- This topic has 9 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated 5 years, 7 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Hello!
I appear to be having a problem with my RAW files… 90% of the time, they look oversharpened and oversaturated (especially the greens in the photo). Would this have something to do with my color profile?
Thanks!—Logan
It could be your colour profile. Different image processing software develop the RAW file differently so it could be how you’re file is being demosaiced or possible some editor presets. What processor are you using? Got any examples?
- This reply was modified 55 years, 4 months ago by .
@loganlamar, what software are you using to view the RAW files? Do they look that way in your RAW editor?
@nasa I don’t have any specific examples ready, but I think you are right, it is my color profile. I shoot in Camera Faithful on my Canon 60D, and so my JPEGs straight out of camera look fine. My RAWs look pretty hideous though in my RAW editor.
I’m using ON1—switching over from Luminar 3—but I left my color profile on “ON1 Standard”. After dumping my edits on the shoot, and starting over with “Camera Neutral”, my photos looked way more natural and more pleasing to look at.
@buddingphotographer I’m using ON1—and they do look bad in my RAW editor… when it’s on Standard. On Neutral, things look better.Thanks for your help!
—Logan
I know that in Lightroom, often I’ll accidentally be editing a wedding photoshoot with the Profile set to Landscape, and that’s not all that great for skintones. 🙂
Curious, @loganlamar, I’d like to hear about why you’re switching from Luminar to ON1. I’ve never used either, but was contemplating using one or the other for teaching post processing on Photography Teams. There’s just too much to Lightroom to try to get new students up to speed on it during a short workshop.
@jamesstaddon, to boil it down, Luminar 3 was simply a bit immature and underdeveloped as a program. I think it has a lot of great potential, but the organizational component (aka the DAM) was not nearly developed enough to quickly cull images. It took about four seconds to render an image to where you could see if it was in focus or not, and for me, that wasn’t very practical. It’s all very new, and still has a bunch of bugs and shortcomings, compared with something like Lightroom. (In the editor, clone stamping/healing brushing was very clunky and hard to use as well. Lightroom wasn’t amazing, but it was usable.)
That said, Luminar has a fantastic RAW processor. It’s very much like Lightroom, and it may be even better. It has some very cool artificial intelligence features thrown in as well that I found myself using a lot for my landscapes (for example, there is a sunrays filter that mimics real sunbeams, and the AI Sky Enhance works very well—it will find where the sky is, darken it slightly and make the clouds pop without affecting the rest of the image). Auto-distortion correction is good, but Chromatic Abberattion correction was quite poor (adding more CA than taking away…).
Export settings were also very limited… it was pretty frustrating.ON1 2019, on the other hand, feels like it’s been around a while longer. It browses reasonablly fast, I can cull. It edits well (maybe not as well as Luminar). I haven’t put it through a lot of paces, but in the month I’ve had it, it works well.
@jamesstaddon I forgot about your photography team contemplation…. ON1 is possibly a little too heavy for what you’re looking for if you’re looking for something simpler than Lightroom, because the two programs are similar in a lot of respects. On1 does offer a free thirty day trial (as does Luminar) which is much longer than Adobe’s weeklong trial.
If you’re going for simpler, though, my recommendation would be to look into Apple Photos. It’s not for Windows, it ships with Mac computers as part of the operating system. It’s pretty basic, but I think it might just have enough functionality to get someone started. You can easily flag your favorite images and crop and edit them, and you can edit RAW files in it. It’s not Lightroom compatible (meaning no saving anything as a DNG)—but neither are ON1 and Luminar.
Attachments:
@nasa I think it has something to do with .DNG maybe being an Adobe specific file format.
THANK YOU @loganlamar!
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.