Skip to main content
Adobe Photoshop Family

39 Messages

 • 

650 Points

Wed, Jul 19, 2017 11:38 PM

Camera Raw/Lightroom: 5D Mark IV, wrong dcp profile from adobe

Raw Files : 5D Mark IV
Software : Camera Raw 9.10.1
Issue : lights and colors rendering

While opening a raw in Digital Photo Professional (DPP), you can set up your space colors to sRGB or adobe98.

- When I open a raw taken by a 5D Mark III, in sRGB/sRGB, i have a normal rendering (lights / colors).
- If I set sRGB/adobe98 by changing the space colors, the light are more strong/contrasty, and the red are more saturated.
- If I open the 5D Mark III raw in Camera Raw, the rendering is like sRGB/sRGB in DPP.


Now, same operation but with 5D Mark IV raw files...

- When I open a raw taken by a 5D Mark IV, in sRGB/sRGB, I have a normal rendering (lights / colors)
- If I set sRGB / adobe98 byu changing the space colors, the light are more strong/contrasty, and the red are more saturated.
- If I open the 5D Mark IV raw in Camera Raw, the rendering is like sRGB/adobe98 in DPP, and that's NOT good.

To see differences between files and rendering I put jpeg files :
1) 5DMarkIII in DPP with sRGB/sRGB, 5DMarkIII with sRGB/adobe98, 5DMarkIII with Camera Raw
2) 5DMarkIV in DPP with sRGB/sRGB, 5DMarkIV with sRGB/adobe98, 5DMarkIV with Camera Raw


5DMARKIII :







5DMARKIV :





As you can see, the problem with the 5DMarkIV : to much contrast in camera raw, causing wrong colors (red saturation, light saturation with less saturation in the highlights etc.).

So, Is there a way for ADOBE, to make dcp profile camera standard to a sRGB look instead of an adobe98 look ?

All put all these capture and raw files on this link for ppl who want to check :

https://1drv.ms/f/s!Ak5vIZqwJCnXjK14AXupfcB8wEkclw


Crossing my finger for the giant Adobe hearing this post !

Thank you !

Responses

1.4K Messages

 • 

19K Points

3 years ago

DCP profiles are color space and white balance agnostic. 
If you see differences in the two (sRGB vs. Adobe RGB (1998)) beyond the color gamut of sRGB, it's a color management issue where the current software isn't properly recognizing the embedded profile.

1.4K Messages

 • 

19K Points

3 years ago

I download raw of woman in green. Rendered in sRGB and Adobe RGB using ACR. They appear absolutely identical! 

Adobe RGB (1998) on left, sRGB on right. 

39 Messages

 • 

650 Points

Hello,

All the things you said are true.
Adobe put the same rendering while choosing adobe98 or sRGB.
There is no issue here, and it works well.

But please, can you read again my post ?
My problem is not opening in Camera Raw a Raw file and playing with the space color, my problem is adobe as made a curve in their dcp file with "adobe98"-like curve instead of a "srgb"-like curve.

And, of course, dcp file are not dependent of the colors space, that's not a colors space problem, but a dcp profile problem (curve + maybe colors).

Try to play with DPP with the color space, and see the difference between DPP and camera raw, with 5DMarkIII file, and 5DMarkIV file.

Again : 

Camera Raw DCP profile for Canon EOS 5DMarkIII are made to display in Camera Raw (srgb or adobe 98 or prophoto or whatever colors space no importance for the choice) with a sRGB look like in DPP with "sRGB-sRGB selected"

Camera Raw DCP profile for Canon EOS 5DMarkIV are made to display in Camera Raw with a adobeRGB look like in DPP with "sRGB-adobe98 selected"


So, the problem is not a calibration problem, it occurs on all my computers, windows and mac, with or without having a calibration done.

The problem is in the DCP, the curve tone.

1.4K Messages

 • 

19K Points

There is no such curve (sRGB/Adobe RGB) as you report in the DCP profiles. 
You should absolutely expect to see differences between DPP and Camera Raw. 
There are curves in the DCP profile and you can edit them but they are not tied to either RGB working space you speak of:

A base tone curve is the default tone curve used by a profile to process images. Choose one of the following options:

 Base Profile: This profile will use the tone curve from the base profile selected in the Color Tables pane. o Camera Raw Default: This profile will use the default Camera Raw tone curve. This option is useful if

you wish to use the color adjustments (but not the tone curve adjustments) of an existing profile as a

starting point.
 Linear: This profile will use a linear tone curve. This option is not recommended for most cases, since it

will make images look dark and flat, but it may be useful to photographers who require linear results for

post-processing (e.g., for some HDR applications). 



39 Messages

 • 

650 Points

i don't said it's a srgb curve or an adobe98 curve... I said the curve in DCP files are made to match the look displayed in DPP and there is two "looks", and i called them "srgb look" and "adobe98 look". The names are not proper i know, i thought it should be clear but in fact, no :)

I assume between different raw converters, looks can't be similar.. All manufacturers have their own feelings about the lights, the colors etc.

But i'm pretty sure about something :

While Adobe created DCP File for Canon Camera RAW files, they took the "Camera Standard" look from DPP.
If you compare my screenshot :
For Canon 5DMarkIII, DPP with "sRGB/sRGB" got the same look in Camera Raw. With minors difference, can't be the same it's ok.
But, For Canon 5DMarkIV, DPP with "sRGB/adobeRGB" got the same look in Camera Raw. With minors difference etc.

The problem is :
If I want to get the look from DPP with "sRGB/sRGB" for my canon 5DMarkIV raw files in camera Raw, i must edit the base tone curve in the DCP file.
And of course, I have already done that.

Why i Need Adobe to do the "correct" profile, is that i think their profile will be more perfect than mine.

In the screenshot :

From left to right :

1) DPP with sRGB/sRB
2) DPP with sRGB/adobe98
3) Camera Raw with Camera Standard profile selected. NB : same rendering as 2. With minors changes, but the intent is here.
4) Camera Raw with my custom Camera Standard profile selected (base exposure + base tone curve edited). NB : same rendering as 1. With minors changes, i tried my best :)

39 Messages

 • 

650 Points

(see .psd to see that instead of Navigator, i put the different screenshots and by enabling/disabling the layers, we can see the problem easily)

39 Messages

 • 

650 Points

And, the problem is with "camera standard" profile, not "adobe standard" what you have used while opening the raw and making your screenshots

Champion

 • 

2.1K Messages

 • 

36.3K Points

3 years ago

I've done extensive research on the Adobe Standard and Camera Standard profiles for Canon DSLRs:

https://forums.adobe.com/message/9095782#9095782

On further investigation and it appears the Adobe Standard profile metrics have been "silently" changed by Adobe sometime in Q3 2014. All Canon and perhaps all other make camera models introduced since Q3 2014 have Adobe Standard profiles with lower color saturation. The 5D MKIV Adobe Standard profile looks similar to the 1DX MKII (lower color saturation). Ironically the 1DX MKII Camera Standard profile has higher saturation previous profiles. When viewed in Canon's Digital Photo Professional 4 (DPP4) with Standard default settings ALL of these CR2 image files look virtually identical. In LR I had to readjust WB and Exposure, but they still looked different than DPP4's Camera Standard rendering.

These image files are Adobe RGB profile so you may need to save them and view in LR or PS. Click on the image to launch it, right-click, and Save to a drive location.

https://forums.adobe.com/message/9099804#9099804

I've already reported this issue to Adobe Engineering.

39 Messages

 • 

650 Points

In your link there is one information not given.
While shooting in RAW, you can set up your camera to sRGB or adobeRGB.
This settings doesn't affects the raw, but, in DPP, the rendering will be affected.
A raw shooted with the setting "sRGB" as color space in your camera, will put the setting to "sRGB/sRGB" in DPP.
A raw shooted with the setting "adobe98" as color space in your camera will put the setting to "sRGB/AdobeRGB" in DPP.

When you take that in account, you see that the profile made by Adobe are pretty the same than the "adobeRGB" look.

But, i'm shooting to sRGB color space... DPP renders my raw correctly (sRGB/sRGB) and Camera Raw still get his strong curve inside the DCP file.

To demonstrate a little the thing, i have taken the DCP profile from 5DMarkIV and i have put the 5DMarkIII curve in it.
By doing this, I got for my 5DMarkIV a look that is corresponding to the look in DPP with "sRGB/sRGB".

I give you my DCP files if you want to test them.
Compare next in DPP / Camera Raw.
But my DCP file corrects only the tonal curve, i can't manipulate the saturations.

DCP files :
https://1drv.ms/f/s!Ak5vIZqwJCnXjK4J7rQPBii7ymS4lg

1.4K Messages

 • 

19K Points

3 years ago

You're NOT shooting sRGB or Adobe RGB (1998) unless you capture a JPEG, period. The settings have ZERO affect on the raw. It's simply a metadata tag that DPP may use to set it's rendering to mimic the camera JPEG. LR tries to do this but it's not going to appear the same as the camera JPEG rendering is proprietary. The DCP profiles with 'look' names that match the camera are an attempt to get closer to that JPEG, there's zero guarantee it will match the camera JPEG or the raw processed in DPP.  You can build your own DCP profiles and edit them in an attempt to get a closer match. But everything you report is to be expected, it's not a bug. 

There IS a reason Adobe provides the features to build and edit a DCP profile! There's a reason why canned DCP profiles may not produce the results you expect; they are not based on your specific sensor for one. 

106 Messages

 • 

1.7K Points

Andrew,
I realize that I'm 5 months late to this discussion, however I've been wracking my brain trying to figure out how people aren't able to see what I and others are seeing as a problem.  After reading this forum over and over I could tell it must have something to do with the sRGB and Adobe RGB working space (and perhaps prophoto RGB) as a couple have mentioned.  And it does.  It's overly simple, actually.  I have 3 separate sets of screenshots comparing Lightroom's Camera standard profile with DPP converted Tiffs in both adobe rgb and sRGB  in hopes you can see what I perceive to be the problem with regard to how the camera profiles in Lightroom have changed from matching the sRGB DPP preview to match an Adobe RGB DPP preview.  I will link to the raw files as well as DPP rendered Tiff files in BOTH sRGB and Adobe RGB to help demonstrate my point.  I realize this isn't scientific.   The other guys were giving you that.   I'm giving you the files so you can import them into lightroom and compare as you'd like, but I do think you can see what I'm referring to if you compare the colors in the shadows close to hairlines, cheeks and necks to see the saturation differences.  That's what I'm trying to show.  In all cases there are no other adjustments made- other than changing the working space in DPP before converting the RAW images to 16-bit Tiffs with the ICC profile.

I'll start at the beginning.  You mentioned that shooting in Raw makes the sRGB or Adobe RGB useless.  But that's not true in DPP.  Because whoever is in charge of matching up DPP previews and Lightroom profiles is matching one or the other.  Canon 5D Mark ii's standard profile in lightroom matches DPP's preview ONLY when viewed in sRGB (see examples).  However, 5D Mark iv's standard profile in lightroom matches DPP's preview almost exactly but ONLY if viewed when Adobe RGB is set as the preferred working space (see examples).

So.  For those of us who have been swearing that something is OFF, we weren't meaning it was slightly off and we were too lazy to fix it or adjust the settings, we were saying that something was WRONG and couldn't be fixed by adjusting the sliders one way or another in any sort of combination like we used to be able to do.  All our presets were useless.  I have re-invented the wheel since I got my 5d Mark iv last Christmas  in lightroom and with my photoshop actions just trying to get back to what was good, and you were acting like we were just whining.  Having a "normal" profile to start editing is essential to getting great shots.  

When I was saying my profile didn't match DPP it's because it WASN'T.  At all.  Not even close.  BUT I was viewing my raw files in DPP with sRGB as the working space.  Maybe that's not correct, maybe it is, but what IS certain is  that all my previous RAW files from Canon 5d Mark ii with a camera standard profile match DPP's preview- in saturation and tone- when viewed with sRGB as the working space  and standard settings.  The same raw file from 5d Mark ii in DPP viewed with Adobe RGB as the working space has yucky over saturated shadows.  They are less flat, but if you look in creases and hairlines you'll see the added orange that you wouldn't see in Lightroom's camera standard preview.  UNTIL 5D Mark iv.    Lightroom copied the Adobe RGB working space preview when they made the 5d Mark iv profiles.  All of a sudden, the srgb working space DOESN'T match Lightroom's profiles. You have to switch the working space to Adobe RGB in order to get the previews to match.  And match they do, but it's UGLY.  Thus why people are noticing the "sudden" oversaturated colors in the shadow areas.  You kept saying they matched, and apparently you had your preferences set to Adobe RGB, but that's NOT how it used to be for us.  When they matched before, they matched off sRGB colorspace.  

I am not asking anyone to make the previews match another camera.  But I would like there to be consistency in the profiles with regard to the color space they are copying.  If in the past camera profiles were copied from sRGB DPP previews, can we please stick to that?  

I thought I was crazy and I thought you were a little nuts for saying you thought the profiles matched.  But now I know that I'm not and that the profile DO match, just not the right color space. Is this enough proof to get someone to match the sRGB camera standard profile instead of the Adobe RGB one?

In summary:
1.  As far as I can tell, past Canon camera standard profiles (at least 5d Mark ii and the 40D) matched the sRGB working space previews in DPP.  
2. Currently, at least with my 5d Mark iv, the camera standard profiles more closley match the Adobe RGB working space previews in DPP which are over saturated in the shadows.  
3. This is not consistent for editing purposes and therefore has been problematic in maintaining consistent editing as long as this profile remains.  

Links to main folder with Raw files and tiffs as well as screenshots:
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/6hkm3wineeoiogm/AADbid0DSyux7r-jVfEWPmlDa?dl=0
The subfolder has other examples from earlier (all srgb working space).

7 Messages

 • 

120 Points

Has this problem been solved????  I just recently upgraded to the new 5D Mark IV and I am having the same issues!  So frustrating.  I previously used the 5D Mark II.  No issues with color there.  Mark IV takes amazing photos but transferring the RAW image into Adobe CC, they look like the color has been sucked right out of them!  What in the world is going on?  I have talked to Adobe at least 6 times and they have taken control of my computer.  They keep saying that every photoshop program has a different temperature and that things will look different.  I have been a professional photographer for 17 years, I know all about color, temp, printing but really, the images should look the same in DPP4 as they should Raw in Adobe!!!  Something is really wrong and for the life of me, I can't figure out why Adobe doesn't see it or want to fix it.  I called Canon, they blame Adobe.  But seriously Canon, if we can't process your images, I'm sending back the camera!!  I spent over $3,000 on this new camera body but can't shoot anything but Jpegs!!  What professional photographer goes back from shooting RAW to Jpegs???   This is super depressing.  I tried converting the RAW images in the DNG converter, that still gives me the same crappy results.

1.4K Messages

 • 

19K Points

Specifically what problem are you having? 
First off no, DPP4 and any other raw processor including those from Adobe are not supposed to or should be expected to match. 
Next, these .DCP profiles have nothing to do per se with color temp and are color temp agnostic. Meaning you are supposed to alter, IF desired, the Tint and Temp sliders or use the White Balance eyedropper to 'season to taste'. The profiles do nothing here in that respect nor should they. 
Have you tried a differing DCP profile or tried making your own? 
Can you upload a raw which you find unacceptable so other's can examine it and maybe provide you with a rendering to see if they appear 'better' (subjective) to you? 
Color Temp reported from a camera is not accurate. I can provide you examples of two cameras shooting the same image that have differing CCT values reported in the same and different raw processors AND the CCT values as actually measured by a spectroradiometer. That instrument and associated software does provide accurate CCT values. So you really should kind of ignore the numbers here. They have no role in the raw data anyway, they are simply a suggestion at best. 
http://digitaldog.net/files/CTT_twocameras_Spectro.jpg

7 Messages

 • 

120 Points

When I import my RAW images to Adobe CC, they look nothing like my images in DPP4.  I just did a shoot the other day.  I set my camera to shoot Raw and Jpeg.  Here is a comparison of the same exact image.  As you can see the color from the Raw image is dull.  This shouldn't be happening. 

1.4K Messages

 • 

19K Points

There is no reason you should expect a match! To a raw processed in the camera or another raw converter. Might be close, might not. All are proprietary processing. Ektachome does not match Velvia: proprietary rendering.

Champion

 • 

2.1K Messages

 • 

36.3K Points

3 years ago

I totally agree with Andrew Rodney. In addition your working color space should be set to a profile that covers the full gamut of your display at a minimum. LR uses ProPhotoRGB and you can set DPP to use the Wide Gamut RGB profile. Beyond that you should use LR or PS soft proof with the target printer paper profile or destination color space for screen evaluation. I assume you are using a wide gamut display and have calibrated it with an X-Rite or Datacolor monitor calibrator.

The Adobe Standard profile is much more suitable profile for portrait work than Camera Standard for any Canon DSLR. There is an issue with the 5D MKIV Adobe Standard profile, which I discuss at the links provided. You can "fix" this as outlined at the below link or use the Adobe DNG profile editor (DPE) to apply these changes and create a custom camera profile.

https://forums.adobe.com/message/9519425#9519425

http://wwwimages.adobe.com/content/dam/Adobe/en/products/photoshop/pdfs/cs6/DNGProfile_EditorDocumen...

http://supportdownloads.adobe.com/detail.jsp?ftpID=5493

http://supportdownloads.adobe.com/detail.jsp?ftpID=5494

39 Messages

 • 

650 Points

3 years ago

I will make a step by step "guide" to show that it's not a calibration problem. You want to see a calibration problem because i talk about sRGB / adobe98 and rendering intent so you focus on that, but clearly it's a DCP profile issue.

If it is a calibration problem, why my nikon and others canon cameras are not affected by this "problem" ?
Calibration problem are not dependent to the camera used.

Champion

 • 

2.1K Messages

 • 

36.3K Points

3 years ago

The reason I asked is because I don't see a significant difference between Camera Standard renderings for the Canon EOS 5D MKIII and MKIV bodies. The below screenshot is with LR default settings and Camera Standard profile. The image file is Adobe RGB color space. Click on the image, then right click on the full-size image, and select 'Save Image As' to your desktop. View it in PS or LR and not your browser.

CORRECTION: You'll need to assign Adobe RGB profile to the below screenshot JPG file as it appears Adobe strips the profile when it is posted.

You can download these test images from Imaging Resource and check them for yourself: http://www.imaging-resource.com/

39 Messages

 • 

650 Points

3 years ago

My post is here to show the different tone mapping done by Adobe in Camera Raw in different DCP Profile and to show that old Canon Camera Raw DCP Profiles were made to get a Tone Curve to perform a the transformation from a Linear Gamma (not talking about Linear space color, but Linear Gamma !) to an sRGB Gamma. And for new Canon Camera Raw DCP Profiles, the Tone Curve is performing a transformation from a Linear Gamma to an AdobeRGB gamma.

And I’m talking only about the « Tone Mapping » in this post.

Just to say it : after the tone mapping, Adobe Camera Raw convert the rendering in the color space you have chosen (sRGB ? Adobe98 ? Prophoto ? etc.). That’s why when you chose different color space in Camera Raw, the rendering is always the same. And that’s why it’s important to get a correct Tone Mapping according to the final space color you want. What Adobe doesn’t do !


In fact : Adobe makes a Tone Mapping (DCP Profiles) per DCP Profile, and you have no choice here. So when you select « Camera Standard », you are using one and only one « rendering intent ».

In DPP, the Tone Mapping is set up while changing the space color. If you setup the Colors Space to Adobe98, the Tone Mapping will convert the RAW data from Linear to Adobe98 colors space.

In Adobe Camera Raw, the Tone Mapping is set up while changing the DCP Profiles and after it is converted to the space color.

So, you can have a DCP Profile with a base tone curve that describes a tonal mapping for sRGB rendering intent, but converted in the Adobe98 colors space.

So, you can have a DCP Profile with a base tone curve that describes a tonal mapping for AdobeRGB rendering intent, and finally converted to Adobe98 colors space.

Two images displayed in Adobe98 color space, but with two different rendering intent.

Etc.
Adobe provides us for our cameras one and only one profile. For example : the DCP Profile « Camera Standard » gets a « rendering intent ». Is it sRGB ? Is it AdobeRGB ? Is it Log ?



So... As you can understand, it’s not about how the image is displayed in Camera Raw under a colors space, and it’s not a display calibration problem.

In this post, I show that old Camera Raw DCP Profiles for Canon Camera were made with a sRGB tone mapping (no dependent to the color space where it is displayed !).
And, I show that new Camera Raw DCP Profiles for Canon Camera are made with an AdobeRGB tone mapping (still no dependent to the color space!)


Link for the different files :

https://1drv.ms/f/s!Ak5vIZqwJCnXjK14AXupfcB8wEkclw


I created some DCP profiles just by taking Adobe’s datas and mixing them to get some rendering.

  • Canon EOS 5D Mark III Camera Standard.dcp (original file)

Profile for Canon EOS 5D Mark III to mimic the « Camera Standard » from DPP with sRGB/sRGB setting. The base tone curve is an sRGB Tone Mapping. 

  • Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Camera Standard.dcp (original file)

Profile for Canon EOS 5D MarkIV to mimic the « Camera Standard » from DPP with sRGB/AdobeRGB setting. The base tone curve is an AdobeRGB Tone Mapping,

  • Canon EOS 5D Mark III Camera Standard - 5D Mark IV Curve.dcp (custom file)

Profile for Canon EOS 5D Mark III to mimic the « Camera Standard » from DPP with sRGB/AdobeRGB setting.

This is the original 5DMarkIII DCP Profile where the original base tone curve as been replaced with the curve from the 5DMarkIV file. And this profile is now made to mimic the rendering of the DPP sRGB/AdobeRGB setting. And so, the base tone curve is now an AdobeRGB Tone Mapping.

As you can see, I didn’t tweak anything, and all I have done is to take curves made by Adobe.

  • Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Camera Standard - 5D Mark III Curve.dcp (custom file)

Profile for Canon EOS 5D Mark IV to mimic the « Camera Standard » from DPP with sRGB/sRGB setting.

This is the original 5DMarkIV DCP Profile where the original base tone curve as been replaced with the curve from the 5DMarkIII file. And this profile is now made to mimic the rendering of the DPP sRGB/sRGB setting. And so, the base tone curve is now a sRGB Tone Mapping.



Folder Content :


  • 1-1 5DMarkIII_Layer1_sRGB.TIF

5DMarkIII file opened in DPP with sRGB rendering, exported to .tif file

  • 1-2 5DMarkIII_Layer1_sRGB - Converted sRGB.TIF

Previous file converted from Canon sRGB to standard sRGB, exported to .tif file

  • 2-1 5DMarkIII_Layer2_AdobeRGB

5DMarkIII file opened in DPP with AdobeRGB rendering, exported to .tif file

  • 2-2 5DMarkIII_Layer2_AdobeRGB - Converted sRGB.TIF

Previous file converted from Adobe98 to sRGB, exported to .tif file

  • 3-1 5DMarkIII_AIO.TIF

Contains all the previous layers to compare them.

  • 3-2 5DMarkIII_Layer3_CameraRaw_CameraStandard.TIF

5DMarkIII file opened in Camera Raw with « Camera Standard » DCP Profile from Adobe, exported to .tif file in sRGB.

  • 4-1 5DMarkIII_Layer4_CustomDCP.TIF

5DMarkIII file opened in Camera Raw with custom DCP Profile « Camera Standard - 5DMarkIV Curve », with a tonal curve from 5DMarkIV « Camera Standard » Adobe DCP Profile, exported to .tif file in sRGB.

  • 5-1 5DMarkIV_Layer1_sRGB.TIF

5DMarkIV file opened in DPP with sRGB rendering, exported to .tif file

  • 5-2 5DMarkIV_Layer1_sRGB - Converted sRGB.TIF

Previous file converted from Canon sRGB to Standard sRGB, exported to .tif file

  • 6-1 5DMarkIV_Layer2_AdobeRGB.TIF

5DMarkIV file opened in DPP with AdobeRGB rendering, exported to .tif file

  • 6-2 5DMarkIV_Layer2_AdobeRGB - Converted sRGB.TIF

Previous file converted from Adobe98 to sRGB, exported to .tif file

  • 7-1 5DMarkIV_AIO.TIF

Contains all the previous layers to compare them

  • 7-2 5DMarkIV_Layer3_CameraRaw_CameraStandard.TIF

5DMarkIV file opened in Camera Raw with « Camera Standard » DCP Profile from Adobe, exported to .tif file in sRGB.

  • 7-2-2 5DMarkIV_Layer3_CameraRaw_CameraStandard Corrected Offset.TIF

5DMarkIV file opened in Camera Raw with a custom DCP Profile « Camera Standard - Offset 0 ». 

  • 8-1 5DMarkIV_Layer4_CustomDCP.TIF

5DMarkIV file opened in Camera Raw with a custom DCP Profile « Camera Standard - 5DMarkIII Curve ».


  • Canon EOS 5D Mark III Camera Standard - 5D Mark IV Curve.dcp

Adobe DCP Profile « Camera Standard » for 5DMarkIII customized only by removing the tonal curve and replacing it with the tonal curve from the Adobe DCP Profile « Camera Standard » for 5DMarkIV.

  • Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Camera Standard - 5D Mark III Curve.dcp

Adobe DCP PRofile « Camera Standard » for 5DMarkIV customized only by removing the tonal curve and replacing it with the tonal curve from the Adobe DCP Profile « Camera Standard » for 5DMarkIII.

  • Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Camera Standard - offset 0.dcp

Adobe DCP Profile « Camera Standard » for 5DMarkIV customized only by raising up the base exposure called « offset » in the original DCP file.




STEP BY STEP :



1 :

Open « 5DMarkIII.cr2 » in DPP

Be sure to get the info « sRGB/sRGB » in the top right of the window, if not set it in preferences settings.
Export to .tif 16bits 300dpi sRGB. (File Name : 1-1 5DMarkIII_Layer1_sRGB.TIF)

Open it in photoshop, convert to sRGB profile (the prevent profile was a canon version of sRGB). Export to .tif 16bits 300dpi sRGB (File Name : 1-2 5DMarkIII_Layer1_sRGB - Converted sRGB.TIF).


2:

Open « 5DMarkIII.cr2 » in DPP

Change the setting of the colorspace to « AdobeRGB ».
Export that to .tif 16bits 300dpi Adobe98. (File Name : 2-1 5DMarkIII_Layer1_AdobeRGB.TIF)
Open it in photoshop, convert to sRGB profile. Export to .tif 16bits 300dpi sRGB (File Name : 2-2 5DMarkIII_Layer2_AdobeRGB - Converted sRGB.TIF).


3:

Open « 5DMarkIII.cr2 » in Adobe Camera Raw. No importance about the colorspace in Camera Raw, as we ALL know, the rendering of camera raw will match whatever the colorspace you choose... So choose sRGB/Adobe98/prophoto, no importance. Chose « Camera Standard » in the Calibration tab of the Camera Settings.

When document is opened, convert it in sRGB color space.

Export to .tif 300dpi 16bits sRGB. (File Name : 3-2 5DMarkIII_Layer3_CameraRaw_CameraStandard.TIF).


4:

Make a new Document in sRGB, put in the layer 1-2 the layer from the first document.
Put in the layer 2-2 the layer from the second document.

Put in the layer 3-2 the layer from the third document.
Export to .tif 300dpi 16bits sRGB. (File Name : 4-1 5DmarkIII_AIO.TIF)




TO SUMMARIZE :


In the document « 4-1 5DmarkIII_AIO.TIF », we have three layers :


Layer 1-2 : from DPP Camera Standard, « sRGB tone mapping »

Layer 2-2 : from DPP Camera Standard, « AdobeRGB tone mapping » and converted to sRGB color space

Layer 3-2 : from Adobe Camera Raw Camera Standard, « which tone mapping ? »


The purpose here is to compare these three layers, and see how they’re made.
Of course, between each layers, there are some differences, in the lights, in the hue, in the saturation. The importance is not to get perfectly the same thing, but to get something similar.
The main thing we can clearly see, is that the rendering intent with Adobe Camera Raw and the DCP profiles, to get the same rendering as in DPP. And here the rendering mimic the sRGB tone mapping. The histogram for « sRGB » layers (Layer 1-2, Layer 3-2) are in a similar way, (sRGB tone mapped ?) where the « AdobeRGB » layer (Layer 2-2) is more contrasty and shadows are stronger.


For me, here, there is nothing bad. All works as intended. No problem with calibration, all layers have been exported to sRGB properly etc.



The steps to get an AdobeRGB tone mapping for 5DMarkIII file with Camera Raw instead of DPP :


5: 

Open « 5DMarkIII.cr2 » in Adobe Camera Raw, chose in the calibration tab the custom dcp profile called « Camera Standard - 5DMarkIV Curve ».
Convert document to sRGB.

Export in .tif 16bits 300dpi sRGB. (File Name : 5-1 5DMarkIII_Layer4_CustomDCP.TIF).
Copy that layer, past it to « 3-1 5DMarkIII_AIO.TIF ».


If you compare the Layer 5-1 from Camera Raw with the Layer 2-2 from DPP, you will see that they are similar and the histograms are telling the same story. Some differences in base exposure and colors, but this is very « similar ».


So, we have 4 Layers : Two layers with a sRGB tone mapping (Layer 1-2, Layer 3-2), Two layers with an AdobeRGB tone mapping (Layer 2-2, Layer 5-1).





Of course, to convince you more, I need to perform all these steps, with the 5DMarkIV file, and shows you the different rendering.


6:

Open « 5DMarkIV.cr2 » in DPP

Be sure to get the mention « sRGB/sRGB » in the top right of the window, if not set it in preferences settings.
Export that to .tif 16bits 300dpi sRGB. (File Name : 6-1 5DMarkIV_Layer1_sRGB.TIF)

Open it in photoshop, convert to sRGB profile (the prevent profile was a canon version of sRGB).

Export to .tif 16bits 300dpi sRGB (File Name : 6-2 5DMarkIV_Layer1_sRGB - Converted sRGB.TIF).


7:

Open « 5DMarkIV.cr2 » in DPP

Change the setting of the colorspace to « AdobeRGB ».
Export that to .tif 16bits 300dpi adobe98. (File Name : 7-1 5DMarkIV_Layer2_AdobeRGB.TIF)
Open it in photoshop, convert to sRGB profile. Export to .tif 16bits 300dpi sRGB (File Name : 7-2 5DMarkIV_Layer2_AdobeRGB - Converted sRGB.TIF).


8:

Open « 5DMarkIV.cr2 » in Adobe Camera Raw. No importance about the colorspace in Camera Raw, as we ALL know, the rendering of camera raw will match whatever the colorspace you choose... So choose sRGB/adobe98/prophoto, no importance. Chose « Camera Standard » in the Calibration tab of the Camera.

When document is opened, convert it in sRGB color space.

Export to .tif 300dpi 16bits sRGB. (File Name : 8-1 5DMarkIV_Layer3_CameraRaw_CameraStandard.TIF).

Because the « base exposure » of the DCP profile is to much in the left, i moved it to the right a little to match the « black point » of the histogram.
You can open the RAW with the DCP profile called « Camera Standard - Offset 0 ».
Convert document to sRGB. Export in .tif 16bits 300dpi sRGB. (File Name : 8-1-2 5DMarkIV_Layer3_CameraRaw_CameraStandard Corrected Offset.TIF).

Copy that layer, past it to « 7-1 5DMarkIV_AIO.TIF ».


9:

Make a new Document in sRGB, put in the layer 6-2 the from the first document.
Put in the layer 7-2 the layer from the second document.

Put in the layer 8-1 the layer from the third document.

Put in the layer 8-1-2 the layer from the fourth document.
Export to .tif 300dpi 16bits sRGB. (File Name : 9-1 5DmarkIV_AIO.TIF)




TO SUMMARIZE :


Layer 6-2 : DPP Camera Standard, « sRGB tone mapping »

Layer 7-2 : DPP Camera Standard, « AdobeRGB tone mapping »

Layer 8-1 : Adobe Camera Raw Camera Standard, which tone mapping ?

Layer 8-1-2 : Adobe Camera Raw Camera Standard, with corrected Base Exposure (Offset), which tone mapping ?


The purpose here is to compare these layers, and see how they’re made.
Of course, between each layers, there are a lot of differences, in the lights, in the hue, in the saturation. The importance is not to get perfectly the same thing, but to get something similar.
The main thing we can clearly see, is that the rendering with Adobe Camera Raw and DCP profiles gets the same rendering as in DPP. And here, the rendering mimic the AdobeRGB tone mapping. The histogram for « AdobeRGB » layers (Layer 8-1, Layer 8-1-2) from default Camera Raw profile and custom Camera Raw profile (offset 0) are in a similar way (AdobeRGB tone mapped ?) than the layer from DPP (Layer 7-2).

The key point is here. And it’s why I’m convinced that Adobe make a AdobeRGB tone mapping in his default Camera DCP Profiles for new Canon Camera.



The steps to get an sRGB tone mapping for 5DMarkIV file with Camera Raw instead of DPP :


10:

Open « 5DMarkIV.cr2 » in photoshop Camera Raw, chose in calibration tab the custom dcp profile called « Camera Standard - 5DMarkIII Curve ».
Convert document to sRGB. Export in .tif 16bits 300dpi sRGB. (File Name : 10-1 5DMarkIV_Layer4_CustomDCP.TIF).
Copy that layer, past it to « 9-1 5DMarkIV_AIO.TIF ».



If you compare the Layer 10-1 from Camera Raw with the Layer 6-2 from DPP, you will see that they are similar and the histograms are telling the same story. Some differences in base exposure and colors, but this is very « similar ».


So, we have 5 Layers : Two layers with a sRGB tone mapping (Layer 6-2, Layer 10-2), Three layers with an AdobeRGB tone mapping (Layer 7-2, Layer 8-1-1, and Layer 8-1-2 which is the 8-1 with a corrected base exposure).




CONCLUSION :


With this post, and the different steps etc, we can clearly see that the DCP Profiles have a tonal base curve made to perform what I call a rendering intent. And we have identified two rendering intents : a sRGB , an AdobeRGB. These rendering intent are next converted to the space colors you chose in Camera Raw, and so, that’s why when you change the color space, the rendering is not modified, until you change the DCP Profile containing the REAL rendering intent.

So, you can have an AdobeRGB rendering intent for the tonal curve in your file, but displayed and converted in an sRGB color space. You can have an sRGB rendering intent for the tonal curve in your file but displayed and converted in an Adobe98 color space.


And, normally we should have different DCP Profile that help us to have these different rendering intent.

For example : some people have tweaked different DCP Profile to get a « Log » rendering intent just by changing the tonal curve. (EOSHD, CineLog DCP etc.).

They just transforms the tonal curve in the DCP to make the tone mapping mimics these different gamma etc. And again, these rendering are displayed in the colors space you chose. Cinelog dcp  rendering intent in a Prophoto color space for example.


So, Adobe should help us to get a DCP Profile for two or more possibilities like in DPP, like in Capture One :

Camera Standard - which is a sRGB tone mapping

Camera Standard High Contrast - which is a AdobeRGB tone mapping

And maybe adds the last one : Camera Standard Linear

And just to say it :

DPP do it while changing the « colorspace », with 5 settings : sRGB, AdobeRGB, RGB Colors, Apple RGB, ColorMatch RVB. And let us to get the linear tone map with an other settings.

Capture One do it while changing the Curve setting in the Characteristic Base, with 4 settings : Film Extra Shadows, Film High Contrast, Film Standard, Linear Response.



Why I need Adobe makes the « good » profiles :


When you take the Tone Curve from a DCP Profile from a Camera and put it to an other Camera, you don’t take in account that the Tone Mapping has been made with two considerations :

The first one, a Tone Mapping to a specified Gamma (sRGB or Adobe RGB for example), and the second one, the camera sensor !
Because they don’t capture the light in the same way, the tone curve must be mapped correctly for each camera.


So for example, Canon EOS 5D Mark II has a sRGB Tone Mapping, and Canon EOS 5D Mark III has a sRGB Tone Mapping too. But when you edit their respective DCP Profiles and look at the Tonal Curve in Adobe DNG Editor, these curves are different because of the Raw Data and the sensor.

But, they gets in common the fact that they are made to make a sRGB Tone Mapping while performing the transformation from Linear Gamma to sRGB Gamma.
So, when I put the 5DMarkIII tone curve to a 5DMarkIV DCP Profile, I don’t take in account that the sensors of these two cameras are different and so the curves, normally, should not be the same.

Adobe has the tools to make better curves and it’s not Adobe DNG Editor that do the work. Too imprecise.

DPP do the work.
Capture One do the work.


Why Adobe force us with one and only one tone mapping ? And why they were making sRGB tone mapping before, and AdobeRGB tone mapping now ?

10 Messages

 • 

150 Points

hi, thank you so much for your hard work. but the download seems expired. can you up your profiles once more? i have no clue how to edit and really would like anything better but whats "camera standard" in lightroom now.. ;(

Champion

 • 

2.1K Messages

 • 

36.3K Points

3 years ago

You make a convincing argument. I can see the difference you describe between the Canon 5D MKIV DPP sRGB convert and LR Export to sRGB using Camera Standard. Whether or not that's a good thing I don't know. Andrew Rodney is the expert on color management so hopefully he will comment on your observations. I'll also report this to Adobe Engineering and see if they have any comments on your observations.

1.4K Messages

 • 

19K Points

3 years ago

As far as I'm concerned, this is mostly CWOBaT (colossal waste of bandwidth and time). Nothing reported is anything I'd not expect to see. 

Champion

 • 

2.1K Messages

 • 

36.3K Points

3 years ago

OK, Thanks Andrew. The DPP sRGB converted test image has noticeably lower saturation in the blues and greens compared to LR's Export to sRGB, Adobe RGB, and DPP's convert to Adobe RGB. Soft proofing the test image used in PS there is very little "visual difference" between the ProPhoto RGB color space image and sRGB soft proof rendering. DPP is doing something that is unexpected when its working color space is set to sRGB. Obviously if you like that rendering it can be achieved easily enough using any number of tools available inside LR.

39 Messages

 • 

650 Points

What raw do have you used ? Mine ?

Champion

 • 

2.1K Messages

 • 

36.3K Points

39 Messages

 • 

650 Points

And that's exactly why you should try with my raws.
To explain :
When you compare sRGB curves and adobeRGB curves in the DCP files, the major changes are with under exposed files, or low light files.
Your raw got a clean light condition and so, you can't see the differences.
When you take my raw, it's a low light condition, with high contrast of lights, and so, when you do your manipulation (dpp changing colorspace) you will see how the rendering is affected, because it affects the entire file.
Try it ^^

I put you the RAW directly in the link https://1drv.ms/f/s!Ak5vIZqwJCnXjK14AXupfcB8wEkclw

39 Messages

 • 

650 Points

If you can take 10min downloading my Files.zip (containing raw files, and dcp files) and test my "step by step" guide, you will see BIG differences between the rendering.
The raw you get from the website don't allow to get clearly these differences.

39 Messages

 • 

650 Points

and, thanks for your time !

1.4K Messages

 • 

19K Points

3 years ago

LR vs. DPP vs. (fill in the blank name of any other raw converter): I would expect a different rendering.

39 Messages

 • 

650 Points

Yes Andrew, nobody says the opposite. It's a common fact. Converters do their own stuff. It's not the problem here ^^

10 Messages

 • 

150 Points

3 years ago

So is there a solution to this problem? I am having a hard nighit shift and the raw files are killing me in lightroom... everything red and fucked up. the jpgs look fine... cant match.

39 Messages

 • 

650 Points

Yes.
Adobe doesn't care.
Canon doesn't care.
Sell your canon's stuff, and go to another brand.
After two years waiting for something correct, it's time to go.
I'm selling all my Canon things at the moment. :)

163 Messages

 • 

2.7K Points

I initially had problems with 5D3/5D4 matching, however using both Lumariver Profile Designer and BasicColor Input I was able to make some pretty similar dual illuminant profiles with some Colorchecker SG images. I can't tell which profiles I like more though. I think Lumariver's might be more pleasing while BasicColors are more accurate. 

Champion

 • 

2.1K Messages

 • 

36.3K Points

So is there a solution to this problem? everything red and f-----d up.
Great description of your problem, which may be due to something entirely different than what's being discussed here.

10 Messages

 • 

150 Points

No its exactly what has been discussed here: the "camera standard" setting applied to RAWs out of a 5D MarkIV in lightroom does not in a million years match the jpg out of cam. skin tones are far from ideal and overall shadows and highlights/contrast differ massively. After reading this thread carefully again it seems I have to manually edit Lightroom's DCP-Profile? I dont understand why this "problem" appeared in the first place anyway. the 5DMarkIV is one of the most popular cameras by canon and almost every photographer uses lightroom...so by now there should be an army of angry people out there realizing their raw edits horribly differ from their jpgs. this is very bad for skin tones for example. the reds are too strong compared to the jpg for example. So can anyone confirm that editing the DCP will do the job and "camera standard" afterwards is pretty close to the jpg again?

Champion

 • 

2.1K Messages

 • 

36.3K Points

Please read my reply from July 23rd:

https://console.getsatisfaction.com/photoshop_family/conversations/5d-mark-iv-wrong-dcp-profile-from...

I'm not seeing "large" differences between the 5D MKIII and MKIV Camera Standard rendering when using raw files shot under controlled conditions of the same subject. However you're saying the 5D MKIV camera JPEG file shot with in-camera 'Standard' profile does not match the camera raw file Camera Standard Rendering inside LR. This is slightly different than what is being discussed here (5D MKIII vs MIV Camera Standard raw file rendering differences). The best way to trouble-shoot your issue is by uploading and posting the share links to a 5D MKIV camera raw file and an unedited camera JPEG file that exhibits the issue.

Champion

 • 

2.1K Messages

 • 

36.3K Points

3 years ago

I never said I didn't believe you.

You said two days ago, "So can anyone confirm that editing the DCP will do the job and "camera standard" afterwards is pretty close to the jpg again?"

Yes. The Camera Standard profile can be edited using the Adobe DNG Profile Editor. If you upload a camera raw file and unedited camera JPEG file I'll see what can done to match the two.

10 Messages

 • 

150 Points

Hi, this sounds very good. Thank you for your help. You can see a RAW file here.
http://www.filehosting.org/file/details/714579/_81A0589.CR2
the out of cam JPG is here
https://picload.org/view/ddgliadw/_81a0589.jpg.html

you most likely will have to add 0,5 f-stops in lightroom to both files to see the colour variation more intensely. but you can already see in the out of RAW jpg, that the shadows are more intense, reds are more intense and the overall balancing regarding white stop and contrast is not so brilliant.

Champion

 • 

2.1K Messages

 • 

36.3K Points

The link for the CR2 raw file is not working:

http://www.filehosting.org/file/details/714579/_81A0589.CR2

Ups, hier hat sich ein
Fehler eingeschlichen... Fehler-Code: 403

Please post to Dropbox or other file sharing site that does not require entering an email address.

10 Messages

 • 

150 Points

hi again, sorry for the delay, had a photo trip to berlin till today. here is the raw file once again:
https://wetransfer.com/downloads/0337e13d0239b93a716313af70f3a3bf20171225180701/020b30b55bba918f995bb21a99c5813820171225180701/fdf0c2

thank you again for your help.

2.6K Messages

 • 

33.7K Points

FYI, the link you posted has some sort of mail-client redirect wrapper and won't work for the rest of us; however, the raw link is:

https://wetransfer.com/downloads/0337e13d0239b93a716313af70f3a3bf20171225180701/020b30b55bba918f995b...

As far as differences between the JPG posted earlier and the CR2 with Camera Standard applied, I'm not really seeing much different except the shadows on the JPG very, very slightly brighter. 

Champion

 • 

2.1K Messages

 • 

36.3K Points

I'm seeing the same rendering as Steve, but with lower Red saturation in the CR2 file with Camera Standard. IMHO opinion the LR CR2 rendering appears more accurate and life-like compared to the camera JPEG. From your description it appears you are seeing just the opposite (i.e. CR2 is over-saturated and higher contrast). As double-check please Export the CR2 file to DNG file format with the settings you used that display the issue and upload that file for examination. The DNG file will have your Develop settings embedded. Thank you!

Here's a DNG Export with LR default settings and Camera Standard profile from my system that you can compare:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/aqiuhee3oq3pa21/_81A0589_TRS_Camera%20Standard.dng?dl=0


106 Messages

 • 

1.7K Points

3 years ago

Update:  After using Todd Shaner's profile I feel like I've made progress toward better images.  But I was still baffled that some people- including Mr. Shaner and Andrew stated that they couldn't SEE much difference between the DPP standard preview and lightroom's camera standard profile.  I couldn't see how they couldn't see it.  So.  I've been wracking my brain trying to figure it out, and after reading this forum over and over I could tell it must have something to do with the sRGB and Adobe RGB working space (and perhaps prophoto RGB) as a couple here have mentioned.  And I think it ultimately does.

 It's overly simple, actually.  I'll start at the beginning.  Andrew mentioned that shooting in Raw makes the sRGB or Adobe RGB info useless.  But that's not true in DPP.  Because whoever is in charge of matching up DPP previews and Lightroom profiles is matching to one or the other.  In my opinion, Canon 5d Mark ii's standard profile in lightroom matches DPP's preview best when viewed in sRGB (see my screenshots).  However, 5d Mark iv's standard profile in lightroom matches DPP's preview ONLY if viewed when Adobe RGB is set as the preferred working space (see screenshots).   I realize this isn't scientific.   The other guys were giving you that.  I'm giving you the files so you can import them into lightroom and compare as you'd like, but I do think you can see what I'm referring to if you compare the colors in the shadows- i.e. close to hairlines, cheeks and necks to see the saturation differences.  That's what I'm trying to show.  In all cases there are no other adjustments made- other than changing the working space in DPP before converting the RAW images to 16-bit Tiffs with the ICC profile.  I realize the Tiffs are softer and have some weird sharpening/noise reduction happening from my in-camera settings-but that's NOT what I'm trying to show.  

Anyway, when I was saying my profile didn't match DPP it's because it WASN'T.  At all.  Not even close.  BUT I was viewing my raw files in DPP with sRGB as the working space.  Maybe that's not correct, maybe it is, but what IS certain is  that all my previous RAW files from Canon 5d Mark ii with a camera standard profile match DPP's preview- in saturation and tone- when viewed with sRGB as the working space  and standard settings.  The same raw file from 5d Mark ii in DPP viewed with Adobe RGB as the working space has yucky over saturated shadows.  They are less flat, but if you look in creases and hairlines you'll see the added orange that you wouldn't see in Lightroom's camera standard preview.  UNTIL 5D Mark iv.    Lightroom copied the Adobe RGB working space preview when they made the 5d Mark iv profiles.  All of a sudden, the srgb working space DOESN'T match Lightroom's profiles. You have to switch the working space to Adobe RGB in order to get the previews to match.  And match they do, but it's UGLY.  Thus why people are noticing the "sudden" oversaturated colors in the shadow areas.  You kept saying they matched, and apparently you had your preferences set to Adobe RGB, but that's NOT how it used to be for us.  When they matched before, they matched off sRGB colorspace.  

For those of us who have been swearing that something is OFF, we weren't meaning it was slightly off and we were too lazy to fix it or adjust the settings, we were saying that something was WRONG and couldn't be fixed by adjusting the sliders one way or another in any sort of combination like we used to be able to do.  All my presets became useless with my new camera because the difference was so drastic.  I feel like I have re-invented the wheel since I got my 5d Mark iv a year ago  in lightroom and with my photoshop actions just trying to get back to what was good.  We weren't just whining.  Having a "normal" profile to start editing is essential to getting great shots.  I think the difference between the adobe rgb and the srgb profile is worse now than it was with my 5d Mark ii, but I don't know why that is.  I can see the differences, which is why I'm here, but they are definitely harder to spot if you aren't looking in the shadowy spots and comparing the color there.

I am not asking anyone to make the previews match another camera.  But I would like there to be consistency in the profiles with regard to the color space they are copying.  If in the past camera profiles were copied from sRGB DPP previews, can we please stick to that?  

Is this enough proof to get someone to match the sRGB camera standard profile instead of the Adobe RGB one?  Am I still crazy?  

In summary:
1.  As far as I can tell, past Canon camera standard profiles (at least 5d Mark ii and the 40D) matched the sRGB working space previews in DPP.  
2. Currently, at least with my 5d Mark iv, the camera standard profiles more closley match the Adobe RGB working space previews in DPP which are over saturated in the shadows.  
3. This is not consistent for editing purposes and therefore has been problematic in maintaining consistent editing as long as this profile remains.  

Links to main folder with Raw files and tiffs as well as screenshots:
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/6hkm3wineeoiogm/AADbid0DSyux7r-jVfEWPmlDa?dl=0
The subfolder has other examples from earlier (all srgb working space).