Showing posts with label calibration. Show all posts
Showing posts with label calibration. Show all posts

Sunday, October 18, 2009

Colorchecker passport minireview

I got myself one of the new colorchecker passports. This product has three different targets in a little make-up mirror format. There is a classic colorchecker that we all now and love, a large white balance target and a "creative enhancement target". The package also comes with a CD with software that allows you to create calibrated dng profiles for use in Lightroom and ACR. There is even a plugin that works straight from Lightroom that is very handy.


Figure: The colorchecker and the creative target in direct sunlight. I white balanced this image from the neutral patch on the creative target and created a DNG profile that is used to correct the image. The image looks almost identical to the real life colorchecker. On mouse over you will see the rendering using the Adobe Standard profile for this camera (A Nikon D300).

Above, by mousing over the image, one can see the results from me calibrating my main camera. There are clear differences in the rendering of a few of the patches and the overall image appears warmer in the calibrated image than in the standard profile version even though both raw renderings were white balanced on the same patch. This might have to do with the very harsh sunlight at the altitudes here. I get far better skin tone rendering using these new profiles generated from the colorchecker. You could do this before (and I have done it) using a standard colorchecker and DNG profile editor. Strangely enough there are small differences between the profiles generated by the two different methods. Something to check out. What's most important of a card like this is to be able to get an accurate white balance. An example is below. This is a shot in my son's room with light from several compact fluorescent bulbs. The walls are painted lightly blue and my camera just has an extremely hard time measuring white balance correctly. The below shows the shot with default settings in camera and in Lightroom and the mouseover shows the result of balancing using the grey card and using a calibrated profile (less important here).


Figure: my son using automatic white balance and grey card white balance (mouseover). Mouseover this link to see the same but with the Adobe standard profile.

His pajamas of course are deep blue, not muddy cyan. Needless to say that the image that used a greycard for white balance is far better. There is not that much difference between the standard profile and the calibrated profile and there it comes down to taste.

The creative target that is provided (see the right part of the top image) is very handy as it changes both temperature and tint instead of just temperature. I measured the white balance change and in the top row (little portrait icons) of white balance patches, each successive patch shifts the assumed white balance up by about 250K, while the tint shifts by approximately 6. In the landscape row, each successive patch shifts by about 300K, while the tint shifts by about 7.5. You can do the same thing with the white balance quick adjust in Lightroom, but that shifts with larger steps and does not bring the tint along. The creative target on the passport is clearly well thought out in my opinion.

In conclusion, it is clear that using a correct color balance is very important especially in difficult light. You can use the colorchecker to very easily generate calibrated profiles for your camera which can significantly alter your image's appearance in limited circumstances.

Tuesday, June 17, 2008

Firefox 3.0 released

Today, to great fanfare (and an embarrassing server crash) Firefox 3.0 got released. This is a great and fast browser even if on the Mac I prefer Safari. One of the promises it held was that finally, there would be a mainstream browser outside Safari that supports color management. Unfortunately, it is not enabled by default which is a very bad decision. There is no good reason for this and the quoted reasons (incorrect color in pages that mix CSS elements and images) is just plain wrong technically. Color managed apps will only color manage images that have a profile. Image elements on webpages never have those, so the appearance will not change. Luckily, there is an option to enable color management in Firefox that is hidden in the secret configuration pages. You enable it by typing "about:config" in the address bar (without quotes). Click "I'll be careful" and you'll get a page with many obscure settings. In the Filter box, type "management" and the only two relevant options will come up. Make sure that display_profile is set to the default, and double click on the"enabled" property to change its value into "true." This will turn on color management and will make those images on the web that have profiles embedded appear as they were meant (as long as you have calibrated your monitor). Even images in sRGB will benefit from this. This really should be the default and I think it is a major error that they did not enable this at least as a visible preference. Next time better I hope.



To learn why this is really important, see this excellent explanation. Test your color managed browser here.

Edit: it turns out that Firefox 3.0 color manages every image, even untagged ones. That is a superb choice!

Tuesday, September 18, 2007

Lightroom values for the colorchecker chart

Since Lightroom's colorspace is based on prophotoRGB but has a different gamma, you cannot use any of the published values for the color patches in one of the Gretag MacBeth colorcheckers that many people use to check the color rendition of their toolchain and that you can use to calibrate the color rendering of ACR for your specific camera. Usually you would do this in ACR/PS, but if you only have LR, what do you do? Well you can use the below values in Lightroom and do it manually by going back and forth between patches and changing the hue and saturation in the camera calibration part of the develop module (after white balancing on the second grey patch!). These values are based of the values in this excellent page, so there will be a small error in there of about 1%. I simply did the appropriate transform to gamma 2.2 for the values in the ppRGB column. The values are in percent of the channel in R,G,B laid out just like the colorchecker chart.



Honestly, I have no idea why not all the grey patches are neutral, but this should help those manually calibrating in Lightroom.

EDIT: No idea why, but blogger messes up my HTML table, so it is now just a picture of a table. Hope this still works.

UPDATE 9/19/07: I uploaded a table with more precise values from 16-bit values of the colorchecker reference in the next post.