[WheresWaldo]

I have a question that I just wasn't sure where it went so I am asking it here.

I have seen many discussions about Pentax color or Sigma color or Tamron color. All these referring to color hue of various rendering based on the type of glass, coatings, etc. Usually the discussions are about camera makes but it has extended down even toward individual lens. I understand that different lens will have general tendencies toward different rendering throughout the light spectrum.

Now I shoot exclusively RAW images. I am teaching my daughter to shoot exclusively RAW images. With the speed of even the least expensive computers now a days working with RAW is not as difficult as it used to be. Certainly converting RAW to other formats is easier than ever.

The first questions are this; If I am shooting RAW all the time doesn't that negate some of the differences of color rendering? Wouldn't RAW ensure that all the color information available within the scene you are photographing? Does RAW shooting provide for some leveling of the playing field so to speak between lenses with regard to contrast and overall image quality?

Now secondly, if I were to not rely on the Adobe provided camera profile and instead create my own, let's say, based on the Gretag-Macbeth or Kodak Color Control Patches or IT8 Reflection Target, wouldn't that create a camera profile that would render all colors the same regardless of the lens used? Would I have to create multiple camera profiles for Adobe Camera Raw for example, one for my most common Pentax lens and perhaps one for my most common Sigma lens?

My understanding is that if a camera profile is created for your specific copy of your camera then you should get the same color rendering despite differences that may be inherent in the other equipment used. I am not just talking about glass either, but Flash units, lighting, etc. Am I incorrect in this assumption? I am sure others have wondered about this also and I can't seem to find a definitive source for the answers.

Thanks in advance.

[drewdlephone]

Good questions.

As to lenses, while RAW certainly does level the playing field, the camera is still at the mercy of the glass on it's nose, so to speak. If a lens renders certain colors a certain way, RAW picks that up and does not apply any after-effects or processing to it.

If you applied color-corrective profiles in post-processing dependent upon the lens used, you could theoretically get all the glass to perform "virtually" the same, but it would take a lot of trial and error to get the color sensitivity just right for each lens. And, perhaps more importantly, why would you want to do this? The whole point in having different pieces of glass isn't merely to cover multiple focal ranges, it's using certain lenses to get a certain "look" in the photograph. So in other words, despite camera profiles being created for each particular camera, you're still going to get different results with different lenses. The rendering on my Tak 55 is nothing like what I get out of my kit lens, and all my other settings are the same.

The beauty of RAW is that, yes, all that information comes out of the camera unmolested, and hence can be tinkered with to the enth degree in post-processing. The reason JPEG still exists on all these cameras is so that you don't have to molest each picture manually after the fact. You pick you settings for NR and the like, and you get what you get. All depends on how you like to shoot, and how much time you want to spend after you shoot.