Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
06-24-2010, 05:50 AM   #241
Veteran Member
RBellavance's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Near Montréal, Canada
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,716
QuoteOriginally posted by Inspector 17 Quote
And while this is an observation rather than an exact quantification, the truth of the K7 is that there is a reddish cast to skin color and some sort of a frosted like muddiness because of this cast to my eyes.
Isn't this "reddish cast" (not that I have noticed one, mind you) a non-issue when shooting raw ? This is an honest question. I have seen this sort of comment regarding this or that brand's skin tone rendition or general color cast, but I have yet to understand why this is an issue except for out-of-camera JPEGs.

06-24-2010, 06:39 AM   #242
Inactive Account




Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Southeastern USA
Posts: 75
QuoteOriginally posted by RBellavance Quote
Isn't this "reddish cast" (not that I have noticed one, mind you) a non-issue when shooting raw ? This is an honest question. I have seen this sort of comment regarding this or that brand's skin tone rendition or general color cast, but I have yet to understand why this is an issue except for out-of-camera JPEGs.
Excellent question!

and I don't know the answer for sure...

I really like to shoot jpg's and fully realize the HUGE benefit of using RAW - most of the time I now shoot RAW+jpg.

It seems that the cast COULD be removed by PP of the RAW - there are simply too few people actually doing this for the (many) samples I have seen. It must simply be a step that most find as inconvenient to HAVE to to do this as I do.

Search flickr on k7 portraiture, then search K10D portraiture. Search PPG on K7, then search PPG on K10D - notice which has vastly more people/portraiture shots and which one has a noticeable absence of the same...

As for the reasons why this may be the case, I attribute it to my observation of a reddish caste in the K7 examples. I noticed this early on and have been influenced negatively since. You are right - RAW with PP will likely turn out nice product.

Maybe this is related to the dynamic range limitations that are sometimes discussed - maybe to the noise sometimes attributed. And again, RAW with PP maybe the perfect route to a solution

As for my cast observation, I should explain. I had the good fortune (or lifelong curse?) of serving a short apprenticeship under world renowned portraiture artist, the late Leon Kennamer. He practically invented the concept of negative lighting in still portraiture (borrowed from leading cinematographers of the 50s and 60s) He was commisioned around the world for decades and did much of Kodaks packaging shots.

When I first worked under him I really didnt understand his protests about color "casts" and mistinted prints but soon began seeing what he meant - and now see these kinds of things...

I still want a Pentax homerun FF DSLR - but please let there be a great sensor with the range and color rendition that CAN BE PP'ed for greatness but doesnt require it..
06-24-2010, 07:12 AM   #243
Pentaxian
Digitalis's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Adelaide.
Posts: 8,612
QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
A, a brother in soul

The Lichtenberg figure may have a two small fractional dimension. It's almost 1 dimensional, like the Mandelbrot set's border.
The Lichtenberg figure can be produced in 2D even in 3D through the process of dielectric breakdown, which produces the fractal patterns down to the molecular level. I own a piece of 15"X15"X0.5" sheet of tempered glass sent to the Austrailian synchrotron science department as an experiment from a university student (and a good friend of mine) who was studying 3D fractal patterns. The glass was bombarded with high speed electrons in order to produce a 3D Lichtenberg figure inside it which, when my friend was finished analysing he kindly allowed me to keep it. I had considered using the Sierpinski gasket, but it is much more difficult to produce in physical form, so the Lichtenberg was the best choice for my purposes.

It's actually a rather beautiful thing, to be able to observe the electrical "treeing" effect in the glass. I have it stashed away somewhere, I'll have to find it and take a pic.

Last edited by Digitalis; 06-24-2010 at 07:20 AM.
06-24-2010, 09:17 AM   #244
Senior Member
Eigengrau's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Colorado
Photos: Albums
Posts: 250
QuoteOriginally posted by Inspector 17 Quote
Search flickr on k7 portraiture, then search K10D portraiture. Search PPG on K7, then search PPG on K10D - notice which has vastly more people/portraiture shots and which one has a noticeable absence of the same...
I'm not sure that your claim of a skin-unfriendly color cast is well supported. I've never heard this complaint anywhere, and the number of photos admitted to PPG is so variable that it isn't really a good metric for anything.

I agree with you that a FF would be awesome, but, having both cameras, the K7 is as good or better than the K20 in almost every respect. And, pro portrait photographers are certainly adjusting white balance manually on every single RAW they shoot, so slight differences in color rendition aren't that big of a deal. All week I've been doing PP on a bunch of portraiture shot with the K7 and K20 and I don't see any evidence of the color cast you're talking about.

Not saying that the K20 is bad (I shoot with two of them while my wife shoots the K7) but just saying that we need better evidence of this color cast you speak of.

06-24-2010, 09:49 AM   #245
Veteran Member
cbaytan's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Trabzon/Turkey
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,010
QuoteOriginally posted by RBellavance Quote
Isn't this "reddish cast" (not that I have noticed one, mind you) a non-issue when shooting raw ? This is an honest question. I have seen this sort of comment regarding this or that brand's skin tone rendition or general color cast, but I have yet to understand why this is an issue except for out-of-camera JPEGs.
You don't even have to shoot RAW for direct JPEG WB control, JPEG output's are controlled by custom WB settings for each preset jpeg options. There is also a full custom WB option too on the WB menu. RAW then PS option is another story, not an option for most PS novices.
06-24-2010, 09:53 AM   #246
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Var, South of France
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,071
QuoteOriginally posted by Eigengrau Quote
I agree with you that a FF would be awesome, but, having both cameras, the K7 is as good or better than the K20 in almost every respect.
But they share the (almost) same sensor, and I indeed noticed this reddish cast with my K20 (before I got the K7).

At the end of the day, I find that both the K10 (which I had) and the Kx (which is my current 2nd body) do produce better skin tones than K20/K7 (for the same PP work-flow, at least)...
06-24-2010, 11:43 AM   #247
Veteran Member
Pentaxor's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,513
for me the problem I have is in the blue casting instead of purple. I have two solutions for this issue. first solution, customize the white balance. second, shoot RAW and later pp it with LR 3. problem solved.
06-24-2010, 12:27 PM   #248
Senior Member
Eigengrau's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Colorado
Photos: Albums
Posts: 250
QuoteOriginally posted by dlacouture Quote
But they share the (almost) same sensor, and I indeed noticed this reddish cast with my K20 (before I got the K7).

At the end of the day, I find that both the K10 (which I had) and the Kx (which is my current 2nd body) do produce better skin tones than K20/K7 (for the same PP work-flow, at least)...
The original poster was claiming that the K7 was worse than the K20 for skin coloration, which I dispute. However, I haven't ever used a K10 and have only limited experience with the Kx, so I can't comment there. The K100 rendered things a bit differently than the newer bodies, but I don't know that I would call it better or worse.

What seems to make a bigger difference is how each camera handles white balance. I rarely have to leave AWB on the K7, and actually find that the tungsten setting corrects so well that it can take some of the desired warmth out of the photo.

It is interesting to hear your experience - I'd love to see some shots that demonstrate the difference if you have them handy.

06-24-2010, 12:56 PM   #249
Inactive Account




Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Southeastern USA
Posts: 75
interesting, blue?

I have seen the PP of RAW suggestion a lot. Could you describe the process in LR3 a bit. Do you use a single preset set of processing or process individually?

Do you have any sample of top level portraiture done with a K7 and LR3? Thanks in advance
06-24-2010, 01:12 PM   #250
Inactive Account




Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Southeastern USA
Posts: 75
QuoteOriginally posted by Eigengrau Quote
The original poster was claiming that the K7 was worse than the K20 for skin coloration, which I dispute. However, I haven't ever used a K10 and have only limited experience with the Kx, so I can't comment there. The K100 rendered things a bit differently than the newer bodies, but I don't know that I would call it better or worse.

What seems to make a bigger difference is how each camera handles white balance. I rarely have to leave AWB on the K7, and actually find that the tungsten setting corrects so well that it can take some of the desired warmth out of the photo.

It is interesting to hear your experience - I'd love to see some shots that demonstrate the difference if you have them handy.

Take a look at flickr.com sorter on K10D/portrait/interesting to bring up the top level flickr contributions:

portrait k10d - Flickr: Search

Page after page of good to excellent portraits

Now take a look at K7/portrait/interesting:

portrait k7 - Flickr: Search

It is not even close. There are a handful of decent shots but a clear shortage relative to the K10D, even among samples from the same photographers in both groups. There are many black and white conversions that look pretty good - telling?

Since its introduction I have not been overwhelmed with the K7 sensor. The camera has some great features and I can see where in many areas it is a great step forward, but I knew early on I wouldnt be a buyer.

Do you have samples of some top class portraiture using the K7?

and BTW, I comment and ask all questions with all due respect and consideration. THANKS!
06-24-2010, 01:56 PM   #251
Senior Member
Eigengrau's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Colorado
Photos: Albums
Posts: 250
QuoteOriginally posted by Inspector 17 Quote
Take a look at flickr.com sorter on K10D/portrait/interesting to bring up the top level flickr contributions:

portrait k10d - Flickr: Search

Page after page of good to excellent portraits

Now take a look at K7/portrait/interesting:

portrait k7 - Flickr: Search

It is not even close. There are a handful of decent shots but a clear shortage relative to the K10D, even among samples from the same photographers in both groups. There are many black and white conversions that look pretty good - telling?

Since its introduction I have not been overwhelmed with the K7 sensor. The camera has some great features and I can see where in many areas it is a great step forward, but I knew early on I wouldnt be a buyer.

Do you have samples of some top class portraiture using the K7?

and BTW, I comment and ask all questions with all due respect and consideration. THANKS!
Actually, I see a pretty significant number of impressive portraits there - although I'm not sure exactly what you're looking for when you say 'top quality'.

Worth noting is that there are ~15,000 portrait results with the K10, and ~3,000 with the K7. And, actually, if you look here: Flickr: Camera Finder: Pentax you'll see that there are about 6 million K10 shots, and about 600,000 K7 shots.

Here's what I'm getting at.

There are only 10% as many K7 shots out there as K10 shots, likely due to camera age, but perhaps some other factors.

There are 20% as many K7 portraits as K10 portraits. That means that people are taking disproportionately more portraits with their K7s compared to what they have taken over the history of the K10.

Now, I'm not saying that this proves anything conclusively, but if we try to control for a few of the variables a different picture emerges.

That said, at DxoMark it does look like the K10 performs well against the newer cameras in every category except high ISO.


PS. Remember, there are lies, damn lies, and statistics. This is pretty subjective, so I don't know if it would every be possible to prove anything.
06-24-2010, 02:49 PM   #252
Pentaxian
falconeye's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Munich, Alps, Germany
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,863
QuoteOriginally posted by Digitalis Quote
It's actually a rather beautiful thing, to be able to observe the electrical "treeing" effect in the glass. I have it stashed away somewhere, I'll have to find it and take a pic.
Does it look anything like this: ?
06-24-2010, 03:39 PM   #253
Pentaxian
thibs's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Belgium
Photos: Albums
Posts: 5,206
QuoteOriginally posted by Pentaxor Quote
for me the problem I have is in the blue casting instead of purple. I have two solutions for this issue. first solution, customize the white balance. second, shoot RAW and later pp it with LR 3. problem solved.
Deactivate the shadow compensation and DR enhancements which makes min iso = 200, and no blue cast anymore.
06-24-2010, 06:22 PM   #254
Veteran Member
Pentaxor's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,513
QuoteOriginally posted by Inspector 17 Quote
interesting, blue?

I have seen the PP of RAW suggestion a lot. Could you describe the process in LR3 a bit. Do you use a single preset set of processing or process individually?

Do you have any sample of top level portraiture done with a K7 and LR3? Thanks in advance
I process it individually for those few with blue casting. although I haven't encountered blue casting yet when it comes to portraits. it only appears on objects with purple color. although as someone mentioned, it has something to do with DR shadow correction and increased ISO, especially at ISO 800.

Sorry but I dont really post top level portraiture here, although I might consider it in the future. it is just my ethical rule for such type of photography. probably because I spent some considerable time on them or just selfish (maybe) ?
06-24-2010, 06:23 PM   #255
Veteran Member
Pentaxor's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,513
QuoteOriginally posted by thibs Quote
Deactivate the shadow compensation and DR enhancements which makes min iso = 200, and no blue cast anymore.
I believe you're right.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
pentax news, pentax rumors
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Pentax at PMA 2010 techmulla Pentax News and Rumors 8 04-21-2010 07:02 PM
Pentax Japan finally speaks about the new camera!!!! vitalsax Pentax News and Rumors 8 05-08-2009 03:03 PM
Pentax PMA vievetrick Pentax News and Rumors 11 03-01-2009 10:11 PM
Hiroshi Onada, GM of imaging systems for Pentax Europe speaks... digitalphil Pentax News and Rumors 21 02-02-2008 02:18 PM
No New Pentax DSLR at PMA? RiceHigh Pentax DSLR Discussion 52 02-26-2007 05:05 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:08 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top