I’ve been using dcamprof for about a week to generate a custom camera profile for my Fujifilm X100T using the camera’s SSF. The profile I created does a noticeably better job handling highly saturated colors compared to Adobe Color or compared to profiles I created using Color Charts.
However, when I compare it to Fujifilm’s camera matching profiles like ASTIA, CLASSIC CHROME etc from the manufacturer, I notice that those render bright, saturated colors even more accurately and pleasingly.
I’m wondering if there’s a specific approach or tweak in the profile-making process that could help me achieve similar results.
You can see the difference especially in the blues
Does anyone have experience with this or any suggestions on how to further fine-tune the profile? I’ve attached images to show the differences visually.
When I was making SSF datasets for profile, I recall troy_s commenting in an email about the cyan-ness of certain saturated blues. I literally forgot about investigating it until your post here.
A cursory look at the dcamprof documention reveals controls for LUT optimization:
Does your Dcamprof profile have blackpoint compensation?? It almost looks like it when you go between the images the fuji is much “blacker” … if so try turning it off in the profile and see what the result is… just a guess from a quick visual comparison…
Just reviewing the documentation again as I have not used dcamprof for some time there are a couple of sections in the manual , one on the handling of deep blues and one on extreme colors where there is some overlap in discussion but there it does highlight the default strategy used by dcamprof to handle those elements and how you can modify them… it mentions lightening the extreme blues to try and preserve tonal information, allow easier correction I believe and to make the overall profile more robust…
Perhaps some of this is what you are seeing as well…
whoa where did you find the X100T’s ssf? did you measure yourself? could you share the data?
also how are you applying the profile (which software, what is applied before and after…)? because these blues are extremely touchy and maybe the profile gives you extreme values that just fall out of the comfort region of the processing that comes after?
…fwiw, this is what my estimated ssf look like (using vkdt mkssf). i’ve never been super happy with them, and the basis for this is the adobe dng profile (which is working so-so, as you can see on the left):
