Making D600 colors look like Canon colors.

B

Blacktop

Senior Member
Hyogen said:
^LOL haha, Canon looks that bad to you? :p

...I should not believe that was your serious effort should I? It obviously looks too gritty. No offense!!!


Thanks for all your guys' efforts. I think I'm starting to get somewhere. I have been underexposing my photos and I'm going to try exposing for skin.
Click to expand...

Well, you can only work with what you're given. You posted a download that looked like it was taken with a flip phone rather than a a D600.. No offense!!!
 
BackdoorArts

BackdoorArts

Senior Member
How's this? I was working with what I was given. ;)

HYO_7636-Edit.jpg


Wasn't sure how much of the warmth you wanted to keep. This is what I'd consider a "natural" look. Process was essentially finding a good neutral point using the Levels adjustment in Photoshop, then I played a little bit with the Color Balance to add back a little warmth. I then used a Tonal Contrast filter from Nik Color Efex 4 to balance the backlighting. I could go a lot of places with the shade of warmth/coolness from here, and there's still work to be done to bring out shadows and burn in some areas, but I think the skin saturation is where it should be.
 
Last edited:
H

Hyogen

Senior Member
Backdoor, the first one looks a little too desaturated in the oranges--skin looks dead. The 2nd one is better, but is now too warm and orange. This is exactly what is taking me way too much time in post trying to get the look I want. All Canon users have to do (it seems) is overexpose the shot a little bit and apply a VSCO film filter. D600 files just don't work that way.

I realize this particular raw file may not be the best example because of the sun flare. I'll upload and post another and link to a more specific example of the tones I'm going for.
 
B

Blade Canyon

Senior Member
Until the day when we are all working with calibrated monitors or passing around the same physical print, there is no way we can know what the others are seeing. My primary work monitor is a 27" Samsung HDTV, but when I see the same shots at work on a Dell flatscreen or on my phone or iPad, they look different every time.

Hyo, I did add contrast and sharpness to overcome the detail lost by your shooting into the sun without a lens hood. On my big screen, it smoothes out, even in the JPEG reduced version I posted here. You are obviously seeing more grit in the JPEG compression algorithm put out for your monitor. You have posted many high quality pictures on this website, so it's a surprise you would use such a poorly-executed picture for your example of blaming the Nikon for not giving you "Canon" colors.
 
H

Hyogen

Senior Member
Hyogen said:
HYO_6730 by www.HYOFOTO.com, on Flickr

this is promising to me, but it's super hard to get it like this in all situations in my opinion..
Click to expand...

I'm sorry I didn't take your edit seriously. Honestly, I thought you were being a troll and saying that Canon looks bad. Your example looks as if you burned all the details in the face for example...that's what I mean by gritty. Maybe I'm not using the correct monitor to see what you're seeing. My macbook IPS screen and laptop calibrated screen, Galaxy IPS screen (phone), and external 24" screens all look the same to me. I can understand why you added contrast to bring back the details that were washed out. My example above should demonstrate that I'm not a complete noob when it comes to taking pictures or getting nice skin tones. As much as I like how I processed the above photo, it's not the STYLE I want to use for weddings.

As for my poor example RAW file, I think I just wanted to show one I had wasted a ton of time on trying to get what I wanted out of it. I just checked out a friend's D800 RAW file and it wasn't too far off from my D600 files, but perhaps a little more neutral. I have downloaded about 10 sample 5D3 raw files and I feel it was significantly easier to get the colors I wanted. Maybe it's a placebo effect...Anyway, I would hate to have to sell and rebuy everything while losing Nikon's control layout. So, I'm not going to give up just yet..

I think it's just as simple as Nikon for Landscape, Canon for People. If it's possible to get the same style that I want, then it just simply takes too much time than it's worth with the Nikon D600. You might know Ryan Brenizer, the popular Nikon shooter...he said the same thing about skin tones with the D600, as I stated in my original post.
 
Last edited:
H

Hyogen

Senior Member
Also, come to think of it I am the type of person who blames equipment somewhat. It's funny that a year and half ago I was shooting with a Canon Rebel T1i and was blaming my crop sensor for not giving me the skin tones I wanted. Going full frame, however, was the best thing I could have done.
 
BackdoorArts

BackdoorArts

Senior Member
It's hard for me because, a) I'm not generally a portrait/people photographer, and b) I've got no real familiarity with Canon color profiles. I do know that I've seen more than a few side-by-side Nikon v. Canon body challenges that will speak to the glory of Canon skin tones, while praising Nikon for landscape detail and color depth, etc. I honestly don't know if you'll ever be able to get exactly what you want out of the D600 because, well, it is what it is. I started looking at the color profiling software, and the thing it does best is to get all the cameras to look the same in the same lighting conditions. But heck, when do you really get that? Obviously you can play with a basic profile and learn what hues you need to tweak for saturation in order to achieve a Canon-like profile, but then you'd need to do that for profiles under every possible lighting condition.

I hate to say it, but if I'm going to be consistent with my mantra use the right tool for right job, then I'm wondering if you might not just be better switching? If the Canon color profile is that important to you and your vision then why not bite the bullet and make the change? You're unfortunately heavily invested in a camera that has seen its market value plummet, so swapping for equivalent Canon gear will be costly. But if it's that important then it may be where you need to go.

Otherwise it may be time to start scouring non-brand specific, post-processing focused forums and asking the question, "How can I achieve a Canon-like color profile on my Nikon D600 without switching brands?", while ignoring the trolls who will slam you for having the wrong brand in the first place.

I've got the question queued up to my brother, and I'll let you know what he says.
 
F

FastGlass

Senior Member
I think your just being to picky. If you want to be so precise that it looks the way you want it to on your monitor, it may look entirely different coming from a print shop. If your so unhappy with your 600 sell it and get something that shoots perfect. And good luck with that.
 
S

sonicbuffalo_RIP

Senior Member
I'm not trying to be facetious, or to be a troll.....but it's already been said, if you're not happy with the colors of Nikon...and there doesn't appear to be a resolution to fix what ain't broken....then go and sell your Nikon and buy a Fuji. Why Fuji? Look at some samples of what the XT1 is doing with skin tones. I think it's better than Canon. Oh....and there's nothing wrong with Nikon's colors either! As millions will attest!
 
Last edited:
B

Blade Canyon

Senior Member
Ken Rockwell, FWIW, has also talked about how Nikons look too greenish. In a photo class a few months ago, we were shooting outside, surrounded by trees and shrubs, and the instructor exclaimed "why does she look so green" when looking at a model's photo on somebody's Nikon. I think surrounding greenery reflects on the skin, and that's the way it really looks to our eyes, but our brains adjust. But when we see it on a photo, our brains see the green.

For shooting JPEG mode, Rockwell sets his auto white balance with a click of magenta added to overcome the green.
 
R

Ruidoso Bill

Senior Member
Hyogen said:
Also, come to think of it I am the type of person who blames equipment somewhat. It's funny that a year and half ago I was shooting with a Canon Rebel T1i and was blaming my crop sensor for not giving me the skin tones I wanted. Going full frame, however, was the best thing I could have done.
Click to expand...

I think we all hope there is that perfect combination of equipment that will reduce the time spent in Post Processing however in 46 years of photography I've yet to find it. I have found Nikon FF bodies and good glass is the most "comfortable" combo requiring less PP plus skin tones are somewhat subjective. I also agree your web site images are very nice indeed.
 
Last edited:
B

Bluebear

Senior Member
No disrespect intended here but, if I'd wanted Canon colours, I'd have bought a Canon instead of a Nikon! For anyone unhappy with Nikon's colour output, I suggest giving DXO Optics Pro a try. It has a feature enabling you to apply Canon/Sony/Olympus/Leica colours to your RAW file - as well as different Nikon camera colours and film styles. It's also a change from using LR!
 
SkvLTD

SkvLTD

Senior Member
The only solid fact here is that Canon and Nikon DO capture colors a little bit differently. So, Hyo, if you feel that this color hairline makes or breaks your whole style at the end of the day, maybe its time to hit ebay and swap over to a 5d3. Only thing I'd worry is if you won't like something inherit on a Canon...
 
Marcel

Marcel

Happily retired
Staff member
Super Mod
SkvLTD said:
The only solid fact here is that Canon and Nikon DO capture colors a little bit differently. So, Hyo, if you feel that this color hairline makes or breaks your whole style at the end of the day, maybe its time to hit ebay and swap over to a 5d3. Only thing I'd worry is if you won't like something inherit on a Canon...
Click to expand...

Before selling and buying, I'd rent at least for a week or two and would make darn sure the switch is worth the expense.
 
H

Hyogen

Senior Member
Thanks for all the advice/tips guys. I will check into the DXO Optics Pro also. My friend just got a 5D3 so I'll check it out and/or rent one. Money is not a huge obstacle--but I do want to give my D600 every chance it deserves. It obviously has a better quality sensor according to DXO Mark, but I think it translates into a better landscape camera. I looked into Fuji and I am impressed with skin tones, but I have also seen and read that peoples' skin starts looking waxy at higher ISOs. I have never looked into Fuji lenses and all, but I'm guessing it's more expensive/limited than Nikon/Canon. One thing I really like about Canon is that 2nd-hand lenses seem to be significantly more abundant and cheaper than Nikon lenses. Just for example, the venerable 135mm f/2.0 L lens can be had for $750 easy, while Nikon's quite old version is closer to $1000.
 
H

Hyogen

Senior Member
By the way, I never even complained about the D600 dust issue. I was happy to clone out dust spots this whole time. When I got the D600 a year and half ago, it was all I could afford and I bought it used. The D600 really made me & my business.. and I absolutely love it for everything other than people photos...Here are just some recent ones--most of which I've tried to imitate the style I want.

HYO_9520-2 by www.HYOFOTO.com, on Flickr

HYO_9391 by www.HYOFOTO.com, on Flickr

HYO_9350 by www.HYOFOTO.com, on Flickr

HYO_9320 by www.HYOFOTO.com, on Flickr

HYO_9290-3 by www.HYOFOTO.com, on Flickr

HYO_9223 by www.HYOFOTO.com, on Flickr

HYO_9140 by www.HYOFOTO.com, on Flickr
 
Last edited:
Top