First test of the DC function
Posted: Wed Sep 03, 2025 9:13 am
The new DC feature, installed in Color Perfect since version 3, is dedicated to color negatives reproduced with a digital camera.
If I understand correctly, as with PerfectRAW, DC recognizes the camera that reproduced the film and adjusts the parameters for that camera. This allows for better and more precise adjustment of the base curve, the color integrity of the sensor, and consequently an optimal starting point, further optimized compared to the previous method.
In fact, it's not that the previous method couldn't achieve good results from color negative reproductions with a digital camera, but it required more work; in my opinion, it wasn't very easy. With DC, it's a whole different story; the file is immediately better balanced, and above all, it offers greater flexibility, resulting in easier optimization. Potentially, you can achieve the same result as a photochemical print—impressive.
I performed the test on a photograph with mixed light temperatures; Ambient tungsten light with a relatively warm cast, flash combined with ambient light—that is, exposure for ambient light, plus fill flash—and finally, the light from the lighter illuminating the hands and slightly the face.
Perhaps not a highly complex situation, but I think it's a good one for the test; those who process digital negatives know that different light temperatures can be difficult to manage all at once in the same frame; if you tend to eliminate the tungsten light cast, then where the flash is, you risk having too much blue, and vice versa, if you tend to balance the cool light from the flash, then the ambient light can appear too yellow.
Sometimes, in balancing the light temperature, the colors lose their integrity, taking on hues that aren't exactly natural, or even pleasant.
In my opinion, in this example, I managed to balance the light temperature fairly well, favoring the cool light of the flash a little more than the warm light of the tungsten.
A personal choice; the opposite could have been done.
What I would like to point out, however, is the quality and integrity of the color, which is not something you can take for granted with a digitized negative.
Thanks to the consistency and credibility of the color, given its integrity and naturalness, you can appreciate all the nuances and hues in the areas with different light temperatures.
We have a subject directly illuminated by the flash, which tends to take on a cool tone, but in less direct areas, it retains an almost natural skin tone, even retaining the natural redness of the skin with hints of yellow/orange from the lighter flame.
In the left background, the white flags are a mix of cold flash light and ambient tungsten light, warm and cold, with a predominance of cold, as the latter, being at a useful distance, are still below the flash beam.
As we move to the right, losing the useful flash beam, the light temperature becomes increasingly warmer, until we reach the window, where we can glimpse the warm cast of the tungsten.
I say glimpse, because it has been deliberately neutralized, but it is still present.
As I said before, the opposite could have been done: leaving more yellow to preserve the ambient light of the tungsten, thus further neutralizing the cold temperature of the flash.
The result in terms of color quality doesn't change; it's just a matter of interpretation.
Personally, I preferred to go this route for two reasons; the first is that, in my opinion, I see the neutrality of a color as tending more toward cold, rather than toward warm. I understand that neutral means neutral, but to me, neutral resembles cold rather than warm.
The second reason is because, above all, I'm interested in the subject, and I find these colors on the skin, which include blue, pink, red, yellow, and orange, to be at the right point to enhance them all simultaneously. The hands and face express the full chromatic strength of this image. I wouldn't have had the same impression with a higher level of yellow.
The negative in question is a Perutz Primera 400 ISO film, which is also expired, although the fact that it's expired doesn't really mean much.
So, although it looks like a film with some Agfa formula, it has nothing professional about it; it's just a common amateur film.
In ColorNEG, I opted for the Kodak Gold film profile (GA 100-6) because, in this case, it seemed like the best starting point. I was pretty quick in my choice. Perhaps, with more thorough research, I could have identified some Agfa film, but I'm still very satisfied.
Well, it may not be perfect, but I've never before achieved a result like this from a color negative reproduced by a digital camera.
What I'm seeing looks like the same thing you can get from a photochemical print, maybe even better.
If I understand correctly, as with PerfectRAW, DC recognizes the camera that reproduced the film and adjusts the parameters for that camera. This allows for better and more precise adjustment of the base curve, the color integrity of the sensor, and consequently an optimal starting point, further optimized compared to the previous method.
In fact, it's not that the previous method couldn't achieve good results from color negative reproductions with a digital camera, but it required more work; in my opinion, it wasn't very easy. With DC, it's a whole different story; the file is immediately better balanced, and above all, it offers greater flexibility, resulting in easier optimization. Potentially, you can achieve the same result as a photochemical print—impressive.
I performed the test on a photograph with mixed light temperatures; Ambient tungsten light with a relatively warm cast, flash combined with ambient light—that is, exposure for ambient light, plus fill flash—and finally, the light from the lighter illuminating the hands and slightly the face.
Perhaps not a highly complex situation, but I think it's a good one for the test; those who process digital negatives know that different light temperatures can be difficult to manage all at once in the same frame; if you tend to eliminate the tungsten light cast, then where the flash is, you risk having too much blue, and vice versa, if you tend to balance the cool light from the flash, then the ambient light can appear too yellow.
Sometimes, in balancing the light temperature, the colors lose their integrity, taking on hues that aren't exactly natural, or even pleasant.
In my opinion, in this example, I managed to balance the light temperature fairly well, favoring the cool light of the flash a little more than the warm light of the tungsten.
A personal choice; the opposite could have been done.
What I would like to point out, however, is the quality and integrity of the color, which is not something you can take for granted with a digitized negative.
Thanks to the consistency and credibility of the color, given its integrity and naturalness, you can appreciate all the nuances and hues in the areas with different light temperatures.
We have a subject directly illuminated by the flash, which tends to take on a cool tone, but in less direct areas, it retains an almost natural skin tone, even retaining the natural redness of the skin with hints of yellow/orange from the lighter flame.
In the left background, the white flags are a mix of cold flash light and ambient tungsten light, warm and cold, with a predominance of cold, as the latter, being at a useful distance, are still below the flash beam.
As we move to the right, losing the useful flash beam, the light temperature becomes increasingly warmer, until we reach the window, where we can glimpse the warm cast of the tungsten.
I say glimpse, because it has been deliberately neutralized, but it is still present.
As I said before, the opposite could have been done: leaving more yellow to preserve the ambient light of the tungsten, thus further neutralizing the cold temperature of the flash.
The result in terms of color quality doesn't change; it's just a matter of interpretation.
Personally, I preferred to go this route for two reasons; the first is that, in my opinion, I see the neutrality of a color as tending more toward cold, rather than toward warm. I understand that neutral means neutral, but to me, neutral resembles cold rather than warm.
The second reason is because, above all, I'm interested in the subject, and I find these colors on the skin, which include blue, pink, red, yellow, and orange, to be at the right point to enhance them all simultaneously. The hands and face express the full chromatic strength of this image. I wouldn't have had the same impression with a higher level of yellow.
The negative in question is a Perutz Primera 400 ISO film, which is also expired, although the fact that it's expired doesn't really mean much.
So, although it looks like a film with some Agfa formula, it has nothing professional about it; it's just a common amateur film.
In ColorNEG, I opted for the Kodak Gold film profile (GA 100-6) because, in this case, it seemed like the best starting point. I was pretty quick in my choice. Perhaps, with more thorough research, I could have identified some Agfa film, but I'm still very satisfied.
Well, it may not be perfect, but I've never before achieved a result like this from a color negative reproduced by a digital camera.
What I'm seeing looks like the same thing you can get from a photochemical print, maybe even better.
.