I am replying hereunder to most of the answers I got. Thank you everybody David Vincent-Jones wrote: > > Your camera JPG is produced using Nikon's secret and special 'sauce' > and achieving an identical result would be difficult. People who shoot > RAW files generally believe that they can hand craft a result that is > at least similar but probably better than that which the camera > manufacturer can offer. >
Yes, unfortunately I think they give their special sauce only to big software companies, like "you know who" company. Indeed I tried to produce a JPEG (from NEF) from THAT software and I got an image that is ~identical to the camera JPEG. Martin Straeten wrote: > You might use > this: https://pixls.us/articles/profiling-a-camera-with-darktable-chart/ > <https://pixls.us/articles/profiling-a-camera-with-darktable-chart/> Yes, luckily I have a X-Rite Colour Checker, I have to use it more often Terry Pinfold wrote: > Not really answering the direct question here, but making an > observation that many others have said before me. If you want your > image to look like the cameras JPG then use the JPG. To me the whole > idea of using RAW files and processing in DT is to hand-craft my own > image how I as the photographer/artist want to render the scene. I don't agree because for example I may want to just adjust the exposure and few other things, by using the colours already generated by the camera > I would also comment that Filmic V4 is giving me a very nice starting > point for most of my images compared to the base curve options or > Filmic V3. Nice suggestion, I am currently studying it with guide https://www.mauriziopaglia.it/filmic-faq/ Archie Macintosh wrote: > place Input Color Profile early in the pipe, as Aurélian Pierre does with the > jpeg he's > editing in this video at 14:22: > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kzACn3l49HM Thank you, I bookmarked the video Kees Stravers wrote: > What version of Darktable are you using? > In my experience, Darktable 2.6.x gets much closer to the Nikon colors > in its defaults than 3.x does. 3.2.1 Timur Irikovich Davletshin wrote: > You're not gonna get precise color reproduction even if your camera has > full support in dt (or you made custom profiling). Default basecurve > module behavior has been changed since 3.0 release. Try changing color > reproduction to 'none' instead of 'luminance'. This is the only way > profiles work for me. Why it has been changed is another question. We > discussed it already couple times. I looks like no one cares about > matching in camera JPEGs but for some unknown reason dt still defaults > to base curve module... which is profiled against in camera JPEGs! > :) > Timur. W-O-W Timur thank you so much, you solved 90% of my problems, switching from "luminance" to "none" I got almost all colours I need. I wonder why "luminance" is the default setting instead of "none"!!!!! Terry Pinfold wrote: > Recently I was teaching a group of students to use DT 3.0. We opened > the same image using base curve to get the initial starting point, we > then opened the image with no base curve and just did our own tone > curve, and finally we used Filmic V4 and adjusted the white and black > exposure sliders. Every student thought Filmic gave the best result > and was easy to use at this basic level. For me Filmic V4 is giving > pleasing results with colour saturation where I found V3 too subdued. Yes, as I said in previous part of this message, Filmic V4 is really a thing to study / practice with ____________________________________________________________________________ darktable user mailing list to unsubscribe send a mail to [email protected]
