p.5 #1 · Struggling with Sony skin tones, want that Canon look, go here -->
I will put in my two cents . I am very pragmatic and flexible in my needs and am not really biased. Shot canon for umpteen million years since the 1ds camera. Got many good files, but found lots of af problems with various bodies, resulting in lots of soft photos...had to finally get my bodies recalibrated at canon pro 3 times to get some consistency. Like the smooth skin tones. I shoot raw + jpeg, but use mainly jpegs in my work and mangaged to get really nice color with little work....but don't every underexpose canon files..or you will be very unhappy...overexposure more than one stop and you are dead. Sony af has revitalized me...I no longer have to worry wether things will be in focus...esp in portraiture...hit the eye af button and you are good to go. Studio portraits....very easy color in skin with very little tweaking...I shoot all my flash stuff in daylight wb and can add a little warmth as needed for particular person.. I shoot all my outdoor stuff in awb and it works great, esp in shade and windowlight. Main issue with sony...its too sharp and clinical and you need more retouching with folks that don't have great skin....but that's the price of excellence. Some times I get jealous of my wife who comes along and snaps some shots on her galaxy phone...how does she get such great color and range with that little work?
p.5 #2 · Struggling with Sony skin tones, want that Canon look, go here -->
numbertwo wrote:
Pd: there's also this metameric failure of the sensor, achieving every color we want from a raw sometimes is not as easy as it would seem. For example, the Sony sensors often have problems with shades of purple/blues, whereas canon does just fine.
I gave up on that original thread where you got these really odd images when the guy never provided RAW files w/ EXIF that any of us could examine for authenticity. In my mind these examples are an extreme ( something technically wrong other than color science quibbles) and probably best to ignore.
p.5 #3 · Struggling with Sony skin tones, want that Canon look, go here -->
hiepphotog wrote:
Ha, I meant a blind test for the people in here that think Sony color science is rubbish. I watched the result done by Tony and it helped me ignore some of the color science debate. I have both the EOS R and the A9 and personally I prefer my current Sony profile more :P.
The problem is that Tony doesn't even know what color science is. So he did a test of Auto White Balance, and called it "color science". Notice that the warmer photo always "won" the blind test.
p.5 #4 · Struggling with Sony skin tones, want that Canon look, go here -->
We’re open minded, please let us know your definition of “colour science”.
NJPhotographer wrote:
The problem is that Tony doesn't even know what color science is. So he did a test of Auto White Balance, and called it "color science". Notice that the warmer photo always "won" the blind test.
p.5 #5 · Struggling with Sony skin tones, want that Canon look, go here -->
numbertwo wrote:
Pd: there's also this metameric failure of the sensor, achieving every color we want from a raw sometimes is not as easy as it would seem. For example, the Sony sensors often have problems with shades of purple/blues, whereas canon does just fine.
I posted that comparison and was asked about providing RAW files so I could prove the issue. I guess people think I'm bashing Sony or a Canon fanboy....I love both systems and it's just something surprising that I had happen to me. Now, you could say it was a WB issue on one shot, but I had to correct it in every single shot i took of the bride for the day....even formals under very controlled lighting.
I am thankful for "numbertwo" and his efforts to make the Sony colors more like Canon. As I said before, "more accurate colors" doesn't necessarily mean "better pleasing" in regards to skin tones. I will continue to use the profile on all my images.
Some people say the orange/red/magenta of the Canon is too strong....and I agree in some cases it is (I shot Canon for 12 years). But it's easier to tone down "warmness" that it is to take a cool/flat image and make it look "warm" and pleasing....
I'm not a fanboy to any brand, I want the best for me and my clients and Sony is leading that charge.
p.5 #7 · Struggling with Sony skin tones, want that Canon look, go here -->
Todd Baugh wrote:
I posted that comparison and was asked about providing RAW files so I could prove the issue. I guess people think I'm bashing Sony or a Canon fanboy....I love both systems and it's just something surprising that I had happen to me. Now, you could say it was a WB issue on one shot, but I had to correct it in every single shot i took of the bride for the day....even formals under very controlled lighting.
I am thankful for "numbertwo" and his efforts to make the Sony colors more like Canon. As I said before, "more accurate colors" doesn't necessarily mean "better pleasing" in regards to skin tones. I will continue to use the profile on all my images.
Some people say the orange/red/magenta of the Canon is too strong....and I agree in some cases it is (I shot Canon for 12 years). But it's easier to tone down "warmness" that it is to take a cool/flat image and make it look "warm" and pleasing....
I'm not a fanboy to any brand, I want the best for me and my clients and Sony is leading that charge.
Yes, it seems we have a similar taste/eye for colors.
I also have sometimes issues with blue/purples in Sony.
The thing with canon is you can get some colors warmer without warming others too much. In Sony, when you start warming up the picture, the whole thing looks like it has a sepia filter, horrible. That's why most people use to keep the Sony files on the cold side, whereas in canon you can have a warm skin while preserving neutral greys, not as warm blues and greens, etc.
p.5 #8 · Struggling with Sony skin tones, want that Canon look, go here -->
Todd Baugh wrote:
I posted that comparison and was asked about providing RAW files so I could prove the issue. I guess people think I'm bashing Sony or a Canon fanboy....I love both systems and it's just something surprising that I had happen to me. Now, you could say it was a WB issue on one shot, but I had to correct it in every single shot i took of the bride for the day....even formals under very controlled lighting.
I am thankful for "numbertwo" and his efforts to make the Sony colors more like Canon. As I said before, "more accurate colors" doesn't necessarily mean "better pleasing" in regards to skin tones. I will continue to use the profile on all my images.
Some people say the orange/red/magenta of the Canon is too strong....and I agree in some cases it is (I shot Canon for 12 years). But it's easier to tone down "warmness" that it is to take a cool/flat image and make it look "warm" and pleasing....
I'm not a fanboy to any brand, I want the best for me and my clients and Sony is leading that charge.
p.5 #9 · Struggling with Sony skin tones, want that Canon look, go here -->
numbertwo wrote:
Yes, it seems we have a similar taste/eye for colors.
I also have sometimes issues with blue/purples in Sony.
The thing with canon is you can get some colors warmer without warming others too much. In Sony, when you start warming up the picture, the whole thing looks like it has a sepia filter, horrible. That's why most people use to keep the Sony files on the cold side, whereas in canon you can have a warm skin while preserving neutral greys, not as warm blues and greens, etc.
Great. Some desire their Sony cameras produce Canon colors. Knock yourselves out. To each his own. Too many solutions already all over the internet. The pushback comes when comments seek to tear down one system in favor of another.
Plenty of approaches, apps, profiles to managing Sony colors in camera and in post. Plenty, to include calibrating your workflow in order to match images taken from multiple camera brands. No problem there either. Maybe not 100% but more than good enough for most deliverables.
Lens selection also effect colors. I tend to use Batis lenses on Sony cameras, particularly IMO for their unique skin tones produced. Again to each his own and as they, opinions are opinions. Color is just another tool among many.
p.5 #11 · Struggling with Sony skin tones, want that Canon look, go here -->
Thank you Todd. I did take some time to examine your files. I see in the EXIF that Vivid picture mode was selected on the Sony Portrait Style setting. I was able to replicate similar Blue/Purple hair effect by selecting Vivid vs Neutral Creative Styles using your RAW file.
I'm still looking into your Manual WB settings too.
p.5 #12 · Struggling with Sony skin tones, want that Canon look, go here -->
From a picture taken today... Straight out of lightroom defaults, only presets applied.
General view (with my preset based on a7iii v4) general view by Juanma Herrera, en Flickr
Comparison between adobe color, camera standard, my old preset (last preset based on a7rii) and my last preset (a7iii v4)
It's easier to see the differences when switching one after the other instead of side by side, but I find adobe color too yellow for skin, camera standard is a complete mess, and in this case I find my old RRR preset the best, the new one has some color cast in the shadows (I think it would be better to just adjust contrast with curves and no by RGB curves because in different lighting conditions these things can happen).
p.5 #13 · Struggling with Sony skin tones, want that Canon look, go here -->
adobe sucks for sony in LR
flat out sucks.
hue light profiles help a bit, I've written about them quite a bit.
I am in communication with the creator to tweak his files to lean closer to better skin tones.
p.5 #14 · Struggling with Sony skin tones, want that Canon look, go here -->
Dj R wrote:
adobe sucks for sony in LR
flat out sucks.
hue light profiles help a bit, I've written about them quite a bit.
I am in communication with the creator to tweak his files to lean closer to better skin tones.
I bought his profiles for a7r2 and still the skin looked green, I never used them.
I didn't buy them that long ago, it was actually an advanced version, and I was told everytime he updates them, he sends the new versions to their customers.
Anyways, just tested your preset, and at least in my A7III it looks too red to me.
p.5 #19 · Struggling with Sony skin tones, want that Canon look, go here -->
I don't think the solution is a preset on this one, I had previously been playing with calibration for red and green based on several threads posted on this site. This gave better, but not as "pleasing" results as compared to Canon. It's almost as if there is a certain range of colors/skin tones that just don't translate in the RAW file and come out looking like crap/pale/blah in lightroom.
With the profile that was converted and created by "numbertwo" I have gotten very, very pleasing results.
