LR RAW export leaving blue tinge. why? (examples in thread)

[Aharami]

i cannot figure out why I get a blue tinge in my jpegs when I export RAW-->JPG in lightroom 4.0.

Example:
JPG from camera
Canon DPP's RAW conversion
LR conversion

Notice the blue hue in the LR conversion? Why? I used sRGB profile and reset all develop settings in LR.

Another example
From camera
LR conversion


Any thoughts?

 

[Aharami]

so after some digging, found that LR uses Adobe RGB profile.
http://help.adobe.com/en_US/lightroom/using/WS268F3399-80B2-4169-A598-04C7F769FFA0.html

But when I export, and export in sRGB, I'd think that the LR export (in sRGB) will be the same as the sRGB JPG from my camera or DPP. but it isn't. Even soft proofing in LR4 between sRGB and Adobe RGB, I don't see any difference.

Odd!

 

[randomrogue]

The difference is so subtle that I can barely see it. If anything there is a tiny difference in the sky but you'd almost have to pixel peep to see it on my screen.

 

[GoSharks]

Your second link is dead, but based on what I see in the first set of images, LR is doing a better job at recovering highlights and shadows during the RAW conversion process and there are slight exposure differences or even minute white balance adjustments being made by the LR RAW engine.

To me, this does not appear to be a color profile issue.

 

[Aharami]

yea LR is definitely doing a better job with highlights, but focus on the right side of the image at the mountain. If you switch back and forth, you can definitely see a blue shift with the LR image
JPG from camera
LR conversion

It is definitely apparent to me right away. No one else seeing this?

Fixed 2nd set of links

 

[Anteaus]

I've seen that also, especially after using lens correction and adding in a bit of vibrancy and contract. Sometimes the camera chooses a white balance thats a little cool. You can try and let LR choose a more appropriate white balance or do what I do, which is just warm the WB up a bit.

Another thing to check is the actually viewer. LR4 colors are corrected for your specific monitor. The Windows Image Viewer won't necessarily look the same. In my case, my JPGs are almost always slightly darker in the viewer than they look in LR. This may not help but it's something I came across. In another case I was getting fringing on one computer that didn't exist on another. The JPGs were fine.

 

[DarkRogue]

What version of Lightroom are you using?

Are you making any changes in LR before exporting to JPG?

LR4 uses a new process version (PV2012) that by default is less contrasty than LR3.6 (PV2010) and is able to recover more highlight and shadow detail. The different process versions also have some differences in the way they display the color.

I don't think it's a problem of sRGB vs aRGB.

I can see the issue right away.
JPG from camera vs JPG from DPP, there's a subtle color cast (looks slightly redder), and the LR JPG is completely different.
This is why people need good IPS screens properly calibrated, lol.

Edit:
Anteaus, it's not that LR4's colors are corrected for the monitor, it's that the program is color managed/aware and will do conversion between the color spaces, while the Windows Image Viewer isn't. But that's not the issue here; the problem is his JPGs are inherently different, even when viewed by us, not on his own machine.

 

[Aharami]

Im using LR4. First time using Lightroom. It's not just when viewed with Irfanview or Windows photo viewer that the RAW look different. Even in LR, the RAW render looks more bluish than the JPG. Here are a couple screenshots

Raw file viewed in LR
Camera JPG file viewed in LR

 

[DarkRogue]

Again, that is because the two files are being processed differently.

The JPGs that come out of your camera, are not "truely" what the camera sees - that would be the RAW file.

JPGs are all processed, either in-camera, or via some external program. Canon's DPP program's JPGs will be very similar to the in-camera JPGs, because Canon designed both, and is able to recreate the camera's processing settings in its software. Adobe does not have this luxury, and must reverse engineer it, or otherwise process it in their own way.

It's easy to test - set up a colorful scene, put your camera on the tripod, and shoot in JPG+RAW mode.

Then,without changing the scene or camera or exposure, change the JPG settings in the camera itself, such as going to faithful, neutral, or some other setting.

Then import everything and view them. The RAWs should be the same, while the JPGs should be all different.

 

[Anteaus]

Edit:
Anteaus, it's not that LR4's colors are corrected for the monitor, it's that the program is color managed/aware and will do conversion between the color spaces, while the Windows Image Viewer isn't. But that's not the issue here; the problem is his JPGs are inherently different, even when viewed by us, not on his own machine.

Thanks for clarifying. Something wierd is def happening in the conversion if his image looks fine in LR but is very different in JPG. I'm presuming the OP unchecked all the various options in the Export menu and the PPI is still set to standard.

 

[DarkRogue]

I don't think the OP's problem is that his JPGs look different when compared to his RAW, but that the JPG from his RAW looks different compared to JPGs from other sources.

If I'm wrong OP, let me know, because that's a different issue if your JPGs saved from the RAW don't look like the RAW.

 

[Aharami]

I don't think the OP's problem is that his JPGs look different when compared to his RAW, but that the JPG from his RAW looks different compared to JPGs from other sources.

If I'm wrong OP, let me know, because that's a different issue if your JPGs saved from the RAW don't look like the RAW.

no you're right. LR RAW export to JPG looks the same as when RAW viewed in LR. But it's not the same as RAW export to JPG from DPP or JPG from camera. I now understand that the algorithms Canon uses to render RAW files are proprietary and that is why LR looks different from DPP or Camera. But I am not happy with the changes that LR is making. And it's not consistent either. I just went out and took a RAW+JPEG shot with my 60D (previous examples were all from my older XSi) and in this image, LR underexposed the image

JPG from camera
LR RAW --> JPG

 

[DarkRogue]

It is not that LR is intentionally underexposing the image.

As I said before, it is LR's "take" on how to interpret the RAW data.
Their new algorithm (Process Version 2012, or PV2012) automatically attempts to recover more highlight detail to avoid blowing any highlights, which is why it appears that it's underexposed.

If you want, try switching to PV2010. Go into develop, scroll down to "Camera Calibration" and click on "Process" then select 2010.

You will see that the image has changed (generally brighter, more contrasty, and highlights will start getting clipped more) yet it's based off the same RAW file. That data has not changed. Only its interpretation has.

Lightroom is meant for editing your photos. If you only want to export RAWs quickly and have them look like your camera, stick with DPP, or just shoot in JPG mode.

If you use Lightroom's new editing controls, you will find that it is extremely powerful.

 

[GoSharks]

You can't expect RAW and JPEG to look the same when you are using different processing engines.

AFAIK RAW->JPEG using DPP can look the same as JPEG straight out of the camera because it is the same engine as the in-camera one.

 

[Aharami]

thanks for explaining. I got that. Are there camera specific profiles that I can download and install from somewhere?

on a related note, I noticed that the RAW file from my XSi has the "ACR 4.4" profile available in the calibration panel in LR. But the RAW file for my 60D doesn't. Why is that? I have ACR 6.7 installed on my machine.

 

[DarkRogue]

ACR is the main RAW processing engine that LR is built on. Throughout the versions, it has changed in the way it interprets the files. Also, newer versions are usualyl required for supprot for newer cameras. (Remember, Adobe must reverse engineer support for every camera.)

What exactly are you trying to achieve?
If you simply want to create JPGs from RAW file that look like it came out of your camera, why not just use DPP?

 

[Aharami]

i am trying to get a nice workflow going. Before I was using photoshop to edit files one by one and irfanview to view jpegs. But Lightroom makes everything streamlined where I don't have to keep duplicate jpegs for all my RAW files on my HD. I can just browse RAW in LR and edit and export the ones I want to publish to an online gallery or print. I was alarmed by the blueish tones i saw in the first picture I posted. That made me think that LR's RAW processing is making all my pictures bluish. But as I dove deeper into it, I realized that all the RAW files in LR are different from camera JPG in different ways, and as you explained, that is because LR's RAW processing algorithms are different than Canon's.

I'd like to stick to LR for RAW processing. Im some cases I like the LR processing better, but there are cases where I like the camera JPG or DPP processing better (such as the first example with the mountain). That is why I was wondering if there is a profile for XSi or 60D which will allow me to quickly flip back and forth between the two processing styles instead of having to keep the camera JPGs around to compare to LR's results.

I hope that makes sense.

 

[GoSharks]

That is why I was wondering if there is a profile for XSi or 60D which will allow me to quickly flip back and forth between the two processing styles instead of having to keep the camera JPGs around to compare to LR's results.

Just some friendly advice: Don't do this. It will drive you nuts.

 

[DarkRogue]

I'm not sure if anything like that exists, but I'm sure you can browse the usual Lightroom-related sites for plugins.

The problem is that you won't get 100% DPP-compatibilty in LR, because DPP reads the files completely differently. It might look the same, or it might not.

I personally don't like how it looks straight out of the camera, and believe everything can use a bit of tweaking, be it the color temp, white balance, fixing lens distortion, or adding creative vignetting.

With regard to that photo you posted of the mountain, I don't have the RAW to test, but I believe that blueish hue can be easily remedied by bumping the color temp down a bit, maybe 100-200K.

Keep in mind that DPP and in-camera JPG's automatically apply white balance, sharpening, and contrast adjustments. LR4 (specifically PV2012) attempts to display the image without any of those, and a flatter contrast curve to start with.

While my work is completely different (I do portraits / cosplay photography), here's a quick example:
http://darkscythe.com/images/lr-3-example.JPG
Basically what my RAW looked on import, with a few CA corrections and such. Note the little [!] at the bottom right - this is still PV2010.
http://darkscythe.com/images/lr-3to4-example.JPG
I updated the photo to PV2012. Overall exposure did not change, but notice the highlights came into more detail by being slightly darkened. (Look at the middle of the wig, as well as the brighter spots behind her.)
http://darkscythe.com/images/lr-4-example.JPG
Final image after some processing.

 

[Aharami]

Just some friendly advice: Don't do this. It will drive you nuts.

yea you're probably right. I'm just nitpicking now

I'm not sure if anything like that exists, but I'm sure you can browse the usual Lightroom-related sites for plugins.

The problem is that you won't get 100% DPP-compatibilty in LR, because DPP reads the files completely differently. It might look the same, or it might not.

I personally don't like how it looks straight out of the camera, and believe everything can use a bit of tweaking, be it the color temp, white balance, fixing lens distortion, or adding creative vignetting.

With regard to that photo you posted of the mountain, I don't have the RAW to test, but I believe that blueish hue can be easily remedied by bumping the color temp down a bit, maybe 100-200K.

Keep in mind that DPP and in-camera JPG's automatically apply white balance, sharpening, and contrast adjustments. LR4 (specifically PV2012) attempts to display the image without any of those, and a flatter contrast curve to start with.

While my work is completely different (I do portraits / cosplay photography), here's a quick example:
http://darkscythe.com/images/lr-3-example.JPG
Basically what my RAW looked on import, with a few CA corrections and such. Note the little [!] at the bottom right - this is still PV2010.
http://darkscythe.com/images/lr-3to4-example.JPG
I updated the photo to PV2012. Overall exposure did not change, but notice the highlights came into more detail by being slightly darkened. (Look at the middle of the wig, as well as the brighter spots behind her.)
http://darkscythe.com/images/lr-4-example.JPG
Final image after some processing.

yea tweaking the overall temp got me closer to the color tones I prefer. and like I said, I'm probably just nitpicking right now. If I didnt have the camera JPG with me, I probably wouldn't even know that something was off with the picture. Thanks for all your help!

 

[Gooberlx2]

but there are cases where I like the camera JPG or DPP processing better (such as the first example with the mountain).

In these cases, I suggest making a slightly warmer LR preset, maybe using this image as a benchmark. Then tweak from there.

 

[SecurityTheatre]

yea you're probably right. I'm just nitpicking now

Also keep in mind that Lightroom is a colour calibration-aware system. If you have an exact colour profile for your screen, Lightroom will use that for display. Most in-camera JPEG processing these days either uses AdobeRGB or sRBG, which have fairly different tonal curves for various colours (blue included).

I think Lightroom assumes you have your screen calibrated to the sRGB colour space, which is a bit different than the images from your camera (which may be set to AdobeRGB, or otherwise). This is usually one of the in-camera options for JPEG processing. Changing this setting will change the appearance of the image on your screen without there actually being any changes in the image itself or in the RAW data.

Make sure you understand how colour spaces work and how you have to think about these in order to be sure that you are processing them appropriately to get the expected results.

Also keep in mind that most printers have an entirely separate colour space and a good program (like the Adobe products) will export using this colour space when printing, use a different colour space when displaying (usually sRGB), all while often saving them with a third space (usually AdobeRGB).

This will result in variations that are entirely expected, but may appear random if you're not being careful with your calibration and settings.