Is there a company that can print a raw file?

[tim]

I'll check it out this evening and let you know what I find.

[jjj5278]

Sent. No rush, thanks again!

[tim]

Right, I've had a look, and I'm confused. The image has sRgb embedded, but when I assign ProFoto RGB the colors really look much better. This makes me think the color profile is an issue, and right now it's my best guess.

When I develop from the RAW in ACR I can see the colors are a bit muted, but with saturation + 50 it looks like the original I received with ProFoto assigned. If develop as ProFoto in ACR/Photoshop the colors are a little more vivid, but not hugely.

Here's some outputs for people to ponder over, and the original raw file can be downloaded here. John, please let me know ASAP if you'd like the images taken down.

Sorry for the size mismatches, getting absent minded.

[Mark Vuleta]

Originally Posted by tim

Right, I've had a look, and I'm confused. The image has sRgb embedded, but when I assign ProFoto RGB the colors really look much better. This makes me think the color profile is an issue, and right now it's my best guess.

Did John send you his JPEG originally??

I did a conversion in Bibble 5, DPP & CS5 and they all look more or less identical, certainly not dull or lacking in vibrancy.

I wonder if he has a corrupt sRGB ICC file in DPP??

[tim]

Yes the first conversion is a resize of the jpeg he sent me.

[Mark Vuleta]

I wonder if it is worth John removing & then re-installing DPP to eliminate a possible corruption??

[Bob_A]

Here is what I get using ACR and the "Camera Standard" profile, saving as an sRGB jpeg and adding sharpening in PS (300, 0.3, 0). No other adjustment.

[René Damkot]

Originally Posted by tim

Right, I've had a look, and I'm confused. The image has sRgb embedded, but when I assign ProFoto RGB the colors really look much better. This makes me think the color profile is an issue, and right now it's my best guess.

Well, if the OP used DPP, there's no way the image can have ProPhotoRGB embedded. DPP only uses sRGB, AdobeRGB and WideGamutRGB.

Gave it a quick try. This is the image straight out of DPP, no adjustments, sRGB embedded.

IMG_3709sRGB.JPG

This is a screenshot of the Raw vs converted jpgs in DPP. There's a definite saturation loss. (Visible in the jpgs, and converted files). You'll need a color managed browser to view it correctly though; the screenshot has my monitor profile embedded)


Click for large view

Since I'm on a wide gamut screen, I tried converting to WideGamutRGB. No difference: Saturation loss compared to the RAW. Not that big of a difference between sRGB and WideGamutRGB jpgs, saturation wise: All appear to be about within sRGB gamut.

I also opened the converted images in PSCS6 to compare.

All jpgs appear to have a bit more black clipping in DPP. (Never noticed that before)
All jpgs have about the same saturation in DPP vs. PS (hard to tell since the blacks also change): Way less then the CR2 in DPP.

For giggles, I opened the CR2 in DPP, maxed out the saturation slider. The image does get more saturated, both CR2 and resulting jpg. They still do not match each other. I also tried different Picture Styles, and "transfer to Photoshop" instead of "Process and Save".

IMO, this is a bug in DPP.


Edit: But not a color management one, but terrible resizing and a bad sharpening/NR preview

Tried DPP 3.11.26 and 3.11.1 on OSX 10.6.8

Side note:
The sRGB jpg has less black clipping in PS then jpgs in any other color space (very old DPP issue, definite bug IMO, and you can actually see this happening when you switch workspace in DPP: Adjustment > Work Color Space. This also affects jpg files viewed in DPP, which should not be happening, and is the reason I avoid sRGB in DPP.)

[jjj5278]

Well, at least it wasn't just me or my eyes. So should I just splurge and buy some other photo processing software? I never bought one b/c I didn't think I'd really need it, b/c I don't do any post processing other than some cropping. Thanks for the help everyone, it sucks that the images look so much better as the raw. I was kind of impressed w/ my first attempts at fireworks photography, haha.

[tonylong]

Originally Posted by jjj5278

Well, at least it wasn't just me or my eyes. So should I just splurge and buy some other photo processing software? I never bought one b/c I didn't think I'd really need it, b/c I don't do any post processing other than some cropping. Thanks for the help everyone, it sucks that the images look so much better as the raw. I was kind of impressed w/ my first attempts at fireworks photography, haha.

Heh! Most of the "serious" photogs here use something like Lightroom, Photoshop with Camera Raw, Aperture, or another more "advanced" Raw processor, but it's really up to you -- you can "tweak" your DPP settings knowing its shortcomings, or you can take on another Raw app!

[René Damkot]

Might also be a problem with the color profiles used for the camera.

However, I don't think so. I think it's more related to sharpening/NR.

While I don't have a fireworks shot, I've tested some colorful images from my 1D3, and in those I think they look the same between CR2 and jpg.
Measuring the two screenshots in PS, I found that in some colors, either G or B values changed 1 unit. I might have seen a slight change in a yellow patch, but I doubt I can reliably tell a change of 1 unit, even on a wide gamut screen


Click for large view

An older 1D2 file did show some more differences, but that turned out to be the noise on a higher ISO shot changing quite a bit, certainly at anything else then 100% view. No idea why, but that difference was visible at 100% view. Color changes again within 1 R, G or B unit. The jpg looked a bit warmer however.

You might be able to see the line in this screenshot, mainly because the changed noise character (less "blobs" in the jpg).


Click for large view

This did make me go look at your shot.

When viewed at 100%, the only things that had less saturation were the small lightbulbs and fireworks trials.

The (terrible) resizing for screen, done by DPP makes the images look very different, mainly sharpness wise, while they aren't. It appears that the CR2 preview for fine details (fireworks trials or noise) simply isn't very accurate. Only: with noise it gives you better noise in the resulting file, which nobody notices, and in this case, it lowers saturation, which is very obvious and unwanted. Might be some sort of NR going on which cannot be disabled.

Side note, if you want more saturation left in the firework trials, you could try to lower the sharpening. The high amount and fineness kill color in blue and yellow respectively (zoom in to 100% as you should when sharpening, and give it a try)

Image at 100%, your settings for everything, except AdobeRGB was used as output color space.
Note the thumbs still appear very different. When comparing the two screenshots in PS I could visibly see mainly the yellow trail and lightblobs change: Sometimes up to 20 or 30B values between screenshot of the CR2 and jpg.

The big red blobs in the lower right (waterfall?) however, and also other larger structures (buildings), are as consistent as they should be between CR2 and jpg: about 1R, G or B unit that changes.
However it's harder to see in a split screen…


Click for large view

Conclusive: For sharpening: view at 100%. We knew that.
Appears that for fireworks shots, it's also best to use another raw converter then DPP.

But, I think it's more of a "bad sharpening/NR preview" issue then a color management one.

[jjj5278]

Ugh, so forgive my lack of technical understanding but from all the reading and comparisons I am guessing I should use other software for fireworks photos at least. If I try sharpening it still doesn't quite capture the colors of the fireworks. I have not noticed any other photos suffering from color loss except these ones.

Oh and yes the red blobs on the lower right are waterfalls. (American Falls at Niagara Falls)

[René Damkot]

Originally Posted by jjj5278

I am guessing I should use other software for fireworks photos at least.

Yes. Either that, or accept the DPP preview is inaccurate WRT sharpening / NR, which causes saturation loss in small, colorful details, and try to compensate by "over saturating" the CR2 before exporting… But that's a bit of a guessing game, and will also over saturate larger colored parts of the image…

[jjj5278]

Ugh, bummer....well at least I have the raw files so when I do find another program I can convert them w/o the loss of color. Again, I'm just glad it wasn't me and something stupid I was doing, haha.

[tim]

Don't worry I don't really understand it either, not fully.