Photos darken from PS to Camera Raw

[bags27]

Don't know if this is the right Forum.

It has been the case over the last couple of major PS upgrades that when I send a photo from PS back to CR on my Macbook Pro with an M1 pro processor that the photo darkens a lot and editing is hit or miss. In the past, I somehow got into the CR settings and disabled part of something or another and it worked, despite a warning that that would soon be disabled. I guess the time is now. With the latest version of PS/CR, I can't seem to bring my photos into CR without them darkening excessively. I'm running Sonoma 14.1.2 if that matters.

These are scans of film negatives by a Panasonic S1R, with no jpgs, only the Panasonic RW2, and converted into tifs by negative lab pro in lightroom.

I googled and folks said turn off the active d-lightening in the camera (whatever that is). But there's nothing in the Panasonic manual or anywhere else that I can find for that.

thanks!

Suggestions?

 

[wiltw]

Do both programs have a setup that both recognizes monitor calibration file usage? It sounds as if one of the program knows about monitor calibration file while the other does not.

 

[bags27]

Thanks. That may have done it. I dunno. I also think I was asymetrical in displaying 8 and 16 bit and now have them both in 8.

 

[koraks]

Do both programs have a setup that both recognizes monitor calibration file usage?

Yeah, sounds like an ICC profile issue, maybe.

@bags27 what are your color management settings in PS and CR?

 

[nmp]

Don't know if this is the right Forum.

It has been the case over the last couple of major PS upgrades that when I send a photo from PS back to CR on my Macbook Pro with an M1 pro processor that the photo darkens a lot and editing is hit or miss. In the past, I somehow got into the CR settings and disabled part of something or another and it worked, despite a warning that that would soon be disabled. I guess the time is now. With the latest version of PS/CR, I can't seem to bring my photos into CR without them darkening excessively. I'm running Sonoma 14.1.2 if that matters.

These are scans of film negatives by a Panasonic S1R, with no jpgs, only the Panasonic RW2, and converted into tifs by negative lab pro in lightroom.

I googled and folks said turn off the active d-lightening in the camera (whatever that is). But there's nothing in the Panasonic manual or anywhere else that I can find for that.

thanks!

Suggestions?

Active d-lighting is a Nikon feature - not sure Panasonic would have the same feature. In any case, once it is out of the camera, it shouldn't make a difference in various Adobe applications as long as correct/same colorspace (AdobeRGB, sRGB etc) is used.

I am not sure I understand why you have to to go back to CR after working on it in LR. Can you not do whatever additional work on the file in LR itself in the raw format before sending it over to PS. Then if you want additional changes, send it back and forth between PS and LR and not involve CR at all. I limit myself to CR/PS combo so I am not fully in tune with the differences in capability between LR and CR, but as far as I understand, LR has everything that CR has and more.

:Niranjan.

 

[bags27]

Active d-lighting is a Nikon feature - not sure Panasonic would have the same feature. In any case, once it is out of the camera, it shouldn't make a difference in various Adobe applications as long as correct/same colorspace (AdobeRGB, sRGB etc) is used.

I am not sure I understand why you have to to go back to CR after working on it in LR. Can you not do whatever additional work on the file in LR itself in the raw format before sending it over to PS. Then if you want additional changes, send it back and forth between PS and LR and not involve CR at all. I limit myself to CR/PS combo so I am not fully in tune with the differences in capability between LR and CR, but as far as I understand, LR has everything that CR has and more.

:Niranjan.

Thanks about d-lighting. I was wondering about that.

Negative Lab Pro "develops" the negatives in LR. So then I send them to PS and go back and forth, like you, in PS and CR.

 

[bags27]

Yeah, sounds like an ICC profile issue, maybe.

@bags27 what are your color management settings in PS and CR?

Thanks so much. For complete cyber idiots like myself, how do I find this. I can see the color management on CR, for which I selected Adobe RGB (1998) 8 bits, but I don't see how to do it in PS.

 

[bags27]

Thanks so much. For complete cyber idiots like myself, how do I find this. I can see the color management on CR, for which I selected Adobe RGB (1998) 8 bits, but I don't see how to do it in PS.

okay. found it in PS under edit--> color settings and set that the same. Still happens.
Maybe it's one of these? I don't know why they were set this way:

 

[wiltw]

Thanks so much. For complete cyber idiots like myself, how do I find this. I can see the color management on CR, for which I selected Adobe RGB (1998) 8 bits, but I don't see how to do it in PS.

There are two different concepts to understand the existence of each

• workspace is how the program works with the image data, in terms of 'color space' or 'gamut' (RGB vs. aRGB vs 'Melissa' or Prophoto RGB) , and in terms of number of bits-per-color
• 'calibration' deals with corrective actions to portray hues on monitors and (separately) on printers to more faithfully reproduced the hues

ICC profiles are files created for individual monitors or for individual priinters, that are used by individual application programs, to more faithfully reproduce hues.
CR might use a different profile to correct a NEC 1234 monitor than the profile that PS uses to correct for the same NEC 1234 monitor, and the two profiles might reside in different folders of your harddrive. If the profile was created incorrectly for one of the applications, or if one of the applications is simply looking at the wrong filename, the monitor could display the same image very differently.

What you found, illustrated in post 8, is yet another manner in which the application might be adjusted, again different from workspace or profile.

 

[koraks]

ICC profiles are files created for individual monitors or for individual priinters

And capture devices such as cameras. Although most cameras will just output something in either sRGB or Adobe RGB space.

I can see the color management on CR, for which I selected Adobe RGB (1998) 8 bits

OK, so first of all I'd suggest doing all editing in 16 bit and only downsample to 8 bit when the time comes to save as e.g. jpeg to prevent posterization.

Secondly, if you work in CR in Adobe RGB, ensure that your files are actually saved in that space in PS when bringing files from PS to CR. If PS is saving your files as sRGB and CR interprets them as Adobe RGB, you'll definitely see some weird stuff color-wise. Part of your problem may be gamma differences; if you save a file with e.g. gamma 1.8 (e.g. ProPhotoRGB) and then have an application open it thinking it's gamma 2.2 (e.g. Adobe RGB), it'll be flat and dark.

Although like @nmp I'm not entirely sure why you'd go from PS to CR; CR is typically the in-between step between your camera and whatever output for your images, where you interpret a RAW file into a regular computer editable and printable format and then do further processing in e.g. PS. From there, there's generally no need and no advantage in going back to CR again.

 

[bags27]

And capture devices such as cameras. Although most cameras will just output something in either sRGB or Adobe RGB space.



OK, so first of all I'd suggest doing all editing in 16 bit and only downsample to 8 bit when the time comes to save as e.g. jpeg to prevent posterization.

Secondly, if you work in CR in Adobe RGB, ensure that your files are actually saved in that space in PS when bringing files from PS to CR. If PS is saving your files as sRGB and CR interprets them as Adobe RGB, you'll definitely see some weird stuff color-wise. Part of your problem may be gamma differences; if you save a file with e.g. gamma 1.8 (e.g. ProPhotoRGB) and then have an application open it thinking it's gamma 2.2 (e.g. Adobe RGB), it'll be flat and dark.

Although like @nmp I'm not entirely sure why you'd go from PS to CR; CR is typically the in-between step between your camera and whatever output for your images, where you interpret a RAW file into a regular computer editable and printable format and then do further processing in e.g. PS. From there, there's generally no need and no advantage in going back to CR again.

Thanks so much for this.
I used to do all editing in 16 bit, but found it made little difference and added keystrokes. But I take your point and will change that.

My workflow is: running Negative Lab Pro in LR and sending it to PS. I edit it there and in CR. I find that CR has certain tools (like the horizon leveling and certain color tools) that are just easier/better than what PS has. So, I dod go back and forth.

I'll check the color space that I'm saving stuff in, but, yes, the gamma difference is something that makes entire sense, too.

Thanks!!

 

[koraks]

You're welcome. It's tedious stuff, but it helps to build a basic awareness of color management so you know how to avoid the major pitfalls. Personally, I generally go to sRGB as quickly as possible (if I don't already start in that space) and then keep it there. Since most of the world assumes sRGB anyway, it's a safe bet, and the penalty of the smaller color space than e.g. Adobe RGB is in practice not a major issue.

 

[wiltw]

Thanks so much for this.
I used to do all editing in 16 bit, but found it made little difference and added keystrokes. But I take your point and will change that.

My workflow is: running Negative Lab Pro in LR and sending it to PS. I edit it there and in CR. I find that CR has certain tools (like the horizon leveling and certain color tools) that are just easier/better than what PS has. So, I dod go back and forth.

I'll check the color space that I'm saving stuff in, but, yes, the gamma difference is something that makes entire sense, too.

Thanks!!

You do not itemize specific functions that you find within CR, but we can point out with certaintly that once your NLP data has gone into LR, LR has a very fine horizon leveling capability, so there is no reason to have to use CR for that function. More than likely LR has same/similar color tools, too.

 

[bags27]

You do not itemize specific functions that you find within CR, but we can point out with certaintly that once your NLP data has gone into LR, LR has a very fine horizon leveling capability, so there is no reason to have to use CR for that function. More than likely LR has same/similar color tools, too.

That may be for most of you, but it's my work flow. I don't like, never have liked, LR aesthetics. I prefer to work in CR and I should be able to.

I'll keep messing with the settings of PS and CR until I regain the interchangeability.