Camera-specific Linear Profiles

DxO PhotoLab
1

Joanna and others on this forum have advocated an initially flat image as the better starting point for subsequent processing.

She recently summarized her approach:

“I set my camera to AdobeRGB because it affects the JPEG shown on the rear screen, for much the same reason as I choose the flattest possible “Picture Setting”. That philosophy carries over to using PL, where my default preset is my custom Optical Corrections only, to which I have added the Adobe DCP profile that matches the camera’s picture setting. The result of all this is the I get the flattest possible rendering, upon which I can build the tonal range and contrast that I want, rather than having to “dial back” somebody else’s idea of a default rendering.”

I use a slight variant of this approach and am generally happy with it, and I’m sure others have their own specific takes as well. But if flat is better, what if we started flatter still?

Guenterm, Ian18, and probably others have referred to the articles and videos (and the online buzz) produced by Tony Kuyper and Dave Kelly who extoll the virtues of camera-specific linear profiles.

These linear profiles (DCP) are simple to make using the DNG Profile Editor (September 2012),

Digital Negative (DNG), Adobe DNG Converter | Adobe Photoshop,

as described by Andy Astbury in an (agnostic) video.

Lightroom Linear Camera Profiles - Make Your Own - YouTube.

These profiles can be selected in DxO PL 6E and earlier versions via the Color Rendering palette like any other DCP profile. If you begin with Optical Corrections only, the resulting image will be extremely flat and darker than the Joanna et al. approach.

Does anyone have experience with these linear profiles? Do they offer any advantage beyond the general Joanna et al. approach, perhaps for a certain class of images? Or is this mostly hoopla?

2

A linear profile provides flat starting points that also show more precisely how bright highlights really are. They are therefore valuable for all who want to see the potential of a shot.

Nevertheless, they simply replace one starting point by an other and necessitate different customizing. Whether one likes the one way or the other is a matter of personal preference imo.

I used to start with a flat preset up to DPL 5, but DPL 6 has changed the neutral presets completely, which has made my way to customize images obsolete. I’ve experimented with linear profiles, but they aren’t the magic bullet either. I’m still searching with DPL6 or fall back to DPL5 if necessary. Needless to say that the changes of neutral presets did not add to my happiness…

1 Like
3

Thank-you, platypus – I very much agree with your opinion of the PL6 Wide Gamut version of the neutral preset – not helpful to say the least.

I am currently experimenting with a default preset that consists of Optical Corrections only + WB (as shot) + Deep Prime. Everything else is off. Next, I’ll fine-tune the WB, if needed. Then toggle on and adjust Smart Lighting, uniform or spot depending on the image. At this point I’ll try different Color Rendering profiles (generic, camera body, and DCP), including the camera-specific linear profiles discussed above. Takes longer to describe than to do, actually, and it’s an interesting exercise.

Regarding the linear profiles, I was at first put off by just how flat and dark an image can be. Then I found that a simple Smart Lighting adjustment would often be all that was needed to get things looking fairly respectable.

Platypus, I know that you have been among those pushing hard for a completely revamped tone curve. That would be the ideal, perhaps necessary, tool for making full use of these linear profiles.

8

Thank-you, AttaBoy – regarding these profiles, I do agree that linear should be “linear.” Someone on another forum even suggested that the “linear” derived simply from the drop-down tab you need to select in the Adobe DNG profile editor! Maybe linear-ish? There is always a “fig leaf” aspect to any of the color rendering profiles, isn’t there? They come on top of several under-the-hood operations, about which only some are under user control. From the general thrust of your comments, safe to say that you are in the “mostly hoopla” camp?

10

What please is WGS?

12

Got it - thanks for you input.

13

Thank you, I thought so but was not sure

14

Yes ! - - With PL6 Wide Gamut, Generic/Camera Profile is a better choice than Generic/Neutral Color - and, it will be a lot closer to the rendering produced by switching to WCS=Legacy … Whereas, Neutral Color with the different WCS options can produce wildly different results !

John M

15

platypus wrote:

I used to start with a flat preset up to DPL 5, but DPL 6 has changed the neutral presets completely, which has made my way to customize images obsolete. I’ve experimented with linear profiles, but they aren’t the magic bullet either. I’m still searching with DPL6 or fall back to DPL5 if necessary. Needless to say that the changes of neutral presets did not add to my happiness…

I posted earlier today under a different topic:

"I’ve also been comparing PL 5.5.0 and PL 6.2.0 behavior regarding the various neutral renderings. Please try this: In PL6: Classic (Legacy) color space; optical corrections only; WB = As Shot; no DxO Smart Lighting; Color Rendering = Generic renderings – Neutral color.

In my set up, this produces seemingly identical images / histograms to that produced in PL 5.5.0 using the same options as above except choosing Neutral Color, Realistic tonality (gamma 2.2)."

My set up: Leica Q DNG raw files; aRGB display; images exported to disc as 16-bit TIFFs with an embedded Adobe RGB 1998 profile.

Note - beginning in PL6 with the DxO wide gamut setting will produce different images / histograms, thus not appropriate for your preferred starting point.