on.raw.photography

Hello,
Hello Christoph.
I am writing from Italy. My name is Roberto and I am passionate about photography.
I have been practicing photography since the late 1980s, first with analog techniques and then with digital technology.
I have come to the conclusion that for me there is no difference between the two technologies, or rather, there is obviously a difference, but it is irrelevant when it comes to conveying a message or an emotion.
I see digital photography much more simply as the evolution, the continuation of analog photography, understood as photography in the broadest sense, and I find that this is how digital photography should be considered and treated.

Come to think of it, I realize that both technologies have their pros and cons. Pros and cons that we are probably all familiar with and that I won't list here, but just to give an example, if it is true that black and white printing on analog baryta paper is unmatched by digital techniques, it is equally true that digital color printing is, perhaps, unmatched by analog techniques. At least, personally, as far as I can remember, if we exclude Cibachrome, all other color papers, whether glossy or matte, have never given me the satisfaction that a good digital print on quality matte paper gives me. The analog prints were certainly beautiful, they were beautiful for their time. Today, these refined papers, with their finishes and textures, are truly superlative.

And to think that at first I disliked digital photography. For me, there was no comparison with analog photography, from every point of view. At first, with digital, I only took color photographs, because black and white seemed unwatchable to me. Then I started doing only black and white, because color seemed fake to me, especially the colors; beautiful, striking, but I found them false, unrealistic.
So, for me, at that time, there was a huge difference between analog and digital photography. And it stayed that way for many years.

In forums, people exchanged ideas and discussed how to get the best out of digital colors. It was a problem common to many, if not all. The real problem was not color balance or white balance, but rather color quality, purity, and integrity.
It cannot be said that analog films have the most natural colors; all films are calibrated to warmer or cooler colors, calibrated to yellow and red rather than green and blue, but for those like me who come from analog, the colors of analog are more credible or more pleasing than those of digital, at least I think so, that's how it is for me.

Then, during various discussions, the name Color Perfect software came up, which, according to some, was the best tool for getting the most out of digital colors, and also the best way to process film scans.

At that moment, I immediately went to download the software, and indeed, after a few tests, I immediately realized that it was something different, something I had never seen before, at least on my part.

But I made a mistake, alas, a big mistake; I underestimated it, or rather, I took it lightly, I didn't give it the consideration it deserved, I tried it for a very short time, maybe just a couple of photos. I can't say exactly why, I guess because I found the adjustment tools more complicated, because I would have had to change my workflow, perhaps because my mind was programmed in a completely different way; basically, for me, at that time, the colors were those produced by the most renowned software, and those were the colors to be adjusted, to be made natural, intact, and pure. So I gave up on Color Perfect. I hadn't yet realized that the issue was completely different from what I thought. That natural, intact, and pure color was a whole other story. I should have re-educated my eye right away. Instead, I did it several years later.

So I continued on my way, still dissatisfied with my colors.

Until, a few years later, feeling more dissatisfied than ever, I remembered Color Perfect, and without thinking too much about it, I purchased a license and discovered that Color Perfect wasn't that difficult to use after all.

Well, since then, perhaps, I haven't always been satisfied with my results, but this time it's my fault, because of my abilities, or lack thereof. But every time I process an image, I am amazed by the beauty of Color Perfect's colors. I swear, I am speechless, my jaw drops, I can hardly believe it, it doesn't seem possible. Yet there it is, the most beautiful color in the world. So beautiful that when I get the color calibration wrong, when I have a dominant color that's not quite right, it's still beautiful.
In short, I believe that the true colors of your sensor can only be achieved through Color Perfect; I don't think there is any other software capable of doing so much.

And to think that I used to believe in the difference between analog and digital, but Color Perfect has changed my mind, at least as far as color is concerned, but not only that.
Now, with a little grain added to the file, preferably analog, I prefer to print my digital color photos on high-quality digital paper rather than a color negative printed on photochemical paper. In any case, I prefer to print the same color negative on digital paper.

Perhaps for some it may seem like heresy, perhaps it is, or perhaps not, but as far as I'm concerned, the color of Color Perfect is real, natural, pure, intact, and better than any analog film I've ever tried. It's certainly more beautiful. Again, from my point of view, with Color Perfect, you don't even need film simulations anymore, because here, with color, you go beyond analog and various digital simulations. I've never seen color of this quality, not even on film. It becomes difficult to want, and perhaps imagine, more.

I am not an expert, neither in analog nor digital, and I have never been particularly interested in technology, but these are my visual and tactile perceptions.
I probably do not yet know how to get the most out of Color Perfect, but I am already very satisfied with the results I am achieving, which are the best I have ever obtained.

In the meantime, I continue to take photographs, both analog and digital.
I generally define my work as documentary, searching for themes of life and my subjects in everyday life.
The landscapes themselves represent for me a document free from the concept of aesthetics, representing reality as it is, as it appears to me, but also as I would like it to be. Almost like a snapshot to take home, where nothing is organized, as in a chance encounter. These are my photographs; encountered by chance.
I do reportage, but often I am simply attracted by something; a color, a shape, a light, a subject, an everyday scene that I capture instantly.
Composing a photograph is first and foremost a personal matter; curiosity drives me to continually seek to know and understand the world.
I believe that every photographer, always and in every case, photographs for themselves, first and foremost for themselves. Personally, I do it to remember, to learn, to express myself. To experience that romantic feeling of seeing something I have already seen; I was there, I was there. Then, only later, to show others that unrepeatable moment. To tell my story, trying to bring my own emotions to life, or rather, to bring the emotions of others to life.

In addition to more traditional systems, I like to take my photographs with toy cameras and/or lenses and pinhole cameras. I am also interested in experimenting with digital techniques to recreate the pictorialism of the late 19th century in a modern key, giving images that dreamlike, poetic quality that has been lost today.

My thanks, for all those times I fill my eyes with color, go to those two philosophers of color, rebellious geniuses of photo editing, Christoph and Dave.

Roberto,
thank you for such a generous introduction. Reading your reflections touched me deeply. What you describe — from your first frustrations with digital color to the moment when ColorPerfect suddenly opened up something entirely different — is not only moving, but also rare to see put into words so clearly.

That observation of yours, “when I have a dominant color that's not quite right, it's still beautiful”, goes deeper. What you are sensing there is the hallmark of complete color integrity: the relationships inside the colors remain intact, so your perception has room to adapt. Light still feels like light — whether a little warmer, a little cooler, somewhat tinted, or somewhere in between. That is why a surprisingly wide range of balances can still feel natural, and why the results stop collapsing into the “dead” look so common elsewhere.

Dave and I set out on the same quest for our own photography. We were fortunate enough to cross paths, and to bring together everything that was needed between the two of us to make this possible — something totally unlikely, and all the more precious because of it.

Grazie mille, and welcome — I’m glad you’re here.
— Christoph

Christoph,

“Something completely improbable, and therefore even more precious.” These words perfectly describe Color Perfect.

Thank you for the welcome, I am very pleased to be here.

You see, I started out as a photographer and became a black and white printer in the darkroom. But I also became a color printer, using mechanical systems such as mini-labs.
I gained a little experience in printing. I developed a decent eye for color and tone corrections and exposure. Not at a high level, but still more than enough to evaluate the results.

The point is that, for me, with backlit systems such as computers, I find it much more difficult to evaluate dominants, exposures, and contrasts. Especially since I don't have the possibility of immediate feedback through paper printing.

Color Perfect, with its color, made me feel like I had “arrived.” Arrived, yes, arrived at a new starting point. All this quality at your disposal encourages you to achieve more, always better. If it is true that with Color Perfect you are immediately satisfied, it is equally true that you then want to achieve the maximum possible.

Precisely because with Color Perfect you realize that this is the right path, the one you always had in mind but that no software has ever given you the chance to achieve.
But then, of course, I have to deal with my inability to evaluate, as described above.

Consequently, even though I am very satisfied with the results I am achieving, I realize that I am not yet able to use Color Perfect to its full potential.

What does this mean? Simply that I aspire to achieve the best results in my work.
And what confirms this? The fact that every time I redo a job, it turns out better. It is also true that sometimes I get confused and have to reevaluate my workflow. But overall, I tend to improve.

I know I'm still a little way off what I want to express with my work. But Color Perfect encourages you to seek it and achieve it. It's not that my work isn't good, even if it's done with other software. It's just that if you're lucky enough to come across Color Perfect, your vision changes completely, and my current vision is fully aligned with the philosophy and science of color in Color Perfect.

If there is a bit of frustration in what I have said, it is due to the fact that I have thousands of images to process and make consistent with each other using Color Perfect.
What's more, I continue to produce more and more images.
My goal is simply to complete my work, making it credible and consistent across the board. To do this, I chose Color Perfect.
You don't have to be a professional or a great artist to do this. All you need is to believe in what you do. All you need is to be passionate, maybe even a little purist.

I would like to add that this is not a rant, but an authentic testimony that aims to be, without presumption, constructive and open to discussion for those who, like me, want and seek to do something extraordinary with photography. Something extraordinary for oneself, something that, once printed, lasts forever, or almost forever. Because photography, as visual communication, is powerful. It tells us about things we have never seen, it makes the invisible visible, you just have to look back to see times gone by, it immortalizes you, and portraits are the most difficult thing to do.

The topics discussed in the forum are very interesting, and it will be fascinating to exchange ideas and opinions with other users in order to learn and improve your workflow and, why not, your vision of photography. Showing your work and sharing files for different processing and interpretations is not only fun, but also a useful source of inspiration that will enrich your personal experience.

Hi Roberto!

First of all, I greatly appreciated reading your introduction, and how your path was shaped chasing what you consider the perfect colors. Not Analog, Not Digital, doesn't matter, as long as it looks right to your eyes.

I am another ColorPerfect Beta Tester just like you , having been kindly offered this opportunity by Christoph,

I too was intimidated initially with ColorPerfect, and it took me some courage to go ahead and try until I realized I only needed to adjust a few of its sliders and it would output a file with enormous latitude, that I can later edit to whatever vision I want.

Your words touch a possibility that I have never considered before, bringing my Digital Files to CP to extract the most out of the Raw Data. I always used it solely for Analog Scans, without ever crossing my mind the science behind it could greatly benefit digital files as well. Now I have to try it!

Greetings from Portugal!

Alexis M.

Hi Alexis,

Yes, as I like to say, and I say it because I believe it, because I see it with my own eyes, Color Perfect's color goes beyond analog.
As far as I'm concerned, it's simply better in its purity, naturalness, and integrity. It's a color of superior quality never seen before.
I'd be willing to bet that, if post-processed well, no big name in the world of photography would argue otherwise, be it a photographer, technician, or printer.

And to think that I still don't post-produce it perfectly, this fact is evident to me right away, even though I still can't adjust it perfectly. But finally, the results are starting to show.
The great thing is that you don't even need to achieve perfection, total neutrality, for two simple reasons; the first, as I said, is that imperfect is still good.
The second is that, paradoxically, when it's perfect, it's so damn perfect that it can even seem sterile, clinical, cynical, perhaps impersonal, perhaps boring.
I mean, as far as I'm concerned, we're talking about absolute perfection, and I'm not sure absolute perfection is a good thing. It's funny, I know
But it's a paradox. We're here discussing how to make color imperfect because when we perfect it, it's too much. Exactly the opposite of what we ask of all the other software. Really funny.

My journey with Color Perfect, unlike yours, began with digital files and then with scans.

I would strongly recommend you try it with digital files.
While films can be poorly developed with C41, rather than E6, and can even have their fixer a little worn out, deteriorating their integrity over time, with digital files this can't happen; you get perfect files that last over time.

So, from the few scan tests I've done, considering the drawbacks described above, and considering my incompetence due to my lack of experience, it's precisely with digital files that I was amazed by Color Perfect's color.

In fact, Color Perfect made me realize how extraordinary digital sensors are in terms of color quality—in fact, better than film, it's just that no one knows.

There are two possibilities: either the sensors are extraordinary in color quality, and Color Perfect is extraordinary in interpreting them in the best possible way, or the latter works miracles.
I dare not imagine Sigma's Foveon matrix being fed to Color Perfect, but directly with the X3F extension and not DNG. In any case, with DNG, they are already extraordinary.

I'll tell you more: where is it written that Color Perfect isn't also Perfect Black and White?

When I have to do a black and white conversion, I always start with Color Perfect's color.
After that, there are several ways to convert, even with Color Perfect itself.

This color image is one of the last files I post-processed with Color Perfect.
Generated by a Fujifilm X-Pro2 with a Leica-M 90mm Summicron pre-aspherical lens.

This black and white image was generated by a rather older Canon 30D with a Canon L-series 16-35 II f/2.8 lens.

If you love the color of Color Perfect, you'll be amazed by the rendering of your files.

Greetings from Italy

Roberto

Hi Roberto!

To add another Cons of Color Film, I can't develop it myself! Just today I had to go Downtown, full of traffic, no place to park the car, just to have two rolls developed. As much as I love the color of Analog Film, the effort is huge, also the cost are constantly rising. Black & White is a different matter. I don't think one can get from Digital Sensors what a fine well developed B&W Film full of Silver Halide Cristals. Maybe the 10 thousand euros Leica Monochrome gets closer. Developing it is also a process easy to accomplish at home, and the cost of chemicals is very low, and they have very long shelf life. For me, it's also a therapeutical process, I love the process of making an image appear out of nowhere, without a single bit of 0 and 1s ever touching in the entire process. It feels like magic, no matter how much I do it!

Now, I tried a few digital photos I have using ColorPerfect in it's Perfect Raw functionality, after being impressed by how well regarded you have it for processing your digital files. I always shoot a ColorChecker Chart for multiple experiments, so I compared the Nikon Flat Profile made specifically for the Nikon Zf, which should be the closest thing to as neutral and linear as possible, to the same Raw converted by ColorPerfect.

The color I noticed the most difference was the Red. The Nikon had the Red toward a Firefighter Truck, while ColorPerfect depicted a Red that had more of a red wine. I was thinking ColorPerfect wasn't correct, so much so that I got the ColorChecker to hold in front of the screen and compare with the output of both pictures. To my surprise, the Red that matched the ColorChecker almost perfectly was the one from ColorPerfect! So you can call me impressed!

I will keep doing more experimentations! Lovely images above! I see you are adapting a Leica Lens with Digital Camera, I am doing similar, adapting my Zeiss 35mm 2.8 Biogon M Mount to the Nikon Zf, and it looks amazing!

Cheers!

Hi Alexis,

How can I argue with you about black and white? When we print it on silver gelatin paper, there's no comparison, except platinum palladium, which is still analog.

As far as I'm concerned, Leica wins every time
Sigma's Foveon is impressive in color, which is typically analog, thanks to its layered sensor that replicates film, but it has its drawbacks. In fact, however, it remains the most beautiful to look at, both in terms of color and extraordinary detail. It's an APS-C/H, but for detail, it has no equal, even compared to Full Frame.
For black and white, I consider it inferior only to the Leica Monochrome. In my opinion, not even the Pentax Monochrome comes close to that depth of tone, which the Pentax already has.

So, Sigma's color sensor, processed in black and white, beats practically everything. Leica doesn't count because it's out of competition

For developing color film, a motorcycle is a good idea

Yes, photography is therapeutic for everyone, for those who create it and for those who enjoy it.

Firefighters are heroes, but red wine is good.
You may have memorized red, all reds, and all the other colors you see in any other photo editing software, even the most renowned ones, which, in my opinion, interpret the color of your sensor, while Color Perfect gives you the color of your sensor.
By using Color Perfect regularly, you re-educate your eye and reprogram your mind. Excellent for your photography.
This happened to me; you begin to see colors for what they should be; not with a wow factor and as unreal.
Colors are a serious matter, not fantastical.

Trust me, there's nothing like Color Perfect. Don't waste your time experimenting. Start post-producing your files as if you were printing them for a solo exhibition.

Let's do this: if you bring me something better than Color Perfect, I'll buy you a drink

Colorful phantasmagorical illusions aside.
I mean, the color we've been accustomed to seeing is a beautiful and wonderful illusion, it feels like we're in a fairy tale, everything is the same captivating colors—false, but captivating.
But as I was saying, color is important, it's a serious thing, it's communication, it sends messages, it makes us see things one way rather than another, it's psychology.
It's up to us to understand which is the right way to see.
This is why I awarded Color Perfect the title of rebel philosopher.

Your Zeiss lens is beautiful, a true rival to Leica.
Two different philosophies, both excellent, to achieve the best quality.
For me, quality isn't an MTF test, but the overall appearance a lens gives us.
They're both my favorite lenses, with a stronger preference for Leitz.
Again, in my opinion, I'd put Voigtlander in third place. Well, we can't forget Schneider, Rodenstock, and Meyer Optik Görlitz on the same level.
Coincidentally, all the best lenses are German.

See you soon

Roberto

In the meantime I'm trying to improve my work with PerfectRAW.

Then one wonders why I should ever use PerfectRAW

Now, this photo is destined for another stage. It's not finished, it's "just" processed with PerfectRAW, and then completed with a painting simulation.

I mean, it's almost a shame not to leave it in color.
But I say, who else can give us color like this?

It's impressive.
The colors that come out of Color Perfect are always impressive, but with certain photographs, they're even more impressive.
For me, this is one of those photographs.

Okay, let's consider the excellent color balance in terms of the dominant color, and we're pretty good so far.
But the color itself, its quality, its integrity.

How is it possible to get grass green like this against the light?

It's a case of looking out the window.