20221016 183320 196.NEF.xmp (12.4 KB)
Using Filmic. The one above is using sigmoid
1 Like
Here’s a shot at it.
20221016 183320 196_06.NEF.xmp (16.2 KB)
Had to export with Adobe RGB (compatible) to get the area around the sun to look like the darkroom view.
In general I like highlights to become desaturated (white) But in this case I prefer orange/yellow.
20221016 183320 196.NEF.xmp (16.0 KB)
1 Like
I didn’t really see that …exported with DT and opened it and compared side by side…seem the same in DT??
Jpg on the right…
Maybe I just don’t look closely
When I look at your color around the sun, it appears the similar to what I have arrived at by gamut compression in color calibration such that there is no change when I use softproofing. I haven’t followed your development closely enough to figure out how you get that. When I softproof all the other edits, I see a change in color around the sun. If you load my xmp and softproof it, you’ll see a change. It gets worse when I create a jpg in sRGB.
What I showed was your xmp…just exported it and pulled it back into DT…they looked the same to be without crazy pixel peeping… I guess I can take another look…
Stepping through the history stack of your image, starting at 16 local contrast and applying softproofing, there is a big change in the area around the sun. Going up one step to filmic greatly reduces the change. Going up to white balance eliminates the change almost completely. Tone equalizer gets rid of what little change is left.
The orange in the sky around the sun in your image looks less saturated than around the sun in my image. Mine apparently is out of the sRGB gamut. At least that’s my analysis.
Just curious, but why do you use white balance for the calibration change instead of color calibration?
Bill I am a little lost and it could be on me. If your comments are for me…its not showing that they are a response to my post in the thread. In any case I will assume they are and if that’s not the case you can clarify. In my initial comment on your post I was merely referring to this statement you made…
I was curious so I downloaded your xmp and applied it and exported as sRGB and compared it to your edit in DT and they were a very good match…my screenshot here is 80% jpg so I guess there could be a small penalty…
Your edit on the left and the resulting jpg on my system look like this…
I now also downloaded your posted image which is stripped of the metadata so I am not sure how it differs from the xmp you posted but perhaps its the result of the AdobeRGB output you speak about…
Now comparing that to the edit as derived from the xmp you posted for sure I can see a difference but again I am not sure exact steps produced that one as for sure I don’t get that darker one using your provided xmp…
Below is your edit again on the left and this time the jpg you uploaded to pixls as displayed on my screen is on the right…
So in summary I didn’t find a mismatch in the output and darkroom view using the posted xmp and an export from my system.
Further if I export to Adobe and view back in DT or a color managed view it looks the same …bit desaturated around the sun so I am not sure how the posted jpg you have is more saturated…
Maybe check that the xmp posted matches the image posted?? Or maybe I am not understanding what you did??
I don’t seem to have the ability to take a full screenshot in windows in jpg format. It pastes into the folder I save it in as a png.
Looking at your last screenshot, my edit on the left looks like the jpg on my screen, and the jpg on the right looks like my edit on my screen. IOW the opposite of your screenshot.
My monitor is a BenQ 2700PT, calibrated for sRGB.
Your going to get crazy histograms…histo profile is usually linear rec2020 esp if that is your working profile…you want to know as you edit looking at the histogram what is going on in that color space… not sure why you have it set for that… also custom display profiles can introduce some issues given the way the pipeline order things and runs them through the display profile… in any case maybe it is just that…
So what you are saying is that you get the jpg that you posted from that xmp posted along with it?? That would be my question because to me its not a match on my system and when I output an edit using your xmp file my exported jpg is a very good match in faststone viewer, win 11 photo and back in DT but I am sure some other curious sole will take a crack at it…
You are using my Adobe compatible jpg, I believe, for your comparison.
sRGB jpg
Adobe compatible
The Adobe compatible is what my edit looks like in dt.
I forgot that for some investigation of something or other that I changed from linear rec2020 to sRGB, and I didn’t change it back. I have done that now.
Do you see a difference between the two jpgs?
I can see this difference. I am thinking that you mean you export this with either srgb or adobe colorspace in your output profile when you say the quoted statement above…not sure… as even doing so for me will show the same image as it gets handled by the color management but maybe this is where I go wrong and I don’t understand what your adobe compatible means… In any case not really important… I was just responding to your original question and I saw no issue with display vs exported… maybe share the xmp for this “Adobe” edit if it is something more than just changing the output profile for export??
It’s just output profile in the storage options module.
To my mind in a color managed app or viewer these should look the same on a monitor with sRGB gamut which is what I see. Maybe if your monitor supports Adobe gamut and it might then the two exported files could look different I suppose when you bring them back in after export.
My monitor supports Adobe. I’ve brought the two jpgs back into dt, and they look different. Your saying when you do that you don’t see a difference?
