Dark 16 bit RAW decoding

[Paul Waldo]

Hi all,

When I try to edit a RAW image, it is very dark.  Yes, I did RTFM; I
have color management enabled :-)

I'm running digikam 0.9.2-final on KDE 3.5.8
Here are my digikam settings:

Color Management
------------------------------
Enable Color Management: on
Launch Color Management plugin with RAW files: on
Use color managed view: on
Color profiles selected for Monitor, Workspace (Adobe RGB), Input, Soft
Proof
Black point compensation: off
Rendering Intent: perceptual


RAW Decoding
--------------------------
16 bit color depth: on
Interpolate RGB as four colors: off
Use camera white balance: on
Automatic color balance: on

Thanks for any insights!


Paul

PS
Is there any way to select a specific color balance when converting
RAW?  Camera WB works most of the time, but sometimes I need a manual
WB, such as when photographing with a grey card.
_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

[Jakob "Østergaard"]

On Wednesday 16 January 2008, Paul Waldo wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> When I try to edit a RAW image, it is very dark.  Yes, I did RTFM; I
> have color management enabled :-)
>
> I'm running digikam 0.9.2-final on KDE 3.5.8
> Here are my digikam settings:
>
> Color Management
> ------------------------------
> Enable Color Management: on
> Launch Color Management plugin with RAW files: on
> Use color managed view: on
> Color profiles selected for Monitor, Workspace (Adobe RGB), Input,
> Soft Proof
> Black point compensation: off
> Rendering Intent: perceptual

My guess would be that you're using the wrong profile.

I had a *lot* of problems with this, but with the right profile for the
camera (and none for the monitor as it's sort-of close to sRGB which I
also use as workspace), everything works.

>
>
> RAW Decoding
> --------------------------
> 16 bit color depth: on
> Interpolate RGB as four colors: off
> Use camera white balance: on
> Automatic color balance: on
>
> Thanks for any insights!
>
>
> Paul
>
> PS
> Is there any way to select a specific color balance when converting
> RAW?  Camera WB works most of the time, but sometimes I need a manual
> WB, such as when photographing with a grey card.

The RAW converter uses the cammera supplied WB, which means, if you set
the custom WB on the camera when you use grey card (select the grey
card image for custom WB before shooting the real photos), the correct
WB will be applied automatically during conversion.

At least this is how it works in 0.9.2 with my EOS 350D.

For actual WB adjustments later on, use the WB adjust tool in the
editor.

--
Jakob Østergaard Hegelund
_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

[Paul Waldo]

Thanks for the reply, Jakob.  Comments below...

Jakob Østergaard Hegelund wrote:

On Wednesday 16 January 2008, Paul Waldo wrote:
  

Hi all,

When I try to edit a RAW image, it is very dark.  Yes, I did RTFM; I
have color management enabled :-)

I'm running digikam 0.9.2-final on KDE 3.5.8
Here are my digikam settings:

Color Management
------------------------------
Enable Color Management: on
Launch Color Management plugin with RAW files: on
Use color managed view: on
Color profiles selected for Monitor, Workspace (Adobe RGB), Input,
Soft Proof
Black point compensation: off
Rendering Intent: perceptual
    

My guess would be that you're using the wrong profile.

I had a *lot* of problems with this, but with the right profile for the 
camera (and none for the monitor as it's sort-of close to sRGB which I 
also use as workspace), everything works.
  

I'm using the same profiles that work great in UFRaw.  That got me to thinking about the differences.  When I convert using my profile in UFRaw, I set the gamma to 0.45 and linearity to 0.02.  I see no way to do this in Digikam...

RAW Decoding
--------------------------
16 bit color depth: on
Interpolate RGB as four colors: off
Use camera white balance: on
Automatic color balance: on

Thanks for any insights!


Paul

PS
Is there any way to select a specific color balance when converting
RAW?  Camera WB works most of the time, but sometimes I need a manual
WB, such as when photographing with a grey card.
    

The RAW converter uses the cammera supplied WB, which means, if you set 
the custom WB on the camera when you use grey card (select the grey 
card image for custom WB before shooting the real photos), the correct 
WB will be applied automatically during conversion.

At least this is how it works in 0.9.2 with my EOS 350D.

For actual WB adjustments later on, use the WB adjust tool in the 
editor.

  

Ah, OK.  I had not seen that before.  FWIW, I tried setting gamma here, but it had no effect.  The only thing I could do was the the EV Compensation way up (3 EV).  In order to do a manual WB with the picker, I had to guess where to click because the image was so dark!

_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

[Paul Waldo]

I stumbled across a discussion of dark RAW conversions in the FAQ.  Apparently
Digikam cannot use the manufacturer-supplied camera profile, yet UFRaw can.  
This puzzles me, since they both are just front ends to dcraw...

My manufacturer-supplied camera profile works great in UFRaw, with gamma set
to 0.45.  When I use the same profile with Digikam, I get a dark image.

So, I tried to take the FAQ's advice.  I created a profile by photographing an
IT8 target and using lprof to create a profile.  When I use this new profile
for Digikam RAW conversion, I get an image that is even darker than when I
used the manufacturer-supplied camera profile! :-O

I'm sure that someone out there has gotten 16-bit decoding of Canon raw images
to work well.  Any hints?  Thanks in advance!

Paul

On Wednesday 16 January 2008 10:30:47 am Paul Waldo wrote:

> Thanks for the reply, Jakob.  Comments below...
>
> Jakob Østergaard Hegelund wrote:
> > On Wednesday 16 January 2008, Paul Waldo wrote:
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> When I try to edit a RAW image, it is very dark.  Yes, I did RTFM; I
> >> have color management enabled :-)
> >>
> >> I'm running digikam 0.9.2-final on KDE 3.5.8
> >> Here are my digikam settings:
> >>
> >> Color Management
> >> ------------------------------
> >> Enable Color Management: on
> >> Launch Color Management plugin with RAW files: on
> >> Use color managed view: on
> >> Color profiles selected for Monitor, Workspace (Adobe RGB), Input,
> >> Soft Proof
> >> Black point compensation: off
> >> Rendering Intent: perceptual
> >
> > My guess would be that you're using the wrong profile.
> >
> > I had a *lot* of problems with this, but with the right profile for the
> > camera (and none for the monitor as it's sort-of close to sRGB which I
> > also use as workspace), everything works.
>
> I'm using the same profiles that work great in UFRaw.  That got me to
> thinking about the differences.  When I convert using my profile in
> UFRaw, I set the gamma to 0.45 and linearity to 0.02.  I see no way to
> do this in Digikam...
>
> >> RAW Decoding
> >> --------------------------
> >> 16 bit color depth: on
> >> Interpolate RGB as four colors: off
> >> Use camera white balance: on
> >> Automatic color balance: on
> >>
> >> Thanks for any insights!
> >>
> >>
> >> Paul
> >>
> >> PS
> >> Is there any way to select a specific color balance when converting
> >> RAW?  Camera WB works most of the time, but sometimes I need a manual
> >> WB, such as when photographing with a grey card.
> >
> > The RAW converter uses the cammera supplied WB, which means, if you set
> > the custom WB on the camera when you use grey card (select the grey
> > card image for custom WB before shooting the real photos), the correct
> > WB will be applied automatically during conversion.
> >
> > At least this is how it works in 0.9.2 with my EOS 350D.
> >
> > For actual WB adjustments later on, use the WB adjust tool in the
> > editor.
>
> Ah, OK.  I had not seen that before.  FWIW, I tried setting gamma here,
> but it had no effect.  The only thing I could do was the the EV
> Compensation way up (3 EV).  In order to do a manual WB with the picker,
> I had to guess where to click because the image was so dark!

_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

[Gerhard Kulzer-3]

Am Friday 25 January 2008 schrieb Paul Waldo:

> I stumbled across a discussion of dark RAW conversions in the FAQ.
> Apparently Digikam cannot use the manufacturer-supplied camera profile, yet
> UFRaw can. This puzzles me, since they both are just front ends to dcraw...
>
> My manufacturer-supplied camera profile works great in UFRaw, with gamma
> set to 0.45.  When I use the same profile with Digikam, I get a dark image.
>
> So, I tried to take the FAQ's advice.  I created a profile by photographing
> an IT8 target and using lprof to create a profile.  When I use this new
> profile for Digikam RAW conversion, I get an image that is even darker than
> when I used the manufacturer-supplied camera profile! :-O
>
> I'm sure that someone out there has gotten 16-bit decoding of Canon raw
> images to work well.  Any hints?  Thanks in advance!
>
> Paul

As I understand it, Canon profiles that come with the camera lack tone mapping
and gamma correction parameters. digiKam does not touch these properties
during raw conversion, but Ufraw does. They have a whole lot of code to
supplement dcraw in the conversion process. One day dcraw will hopefully do
it as it does it already for 8 bit, or we'll integrate the ufraw code.

On the other hand Bibblepro and selfmade lprof profiles work well with digiKam
in my experience since they have tone mapping included, images come out
normally bright.

Gerhard

> On Wednesday 16 January 2008 10:30:47 am Paul Waldo wrote:
> > Thanks for the reply, Jakob.  Comments below...
> >
> > Jakob Østergaard Hegelund wrote:
> > > On Wednesday 16 January 2008, Paul Waldo wrote:
> > >> Hi all,
> > >>
> > >> When I try to edit a RAW image, it is very dark.  Yes, I did RTFM; I
> > >> have color management enabled :-)
> > >>
> > >> I'm running digikam 0.9.2-final on KDE 3.5.8
> > >> Here are my digikam settings:
> > >>
> > >> Color Management
> > >> ------------------------------
> > >> Enable Color Management: on
> > >> Launch Color Management plugin with RAW files: on
> > >> Use color managed view: on
> > >> Color profiles selected for Monitor, Workspace (Adobe RGB), Input,
> > >> Soft Proof
> > >> Black point compensation: off
> > >> Rendering Intent: perceptual
> > >
> > > My guess would be that you're using the wrong profile.
> > >
> > > I had a *lot* of problems with this, but with the right profile for the
> > > camera (and none for the monitor as it's sort-of close to sRGB which I
> > > also use as workspace), everything works.
> >
> > I'm using the same profiles that work great in UFRaw.  That got me to
> > thinking about the differences.  When I convert using my profile in
> > UFRaw, I set the gamma to 0.45 and linearity to 0.02.  I see no way to
> > do this in Digikam...
> >
> > >> RAW Decoding
> > >> --------------------------
> > >> 16 bit color depth: on
> > >> Interpolate RGB as four colors: off
> > >> Use camera white balance: on
> > >> Automatic color balance: on
> > >>
> > >> Thanks for any insights!
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Paul
> > >>
> > >> PS
> > >> Is there any way to select a specific color balance when converting
> > >> RAW?  Camera WB works most of the time, but sometimes I need a manual
> > >> WB, such as when photographing with a grey card.
> > >
> > > The RAW converter uses the cammera supplied WB, which means, if you set
> > > the custom WB on the camera when you use grey card (select the grey
> > > card image for custom WB before shooting the real photos), the correct
> > > WB will be applied automatically during conversion.
> > >
> > > At least this is how it works in 0.9.2 with my EOS 350D.
> > >
> > > For actual WB adjustments later on, use the WB adjust tool in the
> > > editor.
> >
> > Ah, OK.  I had not seen that before.  FWIW, I tried setting gamma here,
> > but it had no effect.  The only thing I could do was the the EV
> > Compensation way up (3 EV).  In order to do a manual WB with the picker,
> > I had to guess where to click because the image was so dark!
>
> _______________________________________________
> Digikam-users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

--
><((((º> ¸.·´¯`·... ><((((º> ¸.·´¯`·...¸ ><((((º>
http://www.gerhard.fr

_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

[Paul Waldo]

Thanks for the reply, Gerhard.

OK, this make a bit more sense now as to *why* UFRaw is working for me.  Any
thoughts on why my profile, generated in lprof, causes the conversion to be
very dark, almost black?

In case it helps, here is the output from lprof:

I have chosen CIE XYZ as PCS
Unknown white point (X:1e-314, Y:7e-312, Z:7e-312)
Primaries (x-y): [Red: 0.625415, 0.277302] [Green: 0, 1] [Blue: 0.0833993, 0]
Estimated gamma: [Red: 1.19788] [Green: 1.22472] [Blue: 1.24135]
Loading sheets...
Reference sheet: /home/paul/.lprof/target_refs/R060101.txt
Measurement sheet: /home/paul/.lprof/temp/meaurement.cgt
Gamut hull: 195 inside, 0 outside, 57 on boundaries
Fitting error (delta E CIELAB): mean=1.97997, RMS=3.01769, 95%%=6.1929,
median=1.09214, MAD=0.666138
Fitting error (delta E CIE94): mean=1.10034, RMS=1.5087, 95%%=3.06707,
median=0.777355, MAD=0.432199
Performing 2-fold cross validation ...
2-fold CV: estimated RMS dE=4.04654, dE94=2.04384
2-fold adj. CV: estimated RMS dE=3.70133, dE94=1.86485

Here are my profile parameters:

Resolution (CLUT points):  33
Profile verbosity: Store anything
Regression:
    Smoothness: 0.500
    Deviation: 1.00e-05
Linear Bradford


On Friday 25 January 2008 12:03:20 pm Gerhard Kulzer wrote:
> Am Friday 25 January 2008 schrieb Paul Waldo:
> > I stumbled across a discussion of dark RAW conversions in the FAQ.
> > Apparently Digikam cannot use the manufacturer-supplied camera profile,
> > yet UFRaw can. This puzzles me, since they both are just front ends to
> > dcraw...
[snip]

>
> As I understand it, Canon profiles that come with the camera lack tone
> mapping and gamma correction parameters. digiKam does not touch these
> properties during raw conversion, but Ufraw does. They have a whole lot of
> code to supplement dcraw in the conversion process. One day dcraw will
> hopefully do it as it does it already for 8 bit, or we'll integrate the
> ufraw code.
>
> On the other hand Bibblepro and selfmade lprof profiles work well with
> digiKam in my experience since they have tone mapping included, images come
> out normally bright.
>
> Gerhard
>

_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

[Gerhard Kulzer-3]

Am Friday 25 January 2008 schrieb Paul Waldo:

> Thanks for the reply, Gerhard.
>
> OK, this make a bit more sense now as to *why* UFRaw is working for me.
> Any thoughts on why my profile, generated in lprof, causes the conversion
> to be very dark, almost black?
>
> In case it helps, here is the output from lprof:
>
> I have chosen CIE XYZ as PCS
> Unknown white point (X:1e-314, Y:7e-312, Z:7e-312)
> Primaries (x-y): [Red: 0.625415, 0.277302] [Green: 0, 1] [Blue: 0.0833993,
> 0] Estimated gamma: [Red: 1.19788] [Green: 1.22472] [Blue: 1.24135]
> Loading sheets...
> Reference sheet: /home/paul/.lprof/target_refs/R060101.txt
> Measurement sheet: /home/paul/.lprof/temp/meaurement.cgt
> Gamut hull: 195 inside, 0 outside, 57 on boundaries
> Fitting error (delta E CIELAB): mean=1.97997, RMS=3.01769, 95%%=6.1929,
> median=1.09214, MAD=0.666138
> Fitting error (delta E CIE94): mean=1.10034, RMS=1.5087, 95%%=3.06707,
> median=0.777355, MAD=0.432199
> Performing 2-fold cross validation ...
> 2-fold CV: estimated RMS dE=4.04654, dE94=2.04384
> 2-fold adj. CV: estimated RMS dE=3.70133, dE94=1.86485
>
> Here are my profile parameters:
>
> Resolution (CLUT points):  33
> Profile verbosity: Store anything
> Regression:
>     Smoothness: 0.500
>     Deviation: 1.00e-05
> Linear Bradford
>

I'm not profile savvy enough to tell what's wrong with it. You can send me the

profile to my address, it's not big. Or if you have icc-examin installed you
can actually see the tone curves in a profile, if they're straight then
there's no correction done.


Gerhard

> On Friday 25 January 2008 12:03:20 pm Gerhard Kulzer wrote:
> > Am Friday 25 January 2008 schrieb Paul Waldo:
> > > I stumbled across a discussion of dark RAW conversions in the FAQ.
> > > Apparently Digikam cannot use the manufacturer-supplied camera profile,
> > > yet UFRaw can. This puzzles me, since they both are just front ends to
> > > dcraw...
>
> [snip]
>
> > As I understand it, Canon profiles that come with the camera lack tone
> > mapping and gamma correction parameters. digiKam does not touch these
> > properties during raw conversion, but Ufraw does. They have a whole lot
> > of code to supplement dcraw in the conversion process. One day dcraw will
> > hopefully do it as it does it already for 8 bit, or we'll integrate the
> > ufraw code.
> >
> > On the other hand Bibblepro and selfmade lprof profiles work well with
> > digiKam in my experience since they have tone mapping included, images
> > come out normally bright.
> >
> > Gerhard

--
><((((º> ¸.·´¯`·... ><((((º> ¸.·´¯`·...¸ ><((((º>
http://www.gerhard.fr

_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users