different colors in raw and jpg /ACR

[bnnrcn]

I wanted to shoot a tulip this morning at home and when I opened the raw and jpg images of same shot I saw that the colours were different in raw image and jpg image.I didn't make any colour adjustments in my camera,so the jpg image couldn't be effected.The raw one is a kind of pinkish red,the jpg one is red.Actually the colour of the raw one seems more real.So,I started thinking why there was a difference between two images although they had the same settings while shooting.Then,I started going around ACR functions with the hope of I could catch a clue about the difference.And I think I got it.When I clicked 'Camera Calibration' ,I saw that 'Camera Profile' was 'Adobe Standart' for the raw image .But Camera Profile for the JPG image was 'embedded' and my camera setting for 'Picture Style' was 'landscape' in may camera when shooting.When I changed the camera profile to 'landscape' for the raw image ,I saw that I got the same colours as JPG.But because the colours with 'Adobe Standart' were closer to the real in raw image I feel confused now.So what do I have to do when I process raw images in general.Do I have to stick with the setting 'Adobe Standart' to get real colours or do I have to change it to landscape,portrait...depending on what I shoot?

[Manfred M]

None of your camera settings will affect the RAW data. You get to do everything yourself; starting with your white balance.

To make life easier on yourself, include a shot of a neutral target; whether it is a white card, colour swatch or 18% grey card as part of your workflow. Just make sure the same light that you are shooting with hits it.

Click on it white the eyedropper tool in ACR, and as long as your lighting hasn't changed, you can continue to use those settings for other images you took during that session.

[bnnrcn]

Manfred I think we are not talking about same thing.It is not about WB.WB was auto when shooting.It is not about camera settings.It is about picture style.Picture style in my camera was set to 'landscape' and the jpg image was effected by this setting.The raw one wasn't effected and 'camera profile' for the raw image was 'adobe standart' in ACR.When I changed it to 'landscape' I got the same colours in raw as the jpg one.But they are not the real colours.The colours in 'adobe standart' option were closer to real.That's why I asked my question.When you process a raw image do you change camera profile in ACR according to what you shoot?I mean if you shoot a portrait,do you change the camera profile setting as 'portrait' when you process your raw image or do you stick with the camera profile as 'adobe standart'?

None of your camera settings will affect the RAW data. You get to do everything yourself; starting with your white balance.

To make life easier on yourself, include a shot of a neutral target; whether it is a white card, colour swatch or 18% grey card as part of your workflow. Just make sure the same light that you are shooting with hits it.

Click on it white the eyedropper tool in ACR, and as long as your lighting hasn't changed, you can continue to use those settings for other images you took during that session.

[DanK]

When I clicked 'Camera Calibration' ,I saw that 'Camera Profile' was 'Adobe Standart' for the raw image .But Camera Profile for the JPG image was 'embedded' and my camera setting for 'Picture Style' was 'landscape' in may camera when shooting.When I changed the camera profile to 'landscape' for the raw image ,I saw that I got the same colours as JPG.But because the colours with 'Adobe Standart' were closer to the real in raw image I feel confused now.So what do I have to do when I process raw images in general.Do I have to stick with the setting 'Adobe Standart' to get real colours or do I have to change it to landscape,portrait...depending on what I shoot?

I think you need to go back to square one. All images start as raw files, and they have to be processed to be viewable. When you shoot jpeg, you are letting the camera do the processing--that is, letting it determine color balance, sharpening, etc. When you read the raw file into a raw editor such as LR, it has to do SOMETHING to make the image viewable. The profiles you found are simply starting points for rendering the image. Since the image is still a raw file, the choice of initial rendering has no permanent effect on the file at all. You can change the rendering any way you want. So the only importance that has is your own convenience. I personally start with Adobe Standard for the reason you noted--it usually seems closer to what I saw--and therefore, I don't have to do as much to get the image to look like I want.

[ajohnw]

Which Adobe profile is used to develop the raw file may have an effect on colour. Does for me but the degree of change varies according to the shot. And which camera actually.

If it's a Nikon camera and you select an adobe's profile that matches the camera setting the raw image is much more likely to come up looking very similar to the jpg but there can be a surprising amount of variation.

John
-

[bnnrcn]

Thank you very much Dan,I think I will stick with 'adobe standard' too for the same reason.I will check with a couple of photos taken outdoors and if 'adobe standart' still gives me the colours which are closer to what I saw when shooting,then I won't change this setting in ACR at all

I think you need to go back to square one. All images start as raw files, and they have to be processed to be viewable. When you shoot jpeg, you are letting the camera do the processing--that is, letting it determine color balance, sharpening, etc. When you read the raw file into a raw editor such as LR, it has to do SOMETHING to make the image viewable. The profiles you found are simply starting points for rendering the image. Since the image is still a raw file, the choice of initial rendering has no permanent effect on the file at all. You can change the rendering any way you want. So the only importance that has is your own convenience. I personally start with Adobe Standard for the reason you noted--it usually seems closer to what I saw--and therefore, I don't have to do as much to get the image to look like I want.

[bnnrcn]

Thank you John,ACR's landscape profile matches well with my Canon 1100D's landscape profile,no problem with it.But there is a profile in ACR which is called 'Adobe Standart' and this profile gives me colours closer to what I have seen when shooting.So I wasn't sure which one to use but after Dan's explanation I think it is better for me to stick with 'Adobe Standart'

Which Adobe profile is used to develop the raw file may have an effect on colour. Does for me but the degree of change varies according to the shot. And which camera actually.

If it's a Nikon camera and you select an adobe's profile that matches the camera setting


the raw image is much more likely to come up looking very similar to the jpg but there can be a surprising amount of variation.

John
-

[shreds]

The RAW image will remain as shot until you change something in PP. The jpeg will have automatically been altered to the camera's adjustment, in this case the 'landscape' settings. If you change the camera profile then of course it will read it differently.

As an example, if your camera allows it, take a shot in RAW and jpeg as normal, then take the same shots again in black and white (most menus allow you to do this) in RAW and jpeg.

Guess what, the RAWs are the same and still in colour. In other words the camera is not changing them.

The camera profile is telling your camera how to adjust the jpegs.

And yes I would adopt a standard Adobe profile, especially if you feel it is giving you the correct rending and results.

[bnnrcn]

Thank you Manfred,your explanation about getting a default WB setting is very helpful because sometimes you don't have any grey area in your photo to click with the eyedropper and you are desperate

None of your camera settings will affect the RAW data. You get to do everything yourself; starting with your white balance.

To make life easier on yourself, include a shot of a neutral target; whether it is a white card, colour swatch or 18% grey card as part of your workflow. Just make sure the same light that you are shooting with hits it


.

Click on it white the eyedropper tool in ACR, and as long as your lighting hasn't changed, you can continue to use those settings for other images you took during that session.

[bnnrcn]

Thank you Ian, 'Adobe Standard' in ACR seems good in terms of giving correct colours.I'm new into PP and I quite like getting to know softwares by trying and seeing the results.So,'Adobe Standart' profile has been today's lesson for me

The RAW image will remain as shot until you change something in PP. The jpeg will have automatically been altered to the camera's adjustment, in this case the 'landscape' settings. If you change the camera profile then of course it will read it differently.

As an example, if your camera allows it, take a shot in RAW and jpeg as normal, then take the same shots again in black and white (most menus allow you to do this) in RAW and jpeg.

Guess what, the RAWs are the same and still in colour. In other words the camera is not changing them.

The camera profile is telling your camera how to adjust the jpegs.

And yes I would adopt a standard Adobe profile, especially if you feel it is giving you the correct rending and results.

[ajohnw]

Thank you John,ACR's landscape profile matches well with my Canon 1100D's landscape profile,no problem with it.But there is a profile in ACR which is called 'Adobe Standart' and this profile gives me colours closer to what I have seen when shooting.So I wasn't sure which one to use but after Dan's explanation I think it is better for me to stick with 'Adobe Standart'

Personally I would remember the alternative profiles are there. One of the main effects they should have is to alter the gradation - variations in tone levels across the shot. Contrast changes is another way of looking at it. For instance there will probably be one marked portrait which will be aimed at getting realistic skin tones. Maybe a vivid which will have the effect the name suggests. Mostly they should give subtle changes but I suspect exposure variations can mess that up.

John
-

[Manfred M]

Binnur - again; back to basics.

Camera captures image data and that RAW data is NOT affected by anything other than your aperture, shutter speed and ISO settings. Everything else is up to you when you do your RAW conversion.

From here, things get a touch more complicated. RAW data is not an image, so every time you take a picture, your camera processes the RAW data and creates a jpeg that is displayed on the screen on the back of your camera, and that image is based on the camera settings. These settings are also written to the data that your camera stores; including the settings you happen to have selected.

On opening the RAW data, ACR has access to these paramters; BUT Adobe does not have access to Canon, Nikon, Panasonic, Sony, etc. firmware, so any interpretations of these settings are based on assumptions made by the Adobe programing team; not the camera manufacturer's engineers.

When you look at the file in ACR, some of these parameters are used as "default" values, but this is not a 100% conversion as sharpening, contrast tend to be less than what an in-camera generated jpeg would look like. The jpeg that your camera produces and the view that ACR gives you may (or may not) be close, but they certainly will never be identical.

It is up to you, the RAW shooter, to use the RAW converter to tweak the image the way you see fit. I would not rely on either the camera or ACR to dictate the correct colours. You don't know which one or if either one is actually correct. Here you really have two approaches, and it does depend on how accurate you want your colours to be.

The simplest is to include a neutral target; white grey, etc. in a shot and then use that to set your white balance. This is what I usually do. I have a couple of "professional" targets, but will also use a white shirt, a piece of paper or even someone's eyeball as a starting point to set my white bqlance.

The second is to get the X-rite ColorChecker Passport; which consists of a colour swatch target and the software to produce a lighting / camera specific profile for the the shooting conditions and this will give you an VERY accurate colour profile to use and you colours will be bang on; although frankly I often don't want 100% colour accuracy because the image may look better if it is a touch warmer or cooler.

[bnnrcn]

Thank you Manfred,for WB I will follow your suggestion and for camera profile option in ACR (I have to choose one in anyway) I think the best choice is to use ' Adobe Standart' because the colours are closer to real.So,what is your choice for camera profile in ACR,do you use 'Adobe Standart' as always?

Binnur - again; back to basics.

Camera captures image data and that RAW data is NOT affected by anything other than your aperture, shutter speed and ISO settings. Everything else is up to you when you do your RAW conversion.

From here, things get a touch more complicated. RAW data is not an image, so every time you take a picture, your camera processes the RAW data and creates a jpeg that is displayed on the screen on the back of your camera, and that image is based on the camera settings. These settings are also written to the data that your camera stores; including the settings you happen to have selected.

On opening the RAW data, ACR has access to these paramters; BUT Adobe does not have access to Canon, Nikon, Panasonic, Sony, etc. firmware, so any interpretations of these settings are based on assumptions made by the Adobe programing team; not the camera manufacturer's engineers.

When you look at the file in ACR, some of these parameters are used as "default" values, but this is not a 100% conversion as sharpening, contrast tend to be less than what an in-camera generated jpeg would look like. The jpeg that your camera produces and the view that ACR gives you may (or may not) be close, but they certainly will never be identical.

It is up to you, the RAW shooter, to use the RAW converter to tweak the image the way you see fit. I would not rely on either the camera or ACR to dictate the correct colours. You don't know which one or if either one is actually correct. Here you really have two approaches, and it does depend on how accurate you want your colours to be.

The simplest is to include a neutral target; white grey, etc. in a shot and then use that to set your white balance. This is what I usually do. I have a couple of "professional" targets, but will also use a white shirt, a piece of paper or even someone's eyeball as a starting point to set my white bqlance.

The second is to get the X-rite ColorChecker Passport; which consists of a colour swatch target and the software to produce a lighting / camera specific profile for the the shooting conditions and this will give you an VERY accurate colour profile to use and you colours will be bang on; although frankly I often don't want 100% colour accuracy because the image may look better if it is a touch warmer or cooler.

[bnnrcn]

Manfred I think I have just understood what you are trying to tell me.Do you mean which camera profile I choose is not very important as long as I set my WB correctly?

[Manfred M]

Thank you Manfred,for WB I will follow your suggestion and for camera profile option in ACR (I have to choose one in anyway) I think the best choice is to use ' Adobe Standart' because the colours are closer to real.So,what is your choice for camera profile in ACR,do you use 'Adobe Standart' as always?

I generally use a custom profile that I have made for the specific scence, and if not, I will use one that is similar; daylight, overcast, studio, etc. I use the ColorChecker Passport to create them.

[Polar01]

Binnur do not really worry "about the colours are closer to real", for some things it is important like skin tone and product colours, however remember it is your reality.

Cheers: Allan

[bnnrcn]

Thank you Allan,I think you are right,it is most important for skin tones.The rest can be adjusted anyway.

Binnur do not really worry "about the colours are closer to real", for some things it is important like skin tone and product colours, however remember it is your reality.

Cheers: Allan

[Brev00]

I think it is a good idea to experiment with the different picture controls and be flexible. They effect contrast as well as color. I used Adobe for a while until I found that I preferred the sky blue in the portrait picture control. I don't use Adobe standard when there is significant sky anymore. With scenes that lack contrast (misty morns, for instance), I might use landscape for the strong contrast--I usually dislike it for well lit landscapes. The picture control is a tool like so many others that can be used to season to taste.

[bnnrcn]

Thank you very much Larry,this morning I tried a couple of shots outdoors and I have come to same conclusion as you that I have to be flexible about picture controls because I tried differrent picture controls for each shot in ACR and I found out that it really depends on in which conditions you have shot.I didn't like the colour of sky in Landscape option like you don't like, I like the one in Adobe Standart but I will try Portrait option too.It has never occured to me that Portrait option can be used for getting nice colours in the sky But if the software is giving us so many options I think we have to use them thoroughly to get better results

I think it is a good idea to experiment with the different picture controls and be flexible. They effect contrast as well as color. I used Adobe for a while until I found that I preferred the sky blue in the portrait picture control. I don't use Adobe standard when there is significant sky anymore. With scenes that lack contrast (misty morns, for instance), I might use landscape for the strong contrast--I usually dislike it for well lit landscapes. The picture control is a tool like so many others that can be used to season to taste.

[ajohnw]

Thank you very much Larry,this morning I tried a couple of shots outdoors and I have come to same conclusion as you that I have to be flexible about picture controls because I tried differrent picture controls for each shot in ACR and I found out that it really depends on in which conditions you have shot.I didn't like the colour of sky in Landscape option like you don't like, I like the one in Adobe Standart but I will try Portrait option too.It has never occured to me that Portrait option can be used for getting nice colours in the sky But if the software is giving us so many options I think we have to use them thoroughly to get better results

I'm glad you decided to remember that they are there. I don't use Adobe software but you may find that there are other profiles about on the web that you can try that others have developed.

John
-