Take your photography to the next level and beyond...

  • NEWS
  • REVIEWS
  • INSPIRATION
  • COMMUNITY
  • COMPETITIONS

Why not join for free today?

Join for Free

Your total photography experience starts here


Get on1's Perfect Effects 9.5 for FREE! (£48 value)

Download section


JJGEE 10 6.5k 18 England
15 Jun 2013 9:51PM

Quote:camera profiles and lens profiles are not the same.

Exactly my point, it appears you have created lens profiles.

Adobe do not have multiple camera profiles with different lenses.
BUT they do have multiple lens profiles for a particular camera.

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

Paul Morgan 14 16.6k 6 England
15 Jun 2013 9:52PM

Quote:Exactly my point, it appears you have created lens profiles


Wake up and open your eyes
Paul Morgan 14 16.6k 6 England
15 Jun 2013 10:01PM

Quote:Adobe do not have multiple camera profiles with different lenses


Lol your quick Smile
GlennH 9 1.9k 1 France
16 Jun 2013 1:23AM
It's a slightly flawed idea, Paul, but what the hell - I just uploaded a quirky collector's edition Sony DSC-R1 profile, since nobody else on the face of the planet is ever likely to profile that camera again. I know one or two people use them around here. The colour I got from the R1/Lightroom was infinitely better after I created that profile. Hasn't appeared yet - I guess it needs approval first.

Jeff, different camera profiles are created for different lenses to account for the variation in lens colour characteristics. Those characteristics probably shift negligibly between marque lenses, but when you have a motley collection of multi-branded optics it becomes a bit more critical. The lens profiles you're talking about correct for distortion and vignetting, but the colour effect is not measured (I've created one or two lens profiles, though it's a rigorous process that tests my 5-minute attention span).
Paul Morgan 14 16.6k 6 England
16 Jun 2013 1:33AM
What software did you use to build the profile.

I`m not even sure if the profiles upload work when there downloaded, they were fine when I uploaded them but I tested a few and each file shows 0 bytes, they should be at least 150kb.

There`s certainly no shortage of people wanting or offering profiles.

http://howgreenisyourgarden.wordpress.com/2011/02/13/using-lightroom-camera-profiles-and-why-adobe-standard-is-a-liability/

http://www.fujix-forum.com/index.php/topic/10519-has-anyone-made-a-lightroom-camera-profile-for-the-x100s/
cats_123 Plus
11 4.3k 25 Northern Ireland
16 Jun 2013 8:54AM
for those of us who are not technically minded could someone please explain:

what this is for?
why are there only 14/15 profiles for cameras I've never heard of Wink- or unlikely to use?
why would we want to download?
what are we uploading if we want to join in?



apologies if this was announced elsewhere....seem to have missed it Smile
Paul Morgan 14 16.6k 6 England
16 Jun 2013 3:58PM
Profiles like pre-sets can be shared.

But unlike pre-sets, profiles only work with if you happen to be using the same camera body.

This is a typical example of the effects of applying a profile, some profiles can have quite a marked effect, others can be quite subtle, there often better than using the default profiles as supplied by Lightroom giving you a better base level to work from.

profile-comparison.jpg


GF2 + 14mm, note the changes to the reds and blues.

There is a whole lot of stuff about profiling on the web like this to give you some idea how it all works.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dn5VvB32wVI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9WWJz8-pgEA
GlennH 9 1.9k 1 France
16 Jun 2013 4:53PM
That difference in blues seems very common between Lightroom and ColorChecker Passport profiles. Here is someone else offering profilesóJay Kinghornóbut note he says you'll get better results making your own, which is sheer inevitability. I don't mind chucking a few profiles into the pot, but last night's effort seems to have disappeared into the ether (it was the right file type).
Paul Morgan 14 16.6k 6 England
16 Jun 2013 5:01PM
Yes I agree, nothing beats having your own, I`ve just shared a handfull that will improve daylight and flash somewhat, there better than the adobe standard profile and will give a better base level to work from.


Quote:but last night's effort seems to have disappeared into the ether (it was the right file type)


They will take a few days to show, but I`ve sent in a report, the files get minced during the download and will not work, the also show as 0 bytes of data Sad
Gundog 2 627 Scotland
17 Jun 2013 4:48PM

Quote:So your trying to tell me no two 5D Mk111 sensors will be the same or deliver the same results :

Nope, I'm trying to tell you that even same-model cameras can vary in their output. Do you imagine Adobe don't use actual 5D MkIII bodies when creating profiles? They're providing you with a generic profile, you're rejecting it, and now you're providing someone else with a generic profile, which is what it becomes when it's not applied to your camera.



That's certainly how I see it.
Paul Morgan 14 16.6k 6 England
17 Jun 2013 4:57PM
My understanding is that although all sensors vary slightly, when fitted to a camera they are then calibrated to tight tolerances.

I guess some of you would rather run the Adobe default profiles in Lightroom, I don`t know about other camera`s but I know the single profile used for Panasonic and Olympus is pretty horrible.
GlennH 9 1.9k 1 France
17 Jun 2013 5:16PM
I think they can vary significantly, Paul, between manufacturing process batches, but at the same time I don't see great harm in what you're trying to do - it's just a different 'recipe' if you like, not entirely transferable but it might be preferable in some cases. One thing though is standard Adobe profiles are usually pretty 'safe' - they don't clip colours easily, whereas in my experience colours do teeter on the edge a little more with home-made profiles. I think that's by Adobe design, but could equally signify a need for me to refine my profile-making technique!

Without a shadow of doubt the colours from my own profiles are frequently more accurate, and though I don't usually need great accuracy there are times when I take a photo because of a specific hue. Often that's lost in the Adobe profile (that blue shift being a prime example).
Paul Morgan 14 16.6k 6 England
17 Jun 2013 5:36PM
Generally the main times I use profiles is at a wedding or shooting portraits, these are generally the times when I need a more consistent base level to work from.


Quote:whereas in my experience colours do teeter on the edge a little more with home-made profiles. I think that's by Adobe design, but could equally signify a need for me to refine my profile-making technique!


Care is needed, I first set a custom WB then photograph the target taking care not to clip the highlights or shadows, exposer needs to be spot on, its pretty fool proof using the xrite software, if you did happen to clip something, the software will flag a warning and not let you proceed.

A lot of people complain that working from Raws with Olympus Cameras there well loved colours are lost, profiling comes very close to getting these colours back.

The profiles I have shared are just good generic profiles like I said, it would be pretty pointless sharing some of my others Smile

wed.jpg

Paul Morgan 14 16.6k 6 England
19 Jun 2013 6:12PM
The profiles are back up for download now the bug has been fixed, I`ve also added profiles for the GF2.

They can be found here.

http://www.ephotozine.com/downloads/lightroom-camera-profiles-448/p-0
GlennH 9 1.9k 1 France
19 Jun 2013 6:57PM
My modest offering is still AWOL. It'd be interesting to see feedback on whether these actually improve matters for anyone or not, even though 'improvement' might be a little subjective.

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.