Lightroom Linear Camera Profiles - Make Your Own
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 11 ก.พ. 2025
- Lightroom Linear Camera Profiles - Make Your Own
Patreon Membership: bit.ly/2SwaSZ6
Adobe DNG Profile Editor: helpx.adobe.co...
Tony Kuypers Linear Camera Profile page: goodlight.us/l...
As an alternative to my Process Version Swap preset method, you can create individual linear camera profiles for each of your cameras - for free - without any hassle, and without handing over your email contact details!
Starting your image processing with a raw file that shows nothing but exactly what has been captured by the sensor is simply the best and easiest way to start your processing workflow, thus making Lightroom behave a little like Raw Therapee!
Worked great, Andy. Thanks!
Glad it helped👍
Thanks, Andy, for the linear profiles, which I was able to install in Adobe Camera Raw for my two Sony cameras.
You are most welcome matey, cheers 🍻🍻🍻
Thank you for this Andy, I do a lot of sunrise seascape photography and since adopting this technique I find I am getting a "cleaner" finished Image, It definitely makes a difference.
Cheers David 🍻
Interesting, I didn’t realise they was tweaking it as much as that. What’s your thoughts on Color profile creation tools like x-rite where you shoot a colour passport and then run the dng through their own profiler. I’ve used it on product photography but unsure if it would apply to landscapes as unsure of what what it’s doing to be quite honest 😅
If I do a portrait or product shot then I'll use an XRite CCP for exactly what you'd think - selectable white balance guide in post.
But as for making camera profiles, the whole concept is nuts!
In order to take a pic with your camera you have to have a lens on the front of it - and therein lies your problem, all lenses have an individual colour cast. So any profile you create is only good for that camera/lens combo.
The effects of 'lens colour cast' can vary with the colour temperature of light, AND in the case of zoom lenses those effects can also vary with focal length.
So in reality, a camera profile created by these means is only good for that particular camera/lens combo, at that particular focal length, and under that exact colour temperature of light.
Don't forget, 6500K is NOT daylight. It's MEAN AVERAGE NOON DAYLIGHT. And light from the sun can be anywhere between 10,000k. The temperature of outdoor natural light is a moving feast, it never stays constant.
So with all those variables how can a profile you make at 3pm today be accurate at 11.30 am next Tuesday - that's right, it can't! So why bother?.....
When I download the DNG Profile editor and open it, it is just blank. All i see is a white box with untitled recipe. no curves or color wheel is showing up. I have a 2023 macbook m3max running sonoma.
As an SLR-hobbyist I have this whacky way of processing my raw files in RT with Irfanview in tow for reference. Whilst processing in RT, I occasionally switch over to Irfan, as a base reference because of its "Interpretation" type rendering.
That's also why I like to preview my raw files in it.
It seems that Adobe are no longer supporting DNG Profile Editor on the latest MacOS. Do you happen to know of any other applications that can be used?
Not off the top of my head, but you can make cam profiles using ColourChecker software too - though you'd need a CC Passport to do the measuring.
Is there any difference between this method of getting linear profiles and the option that is already integrated in Capture One?
COP - can't say Vincente as I do not use it.
Dave Kelly (US photographer and TH-camr) led me to these a few weeks back. I find them to be really good starting point. Interestingly, Dave's just modified his LR workflow from using Topaz DeNoise Ai as a plugin to using it on a smart object as you demonstrated last year ...
Hi Steve - the smart object method is the best way in my opinion, but for batch work it's a little tedious!
Excellent stuff Andy. I've been experimenting with these "linear profiles " late last week for a few of my camera models ( there have been a couple of channels I subscribe to that demonstrated them ). As soon as they first showed it I thought to myself, eh up, this is basically similar to Andy's process swap. As you'll recall I've been applying your process swap on import pretty much every image I've taken over the last 18 months or more. I like both methods but your process swap makes it easier to apply straight from the off and works with any and every camera model. Given you show us here how to make new camera specific profiles I'll give it a try for some of my more obscure cameras like my small point and shoot 1" sensor cameras ☺️ Thanks as always on a great video 👍
Mr Morganti would be one??? Try using my PVSwap and then switch to the linear - check the histogram width and compression at the shadow end - then use the method that gives the best width and least compression on a shot that has a high subject brightness range. Sometimes the linear will be better, and sometimes PVSwap will be better. But PVSwap can be added at import because it's a preset.
Cheers matey🍻🍻
)
Respect to the author for an interesting story, but I suggest he try to reproduce the processing from the “bad” Adobe standard profile, starting with such a linear profile. As an example, it is better to take an image that was illuminated by a light source with a small emission spectrum, or where the room was abundantly filled with light. Not bright, but abundant filling. The difference will be clearly visible in the contrast pivot in brightness and saturation and in hue.
This profile would be great if lightroom had more tools. Controlling saturation in any stops (lights), hue in different stops, and so on.
The problem is that all the tools in lightroom are tailored to their profiles. Just take a linear profile and start working with Adobe tools? )))
There, shadow tools can begin to control almost the entire range of the photo’s histogram, and not a separate part of it, or at least not in the same way as it would be with a profile from their company.
No, well, you can use curves))) But then be look how saturation begins to behave in photography)))
It’s just that if the source is perfect, then you won’t see much of a difference between working with profiles from Adobe, or with a profile made “without a curve: from Adobe.
The author did not mention the starting table of targets - this is the first tab, so as not to bother with the last tab. There is Adobe stabdart, standard camera and others. But that doesn't even matter.
The whole point of this processor (lightroom) is that the picture is standard - it’s like using their editor with version 2 (pv 2) vs their 6 one. The difference is so-so.
Try rawcolor. There is a group called "rawcolor" on the social network VKontakte. The program is not very widespread. You will be pleasantly surprised when you compare it even with darktable app.
Back!,!!,❤️
Not lost in France any more then 😂😂👍
Canon R5 colour profiles are being particularly problematic in lightroom Andy. Canon and Adobe aren't "talking" with regards to the new raw files designated "CR 3". Apart from bad colours, the rendering of noise is considerably higher than what you get with Canons DPP. The problem being the usability of DPP. It's about as fast as an Australian vaccine roll-out.
DPP - it's bloody awful!
R5 images look good in the latest dev build of RT - the problem is it can't handle the exif data. For me R5 images look a bit sterile/blue in Lr/ACR, but the colours are more natural and rich in RTdev.
Yeah I'd sooner put my dick in a blender than use dpp, if I could find a blender big enough that is. But yes everyone's in a right tizz about how the R5 files are being handled. But I found that your process version swap as a base is allowing me, not lightroom programming, to end up with things exactly how want . Everyone seems to want to start with dazzling, yet somehow supposedly accurate colours, right from the get-go. Too lazy to massage the image judiciously from a genuinely raw looking image. But to me that's the whole point. They may as well shoot bloody jpegs. Anyway, hope all the health issues are under control. We're right in the poo over here currently, but that's at least given me some time to play with some photos. What's the deal with RT not reading Canon exif data, is it Canon not playing ball or something else? Cheers Andy!.
The UK is full of nutters who think it's all over - I'd lay even money on a lockdown sometime during the winter here, because I've a niggling idea it ain't anywhere near over yet - but I do hope I'm wrong.
RT uses libraw - www.libraw.org/about - to 'understand' camera raw file formats. They are an independent 3rd party who frankly, have to reverse engineer raw files in order to understand them because the OEMs like Canon will not give them the codecs. The .CR3 container seems to be untidy and variable between camera models. And RT devs have a bit of a problem (or have had) fully implementing the latest versions of libraw as well.
I'm fairly certain that Canon charge a licence fee to the likes of Adobe etc - libraw is created by volunteers just like RT, and they can't afford to pay for anything because they would never get the money back. Such is life buddy!