My version…
20230105_081247_0024.ORF.xmp (17.2 KB)
4 Likes
So your image is a good one to show that just using a couple of simple settings that you will end up with a different look and if carried forward then would influence how you continue to edit esp if you are automatically throwing on sigmoid or filmic…
So here are a series of your images with only legacy as shot wb and 1 EV of exposure added…
Base
Filmic v6 DT 4.0 defaults
Filmic v5 DT 4.2 defaults
Filmic v5 DT4.0 defaults
Sigmoid Default
Sigmoid ACES preset
Sigmoid Default with rgb ratio
Changing settings in filmic esp rel white and contrast settings in sigmoid would alter these and maybe for the better but as you can see just from the choice you make here you will think of your image as being yellow …or maybe not???
1 Like
Sure, but with my eyes I perceived it more red or orange than the yellow my camera captured.
In my edit (second image) I tried to remove as much yellow as I possibly could, and replaced it with red and orange.
1 Like
Are you using a calibrated monitor?
dcpcoxeas edit/color looks really good to me.
1 Like
No, none of my monitors is calibrated.strong text
Its very easy to adjust with the CB module…you can just desaturate or saturate and change the hue if needed… I use the base curve on your raw file and and added just a touch of exposure and it looks pretty much like the jpg…But there is a lot more data in the raw in the sky etc if you want to use it… Also if you set your wb even to just the olympus daylight it takes a bit of the nasty yellow out…Maybe all the foreground shadow and green fooled the autowb if you used that… so lots of small tweaks could impact the image… also adding a lot of exposure like 1.7 ev or so and doing a filmic edit is also pretty close to what your jpg and sky show but with a lot more detail in the shadows…
1 Like
Sure??
I get this when I open - I’ve added 1 ev exposure, and hit the filmic white autopicker - that’s it.
Also using legacy wb. DT 4.2
You look like you have 1.7 EV??? No actually I didn’t show it but using about that much I did a filmic edit that I thought was close to the OP jpg as well… My examples were with 1EV
I think the yellow-ish highlights look quite natural… My screen is calibrated ( a Christmas present to myself a little over a year ago 
) and I wouldn’t really call them yellow… (EDIT after more playing… I take that back - they do look yellow) still, it certainly is on the yellow side of orange. Having said that I prefer the image a little more reddish in those bits. My preferred method of adjusting that kind of thing is the channel mixer in color calibration. In this case I did this:
Which reduces the amount of green in pixels of the image that contain red (pushes the hue more reddish) and compensates (to preserve the overall white balance) by increasing the green in the pixels that contain green. This is the same thing that color calibration does if you use it to match to a color chart.
Anyway, here’s my edit, using sigmoid.
20230105_081247_0024.ORF.xmp (15.7 KB)
What do you think of the colors?
Edit… maybe to yellow still…
Same edit but with this
looks like this, starting to verge on a peachy-pink orange… to my eyes anyway… nice though.
2 Likes
Yes… I thought you said you added 1 ev. And the image opens with +0.7 already! 
But what I was getting at was the wb - yours looks a lot warmer than what I saw… 
Ha sadly my monitor is not calibrated so it looks a bit like iron ore on the top of the mountain in chrome browser…
2 Likes
Ya sorry for the confusion… I don’t add default exposure either… I just open all my images with legacy wb… Then I use the autopicker in exposure and its set at 50% so I try an image average …often this is pretty good so off to edit the image… if not I will use the same thing but select an area of the image that I want well exposed and see what I get… Using the initial workflow lua macro I can automate this, some cb settings and have the tone eq mask set and ready to edit… Its a clever little macro…
2 Likes
I just tried your method of creating a duplicate and using the compare mode in lighttable. Thanks for sharing this workflow. I was wondering how ‘faithfully’ the lighttable view is to the out of camera JPG. Has anyone confirmed this? Thanks
Edit: I usually shoot in Raw + JPG. Sometimes I open the jpg first in Darktable, take a snapshot and then open the Raw file. This allows me to do a direct comparison during the editing process and can be helpful for some images.
1 Like
Yes… I only recently set up lua and it’s very good.
@solitone As I’ve been doing all this, it’s occurred to me that I often had issues with colours when my Olympus was my main camera. I’m not sure why really, but I wonder if whatever input profile dt uses for the Olys is somehow a bit off… but I may be on the completely wrong track!
With my cameras it seems to be a perfect match, with the caveat that my Sony only has very small embedded previews, and if I zoom the lighttable to any more that 2 images on the screen, dt brings up a default processed version which looks more like the initial darkroom view. When I was playing with some Fujifilm files the other day, I noticed that it didn’t match… the embedded jpg showing in the lightroom was lower contrast than the OOC jpg. Don’t know why, but I presume it’s a Fuji thing.
1 Like
Without the raw file I can not test my suggestion, but try changing the highlights reconstruction module method from the default to reconstruct in LCh. I have just been working an overexposed image where the overcast sky had a warm color cast even though the picture was shot in the middle of the day. Switching to reconstruct in LCh gave a natural looking overcast sky. However, the default method of inpaint opposed works well with most images.
I’m not sure the highlights were blown…I feel like these methods are intended to try to reconstruct channels that are blown in the raw data and not for artistic use…but of course whatever works for any image… Im not on my computer so I can’t check but if they not blown then its likely better to deal with those things using highlight compression and deal with the color in CB module . your image if blown might produce better recovered data with one method over the other but I don’t think this image was blown until you start to add exposure…
1 Like
Without the RAW file I don’t know either, but if the clouds are clipped then maybe my suggestion might work. Also, I feel the clouds are probably ‘correct’ being yellow at this time of day.