Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="BackdoorArts" data-source="post: 345728" data-attributes="member: 9240">Hyogen, I heard back from my brother and here's what he had to say...The only real way to modify RAW file color consistently is by doing it&nbsp; in Camera Raw using the Adobe DNG Profile Editor with a ColorChecker&nbsp; target, or with the Datacolor SpyderCheckr Pro package (or just manually&nbsp; doing different presets).&nbsp; I was a beta tester for the original&nbsp; Datacolor product several generations older than the current one, and&nbsp; was pleased with it.&nbsp; It works the same way the Adobe software does, but&nbsp; uses a proprietary target that has many more skin tone sample patches,&nbsp; which would likely be more effective for this particular problem.&nbsp; It&nbsp; also comes with their cool little &quot;cube&quot; for color balancing.&nbsp; In my&nbsp; experience both methods only make subtle changes to the original color,&nbsp; and generally create slightly under-saturated results (which is simple&nbsp; enough to fix).&nbsp; The Datacolor provides the option to create &quot;standard&quot;,&nbsp; &quot;portrait&quot; and &quot;saturated&quot; style profiles under different lighting&nbsp; conditions, so you are getting something for your money over the free&nbsp; Adobe software. Though creating an ICC profile for cameras is possible, I would not&nbsp; recommend it.&nbsp; I could go into painful detail as to why, but basically&nbsp; the profile is only accurate for the exact conditions it was made under,&nbsp; and will wreak havoc with color and tonality everywhere else. If the issue she is having with skin color is consistent, then making&nbsp; modified Camera Raw profiles should work well.&nbsp; You can also do it with&nbsp; hue/saturation actions in photoshop.&nbsp; If the problem is not consistent,&nbsp; then correcting one image at a time is the only way. Has she tried the different built-in Camera Raw profiles besides Adobe&nbsp; Standard (found in the drop down menu of the &quot;camera&quot; tab)? Nikon has had many issues with skin color from the very beginning on&nbsp; several models (the original D1 was downright hideous, people looked&nbsp; sunburned or like corpses).&nbsp; In the past the issues have had a lot to do&nbsp; with not enough IR and/or UV being filtered in front of chip, but I&nbsp; can't say for sure if that is the problem with the D600.&nbsp; I know some D2&nbsp; users spent a small fortune on Tiffen Hot Mirror filters for all their&nbsp; lenses to try and get good skin color out of that camera (blues were&nbsp; real funky too). Unfortunately paper targets don't reflect IR and UV to the same degree&nbsp; as real skin, even if the patches appear to be the same color in the&nbsp; visible spectrum.&nbsp; So if it is an IR/UV issue, no amount of profiling&nbsp; with a standard target will work.I told you, he spends a lot of time thinking about these things. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" />&nbsp; It would be interesting to know whether or not there's something with the IR/UV filtering on the D6xx series that's different than the other Nikons that makes it more susceptible to this issue.&nbsp; I'm even wondering what the difference might be between the D600 and D610 (when I have one of each here I'll see if I can run some tests after calibrating each).</blockquote>

[QUOTE="BackdoorArts, post: 345728, member: 9240"] Hyogen, I heard back from my brother and here's what he had to say... [I]The only real way to modify RAW file color consistently is by doing it in Camera Raw using the Adobe DNG Profile Editor with a ColorChecker target, or with the Datacolor SpyderCheckr Pro package (or just manually doing different presets). I was a beta tester for the original Datacolor product several generations older than the current one, and was pleased with it. It works the same way the Adobe software does, but uses a proprietary target that has many more skin tone sample patches, which would likely be more effective for this particular problem. It also comes with their cool little "cube" for color balancing. In my experience both methods only make subtle changes to the original color, and generally create slightly under-saturated results (which is simple enough to fix). The Datacolor provides the option to create "standard", "portrait" and "saturated" style profiles under different lighting conditions, so you are getting something for your money over the free Adobe software. Though creating an ICC profile for cameras is possible, I would not recommend it. I could go into painful detail as to why, but basically the profile is only accurate for the exact conditions it was made under, and will wreak havoc with color and tonality everywhere else. If the issue she is having with skin color is consistent, then making modified Camera Raw profiles should work well. You can also do it with hue/saturation actions in photoshop. If the problem is not consistent, then correcting one image at a time is the only way. Has she tried the different built-in Camera Raw profiles besides Adobe Standard (found in the drop down menu of the "camera" tab)? Nikon has had many issues with skin color from the very beginning on several models (the original D1 was downright hideous, people looked sunburned or like corpses). In the past the issues have had a lot to do with not enough IR and/or UV being filtered in front of chip, but I can't say for sure if that is the problem with the D600. I know some D2 users spent a small fortune on Tiffen Hot Mirror filters for all their lenses to try and get good skin color out of that camera (blues were real funky too). Unfortunately paper targets don't reflect IR and UV to the same degree as real skin, even if the patches appear to be the same color in the visible spectrum. So if it is an IR/UV issue, no amount of profiling with a standard target will work.[/I] I told you, he spends a lot of time thinking about these things. :) It would be interesting to know whether or not there's something with the IR/UV filtering on the D6xx series that's different than the other Nikons that makes it more susceptible to this issue. I'm even wondering what the difference might be between the D600 and D610 (when I have one of each here I'll see if I can run some tests after calibrating each). [/QUOTE]

Verification