Linearsharpen D60 beta preview

[Pekka]

Hi,

Last two weeks I've been developing an action which would do what Linearsharpen did for D30 photos. I did hundreds of tests and dig up a quite simple linear conversion (that actually produces very correct colors for D30, too). The conversion of course needed sharpening, and this action includes an experimental set of linear sharpening versions, one medium strong (ISO 100-200), one strong (ISO 100-200) which is my default sharpening, and one for all high ISO shots with two extra noise reduction action steps which will reduce noise in manner which does not eat any detail off. Noise reduction action 2 is for high ISO and the normal one is for ISO 200. Noise reduction actions is cumulative - just keep repeating them until you're satisfied, so for ISO 800 and 1000 you may want to run them few times.

There is also a set of actions to set brightness and saturation etc - these do not clip histogram.

The goals I had was not just to repeat what Canon did with curves and colors, but to improve and "clean" colors while driving for extremely realistic well-saturated colors. Perfect histogram with room to adjust was also achieved. Also, I wanted to get more shadow detail out and get stronger sharpening which would be as haloless as possible and that would make a real difference to unsharpened photo (without destoying DoF).

I work with Photoshop 6 which is set to have color management off. The end result is in AdobeRGB color profile. To convert for web export there are actions included (basically you need to convert to sRGB for web otherwise you may get washed colors).

NOTE: The linear TIFF files I use come from plain old Canon RAW Converter 2, false color filter on (no sharpening). I have not tested it with Yarc or breeze linear output.

Thanks a LOT to all who sent me files to test out! It was really helpful.

Try it out:

http://photography-on-the.net/D60/LS_D60_beta_preview.zip

There is still plenty to do, but I'd love to hear if this is useful and how do you like it.

Here are some test photos I took for developement of LS D60, in 33% size:

http://photography-on-the.net/D60/CRW_1839_RT16b.jpg
http://photography-on-the.net/D60/CRW_1825_RT16b.jpg
http://photography-on-the.net/D60/CRW_1840_RT16b.jpg

ISO 1000 (ISO 400 sharpen with two additional noise reduction runs):

http://photography-on-the.net/D60/CRW_2221_RT16b.jpg

[Pat Lepore]

Pekka,

I think I can speak for many here on this board when I say Thank you very much! I will download it now and try it.

P.S. I believe that you are missing a couple of popular Finnish beers in that second picture. Where is the Lapin Kulta and the Koff?

Pat.

[twwilliams]

Pekka:

I still have a D30 and use Roger Cavanagh's Linear Sharpen Menu (based on your action).

You mention that you found a simple linear conversion that produces very accurate colors for the D30, too.

Is the color better than what you get out of Linear Sharpen and/or Linear Sharpen Menu? If so, could you explain the method or post an action?

Thank you very much.

[Pekka]

twwilliams wrote:
You mention that you found a simple linear conversion that produces very accurate colors for the D30, too.

Is the color better than what you get out of Linear Sharpen and/or Linear Sharpen Menu? If so, could you explain the method or post an action?

Thank you very much.

Get http://photography-on-the.net/D60/LS_D60_beta_preview.zip

The sharpening is for D60, but there is "conversion only" action - that works for D30, too, as all extras there (brighter, darker, more sat...).

[Georgees]

I have put a comparison of Pekka's beta against Mirandas D60 Lpbatch on my web site for anyone interested in comparing apples to apples (err...apple blossoms to apple blossoms).

www.ksscinc.com


Regards,

George Smith

[Pekka]

The colors there are not what you get in AdobeRGB - the "to web" action is not correct. It must be _converted_ to sRGB otherwise you get washed out look. Sorry about that false info.

So, the right way to do export to web is to "Convert to Profile" SRGB (Microsoft, Relative, Black point), then to 8 bits, and then save with "save for web".

You got:

http://www.ksscinc.com/CRW_8494_L16_C_A2_200_GIF.gif

corrected export as noted above:

http://photography-on-the.net/D60/crw_8494_RT16.jpg

And for this photo I would click "more saturation" 10 times (it adds in very small steps) and then "darker" once:

http://photography-on-the.net/D60/crw_8494_RT16_sat.jpg

[T a z]

Wonderful news, Pekka!

Your original action is, in large part, why I didn't upgrade to the D60...and also made me hesitate when I was considering the 1D. I have yet to find anything that sharpens as well as Linear Sharpen....and I've tried a LOT of sharpening methods and software. But it's not just the sharpening, of course, as the color rendition is excellent as well.

But alas, my D30 is starting to show it's age. So who knows...now that a new model is reportedly going to be taking the D60's place in a couple of months, I might be able to upgrade at a bargain and still be able to retain the excellent results that I get with your actions.

I for one, thank you very much not only for your efforts but for your willingness to freely share of your labor with the photographic community. Your ingenuity is exeeded only by your generosity. The same can be said, of course, about Roger Cavanaugh who spent a great deal of time adding features to your already excellent action.

Thank you,

-Taz

[Georgees]

I agree Taz, I had looked forward to Pekka's action for some time now.

I join Taz in thanking you Pekka for this great site and all the wonderful work you do on our behalf.

Regards,

George Smith

[Persio]

I have tested some D30 images with people under sunlight (it is summer in the southern hemisphere) and here are my findings:

When compared with LS_D30 the skin tones are somewhat warmer and nicer.

I used the option D60 Sharpening Medium Strong and found the sharpening adequate. Maybe I am not skilled enough to notice a problem.

I like this action better than the D30 v.342 action.

I had some difficulty with the setup of Color Settings in PS7.01. Maybe someone could tell me the proper configuration of the Color Management Policies dialog box.

[lozoyad]

Pekka,

I'm using BreezeBrowser to convert my D60 Raw to a .tiff linear. Your action seems very cool, especially the sharpening process, can't wait for the final version...in fact I'm willing to pay for it...I think your effort is certainly worth compensation! I do however, see that my images are all consistenly lighter than they should be. I correct this by using 'darker' about 3-4 times. Could this be due to BreezeBrowser (release 2.3)?

[rrb01]

This is amazing! I had tried every linear method that came along, previously with the G2 and now the D60, and was never happy with the results compared to nonlinear. Pekka's action has changed all of that; I have never seen anything like it. And this is only the beta version? All I can say is thanks.

Dick

[john_houghton]

lozoyad wrote:
I do however, see that my images are all consistenly lighter than they should be. I correct this by using 'darker' about 3-4 times. Could this be due to BreezeBrowser (release 2.3)?
I liked the results from my D60 images but also found that the images were much too light. 3-4 applications of "darker" seems right. (I'm currently on BB 2.2b, and my monitor is calibrated with a spyder and Photocal).

John

[rrb01]

I also use BB but didn't notice any consistent "too light" effect on my first trials with Linearsharpen. However, if it is in fact the case, well there's the solution to all the carping about D60 underexposure!

[elm54]

Is this action applicable to mac?
Even if it is not thank you for you generousity.
Eric

[mrbobco]

hi eric...

i was a bit worried when i noticed it as a zip file too...but just unstuff the file and it will work perfectly on your mac (works on mine that is : )

great work pekka!

bob

[john_houghton]

With reference to the "too light" issue, I thought I would compare the histogram of the image displayed by the camera with the levels of the converted image. (I chose "D60 SHARPENING medium strong". This is what I got:

http://homepage.dtn.ntl.com/j.houghton/d60lev.jpg

Applying 4 shots of "darker" was enough to bring the levels down to those shown in the camera display.

John

[Dale]

Pekka wrote:

The sharpening is for D60, but there is "conversion only" action - that works for D30, too, as all extras there (brighter, darker, more sat...).

I find the colors very good for the D30. If the D30 LS or LSM had a sharpening only option to be used after conversion I could get the benifit of both actions.

[henkbos]

Pekka,

Thanks for the action. I'm a user of Fred's actions but decided to do some tests against yours. Goal was to get the best result with the least amount of work, based on viewing the pictures on my monitor.

I converted the pictures to 16-bit linear TIFF using BB.
After that I used the following actions from Fred:
- D60 LPbatch, normal saturation, normal sharpening
- D60 LPbatch, normal saturation, high sharpening
- D60 LPbatch, normal saturation, very high sharpening
I applied your action as well:
- no sharpening
- medium sharpening
- strong sharpening
I decided that the following were right for me:
- D60 LPbatch, normal saturation, very high sharpening
- strong sharpening

After comparing the pictures I found your action to be better. Color was more lively and the picture was more crisp. One conversion of a shot taken at ISO200 was rather blurry, but that was solved with the selective noise blur.

After the sharpening actions I used the curves and selected black and white points. Again 'your' colors were better, but a reduction of red by 25% was necessary to make it perfect.

This 'test' has not the presumption to be scientific or even thourough. It's an indication. Can post the results if people are interested.

[seanspeng]

Thank you, Pekka! I know this great action will delight so many D60 owners. I think this is a significant addition to Pekka's portfolio.

Just for your information, here is a comparison that I did on Pekka and Fred's D30 action. You might want to take a look at it:

http://www.pbase.com/pengrus/breezebrowser_and_yarcplus_w_pekkas

If Pekka has time to develop other actions, I am willing to buy them all. :)

Thanks!

[gooza]

Thanks Pekka! I just received a D60 the day after Christmas. I have been looking for some tools for USM and other tweaks. Your D60 beta is terrific! I love the saturation and contrast options...awesome colors! Keep up the great work...you've helped me out immensely :-)
Paul

[Persio]

Henk Bos,

I would like to see the results of your tests since I am also considering the use of Pekka's D-60 action on my D-30 Linear Tiff files.

Thanks,
Persio.

[henkbos]

No problem Persio. It might take some time though since I will be travelling next week and editing is something I will never do on my laptop.
Expect results within 10 days.

[lozoyad]

All,

In addition to the 'too light' conversion I have been experiencing with this otherwise wonderful action, I too have noticed a little too much red in some of the photos. So cutting back on the red has helped. We do have to keep in mind that this is a beta release.

To summarize:

1) too light, must use 'darker' 3-4 times
2) sometimes pulling back on the red to adjust for red bias...

on the plus:
1) wonderful sharpening...some of the finest I've seen
2) colors are generaly neutral, with above exceptions

[Persio]

Pekka,

Let me start by thanking you for this fantastic action.
I am still a bit confused as to the proper way of providing the linear tiff image to the action.
When I load a linear tiff image in PS7 I am requested to define:
1)Use embeded profile (sRGB for my D30 files)
2)Convert to working space (Adobe RGB in my case)
3)Discard profile (do not color manage)
I get very defferent results for each option.
What is the correct option I should adopt?

On another front, if I Batch/Automate this action will I get the same results as processing each image individually?

Thanks for helping,
Persio.

[Roger_Cavanagh]

Persio wrote:
Pekka,

Let me start by thanking you for this fantastic action.
I am still a bit confused as to the proper way of providing the linear tiff image to the action.
When I load a linear tiff image in PS7 I am requested to define:
1)Use embeded profile (sRGB for my D30 files)
2)Convert to working space (Adobe RGB in my case)
3)Discard profile (do not color manage)
I get very defferent results for each option.
What is the correct option I should adopt?

On another front, if I Batch/Automate this action will I get the same results as processing each image individually?

Thanks for helping,
Persio.

Persio has raised an important point here. LS342 and LS D60 don't use ICC profiles for the camera (unlike, for example, Fred Miranda's Linear Pro), so the linear image shoud be opened with "no colour management".

However, as far as I can establish under this circumstance Photoshop will still use the default colour space for any edits. This means with LS D60 that the inital series of channel mixer and curves commands will produce varying results depending on the default colour (and the image characteristics). My view is that the default colour space should be set to Wide Gamut RGB, or - as I have done with LinearSharpenMenu - assign Wide Gamut RGB as the first step in the LS D60 processing.

Regards,

[Persio]

Roger,

Thanks for your comment.
I agree with your suggestion, the first step in the action should be assigning a profile so that the action executes its functions over a standard base.
I would like to hear Pekka's views on this suggestion.
I am not knowledgeable about assigning profiles so my doubt is whether assigning a profile to an image would in any way deteriorate the purity of a linear tiff image.

Regards,
Persio.

[Roger_Cavanagh]

Further to my last post, I have created a small test file.

http://www.pixelpixel.org/images/linked/cdp/lsd60testl.zip

It's a PSD with four layers showing the differences due to initial profile assignment:

1. wide - assigned Wide Gamut RGB then processed with LS D60 No Sharpening.

2. adobe - assigned Adobe RGB then processed with LS D60 No Sharpening.

3. srgb - assigned sRGB then processed with LS D60 No Sharpening.

4. LSM - since this is a D30 image I also processed it using LSM (high gamma, no sharpening - equivalent to LS342)

After processing all variations were converted to 8-bit sRGB to create the layered file.

You can see differences between the differences results by hiding/unhiding the different pairs of layers.

I've posted the test as a download (around 650k) because it's not easy to compare the images side-by-side.


Regards,

[Roger_Cavanagh]

Looking specifically at using LS D60 for processing D30 images, I've also created a variation of the layered PSD in my last post:

http://www.pixelpixel.org/images/linked/cdp/lsm-lsd60small.zip

There were variations in the brightness of the LSM and LS 60 versions, so I adjusted using Levels>Options>Enhance Monochromatic Contrast with no clipping or gray snap for both versions.

The results indicate that the vanilla LS D60 does not appear to yield good results on D30 images. This ZIP is just over 400k.

Regards,

[yavor73]

The group has it right...LS beta is slightly too red and slightly too hot. Otherwise it's superb! I did some test shots- although not rigorous technically, newbies might like to check them out. www.esb.utexas.edu/nagy/D60/

Pekka, open a PayPal account so we can help you out a bit.

Bob

[pigasus]

yavor73 wrote:
The group has it right...LS beta is slightly too red and slightly too hot. Otherwise it's superb! I did some test shots- although not rigorous technically, newbies might like to check them out. www.esb.utexas.edu/nagy/D60/

Pekka, open a PayPal account so we can help you out a bit.

Bob,
Pekka has a paypal account:
http://photography-on-the.net/D30/linear/

On the subject of too red and too hot - what profile are you assigning to your linear TIFFs when you open them in PS? It makes a big difference to the final result. Bringing the TIFF in as untagged gives the same result as if you had assigned your working space as the profile. So if your working space is sRGB try assigning AdobeRGB or some other profile to the TIFF before running the action - or vice versa.

[wcapald]

I just tried D60 beta on some wedding shots and its pretty dam good. Needed about 4 shots of dark and skin tones are a bit red. Sort this and you are onto a winner for wedding photographers who want simplified workflow from RAW files on D60's. Hello to Roger by the way who gave me loads of help last year whilst I was learning the ropes of D30's and D60's. Can't wait for the next generation of bodies from the manufacturers. Regards Wayne

[wcapald]

So if you bring in a 16 bit linear TIFF having converted from BB, and your working space is Adobe RGB, what do you assign before running the action?

[Wheelie]

I tried LS D60 on my D30 files and found it a very worthwile processing . I assign Adobe RGB as my complete workflow is based on that profile and , I'm very pleased with the results so far .
http://www.canonians.com/linearsharpen.htm
I can't wait to see what Pekka will offer in the definitive or next beta version .
I think it is very promising .

Wheelie

[Roger_Cavanagh]

Hey, Wayne. :)

I think we need Pekka to comment on this issue of colour space. The way he's got LS D60 set up at the moment don't make no sense to me. (I'm only talking about the no sharpening, conversion only option - haven't looked at any others.)

The start of the action has 5 curve adjustments and one channel mixer. As we have discussed these will either be executed in the default colour space or a space specifically assigned by the user. As my test file a few posts ago shows, this will give different results for different colour spaces.

The next command converts to wide gamut, and the one after that (ignoring purges) converts to Adobe RGB. From what space are we converting into Wide Gamut? Why have two conversions one after the other?

I don't have a D60 test file that allows me to make a judgement, but based on my experience with LS342 and what I've done with LSM, I'd suggest that the sensible choice would be to assign Wide Gamut RGB to the linear file so that all the initial commands work in this space.

Pekka's probably off earning a crust somewhere. He will no doubt comment when he can.

Cheers,

[pigasus]

Roger_Cavanagh wrote:
The next command converts to wide gamut, and the one after that (ignoring purges) converts to Adobe RGB. From what space are we converting into Wide Gamut? Why have two conversions one after the other?,

Also watch out for the convert from LAB to RGB color mode in the 'lab mask and sharpen' action. This converts the image into your working space and not back to Wide Gamut.

I don't have a D60 test file that allows me to make a judgement, but based on my experience with LS342 and what I've done with LSM, I'd suggest that the sensible choice would be to assign Wide Gamut RGB to the linear file so that all the initial commands work in this space.

My tests have given me garish reds using Wide Gamut with the D60 action. The reds seem to subdue with either AdobeRGB or BruceRGB.

Pekka's probably off earning a crust somewhere. He will no doubt comment when he can.

He's in the States I believe. I wonder if he'll come back with any new toys. :)

[Morden]

I have not owned my D60 for long. With my previous digital cameras (including a G2), I never looked at 'raw' modes. Soon after getting my D60, I found myself reading numerous examples of praise of shooting in raw mode. I decided to make the change from having the D60 create JPEG fils, to processing the raw files myself.

Unfortunately, several days ago, I believed that my D60 body was defective; I had taken many test shots to check my new lens (a Canon EF 16-35 f/2.8) and I noticed that EVERY picture was blurred. I initially assumed that the lens was at fault, but subsequently discovered that shots from both of my other lenses were turning out blurred, even though those lenses had produced sharp pictures previously. I then moved my finger to point at the D60 body as being the faulty component, but then I remembered my recent switch to raw. I took a few shots in JPEG mode, with each of the three lenses, and was - more than anything else - relieved to see nice, sharp pictures.

I was then all for abandoning the idea of shooting in raw, even though I had already bought Fred Miranda's D60 actions. Before giving up on raw mode, I decided to give this "Linear Sharpen D60 beta" a try. Now, I am going to stick with raw; LS D60 seems to do the trick! I note this 'lightness' issue and await the result of the debate on this, but as for sharpening, Pekka's action delivers.

I eagerly await the next version of Linear Sharpen for my D60.

Go Pekka!

[wcapald]

so would this be worth looking at

Tiko's Linear workflow:

1. Convert RAW to linear TIF in BB, open to Photoshop.

2. use Image/Mode/AssignProfile and Assign Tiko's
linear D60 profile.

3. Use the Image/Mode/ConvertToProfile and convert to the AdobeRGB Working-Space.

Then run LinearSharpen Beta 60 action

??

[Roger_Cavanagh]

wcapald wrote:
so would this be worth looking at

Tiko's Linear workflow:

1. Convert RAW to linear TIF in BB, open to Photoshop.

2. use Image/Mode/AssignProfile and Assign Tiko's
linear D60 profile.

3. Use the Image/Mode/ConvertToProfile and convert to the AdobeRGB Working-Space.

Then run LinearSharpen Beta 60 action

??


Wayne, do you mean Timo Autiokari's D60 profiles? If so, the answer is no because assigning this profile will fix the dark colours and gamma in the linear TIFF, so LS D60 would be redundant.

Cheers,

[Roger_Cavanagh]

Morden wrote:
I have not owned my D60 for long. With my previous digital cameras (including a G2), I never looked at 'raw' modes. Soon after getting my D60, I found myself reading numerous examples of praise of shooting in raw mode. I decided to make the change from having the D60 create JPEG fils, to processing the raw files myself.

Unfortunately, several days ago, I believed that my D60 body was defective; I had taken many test shots to check my new lens (a Canon EF 16-35 f/2.8) and I noticed that EVERY picture was blurred. I initially assumed that the lens was at fault, but subsequently discovered that shots from both of my other lenses were turning out blurred, even though those lenses had produced sharp pictures previously. I then moved my finger to point at the D60 body as being the faulty component, but then I remembered my recent switch to raw. I took a few shots in JPEG mode, with each of the three lenses, and was - more than anything else - relieved to see nice, sharp pictures.

I was then all for abandoning the idea of shooting in raw, even though I had already bought Fred Miranda's D60 actions. Before giving up on raw mode, I decided to give this "Linear Sharpen D60 beta" a try. Now, I am going to stick with raw; LS D60 seems to do the trick! I note this 'lightness' issue and await the result of the debate on this, but as for sharpening, Pekka's action delivers.

I eagerly await the next version of Linear Sharpen for my D60.

Go Pekka!

Neil, that's one of the big pluses for raw, especially using linear conversion, no sharpening (or contrast, tone and saturation) is applied unlike JPG. This let's you decide what's best for each image and even better allows you to change your mind even after you've taken the picture. :) But it is a big shock when you first see an unsharpened image. :D

Regards,

[wcapald]

Hi Rog,

So for sake of clarification, (most wedding photographers are working in AdobeRGB workspace)
after converting from RAW to TIFF in BBrowser, what is the workflow you suggest?

convert to working space?
then run the beta L60 action

bit confused...

Wayne

[piscator]

Greetings, all. I'm new to the forum, joined because of Pekka's linear sharpen action.
Unfortunately, I'm lost. How does one use the Linearsharpen D60 actions? I would really appreciate it if someone could give me a list of steps used to 'process' a linear image (I got that part) into a final image. I tried selecting 'D60 sharpening medium strong', and after watching it seemingly repeat itself for about 10 minutes I stopped. I'm on a Mac G4 with plenty of horsepower, so that's not the problem. I've used Pekka's D30 linearsharpen actions when I had a D30, and it didn't take any time at all.
HELP, pleeeease!

[Roger_Cavanagh]

wcapald wrote:
Hi Rog,

So for sake of clarification, (most wedding photographers are working in AdobeRGB workspace)
after converting from RAW to TIFF in BBrowser, what is the workflow you suggest?

convert to working space?
then run the beta L60 action

bit confused...

Wayne

Wayne,

OK, this is a bit seat of the pants because (a) I don't have any D60 test images (other than the one you sent me a while back of the inside of your beamer :) ) and (b) there are clearly some issues wrt LS D60 about initial colour space and brightness (if not more).

This is what I would do:

- Convert to linear TIFF in BreezeBrowser or YarcPlus.

Personally, I think that for ISO 100/200 images YP with ARF2 gets the best results, although I still use BB for browsing and sorting.

Linear TIFF is important here, not the standard TIFF. The linear TIFF image will look very dark. There are no corrections applied other than any selected WB adjustments

- Load linear image to Photoshop

ASSIGN the Wide Gamut RGB profile. Important to assign not convert at this point. In fact, I would be inclined to set Wide Gamut RGB as the default working space for working with linear images. It's easy to change preferences back and forth. I have posted about the possible destructive effect converting in and out of Lab space before and how PS forgets the colour space the image was in before lab conversion. Sally mentions it as well in her last post.

I first noticed this with an image that was in Wide Gamut RGB, converted to Lab, back to RGB but the Adobe RGB default working. There were bright yellows in the image that were completely blown by this procedure.

Even more worrying (and a bit of an aside) I have just been reading an article on Bruce Lindbloom's web site (see the link on my colour management page), he writes:

... converting an image into Lab for the purposes of applying a color correction in Photoshop can severely reduce the number of unique colors in your image... Whether this is a significant loss depends on the particular situation, but you should at least be aware of it.

Bruce demonstrates how 16,777,216 unique sRGB colours are reduced to only 2,186,578 (only ??!) colours because of quantisation in the lab conversion process.

- Then I would run my preferred LS D60 option for sharpness. Conversion to Adobe RGB occurs as part of this process, so the image is now ready for any further adjustments that may be required.

Sorry, I got a bit side-tracked in the middle, but does that make sense?

Cheers,

[Roger_Cavanagh]

piscator wrote:
Greetings, all. I'm new to the forum, joined because of Pekka's linear sharpen action.
Unfortunately, I'm lost. How does one use the Linearsharpen D60 actions? I would really appreciate it if someone could give me a list of steps used to 'process' a linear image (I got that part) into a final image. I tried selecting 'D60 sharpening medium strong', and after watching it seemingly repeat itself for about 10 minutes I stopped. I'm on a Mac G4 with plenty of horsepower, so that's not the problem. I've used Pekka's D30 linearsharpen actions when I had a D30, and it didn't take any time at all.
HELP, pleeeease!

Piscator,

LS D60 does have multiple image resize steps, which are slow on my PC. I don't know how a Mac G4 compares with this, but are you sure this is not what's causing the problem? Does the "No sharpening" option run OK? This has no resizes.

Regards,

[wcapald]

Ok I'll give it a go and see what the results look like.

Cheers Wayne

[wcapald]

OK Roger, done that, the sharpening is amazing, absolutely superb. But its still too light and a tad red. So confirms other peoples feedback, but I like the end result if the red tinge could be fixed. Nice action, easy peasy workflow. Wait for the next edition then. Something to be said for RAW, I've been shooting Fine JPEG for 6 months.... Wayne

[elm54]

Roger_Cavanagh wrote:
piscator wrote:
Greetings, all. I'm new to the forum, joined because of Pekka's linear sharpen action.
Unfortunately, I'm lost. How does one use the Linearsharpen D60 actions? I would really appreciate it if someone could give me a list of steps used to 'process' a linear image (I got that part) into a final image. I tried selecting 'D60 sharpening medium strong', and after watching it seemingly repeat itself for about 10 minutes I stopped. I'm on a Mac G4 with plenty of horsepower, so that's not the problem. I've used Pekka's D30 linearsharpen actions when I had a D30, and it didn't take any time at all.
HELP, pleeeease!

Piscator,

LS D60 does have multiple image resize steps, which are slow on my PC. I don't know how a Mac G4 compares with this, but are you sure this is not what's causing the problem? Does the "No sharpening" option run OK? This has no resizes.

Regards,


Hello fellows, I probably shouldn't open my mouth ( ya know "better to keep your mouth shut and be thought an idiot , than open it and remove all doubt) so here goes any way....
When I first tried to use pekkas action "linear sharpen D60. ( I also use a g4 ) I highlighted "D60 sharpen medium strong" and hit the play arrow and it proceeded to run every action in the folder, ( and I think this is what Piscator is talking about . If not hopefully someone will gently show me my error.
Now I'm not sure of what it is supposed to do (being a fng myself) but after looking around it a little I found that I could pick options or actions out an command dbl click them and they would perform individual commands. Ie: unsharp mask , convert mode, purge ,curves etc..
So I hope I am using it right as it does definatly improve the image as I apply different commands.
As it is a beta it may have bugs but I am not qualified to point them out as I am not sure as to how it is supposed tio perform.

I hope I clarified the above situation as I saw it . If not ...oh well.

Peace Eric

[Roger_Cavanagh]

Part 1


Eric and Piscator, it sounds to me like a corruption in the Mac version of the action. There are four possible choices for processing the linear image:

NO SHARPENING
D60 SHARPENING medium strong
D60 SHARPENING strong
D60 SHARPENING ISO400

I've just run them all and they complete fine in may be a coupla minutes. So you could try re-installing the action or is there something that has to be done to PC-created actions to make them run properly on a Mac?

Part 2

Following on from my last response to Wayne's query about workflow. Having run extensive tests ony my vast portfolio of one D60 image, :) I am revising my suggestion to assign Wide Gamut RGB when the image is opened. Adobe RGB seems to give better results.

It's easy to try out the differences. Load a decent image for testing assign the Wide Gamut RGB and then run the no sharpening option. When the action completes, double-click on the snapshot and change its name.

Select the original linear TIF, assign Adobe RGB and re-run the no sharpening action. You can then compare the two results.

Regards,

[lozoyad]

Fun thread!

Adding to my previous too red and too light comments I have also experienced my Texas skies as too cyan using the action.

Once I have the linear tiff file I do not color manage or assign the Wide Gamut RGB (as suggested by Roger C.). I did try it with the Wide Gamut RGB but didn't see major changes to my cyan skies.

Currently I use AboutdigiCam's ICC profiles as my baseline for comparisons...which I find very close to reality (well...at least my reality!).

As I have said before...this is still a worthy beta...can't wait for the final release.

[Roger_Cavanagh]

lozoyad wrote:
Once I have the linear tiff file I do not color manage or assign the Wide Gamut RGB (as suggested by Roger C.).

I've changed my mind (we're allowed too :) ) to Adobe RGB - see my last post.

Also even with colour management turned off, PS will, according to Andrew Rodney, edit an unprofiled image in the default working space. As far as I can tell (with PS7), there's no way not to have a default RGB spaced defined. There always is some colour space selected.

Regards,

[SteveO]

I've been waiting with worms on my tongue* for the conclusion to this thread. Has anyone contacted Pekka for his recommendations to the color space to be using? Further, does anyone know if "beta2" is in the works that might fix the "red problem"?

*bated breath

[Morden]

Neil, that's one of the big pluses for raw, especially using linear conversion, no sharpening (or contrast, tone and saturation) is applied unlike JPG. This let's you decide what's best for each image and even better allows you to change your mind even after you've taken the picture. :) But it is a big shock when you first see an unsharpened image. :D
I totally agree about the "big pluses" of using raw! My favourite is the "change your mind later" clause. But you are correct; it was a BIG shock (in that I deemed my D60 to be defective) when I saw blurry images - even though I was applying sharpening actions in Photoshop 7 (Miranda's CS-D60 or the sharpening in D60-LPBATCH).

But it all looks good now, thanks - it appears - to Linear Sharpen!

I will be sticking to shooting in raw, I believe!

[elm54]

Roger_Cavanagh wrote:
Part 1


Eric and Piscator, it sounds to me like a corruption in the Mac version of the action. There are four possible choices for processing the linear image:

NO SHARPENING
D60 SHARPENING medium strong
D60 SHARPENING strong
D60 SHARPENING ISO400

I've just run them all and they complete fine in may be a coupla minutes. So you could try re-installing the action or is there something that has to be done to PC-created actions to make them run properly on a Mac?


Regards,



Thank you Roger,

I am glad I said something, Bonehead that I am I had tried the actions on a tif file that I had converted in "Canons Fileviewer utility" for osx , without the linear box checked . so they were not set up linierly (?). Man I got some strange results.
Anyway I just ran the 3 actions (not iso400) on 16bit tif and an 8 bit version. The 16 bit tif saved as psd in adobe rgb 1998 came out good the 8 bit saved the same way are way too light .
Unfortunatly I don't know if it is a mac thing or if my work flow is flawed or if evan my image is faulty.
1)The crw file is on the hard drive copied without conversion....
2) saved to a 16 bit tif with linier, false color filter enabled.
3) assigned to adobe rgb 1998.
4) one of the actions of Pekkas is applied.

The 16 bit images came out good the 8 bit came out way too saturated and the gamma is too high.
I pretty much have a laymens working knowlege of Photoshop but never delt with raw before I got the d60, so take it for what it is worth.
I appreceiate you input , I would still be using the individual commands if you and Piscator hadn't posted what you did.

Thanks again
Eric

[Roger_Cavanagh]

elm54 wrote:
The 16 bit images came out good the 8 bit came out way too saturated and the gamma is too high.
I pretty much have a laymens working knowlege of Photoshop but never delt with raw before I got the d60, so take it for what it is worth.
I appreceiate you input , I would still be using the individual commands if you and Piscator hadn't posted what you did.

You don't get good results using 8-bit conversions with D30 images and LS342. There's far too much chance of posterisation. I can't imagine the 8-bit D60 images and LS D60 would work any better.

Regards,

[piscator]

Thanks, Roger. I'll try re-loading the program.

[Persio]

I have noticed that when I run this action the EXIF Date and Time information changes to the date and time of image processing.
Is there a way to preserve the original EXIF Date and Time? This info is the basis for my achiving of the images.

Roger, can you suggest a workaround?

Thanks to all,
Persio.

[Roger_Cavanagh]

Persio wrote:
I have noticed that when I run this action the EXIF Date and Time information changes to the date and time of image processing.
Is there a way to preserve the original EXIF Date and Time? This info is the basis for my achiving of the images.

Roger, can you suggest a workaround?

Thanks to all,
Persio.


Persio,

If you archive a TIFF or JPG version of the image, then EXIF can be copied from the original CRW/THM files. BreezeBrowser and YarcPlus both do this. I don't know about the Canon software as I've never tried. BB also allows you to set the system timestamp on the file to match the EXIF.

Regards,

[Pekka]

Hi all and greetings from NYC - Tour was great (got great reviews, and we were invited to play at Carnegie Hall in couple of years). Jet lag is still on and I have some nice photos coming, too, but last two days I have been solving some Linearsharpen D60 problems mentioned in this thread.

I'll upload a new version in couple of hours which fixes all discussed problems :)

Some talk about the next version:

I have no PS7 to test, but to prevent apparent forced profile conversion issues in it I have built a new conversion which works with AdobeRGB (1998) profiled linear TIFF and outputs AdobeRGB TIFF. So, for next version PS should be set so that the source image must be either "untagged" or "AdobeRGB 1998". If the source is untagged LS will assign and convert the photo to AdobeRGB before proceeding.

Because many different color management settings are possible, I'll try to explain some scenarios:

1. Your working space is AdobeRGB
In this case (in PS7) you should activate "RGB: Convert to working space" in color management dialog's section "Color Management Policies" and tick on "ask when opening". Now, PS asks you to choose each time you open a linear TIFF. The reply is easy: all choices are equally correct.

In photoshop 7 there is apparently no possibility to assing a photo "no profile", so if there are some odd questions on the opening dialog just make sure that you "assing" or "assign and convert" to AdobeRGB (1998) - and not your working profile whatever else that might be.

2. Your working space is "Monitor RGB"
In this case Color Management Policies are automatically set to "RGB: Off". I have no idea how PS7 behaves here.

2. You have color management off (PS 6)
No settings, just run LS. LS will convert to AdobeRGB.

3. Your working space is some other than AdobeRGB
In this case you should activate "RGB: Convert to working space" in color management dialog's section "Color Management Policies" and tick on "ask when opening". Now, PS asks you to choose each time you open a linear file. The reply should be:
TICK ON "Assign profile:" and choose "AdobeRGB (1998)" from dropdown menu. Then UNTICK "and then convert document to working RGB".

If PS7 insists on converting the opened photo to selected working space, you must use AdobeRGB as your working space. I'll get PS7 update and check how it behaves as soon as I can get hands on one.

The bottom line is that before opening a linear TIFF you must ensure that Photoshop either:

- converts opened untagged photos to AdobeRGB
- or does not assign any profile to opened untagged photos

In theory it is perfectly good to feed LS images that are in larger working gamuts (WideGamut) than AdobeRGB, which means LS will just convert it to Adobe RGB and that's it. But you may experience hue shifts if AdobeRGB really does not "fit" inside chosen profile's gamut.

The above text is for NEXT version of LS (beta 2). I'll notify here as soon as it's online.

[Persio]

Pekka,

Congratulations on your tour!!! and have a save trip.
Thanks for the good news. I like the approach you are taking regarding color management profiles.

Regards,
Persio.

[SteveCliff]

Working with AdobeRGB seems to be a very sensible move Pekka.

The fact that it completely matches the way I work in PS7 has no bearing at all ... honest! :)

Excellent job on the action - I know a lot of people will be very glad you put the work in to creating a D60 version - thanks.

[Roger_Cavanagh]

Pekka,

Congratulations on a successful trip. Didn't buy a 1Ds while you were in NY, then?

Some comments on your post:


Pekka wrote:
Because many different color management settings are possible, I'll try to explain some scenarios:

1. Your working space is AdobeRGB
In this case (in PS7) you should activate "RGB: Convert to working space" in color management dialog's section "Color Management Policies" and tick on "ask when opening". Now, PS asks you to choose each time you open a linear TIFF. The reply is easy: all choices are equally correct.

In photoshop 7 there is apparently no possibility to assing a photo "no profile", so if there are some odd questions on the opening dialog just make sure that you "assing" or "assign and convert" to AdobeRGB (1998) - and not your working profile whatever else that might be.

PS7 will still allow the choice "no colour management", if an image is opened that does not contain an embedded profile. And the same option applies to set up colour management options to asssign Adobe RGB to such an image or let LS D60 do it as step 1. So there should be no problems.

2. Your working space is "Monitor RGB"
In this case Color Management Policies are automatically set to "RGB: Off". I have no idea how PS7 behaves here.

2. You have color management off (PS 6)
No settings, just run LS. LS will convert to AdobeRGB.

Anyone using either of these options should read this article http://digitaldog.net/files/II-PS6ColorManagement.pdf by Andrew Rodney who explains why they are both poor choices.

3. Your working space is some other than AdobeRGB
In this case you should activate "RGB: Convert to working space" in color management dialog's section "Color Management Policies" and tick on "ask when opening". Now, PS asks you to choose each time you open a linear file. The reply should be:
TICK ON "Assign profile:" and choose "AdobeRGB (1998)" from dropdown menu. Then UNTICK "and then convert document to working RGB".

If PS7 insists on converting the opened photo to selected working space, you must use AdobeRGB as your working space. I'll get PS7 update and check how it behaves as soon as I can get hands on one.

PS7 will not force the conversion into a working space unless colour management options are so configured. Specify "preserve embedded profiles" is the sensible choice. There are separate that will issue wanings if an image is opened with no profile embedded, or the embedded profile does not match the working profile.

If you are using BreezeBrowser to convert files, then the Adobe RGB profile can be embedded in the image during conversion.

The bottom line is that before opening a linear TIFF you must ensure that Photoshop either:

- converts opened untagged photos to AdobeRGB
- or does not assign any profile to opened untagged photos

PS7 will allow this just fine.

In theory it is perfectly good to feed LS images that are in larger working gamuts (WideGamut) than AdobeRGB, which means LS will just convert it to Adobe RGB and that's it. But you may experience hue shifts if AdobeRGB really does not "fit" inside chosen profile's gamut.

Again the advice of Andrew Rodney is that conversion options should be set to:

Adobe ACE conversion engine
Relative colorimetric intent
Black point compensation on

The colour gamut of the D30 is outside Adobe RGB for some colours ( see http://users.skynet.be/bk244311/gamut/gamut.htm), presumably the D60 will be the same. But apparently some colours in Wide Gamut RGB can't exist in real life :eyes: , so what the hey!

Regards,

[GenEOS]

Man, this is an impressive thread. I have a ton of things to learn about Photoshop and my D60.

I guess I should have actually read those books in school....

[Thomas]

Roger,

I use BB to convert to a linear TIFF.
For Pekka's LS D60 would you recommend:
a) to use the smart noise reduction, or not?
b) false colour filter on or off?

It makes a difference if you assign Adobe profile to your TIFF after opening it in Photoshop and running LS D60.

Thomas

[Roger_Cavanagh]

Thomas wrote:
Roger,

I use BB to convert to a linear TIFF.
For Pekka's LS D60 would you recommend:
a) to use the smart noise reduction, or not?
b) false colour filter on or off?

Thomas,

I wouldn't use the noise reduction on every image, just those where there is a possible benefit. The NR is essentially blurring the image so that noise is masked, and consequently, detail can be masked as well. Personally, I have switched to YarcPlus for conversion because I believe the the Artefact Reduction Filter improves image quality and is not the same as a noise reducer.

I was doing some comparisons of the Photokit Noise Reducer, Smarter NR and Pekka's Selective Noise Blur 2 the other day. There was not much difference between them. I know Sally (Pigasus) likes SNB2 very much and the price is certainly right. :) It is pretty slow on my PC.

I can offer no opinion about the FCF. I've always left it switched on. Remiss of me, perhaps, not to test, but I've never heard anyone complain that it harmed an image and it's easier to leave it on than decide whether an image is likely to suffer false colour artefacts. The only downside is a somewhat increased conversion time.

It makes a difference if you assign Adobe profile to your TIFF after opening it in Photoshop and running LS D60.

Not sure what you're getting at here. Embedding the Adobe RGB profile in a TIFF image during conversion is the same as assigning the profile as the first step in LS D60, which Pekka said in his last post will be the way the next version works.

Regards,

[rrb01]

Roger_Cavanagh wrote:


Again the advice of Andrew Rodney is that conversion options should be set to:

Adobe ACE conversion engine
Relative colorimetric intent
Black point compensation on


Regards,


Roger,
Please clear something up: I just re-read Andrew's PS color management article, from a link on your site ;). He says just the opposite about black point compensation, if I understand it correctly. He says use it only for conversions relating to CMYK, but not for "RGB output conversions". Am I missing something?

[Roger_Cavanagh]

rrb01 wrote:
Roger,
Please clear something up: I just re-read Andrew's PS color management article, from a link on your site ;). He says just the opposite about black point compensation, if I understand it correctly. He says use it only for conversions relating to CMYK, but not for "RGB output conversions". Am I missing something?


I couldn't find this bit. Can you describe where you find it more precisely. I just quickly reviewed this document again "Photoshop Color Management (Versions 6.0 and 7.0)". There is a screen shot of "AR's defaults" on page 6 that shows BPC on. But I did get the Intent wrong in my post. AR has his set to Perceptual not Relative Colorimetric.

I didn't read every word, but in a quick scan, I couldn't find much discussion about BPC except in respect of the changes to soft proofing from PS5.5 to PS6. So if you can point me to what you say, I'll take a look.

Regards,

[rrb01]

Roger_Cavanagh wrote:
rrb01 wrote:
Roger,
Please clear something up: I just re-read Andrew's PS color management article, from a link on your site ;). He says just the opposite about black point compensation, if I understand it correctly. He says use it only for conversions relating to CMYK, but not for "RGB output conversions". Am I missing something?


I couldn't find this bit. Can you describe where you find it more precisely. I just quickly reviewed this document again "Photoshop Color Management (Versions 6.0 and 7.0)". There is a screen shot of "AR's defaults" on page 6 that shows BPC on. But I did get the Intent wrong in my post. AR has his set to Perceptual not Relative Colorimetric.

I didn't read every word, but in a quick scan, I couldn't find much discussion about BPC except in respect of the changes to soft proofing from PS5.5 to PS6. So if you can point me to what you say, I'll take a look.

Regards,


I found it in his article "Black Point Compensation". Here is the quote:

"In rare cases using Black Point Compensation can cause unacceptable results and the effect is usually
washed out detail in the very dark regions of the final image. In our experience this problem
usually rears its ugly head with some RGB output profiles. Adobe recommends, and we agree, that
in almost all cases, Black Point Compensation should be on when dealing with CMYK files (doing
RGB to CMYK conversions or CMYK to CMYK conversions). In most cases, doing RGB to RGB
conversions without Black Point Compensation will produce desirable prints. However, depending
on the profile, doing a conversion from RGB to RGB with Black Point Compensation can produce
poor output with washed out blacks. It appears that this problem with some RGB profiles is dependent
on the software that is used to generate the profile. Apparently there is a “Black Tag” feature in
ICC profiles that in some cases can be used or unused depending on the software that actually
creates the profile. For this reason, there is no hard and fast rule that says we should or should not
use Black Point Compensation with RGB output. Our recommendation is to turn off Black Point
Compensation with RGB output profiles or if possible, try a test with Black Point Compensation
on and off."

Although his recommendation is to turn it off, it seems the answer as usual with digital imaging is "it depends"! I'm interested because I'm re-evaluating everything in my setup since suddenly I'm not getting good monitor-to-print matching. Have looked at all the usual things, recalibrated monitor, etc. Looks like I will be burning lots of ink and paper with more tests.

Dick

[Roger_Cavanagh]

Dick,

I hadn't read that article because the first line mentions PS5, which I never owned. :) As you say, the conclusion is "it depends". :eyes

AR mentions in the colour management article for PS6/7 that BPC is the Adobe-recommended setting. So perhaps things have changed.

I had a D60 image that I'd just processed with LS D60 beta 2 on screen, so I just ran a quick test:

Duplicated the image twice still in 16-bit:

BPC: convert from Adobe RGB to sRGB with BPC on
No BPC: conversion with BPC off

The histogram for each image shows identical numbers for mean and STD for L channel.

However, in soft proof custom set up (for Premium Semigloss on my Epson 2000P), toggling the BPC on and off does make a noticeable difference to the preview.

So my initial conclusion is to leave BPC on for profile conversions, since I rarely work with anything other than Wide Gamut, Adobe or sRGB, and do some print tests to see the results on paper.

Well spotted, that man! :)

Regards,

[Pekka]

Yes, black point should generally be on - as profiles are converted it ensures proper distibution of tonal scale to new gamut.

There is also an issue with conversion engines:
it seems that Adobe ACE conversion engine stuffs left side of histogram seriously and Microsoft ICC does it right - at least on Windows Photoshop. Timo Autiokari had also noted some time ago that Microsoft conversion lacks shadow posterization you often get with Adobe.

One question is that is Microsoft ICC conversion available there on Mac Photoshop? As LS uses Microsoft conversion will it be translated to Adobe ACE automatically by Photoshop on Mac?

[Roger_Cavanagh]

...is recommended that conversions using profiles
be done in Photoshop and the default should be to always use “Black Point Compensation,”

This is from http://digitaldog.net/files/Soft%20Proofing%20in%20Photoshop.pdf, which was only posted just before Xmas.

Regards,

[Roger_Cavanagh]

And one more reference...

Martin Evening in "Adobe Photoshop 6 for Photographers" refers to issues with BPC in PS 5.5. which "have been corrected in version 6.0".

So BPC on, it is. :)

[rrb01]

Roger_Cavanagh wrote:
And one more reference...

Martin Evening in "Adobe Photoshop 6 for Photographers" refers to issues with BPC in PS 5.5. which "have been corrected in version 6.0".

So BPC on, it is. :)

Roger,
Thanks for running this down. BPC on, forever! One less variable to worry over.

Dick

[ruby]

Hi I can't seem to download it? Is your site down? Is it somewhere else where I need to purchase it?
Thanks Ruby