alschlafli Loc: Colorado Springs

Ten years ago I had my first cataract surgery in my left eye. This past summer I finally gave in and did the right eye. The results were amazing - prior to the 2nd surgery, the view in my left eye was noticeably darker. After the surgery, the right eye was NOW noticeably darker. And the left eye was noticeably sharper. Age has taken its toll on the lens in the right eye both darkening and loss of focus I think I had originally.

I accept what it is... and realize when I alter a photo, it is to my liking. Most people will accept it "as is".

Ysarex Loc: St. Louis

You have not answered my question.
You said; "That's how I discovered that your "custom input profile" was artificial. It cannot be 'accurate.'"
It's established I never said the custom profile was accurate. AGAIN here's the question: Are you trying to misrepresent what I said?

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

Asked and answered. Get a life.

Ysarex Loc: St. Louis

I'll take that as a yes then. You did deliberately try and misrepresent what I said.

louparker Loc: Scottsdale, AZ

You see images differently because the eye that had cataract surgery has a new, clear lens while the other eye has the lens you were born with which has become cloudy and yellowish. I recently had cataract surgery in both eyes (one at a time) and it was very apparent that viewing images with just the surgical eye was sharp and no yellow cast, while the other eye was not, but when I had the cataract surgery on the other eye, everthing was much sharper, colors were true and brighter and no yellow cast.

MJPerini

@ Ysrex Has this one right, especially here......
All you're saying is that NX-Studio is the only way to process NEF files and get Nikon's own camera input profiles. That's correct. And you're right there's a difference. They're all different one from another. You're wrong if you suggest it's a quality difference. It's fine for you to prefer the results produced by Nikon's input profiles. It's just as fine for someone else to prefer an alternative."

When you say silly stuff like 'I rest my case' AND base it on what your lab tech told you, you should know you are on shaky ground.
Let me give an example , I shoot Canon, My daughter shoots Nikon. We often take pictures of the same stuff. We each get some good ones, The colors are different. We each own and have used the manufacturer's software, we both switched to different much more powerful Editing Apps, we can each get great color that prints well.

Every camera manufacturer has a look that they prefer, Their proprietary editing software reinforces that look.
They are all more or less pleasing. But NONE of them are Correct in any objective Colorimetric sense.
Especially once you start pushing sliders.
My background is from commercial advertising Photography, I've done a fair amount of color matching. Even the best available cameras need tweaking for color matching.
The reason for that is that the camera companies do not aim for accuracy alone, it is more "Generally accurate but Pleasing" Thats why everyone's version is slightly different. And that is OK

So If you Like the color you get from Nikon's software, by all means use it, be happy, but don't try to extrapolate that into some sort of revealed color truth, that is somehow more correct than what (most) other people do.
It is simply not the case.
Good luck

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

Wrong on both counts. Your own words were enough.

Retina Loc: Near Charleston,SC

Q: When does blue return and the blues go away?
A: Upon cataract surgery.

Ysarex Loc: St. Louis

No. You wrote this: "That's how I discovered that your "custom input profile" was artificial. It cannot be 'accurate.'"

You're addressing me. You put custom input profile and accurate in quotes as attributable to me. That misrepresents what I said as I never claimed the custom input profile was accurate only that it was more or most accurate when compared with the results from the two generic profiles.

You misrepresented what I said and your comment hinges on that misrepresentation. If you didn't do it deliberately then how did it happen? Do you have poor reading skills? Are you just too lazy and sloppy to take the time to read and think carefully? Why did you misrepresent what I said?

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

You are making yourself look bad. You need to find someone less intelligent than yourself to argue with, if you can.

JBGLADSTONE Loc: Oregon

I kinda got lost with all the different replies to each other.

My question is in ON1 2024.1 I can select ON1 or Camera settings like ,"Landscape ". Does the mean My Canon 80D is using Canon RAW instead of ON1 RAW for bases of editing?
I guess I should list the steps I take when editing on ON1: 1] I crop 2] No Noise 3] Then I select Tone and Color 4] This is where select either ON1 or Canon for base settings in RAW.

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

"When you say NX-Studio renders TRUE colors what you really mean is NIKON colors correct?" YES, from what I know.
"When you say NX-Studio renders ACCURATE colors what you really mean is NIKON colors correct?" YES, from what I know.
"When you say NX-Studio renders BEST colors what you really mean is NIKON colors correct?" YES, from what I know.

Please, understand that when I say TRUE, ACCURATE and BEST I am saying what I have been told by my printing technician, Olympus and Nikon referring to proprietary software. If not printing it makes no big difference the colors being reproduced online.
If you are using an editor that is not proprietary software, like Lightroom and you are happy with your prints simply ignore me. I am not here to tell others what they should do with their prints.

I calibrate my monitor every two weeks and I only use Nikon and OM Workspace software to edit and obviously, other editing softwares if I need to do further work. I am happy with my prints.
In order to put an end to this discussion my advise is that each one of us should use the editor that best satisfies the colors each one of us like.

Thank you for participating in my thread.

Ysarex Loc: St. Louis

No. You're using On1 as a raw file processor and the input profiles that are available are supplied by and created by the On1 technicians. It's typical for the various processing apps to provided a simulation that they create of the input profiles offered by your camera -- they try and reverse engineer them.

On1 is a full featured raw processor and as expected supports the use of custom camera input profiles. You can create your own or find profiles for download.

You can hand process raw files and get Canon's original input profiles for your camera by using DPP as a processing app, but Canon does not make those profiles available for use in On1.

goofybruce

This is an unsustainable debate/argument.

As has been said: "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder." Everyone's eyes/brain/emotions (at that particular moment) all play a part in how we perceive "that picture." Line up a dozen photographers overlooking the Grand Canyon and you will get at least 240 different shots (all will insist on taking more than one, and when you have zoom lenses to frame the view, etc., my estimation is probably greatly underestimated). And I'll bet every one of those individual shots will have several "finished" prints.

So why argue over what is "real" because there a multiplicity of opinions as to what "beauty" is.
In fact, nobody is really sure who first coined the phrase: (the following are copied and pasted, which is also not "real."

1. Margaret Wolfe Hungerford (née Hamilton) is widely credited with coining the saying in its current form. Hungerford wrote many books, often under the pseudonym of 'The Duchess'. In the 1878 novel Molly Bawn, there's the line "It is an old axiom, and well said, that “beauty is in the eye of the beholder".

2. Shakespeare expressed a similar sentiment in “Love's Labours Lost” which read, “Beauty is bought by judgment of the eye.”

3. Miss Piggy summed this conversation best: “Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and it may be necessary from time to time to give a stupid or misinformed beholder a black eye!”

...and yes, all those quotes were taken from a computer search...

goofybruce

....as a follow up to my immediately past post: I grew up in northern New Hampshire, and my dad worked in a creamery owned by Whiting's Milk Company, based in Boston. The company's advertising slogan was "There is a difference!"

Now, I don't know who originated it, or if it was part of the company's advertising, but posted in the local creamery was a drawing of two diapered kids pulling out the front of their single piece of clothing. The two children, who looked like twins were looking down into the front of the diaper of the one beside them. The company's slogan was printed below the drawing.