon's raw software gives good image quality but is a pain to use, and C1 doesn't give as good of quality as Adobe's software for this camera, in my opinion.
The Nikon D70 did best with Capture One. Nikon Capture gave good color but was not as good as C1, and was a pain to use. Adobe software was ok, but not great, especially for skintones.
The Kodak 14n did best with Adobe Camera Raw (LR wasn't made when I had the 14n). C1 doesn't support this camera, and Kodak's raw converter was HORRID. Terrible image quality. Adobe did very well though.
The Canon 5DmkII that I now use works great with Adobe Lightroom or Photoshop. Canon's raw software gives good image quality but is a pain to use, and C1 doesn't give as good of quality as Adobe's software for this camera, in my opinion.
healyzh
Well-known
Chris, I think it's also a question of how the individual photographer likes to see their colour.
While I'm finally able to get colour from RAW Nikon or Leica files that I'm happy using Adobe Camera RAW, I find it is easier to get it with C1.
Having said that, I have some photo's that ACR simply can't handle (at least not with LR3 or CS5) as they result in bad banding, that look perfect in C1.
While I'm finally able to get colour from RAW Nikon or Leica files that I'm happy using Adobe Camera RAW, I find it is easier to get it with C1.
Having said that, I have some photo's that ACR simply can't handle (at least not with LR3 or CS5) as they result in bad banding, that look perfect in C1.
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
I agree on individual preferences for color, etc. What camera were you getting banding from in ACR? Is it only from doing really big tonal edits, like on underexposed or very contrasty images? I got some on one image from my 5DmkII because it was underexposed and I tried to bring the shadows back up. Might have to try it in C1. I think its good to keep more than one RAW program around for such cases. Like how I keep several chemical developers around for film, some images and some films work better with one developer, others need another..