IRCC Certification

Dear Platypus

In the case of a national wildlife photography competition in France, we may be required to certify that our photographs have not been overly altered.
Regards

Tu peux pas faire une déclaration sur l’honneur ? T’as un lien vers le site pour le concours ?

Ou tu évites les concours qui utilisent l’IRCC :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:

Hi everybody
This is a real question and for this photographer a real certification issue so can we try to find an answer not just telling him do use IRCC?

In an other forum I suggested him to look inside the dop sidecar where the RGB Channels modifications are stored by PL. To the best of my understanding for each color and each point the modification are stored as an X/Y coordinate on the curve graph, from 0 to 1 with the neutral at 0.5. Question: Is it possible to translate these coordinates in % relative to the neutral point, like if 0.5 = 0 so 0.6 = 20% and 0.45=-10%? Maybe I am totally wrong, I know :face_with_hand_over_mouth:

Unfortunately, the problem is that RGB values are not just stored in one place. You have the colour wheel, the saturation, the vibrance, etc; and that’s just some of the global adjustments. Then you have local adjustments for colour temperature, tint, saturation, vibrance, etc. Not to mention the undocumented effect that Smart Lighting and ClearView Plus can have. Not forgetting the effects of the Channel Mixer, Colour Filters, film emulations.

All these things and more can affect the RGB values of a pixel.

And, as I already said, with different colour temperature and direction of lighting, combined with nature’s ability to reflect infrared and ultra violet, the whole idea of an “automated” assessment of “fakery” is never going to be reliable.

Measuring colors depends on many things and as long as the IRCC does not sufficiently specify how they measure (tools, methods, references…), you’re left with trial and error.

On Mac, there is a “digital color meter” application that measures RGB values of whatever screen pixel you sample. Depending on how you set the tool, values will differ from setting to setting…

Even if you get a certificate for a jpeg, it does not mean that the people who look at the certified image will see the colors that you saw on your screen…unless each image came with a color reference, something that is used in repro work, but seems to be excluded by IRCC.

Dear Gao

Thank you very much for your encouraging and constructive response. I didn’t take the time to respond to individuals who told me not to use IRCC because if I had, I wouldn’t have written this piece.
I tried what you suggested, looking at the effect of light variation as well as simply one color variation on the dop file… and, as Joanna mentioned, it’s not as simple as it seems.
I wrote this post thinking that perhaps I missed something or I did not take the right approach.
The essential point is that, in the end, we have to not utilize a lot of buttons to optimize the color and light because we will modify too many RGB values of a pixel. So the goal is probably as you proposed, to follow the modification stored in an Y/Y coordinate when you only applied the change on two or three specific buttons and see the results in the IRCC report.
Anyway thank you very much for your answer.

Dear Platypus,

you’re right… the only data I have at the end is the standard files I joined one with this post. This is the final product, but they also did it on each of the nine sections of the photo. This is what I generally performed with the trial and error method, but certification is not free in this case… This is why I asked if someone has already think on that specific point.
Anyway thank you for you help.
Regards

I’d like to understand what means rgb corrections and how they can measure this ?
What if your image is not perfectly exposed when shooting ?
What if you use different demosaicing softwares ?
In fact what means not corrected RGB ?
How do they define this ?

1 Like

Now, this is interesting, since sensors are usually RGBG devices, whose data has to be de-mosaïced in order to turn it into a viewable image and different converters produce different results. I wonder whose software they would use as the standard?

Just send them an email for knowing wich demosaicing software they support to define not corrected rgb colors …
Will post response here if I get one.

2 Likes

Here is the response (fast, but …)

So “they can’t share informations I asked”.
I tried to read provided links, but it seems that it is a secret potion. Unless I missed something, but I don’t think so.
If anyone find more info than me, I’m interested to know it.

A good test would be to send them several RAW + jpg processed with several demosaiceurs without any tool applied. Seeing results we should find wich demosaiceur they use. Because they have to use one. (Unless they have developed some IA thing supposed to be smart).

…incurring some cost according to this post: IRCC Certification - #11 by Mantraya

1 Like

Anyway, magic potions aren’t things that give me confidence when it’s about to reveal truth.
And sending my raw files on the web isn’t something I like too.

Yes, without a doubt… but the test isn’t free ;-). According to their website, the software they utilize is based on medical image analysis research…
Anyway, if you need assistance, you can use ImageJ, which is also a free image analysis software.
Regards

Without a doubt, they will not… most likely because they want to be the only ones on the sector.

Dear JoPOV

Working on this subject has taught me that simply “playing” with brightness, contrast, and other buttons significantly changes the RGB level. By comparing the non-changed and modified jpgs, I uncovered software (freeware) that allows you to estimate the change in RGB level. ImageJ can assist you in calculating this.
If you need more details, I can help you.
Regards

Do you know who created those IRCC criterias ? Them ?
I understand their purpose when it’s about image manipulation, but I’m very suspiscious when it comes to regulate an artistic field.
So they have decided which photographer is ok and they ask other to conform to them … it looks a bit like it, isn’t it ? …
Is it allowed to do shadow recovery ? Is it allowed to control white balance in post ? Is it allowed to recover a not perfect exposure ? … sounds weird.

Anyway, maybe will we see less oversaturated landscape photography. :face_with_diagonal_mouth:

1 Like

To be honest this whole thing sounds like a scam. That you have to pay to have an image evaluated is a clear indicator. If they were honestly an organization interested in having photographers represent their photos with true to life colors they would be more open with the details/criteria and/or offer free evaluation of your images.

This whole thing sounds fishy to me.

Anyway I know my rant is off topic.

As to the topic at hand I agree with what others have said. RAW files must be interpreted. So what’s the standard?

1 Like

Hallelujah! The truth shall set you free! :laughing:

My point exactly. But not even just that. If I take a high dynamic range shot, in order to capture everything without either blocking shadow detail or, more importantly, blowing highlights, I am going to produce a RAW file whose JPEG preview is going to look horrendously dark but, after processing, the full range will be revealed. That can involve raising the “exposure” of the shadows by anything from 2-5 stops. This is not modifying the image, in the sense that I am adding or removing something, it is simply “decompressing” the shadows to reveal what the sensor captured, in the same way as a film photographer would use multigrade paper and contrast filters, plus several exposures, dodging and burning, under the enlarger to get the best quality print.

Although what on earth the IRCC are hoping to achieve with only a 1920 pixel image, I cannot for the life of me imagine. Apart, of course, for creating a very lucrative money-making scam :crazy_face: