Lightroom: Red/overexposed RAW photos from Canon S100

  • 1
  • Problem
  • Updated 7 years ago
I am creating a new thread on this with the same title and info as the one I created before because the previous one was marked as "Solved" when it has not actually been solved at all. And when I mentioned that it hadn't been solved, I was ignored... so here's a new topic.

I originally had this issue with 3.6RC, and was told that the problem was fixed in the final build... but that is not the case and I am still having this issue.

I have the new Canon S100 which apparently uses some new/modified CR2 file format. I import the photos into a Lightroom catalog and they all look fine within the importer window, but when I click on the photo in Library or Develop, once the photo finishes loading, the red saturation goes through the roof.

Any photo that already had a little bit of warmth to it exploded with red. Literally looks like any photo was taken in a furnace with bright red lights illuminating everything. By turning the temperature all the way down and messing with the colors it makes the photos decent to look at, but obviously produces other problems with photo quality.

It could be an issue with reds, however it may also be a problem with it overexposing the photos.
With photos that don't contain a lot of red already it makes parts of the photo a lot brighter than they normally would be. I've also noticed significant amounts of noise in Lightroom compared to what can be seen in-camera.

Here are a few examples I posted previously:

Photo of Patrick Martin

Patrick Martin

  • 26 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
  • frustrated

Posted 7 years ago

  • 1
Photo of jdv

jdv, Champion

  • 728 Posts
  • 56 Reply Likes
Remember that the photo is not being changed. What you are seeing are the previews being generated. Lightroom does not use or trust the embedded previews made by the camera.

Your first step is to confirm that you have not applied a develop preset upon import. If you are sure this is not the case, then the next step is to see what the Camera Calibration settings are. Try switching it away from "Embedded" and see what changes. You probably only have the choice of embedded if this is a JPEG, but it is worth poking around in that panel.

Because, the problem may not necessarily be with the file format or average camera response, but rather the response under some conditions by this specific sensor in this camera.

You can also experiment with "zeroing" out the image. If this helps, then you could use this as a starting point for a preset you /can/ apply to images from this camera on import. That is, you can set the saturation and contrast to some reasonable starting point and use that as an import develop preset.
Photo of Patrick Martin

Patrick Martin

  • 26 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Yeah, sorry, I should have posted a link or more information from the previous topic to show what I have and haven't tried. I just wrote this real quickly last night.

I'm positive there are no presets being applied to the photo upon import, I've checked it multiple times.
I've tried importing the photos into Lightroom straight from my camera, and I've tried importing them onto my desktop using a different software, then just throwing them in Lightroom, both yield the same results.

I am fairly certain it is a problem with how Lightroom deals with those specific files and not just photos from the camera. Within that same batch, I had photos that were both JPEGs and CR2 files (some were nearly identical photos taken with the same lighting of the same scene, like that second one above of my girlfriend). The CR2 files transformed as seen above, while the JPEGs did not change at all after loading.
I also recently took a bunch of other photos (in JPEG format) in the same warm lighting settings and none of those photos did what is seen above.

I will, however, try switching calibrations settings as you have suggested and see what happens. I *think* I've tried it before, but I've tried so much at this point I don't know what I have or haven't tried... so I may as well do it again haha.

Thanks for your help.
Photo of Patrick Martin

Patrick Martin

  • 26 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
One more thing to add onto this.
I just tried converting all the CR2 files to JPEGs using Canon's (horrible) RAW editing/converting software that come with the camera, then importing them into Lightroom as JPEGs... it did not alter the photos in any way.
I didn't think it would, but just wanted to make sure.

That is a temporary solution to the problem, but Canon's software does not treat the photos well upon export, and it is very limited in its editing options.
And in Lightroom, editing JPEGs obviously produces signs of tampering with the photos more than RAW files do.
I would still like to be able to edit the RAW files that my camera took for better results.
Photo of Removed

Removed

  • 9 Posts
  • 2 Reply Likes
Maybe try converting them to DNG upon input and see if that changes anything. Adobe likes their own RAW format.
Photo of Richard Owens

Richard Owens

  • 28 Posts
  • 8 Reply Likes
What is the white balance set to?
Photo of Jeffrey Tranberry

Jeffrey Tranberry, Sr. Product Manager, Digital Imaging

  • 14147 Posts
  • 1765 Reply Likes
If you set Lightroom to use the camera's profile "Camera Neutral" do the colors match the JPG:

Photo of Lee Jay

Lee Jay

  • 990 Posts
  • 135 Reply Likes
My guess is that the camera is on "Standard" as it comes out of the box.
Photo of Patrick Martin

Patrick Martin

  • 26 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
It doesn't look as gnarly and red as it does with "Adobe Standard", but it still doesn't match the color of the JPEG or how it looks on the camera itself.
It makes everything a lot more pale and desaturated.

"Camera Standard" looks even worse than "Adobe Standard", and none of the profiles really come close to matching the actual colors on the JPEG or the camera.
Photo of Chris Cox

Chris Cox

  • 20280 Posts
  • 813 Reply Likes
Have you checked your display profile to make sure it is accurate? If it were off, that could make the color too saturated (or the reverse).
Photo of Rob Cole

Rob Cole

  • 4831 Posts
  • 382 Reply Likes
Post a link to a raw so others can check it.
Photo of Patrick Martin

Patrick Martin

  • 26 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Here's a link to the two RAW files that Jeffrey has as well.

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/18227340/IMG_...
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/18227340/IMG_...

Really appreciate the help, everyone.
Photo of Rob Cole

Rob Cole

  • 4831 Posts
  • 382 Reply Likes
What were Jeffrey's assessments?
Photo of Rob Cole

Rob Cole

  • 4831 Posts
  • 382 Reply Likes
My assessments:

Both Images:
-----------------

- Every camera profile sucked except Adobe Standard, and that one runs somewhat magenta-y and a little cyan-y.
- Both were oversaturated.

On both images, I adjusted the camera calibration:
Red Hue: +6
Blue Hue: +3
and used a significantly greened tint,
and desaturated.

IMG_0156.CR2:
---------------------

Mixed Lighting. - Daylight coming in from the window, Fluorescent coming in from another angle, and some incandescent thrown in there too. I solved by using a modified Fluorescent white balance, and a gold gradient.

IMG_0417.CR2:
---------------------

Again there was some tinted light coming that did not shine equally on stuff, and white balance was too warm. I solved by cooling and another gold gradient to warm up the corner that became too cool. I also up'd the vibrance, and downed the saturation even more than the other (a bit too much probably). Tossed in a bit of split-toner for fine tuning.

Here are the settings I changed, as presented by change manager:



And here are the settings via xmp if you want to take them for a test ride:
http://www.robcole.com/_temp/S100.xmp...

Final recommendations:

- Brew your own version of Adobe Standard using DNG Profile Editor that suits your camera and tastes better.
- White Balance can account for a lot of the initial color variations.
- Be aware of mixed Lighting situations.

(I don't think there is anything particularly wrong with your camera or Lightroom's handling - just a matter of getting used to what's happening and knowing what to do about it).

Also: Adobe Standard runs bright, especially at the top end.
Consider a modified tone curve in at least one variation of profile that you create.
e.g. http://feedback.photoshop.com/photosh...

And, your camera and Canon DPP use intelligent contrast reduction - Lightroom doesn't - that explains some of the differences too. Consider dropping exposure a bit and add fill (and/or use a dab of h.recovery if you're after a flatter look).

PS - Your camera and DPP apply luminance noise reduction by default, Lightroom does not - that could be why you notice more noise in the initial Lightroom rendition. (I use my CollectionPreseter and some people use JF's BulkDevelopSettings for a better lum. NR starting point, since Lightroom's defaults can not be tied to ISO ranges.

Lastly: I don't know whether what I saw is what you saw - hard to be sure with the continuing difficulties of color management... - e.g. the images you posted here on this forum look a lot different to me when I click to view them on their own "page".
Photo of Patrick Martin

Patrick Martin

  • 26 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Initially I was going about this that it was a problem that I was personally having with my previous post, but when an Adobe employee said that this bug was recognized by the staff was to be "fixed" in the public release of LR 3.6, that's when I began saying it was a problem with Lightroom.
If it's been recognized as a bug but not fixed, I don't think I can be the only person with this problem.
Although, I'm obviously one of the few who are actually vocal about it.

I can't actually figure out how to create an entirely new camera profile in Lightroom. Any tips with that?
Thanks again for the help and advice regarding this issue.

Should I post it in the ACR or the Lightroom forum?
Photo of Rob Cole

Rob Cole

  • 4831 Posts
  • 382 Reply Likes
Got your point Patrick.

for every person having a problem who vocalizes it on the forum, there are often thousands who suffer in silence...

Anyway, I'd definitely go with the ACR forum - its where most of the image processing issues common to Lightroom and ACR are aired.

Regarding custom camera profiles, first stop is the DNG Profile Editor web page which has the instructions. There are two ways I know of for creating new camera profiles:
1. Start with an existing camera profile (based on Adobe or Camera manufacturer's vision) and modify using points from real photograph(s), and/or chart photos, and/or your imagination... (these may be twisted profiles).
2. Use X-rite software to base a new profile entirely on one or two photographs of a color chart. (these will always be linear profiles).

Info about twisted vs. linear profiles available from Sandy McGuffog: http://dcptool.sourceforge.net/Hue%20...

Rob
Photo of Patrick Martin

Patrick Martin

  • 26 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Ah, dang. Didn't think you'd get back to me that quickly... I already created a thread in the Lightroom forum. I'll see if a mod can move it for me.

Man, both of those ways for creating camera profiles are still a little confusing.
I don't know what the DNG Profile Editor or anything about modifying points from real photographs or chart photos. Or even what chart photos are.
Photo of Rob Cole

Rob Cole

  • 4831 Posts
  • 382 Reply Likes
Did you read the instructions (tutorials and documentation) on DPE page? http://labs.adobe.com/wiki/index.php/...

If you buy a 24-color chart and take a picture of it, DPE is all set up to use it...

See x-rite website for their way: (http://xritephoto.com/ph_product_over...) - you just shoot the chart and feed it to their software and out pops a profile...

I personally like to start with the twisted profiles made by Adobe (since they solved the highlight recovery hue-shift problem). e.g. Adobe Standard, or the camera matching profiles.

Without even having a chart, you can just load an existing profile, and a photo (converted at least temporarily to DNG), and start adjusting the colors.

Advanced Color Editor may be of some assistance.
Photo of Patrick Martin

Patrick Martin

  • 26 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Alright I'll check all that stuff out. Thanks for the help, Rob.
Photo of Patrick Martin

Patrick Martin

  • 26 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
So far nothing has really helped besides just manually fixing everything.
Some others in the Lightroom forums seem to agree that it might just be a problem with how Lightroom handles the Canon S100's RAW files.

It's been a while since anyone from Adobe has said anything regarding this... just wondering if there's any official news on whether there are Engineers at Adobe working on this at all?
I can't be the only person with this issue...
Photo of Jeffrey Tranberry

Jeffrey Tranberry, Sr. Product Manager, Digital Imaging

  • 14147 Posts
  • 1765 Reply Likes
Hi Patrick, I received your email and meant to reply. Engineering is still looking at whether this is a problem with the way the camera is profiled or another issue. So, yes, we're still looking into it.
Photo of Patrick Martin

Patrick Martin

  • 26 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Alright, great, thanks! Glad to hear it's being looked into.
Photo of Patrick Martin

Patrick Martin

  • 26 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Just wondering if there's been any update from the Adobe team on whether or not anything has been figured out yet.

-Patrick
Photo of Rob Cole

Rob Cole

  • 4831 Posts
  • 382 Reply Likes
Patrick - did you try Lr4b?
Photo of Patrick Martin

Patrick Martin

  • 26 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
I have not. I'll give it a shot, though. However, if it's a problem with the Canon S100 color profiles (which I think it is), I don't think the problem will have fixed itself.
Photo of Patrick Martin

Patrick Martin

  • 26 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Well, I downloaded and installed Lightroom 4, imported the photos into a new catalog, and held my breath... same results.
Although, I do like the look of Lightroom 4. However, until this issue is fixed, Adobe's not getting anymore of my money.
Photo of Rob Cole

Rob Cole

  • 4831 Posts
  • 382 Reply Likes
Fair enough. (fingers crossed for ya)
-R