aolander
Well-known member
Most certainly are. What does it say next to "Profile" in the Basics panel of the Development Module?No presets on my LrC. No camera profiles either.
If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).
Most certainly are. What does it say next to "Profile" in the Basics panel of the Development Module?No presets on my LrC. No camera profiles either.
No presets on my LrC. No camera profiles either.
Nikon has picture controls. Neutral, STANDARD, vivid, and a few more. Neutral is as little processing as you can get I believe. There is no way I know to turn picture controls off. They affect every raw file you take. I have no experience with other brands.Which in camera settings are automatically applied to the RAW file ?
Nikon has picture controls. Neutral, STANDARD, vivid, and a few more. Neutral is as little processing as you can get I believe. There is no way I know to turn picture controls off. They affect every raw file you take. I have no experience with other brands.
I believe you can find and use the Nikon colour profiles supplied with Nikon NX-i to use them in other image viewers/converters. One way How to get Nikon ICM profiles .If you don't use Nikon software to convert the raw, you don't get Nikon picture control
I'm saying that a RAW file SOOC and not yet opened in any editor is as unprocessed as it can be.
The image should look very similar if you select the same viewing ICC profile in each viewer/converter you use.The same image brought into Nikon NX Studio, DxOPL4, Affinity, Fast Raw Viewer or even Mac Finder/Preview all look different because each defaults to different initial interpretations.
Ah, but they don't/can't. And it's still NOT SOOC.The image should look very similar if you select the same viewing ICC profile in each viewer/converter you use.
How so?Ah, but they don't/can't.
I believe you can find and use the Nikon colour profiles supplied with Nikon NX-i to use them in other image viewers/converters. One way How to get Nikon ICM profiles .
They then need to be installed correctly for the chosen image viewer/converter, see below.
On Windows you might/should find some ICC/ICM profiles in "C:\Windows\System32\spool\drivers\color" to use, see below for NX-i selection.
Nikon NX-i for example has a help site here that lists the supplied colour profiles it can use and how to change them in NX-i.
NX-i can also use profiles not supplied, click on the down arrow of "Default RGB color space" to see the list of profiles available.
View attachment 22844
XnViewmp has selection of the ICC or ICM profile in Settings/General/ICC, you choose the profile/s from where the files are located and the software then uses those profiles until changed.
View attachment 22837
ART / Rawtherapee, see Preferences/Color Management, select from the list or choose your own.
Usually you can set which colour profile you wish to use for your RAW viewing, you can/should be able to set your output/print colour profile/s as well.
You might also look at NikonPC which has a number of profiles that you can test online and download.
With some software you can generate your own colour profiles to use in your chosen viewer/converter.
Apologies for the long loong post.
A Google search for "adobe lightroom color profiles" took me to this page which at the bottom of the page shows a "how to" for installing a color profile in Lightroom.How would it work in Lightroom, which uses .dcp profiles for raw conversion?
The camera profiles are a must in Lightroom. You have to choose Adobe color or Adobe standard or whatever. If you click the four square menu to the right of the profiles you can browse to see if they offer a camera matching profile to simulate the look of the in-camera picture styles. It will say camera standard or whatever. Here is a list of which cameras have camera matching. Mine doesnt. Some reason they aren't doing recent Canon. Nikon d850 and other Nikons do have it.
In lightroom I find I am partial to the Adobe Color profile since my camera doesn't have a camera matching profile. In Canon software I like Faithful. The most color neutral profile in lightroom would be the one from the color checker passport, that way the color of a given subject would look the same no matter which camera was used. Otherwise every camera profile looks just a little different, sometimes in a good way.Why are they a must ? A must for what ?
Edit. Just realised what you meant.
If you don't use Nikon software to convert the raw, you don't get Nikon picture control, in Lightroom you get Adobe color or Adobe standard, or Adobe's imitation of Nikon in their Camera Standard
Interesting. I never played with that setting or knew what it did. I always just selected me desired profile from the dropdown after import. Looks like I need to do some more learning.You can also create your own profiles. For example, my D600 is converted to IR, and I could create a profile with DNG profile editor and make it the default preset for that camera. It allows me to start with a WB that is different from Standard, and then further adjust WB as needed. Without the Custom Profile, the required WB adjustment is outside the range available. With the Custom Profile, I can start reasonably close and refine the WB further as needed.
Yes, the discussion certainly did go down the road of semantics! All digital files are simply numbers until we "pull them up" with software, not sure why the discussion always goes that way. I guess it does because digital is still new even after years of being around. The point here is, as DRwyoming noted, just about all files/images can benefit from skilled processing, JPEG or RAW. Why anyone would want to show work "SOOC" confounds me, unless the lighting and the composition were absolutely perfect (and I've had a few of those as we all have). Why not show our very best work instead!
I could not agree, more. Well done.Someone recently posted, not in this forum but in the general forum, about posting our "naked" files, his term for a non-processed image file (which, of course, really cannot happen in digital unless it's a RAW file). As I was playing today with an image it clearly showed why I process my digital files and how big of a difference it makes to do so. I do understand contest rules and would abide by any processing contest rules if I chose to enter an image so no need for anyone to comment on that. Good processing can make a decent shot a much nicer shot, and yes I do try to "get it right" in camera but that simply cannot always be done. This RAW image was taken at a hummingbird feeder. I used Topaz DeNoise, LrC, and PS to complete the processing. The original image is in the middle, top is the Topaz DeNoise image (also made the subject larger in LrC), and bottom is the image as completed in LrC after the feeder was removed in PS. I have a hard time understanding why someone would not want to process their images to be the best that they can be. For me, processing images is digital magic, a bit like watching the image come up in the photo processing bath for BW film.
View attachment 22698View attachment 22699View attachment 22700
Something that is ever-so-slightly missing in this discussion is that raw files are very "loosely" interpreted, while JPG files (for example) are strictly displayed.
Raw files are merely a large collection of exposure level measurements for each pixel. There's no one set of authoritative instructions for turning those data numbers into a final image. Each program does it differently. The camera does it one way. LR does it another. Capture One does it a 3rd way. And so on and so on.
JPG, on the other hand, (and HEIC, and TIFF, and etc) is much more strict about how to turn the JPG's 1s and 0s in its file into a viewable image.
Just because both are digital does not mean both have to be subjectively interpreted. One is strictly defined, the other (raw) is not really well-defined at all.
The style of conversion from raw data to visible image is left entirely to the software doing the conversion. There's no strict spec, and there can't be, because each camera has a different CFA and different sensor.