K5 / DA L 55-300 / Tulips (over-saturated?)

Designosophy · 05-27-2012, 07:54 AM

Originally posted by Anvh

yes and no, the reason for this is what kind of red, what kind of blue and what kind of green do you mean, there are so many shades.

RAW uses his own unique rgb values and is as such not restricted to one particular defined pallet, such as sRGB, aRGB, prophotoRGB or CMYK, who says a sensor need to use only red green and blue?
Whit Astro photography often special filters are used to show different elements in the photo for example, I know it's not standard photography but it shows you can use more.

What I'm suggesting is that it's problematic to say that a camera sensor has no color space. It's definitely RGB, and no question about it. I think there's some confusion here due to terminology. sRGB, Adobe RGB, etc. are subsets of RGB. They're limited to a portion of the entire RGB color space. The gamut of RGB is defined as "every visible color," and all visible light is composed of red, green, and blue primaries. There are other colors at either end of the spectrum - ultraviolet on one end, infrared on the other - but these aren't part of the visible spectrum. The red sensors on a camera sensor might pick up some infrared, and the blue might pick up some ultraviolet. But there are very definite primaries in red, green, and blue. There does not exist a visible color that cannot be constructed from pure red, green, and blue. That said, any sensor's effective primaries vary from the absolute wavelengths of red, green, and blue, but they are still red, green, and blue primaries. As far as I know, there does not exist a sensor that can take in the entire spectrum of RGB - even a camera sensor is limited to some subset of RGB. So there is an RGB color space for every camera's RAW. And sensitivity varies among human eyes. Some people see more colors and gradations of colors than others. Even the human eye sees a subset of RGB.

CMYK is a different beast altogether. It is a subtractive color model that can only be simulated on-screen because (essentially) all screens use RGB, and RGB is an additive color space. True, there are televisions and monitors that use an additional "primary." But the additional primary (usually yellow) isn't a true primary; it's a mixture that makes up for the limitations of the screen's necessarily imperfect red, green, and blue primaries.

LAB and HSB are descriptive tools, not true color spaces.

Anvh · 05-27-2012, 12:24 PM

Well if we look at the basic the sensor only measure luminance and nothing more... but what i was suggesting is that the colorspace of RAW is not defined by a standard.

You talk about RGB, that's only 1 of the possible combinations.
CMYK was wrong from my part, it should have been CYGM cyan, yellow, green and magenta and yes this filter is really in use in consumer cameras, some sony, canon and nikon cameras use it.
We have RGBE (e = emerald), RGBW, CMYW (w=white) are other examples, RGBW is something we have seen more of the last year not sure if the other 2 were ever used.

RAW simply store the luminance values for each of these colours separately and that's it.

Antifreez · 05-27-2012, 01:31 PM

Originally posted by kcobain1992

Yes, camera calibration, sorry. Anyway, using the embedded color profile gives a rather significant change in the way greens, reds, yellows and blues are rendered, much closer to the in-camera JPEG. Took me a while to figure that out. You should try it (I think it only works for DNG files, but I assume that's the format you're using).

Originally posted by abmj

Although I normally use the custom PSKiss camera calibration profiles, I'd agree with the above. Reset the calibration from "Adobe Standard" to "Embedded" and see if that makes the difference you are looking for.

I don't use LR to render from RAW but can see a definite difference in ACR, which is virtually the same as Lightroom under the hood.

Please bear with me as I'm struggling to figure out how to change the calibration from Adobe Standard to Embedded.

In the drop-down for Camera Calibration, I have "Process:" on the left, and "2010 (Current)" on the right. Nothing happens when I click "Process:". And the drop down for "2010 (Current) only gives me the option to change it to "2003".

Directly under "Process:" and "2010 (Current)", I have "Profile:" on the left, and "Matrix" on the right. Just as with "Process:", nothing happens when I click on "Profile:". And with "Matrix", the drop down shows that it is checked, without giving me the option to un-check it.

I must be missing something (probably obvious)...

OK5 · 05-27-2012, 01:52 PM

You can only change (back and forth) from adobe standard to embedded with profile, only with a raw file, I believe.

OK5

Anvh · 05-27-2012, 02:22 PM

Originally posted by OK5

You can only change (back and forth) from adobe standard to embedded with profile, only with a raw file, I believe.

OK5

thats correct.
I believe it also needs to be DNG but not sure about that one.

Antifreez · 05-27-2012, 03:35 PM

Originally posted by OK5

You can only change (back and forth) from adobe standard to embedded with profile, only with a raw file, I believe.

OK5

Originally posted by Anvh

thats correct.
I believe it also needs to be DNG but not sure about that one.

I'm still puzzled then because I'm only shooting in RAW so I should be able to make the change to embedded. Not sure if the files are DNG. Anyway, thanks for the help and I'll keep fiddling with it.

OK5 · 05-27-2012, 04:35 PM

Antifreez, where you have "Matrix", I have "adobe standard" and using that drop down box, I can either choose it or "embedded".
I do not have a "Matrix" option".
Here is some rather dated info, but this may be your problem.
http://labs.adobe.com/wiki/index.php/DNG_Profiles:FAQ#WhatIsTheMatrix
When I go to the profile pop-up menu, I only see a profile called "Matrix." What is this?
If Camera Raw/Lightroom cannot find any external profiles for a camera newly supported in CR 5.2 and LR 2.2, it will show you a baseline profile titled Matrix which is similar in color rendering to our legacy profiles (e.g., named ACR 4.4). By default, when external profiles are available (such as the default Adobe Standardprofile), the Matrix baseline profile is hidden.

OK5

Last edited by OK5; 05-27-2012 at 05:12 PM.

Antifreez · 05-27-2012, 05:32 PM

Originally posted by OK5

Antifreez, where you have "Matrix", I have "adobe standard" and using that drop down box, I can either choose it or "embedded".
I do not have a "Matrix" option".
Here is some rather dated info, but this may be your problem.
DNG Profiles:FAQ - Adobe Labs
When I go to the profile pop-up menu, I only see a profile called "Matrix." What is this?
If Camera Raw/Lightroom cannot find any external profiles for a camera newly supported in CR 5.2 and LR 2.2, it will show you a baseline profile titled Matrix which is similar in color rendering to our legacy profiles (e.g., named ACR 4.4). By default, when external profiles are available (such as the default Adobe Standardprofile), the Matrix baseline profile is hidden.

OK5

This is interesting OK5, thank you for doing this research.

Does LR have a profile for the K5 and, if so, can anyone tell me how to set this up?

OK5 · 05-27-2012, 06:23 PM

I believe you need to update to this if you haven't done so already.
Adobe - Adobe Camera Raw and DNG Converter : For Windows : Adobe DNG Converter 6.3 update

OK5

RBellavance · 05-27-2012, 07:24 PM

It looks to me like the red channel is completely blown (overexposed), at least in these jpgs. It *may* be recoverable in the RAW file, but maybe not.

Red flowers (well, basically any red subject) is hard to shoot properly, as the red channel has a tendency to be overexposed easily, and often it will not be apparent in the global in-camera histogram.

Designosophy · 05-27-2012, 07:30 PM

Originally posted by Anvh

Well if we look at the basic the sensor only measure luminance and nothing more... but what i was suggesting is that the colorspace of RAW is not defined by a standard.

You talk about RGB, that's only 1 of the possible combinations.
CMYK was wrong from my part, it should have been CYGM cyan, yellow, green and magenta and yes this filter is really in use in consumer cameras, some sony, canon and nikon cameras use it.
We have RGBE (e = emerald), RGBW, CMYW (w=white) are other examples, RGBW is something we have seen more of the last year not sure if the other 2 were ever used.

RAW simply store the luminance values for each of these colours separately and that's it.

RGBW, CMYW, etc. are examples in which false primaries are used. All colors in these color spaces fall within the RGB colorspace. The color space of RAW is not defined by an agreed-upon standard, but it is comprisd by RGB. So the color space of RAW is still RGB. I understand your point about the lack of standardization in RAW formats, I just think it's confusing to say that RAW has no color space, so I wanted to make it clear that RAW does, for all practical purposes, have a color space.

Anvh · 05-28-2012, 09:00 AM

Originally posted by Designosophy

RGBW, CMYW, etc. are examples in which false primaries are used. All colors in these color spaces fall within the RGB colorspace. The color space of RAW is not defined by an agreed-upon standard, but it is comprisd by RGB. So the color space of RAW is still RGB. I understand your point about the lack of standardization in RAW formats, I just think it's confusing to say that RAW has no color space, so I wanted to make it clear that RAW does, for all practical purposes, have a color space.

RAW does not fall back to RGB, it simply states the luminance for each colour it uses in the bayer filter.
So if they use CMYW then it would state the luminance of Cyan, Magenta, Yellow and White, it does not convert this information inside the camera/file to RGB.

Demosaicing is after al not done with the RAW file

obxeye · 05-28-2012, 12:58 PM

you clipped the red channel. learn to use the rgb histogram.

Anvh · 05-28-2012, 03:25 PM

Originally posted by obxeye

you clipped the red channel. learn to use the rgb histogram.

Doubt he did, if these were the default RAW files, he should easily be able to recover those

ndhonghai · 05-29-2012, 12:10 AM

As my opinion, K5 has too saturated with RED color.
So simple try this: reduce RED until you see it's natural.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Looking for some nice saturated color 35mm film	ComputerControlled	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	11	01-10-2012 12:40 PM
Nature Saturated Red Rose	eaglem	Post Your Photos!	8	01-06-2012 05:19 PM
Macro Saturated Orange Tree Leaves	eaglem	Post Your Photos!	2	01-04-2011 11:22 PM
K20D - Images overexposed & saturated	Johnny5	Pentax DSLR Discussion	16	06-05-2010 01:33 PM
Too Saturated?	heliphoto	Photo Critique	7	01-31-2009 10:01 AM

05-27-2012, 07:54 AM	#16
Designosophy Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Northeast Philadelphia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,137	Originally posted by Anvh yes and no, the reason for this is what kind of red, what kind of blue and what kind of green do you mean, there are so many shades. RAW uses his own unique rgb values and is as such not restricted to one particular defined pallet, such as sRGB, aRGB, prophotoRGB or CMYK, who says a sensor need to use only red green and blue? Whit Astro photography often special filters are used to show different elements in the photo for example, I know it's not standard photography but it shows you can use more. What I'm suggesting is that it's problematic to say that a camera sensor has no color space. It's definitely RGB, and no question about it. I think there's some confusion here due to terminology. sRGB, Adobe RGB, etc. are subsets of RGB. They're limited to a portion of the entire RGB color space. The gamut of RGB is defined as "every visible color," and all visible light is composed of red, green, and blue primaries. There are other colors at either end of the spectrum - ultraviolet on one end, infrared on the other - but these aren't part of the visible spectrum. The red sensors on a camera sensor might pick up some infrared, and the blue might pick up some ultraviolet. But there are very definite primaries in red, green, and blue. There does not exist a visible color that cannot be constructed from pure red, green, and blue. That said, any sensor's effective primaries vary from the absolute wavelengths of red, green, and blue, but they are still red, green, and blue primaries. As far as I know, there does not exist a sensor that can take in the entire spectrum of RGB - even a camera sensor is limited to some subset of RGB. So there is an RGB color space for every camera's RAW. And sensitivity varies among human eyes. Some people see more colors and gradations of colors than others. Even the human eye sees a subset of RGB. CMYK is a different beast altogether. It is a subtractive color model that can only be simulated on-screen because (essentially) all screens use RGB, and RGB is an additive color space. True, there are televisions and monitors that use an additional "primary." But the additional primary (usually yellow) isn't a true primary; it's a mixture that makes up for the limitations of the screen's necessarily imperfect red, green, and blue primaries. LAB and HSB are descriptive tools, not true color spaces.

05-27-2012, 12:24 PM	#17
Anvh Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Posts: 4,616	Well if we look at the basic the sensor only measure luminance and nothing more... but what i was suggesting is that the colorspace of RAW is not defined by a standard. You talk about RGB, that's only 1 of the possible combinations. CMYK was wrong from my part, it should have been CYGM cyan, yellow, green and magenta and yes this filter is really in use in consumer cameras, some sony, canon and nikon cameras use it. We have RGBE (e = emerald), RGBW, CMYW (w=white) are other examples, RGBW is something we have seen more of the last year not sure if the other 2 were ever used. RAW simply store the luminance values for each of these colours separately and that's it.

05-27-2012, 01:31 PM	#18
Antifreez Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Kenmore, WA Posts: 156 Original Poster	Originally posted by kcobain1992 Yes, camera calibration, sorry. Anyway, using the embedded color profile gives a rather significant change in the way greens, reds, yellows and blues are rendered, much closer to the in-camera JPEG. Took me a while to figure that out. You should try it (I think it only works for DNG files, but I assume that's the format you're using). Originally posted by abmj Although I normally use the custom PSKiss camera calibration profiles, I'd agree with the above. Reset the calibration from "Adobe Standard" to "Embedded" and see if that makes the difference you are looking for. I don't use LR to render from RAW but can see a definite difference in ACR, which is virtually the same as Lightroom under the hood. Please bear with me as I'm struggling to figure out how to change the calibration from Adobe Standard to Embedded. In the drop-down for Camera Calibration, I have "Process:" on the left, and "2010 (Current)" on the right. Nothing happens when I click "Process:". And the drop down for "2010 (Current) only gives me the option to change it to "2003". Directly under "Process:" and "2010 (Current)", I have "Profile:" on the left, and "Matrix" on the right. Just as with "Process:", nothing happens when I click on "Profile:". And with "Matrix", the drop down shows that it is checked, without giving me the option to un-check it. I must be missing something (probably obvious)...

05-27-2012, 01:52 PM	#19
OK5 Junior Member Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: Ontario Posts: 28	You can only change (back and forth) from adobe standard to embedded with profile, only with a raw file, I believe. OK5

05-27-2012, 02:22 PM	#20
Anvh Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Posts: 4,616	Originally posted by OK5 You can only change (back and forth) from adobe standard to embedded with profile, only with a raw file, I believe. OK5 thats correct. I believe it also needs to be DNG but not sure about that one.

05-27-2012, 03:35 PM	#21
Antifreez Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Kenmore, WA Posts: 156 Original Poster	Originally posted by OK5 You can only change (back and forth) from adobe standard to embedded with profile, only with a raw file, I believe. OK5 Originally posted by Anvh thats correct. I believe it also needs to be DNG but not sure about that one. I'm still puzzled then because I'm only shooting in RAW so I should be able to make the change to embedded. Not sure if the files are DNG. Anyway, thanks for the help and I'll keep fiddling with it.

05-27-2012, 04:35 PM	#22
OK5 Junior Member Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: Ontario Posts: 28	Antifreez, where you have "Matrix", I have "adobe standard" and using that drop down box, I can either choose it or "embedded". I do not have a "Matrix" option". Here is some rather dated info, but this may be your problem. http://labs.adobe.com/wiki/index.php/DNG_Profiles:FAQ#WhatIsTheMatrix When I go to the profile pop-up menu, I only see a profile called "Matrix." What is this? If Camera Raw/Lightroom cannot find any external profiles for a camera newly supported in CR 5.2 and LR 2.2, it will show you a baseline profile titled Matrix which is similar in color rendering to our legacy profiles (e.g., named ACR 4.4). By default, when external profiles are available (such as the default Adobe Standardprofile), the Matrix baseline profile is hidden. OK5 Last edited by OK5; 05-27-2012 at 05:12 PM.

05-27-2012, 05:32 PM	#23
Antifreez Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Kenmore, WA Posts: 156 Original Poster	Originally posted by OK5 Antifreez, where you have "Matrix", I have "adobe standard" and using that drop down box, I can either choose it or "embedded". I do not have a "Matrix" option". Here is some rather dated info, but this may be your problem. DNG Profiles:FAQ - Adobe Labs When I go to the profile pop-up menu, I only see a profile called "Matrix." What is this? If Camera Raw/Lightroom cannot find any external profiles for a camera newly supported in CR 5.2 and LR 2.2, it will show you a baseline profile titled Matrix which is similar in color rendering to our legacy profiles (e.g., named ACR 4.4). By default, when external profiles are available (such as the default Adobe Standardprofile), the Matrix baseline profile is hidden. OK5 This is interesting OK5, thank you for doing this research. Does LR have a profile for the K5 and, if so, can anyone tell me how to set this up?

05-27-2012, 06:23 PM	#24
OK5 Junior Member Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: Ontario Posts: 28	I believe you need to update to this if you haven't done so already. Adobe - Adobe Camera Raw and DNG Converter : For Windows : Adobe DNG Converter 6.3 update OK5

05-27-2012, 07:24 PM	#25
RBellavance Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Near Montréal, Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,716	It looks to me like the red channel is completely blown (overexposed), at least in these jpgs. It may be recoverable in the RAW file, but maybe not. Red flowers (well, basically any red subject) is hard to shoot properly, as the red channel has a tendency to be overexposed easily, and often it will not be apparent in the global in-camera histogram.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

05-27-2012, 07:30 PM	#26
Designosophy Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Northeast Philadelphia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,137	Originally posted by Anvh Well if we look at the basic the sensor only measure luminance and nothing more... but what i was suggesting is that the colorspace of RAW is not defined by a standard. You talk about RGB, that's only 1 of the possible combinations. CMYK was wrong from my part, it should have been CYGM cyan, yellow, green and magenta and yes this filter is really in use in consumer cameras, some sony, canon and nikon cameras use it. We have RGBE (e = emerald), RGBW, CMYW (w=white) are other examples, RGBW is something we have seen more of the last year not sure if the other 2 were ever used. RAW simply store the luminance values for each of these colours separately and that's it. RGBW, CMYW, etc. are examples in which false primaries are used. All colors in these color spaces fall within the RGB colorspace. The color space of RAW is not defined by an agreed-upon standard, but it is comprisd by RGB. So the color space of RAW is still RGB. I understand your point about the lack of standardization in RAW formats, I just think it's confusing to say that RAW has no color space, so I wanted to make it clear that RAW does, for all practical purposes, have a color space.

05-28-2012, 09:00 AM	#27
Anvh Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Posts: 4,616	Originally posted by Designosophy RGBW, CMYW, etc. are examples in which false primaries are used. All colors in these color spaces fall within the RGB colorspace. The color space of RAW is not defined by an agreed-upon standard, but it is comprisd by RGB. So the color space of RAW is still RGB. I understand your point about the lack of standardization in RAW formats, I just think it's confusing to say that RAW has no color space, so I wanted to make it clear that RAW does, for all practical purposes, have a color space. RAW does not fall back to RGB, it simply states the luminance for each colour it uses in the bayer filter. So if they use CMYW then it would state the luminance of Cyan, Magenta, Yellow and White, it does not convert this information inside the camera/file to RGB. Demosaicing is after al not done with the RAW file

05-28-2012, 12:58 PM	#28
obxeye Inactive Account Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: nc Posts: 73	you clipped the red channel. learn to use the rgb histogram.

05-28-2012, 03:25 PM	#29
Anvh Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Posts: 4,616	Originally posted by obxeye you clipped the red channel. learn to use the rgb histogram. Doubt he did, if these were the default RAW files, he should easily be able to recover those

05-29-2012, 12:10 AM	#30
ndhonghai New Member Join Date: Apr 2012 Photos: Albums Posts: 23	As my opinion, K5 has too saturated with RED color. So simple try this: reduce RED until you see it's natural.