# Color accurate Camera for Car photography



## 360carstudio.de (Dec 8, 2021)

Hey im really tired.

Im looking for a Camera that gives me Most accurate colors.

Im so tired of Reading and trying around, idont have words for that. I try for years for a solution.

We using CRI95 flouriscent Lights with 6500k and varoius LED Lights, also Hensel Studio flashes.

We try Colorchecker Digital with Xrite Software, Basiccolor Input, Lumariver.

We try different Cameras over years (5D MKII, 5Ds R, EOS R, Sony A7III) and now i buyed a EOS R5, hoping Standard Camera Profile for ACR was good enough to get good colors.

But at least i See better and more accurate colors from my Pixel Phone Camera.

Sometimes its Not even near the Color that i See in Front of me.

I dont want to Spend 20k for a Hasselblad or Something when my Phone can do a better Job.

Any ideas?

Look at the Brown from Interieur. On left Side R5, right EOS R both RAW with ACR (Camera Standard), with Exterieur taken with Google Pixel, Color real accurate.


----------



## snowbear (Dec 8, 2021)

I usually just find a white or black space and use that to set white balance (I also shoot raw).  Maybe try one of these in a spot that can be cropped out.




Grey Card by Charlie Wrenn, on Flickr


----------



## 360carstudio.de (Dec 8, 2021)

White Balance is not the problem (we also have Xrite Grey Card, spydercheker Cube), we find Out our Grey flooring is pretty great and gives also perfekt white balance. 😁 Its Problem with the Camera Profile! Lots of funny different Color with Adobe or Camera Profiles or with the Profiles from Xrite Software. But Not the correct Color. 🤮

Here i have a old Picture attached. Both Pictures taken RAW, Same Camera, Same settings, Same Car, same Camera Profile, correct White Balance, only different light gives total wrong yellow in the Car.


----------



## NS: Nikon Shooter (Dec 8, 2021)

WB is the least critical parameter when  recording, 
the only thing is to use a proper reference of grey.


----------



## WalterRowe (Dec 8, 2021)

You always have to manage white balance / color balance between raw file and output. Regardless of what WB you set in camera, the camera will do a little thinking on its own.

If you need truly accurate colors, you need to use Photoshop or Capture One where you can pin color readouts in the image that shows LAB or RGB values, then adjust until the color readout shows the correct value.


----------



## Lez325 (Dec 9, 2021)

360carstudio.de said:


> I dont want to Spend 20k for a Hasselblad or Something when my Phone can do a better Job.


Now that is something I would like to see 

I have been a Pro Photographer for many many years and to be blunt there is, and never will be a phone camera as good as a Hasselblad 

Les


----------



## NS: Nikon Shooter (Dec 9, 2021)

360carstudio.de said:


> I dont want to Spend 20k for a Hasselblad or Something when *my Phone can do a better Job. Any ideas?*



Nope… I was never good with miracles.


----------



## Lez325 (Dec 9, 2021)

NS: Nikon Shooter said:


> Nope… I was never good with miracles.


 Makes me laugh with comments like " My phone is better than any camera " etc etc 

I hear this all the time- One customer, well a potential customer- refused a quote for a Wedding shoot and added my sister has the latest iPhone and she can do the shoot an for half the price you quoted.......

Needless to say the images she later posted on Facebook, were at best, abysmal  I tried very hard NOT to comment, but I have to admit I did laugh out loud when I saw them .

What is the old adage, you get what you pay for ?


Les


----------



## 360carstudio.de (Dec 9, 2021)

Okay, nothing helpful for now. 

I never say my Phone Makes better Pictures then a Hasselblad, I say my Phone Makes more Color accurate Pictures then my EOS R5 and i dont want to buy a 20k Camera.

Maybe im in the wrong Forum. Think i can find some pro product Photographer with some know how about Color reproduction.


----------



## NS: Nikon Shooter (Dec 9, 2021)

360carstudio.de said:


> Maybe im in the wrong Forum.



Or maybe your understanding of colour science is not supporting 
your ambitions. I discovered that there is a lot of good people here
if one invests the time to investigate.


----------



## Rickbb (Dec 9, 2021)

You are asking for a camera that takes color the way you eyes sees color.

There is not one, at any cost.

Making the color match what you think is correct is your job, not the cameras.

This is done in post processing with software in today’s digital world.

In the past it was done post in a darkroom. But it still had to be done, even with a $20,000 Hasselblad.


----------



## 360carstudio.de (Dec 9, 2021)

Oh okay my fault. Then sounds Like an easy Job for Camera manufacturers. They only have to Deliver a Basic wrong Picture with false colours an i should remember and Paint that the right way in Photoshop. That Sounds great! 

So why spend thousands for professionell Camera Gear If have have to do the Work.and correct every image? Why i have to manipulate a yellow or a brown? To complicated for the Camera? Only face optimisation that can give faulty orange colors?

Why my Phone give me every single Image a 9 Out of 10 in Color under Studio condition? And the Cameras Not? 

How can that be normal?


----------



## NS: Nikon Shooter (Dec 10, 2021)

360carstudio.de said:


> Oh okay my fault. Then sounds Like an easy Job for Camera manufacturers. They only have to Deliver a *Basic wrong Picture with false colours *an i should remember and Paint that the right way in Photoshop. That Sounds great!
> So *why spend thousands for professionell Camera Gear* If have have to do the Work.and *correct every image?* Why i
> have to *manipulate a yellow or a brown?* To complicated for the Camera? Only face optimisation that can give faulty
> orange colors?
> ...



IF YOU WERE IN THE WRONG FORUM, THERE WOULD BE NOBODY TO 
BOTHER TO EXPLAIN THIS TO YOU.

_A camera is like an art supply shop_ — they have an inventory of wood, wool,
all kinds of natural and artificial stuff… but no masterpieces whatsoever. The
camera will offer you only what it captures: PHOTONS and in three flavours:
quantity, colour ratio, and position. *Basic wrong Picture with false colours*
you say? Well, somehow you are right. It captures a scene and records data
— not on a film that can also record wrong colours — but on a sensor. At su-
per high speed, it will record how many photons, in which ratio, and in what
order on each and every photosite or pixel… rigorously. The lens captures as
the camera records — data that is… no pictures.

The painter or sculptor in the atelier is alone with his/her imagination and ta-
lent just like you are in studio or on location — from raw material to the master
piece or flop. *Why spend thousands for pro Gear* you ask? Because we are
demanding that at such recording speed, everything will be done correctly. Top
money gives one access to scenes records that are difficult to capture in terms
of DR, speed of execution, etc but that has nothing to do with colours.

When it comes to colours, _ratio_ is the keyword that was mentioned and the on-
ly one that counts. One of the coolest feature of data recording is the said ratio
and the better way to use it is with a neutral reference like a neutral grey card.
Under the same recording conditions, the ratio will be the same. The advantage
is that whatever tweak is done to achieve the right colours on one set of data is
copied to ALL the sets captured in the same conditions. *Correct every image*
you say? Yes, you got that right… but at copy/paste speed.

Digital photography is a three elementary colour activity and they are additive:
Red + Green + Blue aka as RGB colour space. It is the ratio of this trio that will
render zillions of colours — even that brown you're after. *Manipulate a yellow 
or a brown* you ask? Get one colour right in the ratio and all will fall in the place.

Ok for now, I should get moving… my coffee is finished and the client is waiting.


----------



## Lez325 (Dec 10, 2021)

360carstudio.de said:


> Okay, nothing helpful for now.
> 
> I never say my Phone Makes better Pictures then a Hasselblad, I say my Phone Makes more Color accurate Pictures then my EOS R5 and i dont want to buy a 20k Camera.
> 
> Maybe im in the wrong Forum. Think i can find some pro product Photographer with some know how about Color reproduction.



*" dont want to Spend 20k for a Hasselblad or Something when my Phone can do a better Job."*


Really- then what did this statement mean ?

Les


----------



## weepete (Dec 10, 2021)

Any of those cameras you mentioned should be able to produce accurate colours, so I think there's something in your process that's not quite right.

Fluroecent lights are notorious for causing flicker and colour issues, so not ideal for consitant results. I also notice a large window in one shot of the car interior and not in another. If you are mixing light sources then that can be another cause of issues. 

How are you setting your white balance?


----------



## 360carstudio.de (Dec 10, 2021)

weepete said:


> Any of those cameras you mentioned should be able to produce accurate colours, so I think there's something in your process that's not quite right.
> 
> Fluroecent lights are notorious for causing flicker and colour issues, so not ideal for consitant results. I also notice a large window in one shot of the car interior and not in another. If you are mixing light sources then that can be another cause of issues.
> 
> How are you setting your white balance?



We have Philips Graphica Flurocent Lights, they are with high cri Special for perfect Color reproduction.

MASTER TL-D 90 Graphica | Philips

Only Want to Show the extreme Color different in Interieur with the LEDs in Showroom. But Booth colors are totally wrong. 

For White Balance we use Xrite Grey Card or our flooring the is also perfect Grey. Tried with Grey Card on it. No difference.

Problem is Camera Profile for Camera RAW. Every Profile gives different colors. We create our own Profile with Basiccolor Input and Colorchecker Digital SG. Its even better but gives US to much blue and purple in Results.

Problem is every Profile created with Basiccolor varies a little Bit even when its createt with Same profiling Image they gives different Results every time. So how can that be right? Xrite Software gives totally wrong really purple Red Results in profiling.

Camera Standard Profile in ACR gives to much orange and really to high contrasts.

Canon Camera Software Lacks on blue and Red and also gives to orange yellow.

I can Upload some Sample RAW Files If Someone Take a closer Look.


----------



## Designer (Dec 10, 2021)

360carstudio.de said:


> Problem is every Profile created with Basiccolor varies a little Bit even when its createt with Same profiling Image they gives different Results every time. So how can that be right? Xrite Software gives totally wrong really purple Red Results in profiling.


You seem to be chasing your tail.  You have several issues that have not been properly addressed.  There  is not just one issue, but several, all working against you. 

The best perceived result will be the final output, and how your customer sees it.  If you ONLY view on one certain output, (CRT) then you might eventually get someplace, but your customers all have different viewing platforms, and you cannot set the color profile to be seen the exact same way on every possible output device. 

Then, there is the possibility of print.  The type of paper and ink is again, only part of the problem, you also then need to set the color profile for what printer will be used, and you probably can't do that on your computer, because it will look different than the printed result.

Lastly, (or first, actually) is that you should not be mixing different types of lighting.  You've got fluorescent, LED, and daylight, and possibly more that you haven't listed.  You really need to start there and use only one type of light to give you the best chance of adjusting colors on your computer.

If you are getting these images printed, get the printer profile from the printer.  Forget trying to get the colors right on your customer's CRT (unless they are using the exact same device with the exact same color profile and viewing the images in a room that has the same exact lighting as your own studio). 

Good luck!


----------



## weepete (Dec 10, 2021)

I'm almost certain this is a white balance issue more than anything else. I appreciate what you are saying about the colour profiles, and that may be true as well, however I don't think that you should be getting that large a colour difference in the original shots.

Indeed, you probably don't need to be absolutley accurate with the colour, as colours look different in different lighting situations, and as Designer points out anyone viewing it is probably using an uncalibrated monitor anyway. Saying that, I think you should be expecting to be able to produce reasonably consistant colour between shots.

I took the liberty of having a look at your example shot in photoshop, and using a large sampling area had a look at the colour. It looked to me like you awere lacking a bit in the magenta channel using the CMYK colours, and a -16 adjustment in the yellow channel evened up a lot of the difference.






I think your issue is largely coming from the flourecent lights and/or the mixed lighting, but I'd suggest getting some white styrofoam (like those used for takeaway containers) and trying a white balance from that. Make sure you are shooting in a neutral color style, and turn off any in camera processing if you haven't already too.


----------



## NS: Nikon Shooter (Dec 10, 2021)

weepete said:


> … using the CMYK colours…



The CMYK colour space is better used only for final print with four colour
separation in the pre-press process — like for magazine and books. It al-
lows for black to be printed last to rendering richer, deeper tones in sub-
stractive printing.

For on screen processing OTOH, the additive RGB colour space is the 
only one that really makes sense.

… just saying.


----------



## weepete (Dec 10, 2021)

NS: Nikon Shooter said:


> The CMYK colour space is better used only for final print with four colour
> separation in the pre-press process — like for magazine and books. It al-
> lows for black to be printed last to rendering richer, deeper tones in sub-
> stractive printing.
> ...



Yeah, it's in photoshop so will be in prophoto colour space, but the colour sampler there gives a few different values: HSB, RGB, LAB, CMYK. It's just easiest to see the difference in the CMYK values in this case, as there's about a 20% difference in the magenta one 😉


----------



## NS: Nikon Shooter (Dec 10, 2021)

weepete said:


> Yeah, it's in photoshop so will be in *prophoto colour space*, but the colour sampler there gives a few different values: HSB, RGB, LAB, CMYK. It's just easiest to see the difference in the CMYK values in this case, as there's about a 20% difference in the magenta one 😉



The prophoto colour space exists but is not yet representable 
on screen today… the technology is not there yet.


----------



## weepete (Dec 10, 2021)

true, but it's photoshop and Lightroom's default colour space. Just because it can't be displayed doesn't mean it's not there, a bit like Adobe RGB on an sRGB monitor, that's an aside though.

My point is, I wasn't suggesting that the OP edits in CMYK, just that's where a difference can easily be seen. I think it's due to the cycling of the flouroecent lights, as a green cast is common to that lighting. 

A fairly easy test would be to set up their cameras and shoot them side by side under stable daylight conditions, this should then show the difference between the colour rendition in the cameras pretty accuratley, and give a baseline for the difference profiling can make. 

If that's then compared to shots under studio conditions, it can then be assessed if the lighting is the issue, but that also needs care not to mix different light sources.


----------



## NS: Nikon Shooter (Dec 10, 2021)

weepete said:


> not to mix different light sources.



Unless tested for their colour temperature… absolutely right!


----------



## photoshutter (Dec 14, 2021)

360carstudio.de said:


> Hey im really tired.
> 
> Im looking for a Camera that gives me Most accurate colors.
> 
> ...


I use pretty old PhaseOne H20 digital back on my old Hasselblad wired to macbookpro, today it-s not too expensive and much cheaper than any modern DSLR, one of the best color in product photography, nothing with proper white balance, it's just deeper in color.


----------



## Braineack (Dec 14, 2021)

360carstudio.de said:


> Im so tired of Reading and trying around, idont have words for that. I try for years for a solution.
> 
> We using CRI95 flouriscent Lights with 6500k and varoius LED Lights, also Hensel Studio flashes.




lol.  are you serious?


----------



## NS: Nikon Shooter (Dec 14, 2021)

360carstudio.de said:


> Im so tired of Reading and trying around, idont have words for that. I try for years for a solution.
> 
> We using CRI95 flouriscent Lights with 6500k and varoius LED Lights, also Hensel Studio flashes.



Then, your only way to go is to scrupulously, precisely gel ever single 
light sources like it was done in studio years back with a colour meter
and testing properly… if you want to go on with the multiple makers.

Serious photographers today have mostly single branded studio and 
solutions. Mine are in an extended Profoto light sources system.


----------



## Dave G. (Dec 14, 2021)

Big shout out to folks who kept this marvelously constructive for all readers & not going down the easy slippery slopes of hyperbole.  The responses related to color correction curves, white balance, and studio lighting are of course spot on. But since the original post was about camera selection, I’ll offer a very probably completely ignorant reply.  The cameras mentioned as having been tried are all made either by “camera manufacturers” or by “electronics manufacturers”.  You might consider renting a camera that’s made by a “film manufacturer” to get something built from a different perspective in how light is gathered, converted to electrical signals, and processed to produce an image. Namely Fujifilm. I’m not proposing that it’ll solve all your issues and make you a great espresso in the morning, just that I’ve used a LOT of cameras and found them all to be true to the basic nature of their roots.  So you might not be far off in your desire to find a camera that’s in harmony with your environment and objectives. But a half dozen different Canons are all still Canons and more alike than different.  Maybe branch out a little to Fuji or Olympus to find different takes on image capture and the controls that manage it. Just a thought. Best of luck!  And great work you’re doing there, by the way. Thanks for sharing.


----------



## Jim Tellier (Dec 14, 2021)

As a former pro photographer, portrait studio owner and denizen of the darkroom - who happens to be partially COLOR-BLIND, I can offer my $0.02 worth of experience: First (and most importantly) you NEED to get an accurate color temperature meter, to be able to measure BOTH the color-temp of the Ambient light (illumination source) and the light Reflected from the subject.  Without that info, ANY camera (digital or film) and ANY light source is a complete CRAPSHOOT.  (In the case of film, you also need a good understanding of the Particular film's color response curves; digital sensors are a little more linear in that regard these days).  You also need Standardized color samples with which to calibrate your entire process.  Also, remember "there's no such thing as 'neutral' light" - that's an advertising buzzword; Measure that color temp!  When you get to Photoshop etc and a computer monitor - GET A CALIBRATOR!  Your eyes are NO real judge of what is Correct Color.  And, as others have alluded, white balance is important, but is likely Not the problem.  I strongly suspect you don't have a handle on the color temps of your light source(s).


----------



## Jim Tellier (Dec 14, 2021)

@Dave G. --- While you *may* see some differences across mfgrs and cameras made by "film companies" etc., the reality is that most of the sensors used by all of them are pretty much the same electronics today.  They're all at the front edge of the technology, so IMHO, I think the differences will be miniscule (I may get flak for that! LOL!).  The methodology of trying this camera, that camera, etc until you find one that's "correct" is both expensive AND unnecessary: just move closer to the scientific method, and Measure, Measure and Calibrate your process.  Oh, and the notion of putting gels on lights isn't dead!   You just need to know When to do it - after you've taken measurements!


----------



## ronlane (Dec 14, 2021)

Each camera sensor is different and will record it's interpretation of color. Are they close? for the most part. For truly accurate color from any camera, iPhone to Hasselblad, you are reliant on a number of things not just the camera.

The camera is recording the data that is there. The color will be dependent on the camera, the lighting and the monitor that you are displaying it on.

To make sure that there is consistency, it is best to use some sort of color swatch like a ColorChecker Passport.

You mention that you use mulitple lights? If you are mixing them in the photo, that will/could cause color issues if the lights are of the same type and tempature.

Then once you have the files, if your monitor is not calibrated, you may not get the "correct" color that you are expecting.

As it was also mentioned above, if you are shooting raw, the images will ALWAYS need to be processed somewhat to get the best color. And if you are shooting jpeg, then the camera is doing this processing for you.

If, as you say, you don't have time for it. My suggestion would be to contract it out. Either the color correction or the product photography in general.

Sure many will say you "can get it right in camera" but that requires the time and effort as well to "get it right".

Good luck.


----------



## ParadiseBizz (Dec 15, 2021)

360carstudio.de said:


> Hey im really tired.
> 
> Im looking for a Camera that gives me Most accurate colors.
> 
> ...


Having a greyscale card or color chart with you is crucial, and always use it for the first image. So now you can make a white balance correction in Lightroom or whatever program you're using. But this only works if your monitor is color calibrated, like this one: https://amzn.to/3DYUgxF That's what I have. So you truly see the colors how they come out


----------



## NS: Nikon Shooter (Dec 15, 2021)

360carstudio.de said:


> Im looking for a Camera that gives me Most accurate colors.



Understand this:

NO sensor of mineral making will render the organic colours you're
after, that's why it is often spoken of "colour science". In this, gear
like my Nikons have provided the most satisfactory results when it
is used with a proper converter.


----------



## RacePhoto (Feb 6, 2022)

I see a few who answered what I see as the plain and simple. Mixed lighting, end of story. It's not the camera.


----------



## snowbear (Feb 6, 2022)

I guess the OP figured it out; they haven't been back since December 11.


----------



## RacePhoto (Feb 13, 2022)

Yeah I'm holding back from what I really think of some of this.  🤫 







From the start, LED, Daylight, (what time of day?) Florescent, flashes and who knows what else. It's just creating the situation that's impossible to fix. I've made the mistake and had daylight (real from the Sun) that slipped in to some twist tubes food lighting. You can take out the yellow green, (from the fluorescent) but it's still ugly. That and the real colors are lost forever.

Getting a car color right or even close in mixed lighting is just going to be torture. Auto paint colors are very specific to the makers.

Some days I question my own decision to standardize on 6500K for the light stand and overhead panels. Close enough for Rock and Roll when using a flash along with them. IF I did. 

You can buy all kinds of lighting that calls itself "Daylight" but they can vary according to the company's opinion. Some don't list on their packaging, or didn't in the past, and writing them might be the only way to get a real answer. I only buy bulbs, lights or anything else now, that lists the color temperature.

The OP mentioned CRI rated bulbs. If anyone here hasn't gone into that, this is a good basic explanation. 









						A Standard for Lighting Color Preference?
					






					www.nist.gov
				




Outdated Standard:  _The higher the CRI score, the more natural objects should look when illuminated. A score of 100 is considered “perfect.” Most good white light lamps get scores of 80 or higher._


----------



## 360carstudio.de (Mar 21, 2022)

snowbear said:


> I guess the OP figured it out; they haven't been back since December 11.



Nope, but this tread only reminds me not to discuss with people wo have way less experince and never heard about color profiles. 

No color temprature mix in our studio and we use right wb, but thanks for this "pro" tips!

Maybe i ask wrong... someone knows a good camera with a color accurate standard profile for ACR?


----------



## smoke665 (Mar 21, 2022)

360carstudio.de said:


> Nope, but this tread only reminds me not to discuss with people wo have way less experince and never heard about color profiles.


Wow, maybe you are in the wrong forum. So many people have commented trying to help you, but instead of being grateful you've taken to insulting those who actually do have the experience to help. Maybe you need a forum that explains the art of listening.



360carstudio.de said:


> Maybe i ask wrong... someone knows a good camera with a color accurate standard profile for ACR?



The whole purpose of a RAW file is to provide a set of data, free from any distractions or additions added by the camera. A file that you can then manipulate to the edit you want. If you're relying on a profile to meet your needs that's your first mistake. Profiles are nothing more than a specific set of editing instructions. Using a good calibrated monitor and a Color Checker as your first shot, will allow you to set an accurate color palette. If that's not close enough take it into PS and color grade with HSB or LAB specific colors.

However you're also failing to realize that the light reflected on your sensor is also affecting color to a point that corrections may or may not be perfect, that's why it's important that you avoid mixed temperatures and avoid underexposing, because the value and intensity of colors are affected by the amount of light. In lower light, colors appear darker and less intense. As you increase the amount of light, the saturation lightens, and the intensity increases until you reach the true color. I did a little research on the fluorescent bulbs you're using. You'd need 3-4 bulbs just to equal the Lumen of one 400 watt strobe. Not to mention the color variations that occur each time a fluorescent bulb cycles.

Frankly you're running around in a circle trying to find fault with everything but the real problem.


----------



## snowbear (Mar 21, 2022)

smoke665 said:


> Wow, maybe you are in the wrong forum. So many people have commented trying to help you, but instead of being grateful you've taken to insulting those who actually do have the experience to help. Maybe you need a forum that explains the art of listening.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


This, exactly.  Good luck in your quest.


----------



## 360carstudio.de (Mar 22, 2022)

smoke665 said:


> Wow, maybe you are in the wrong forum. So many people have commented trying to help you, but instead of being grateful you've taken to insulting those who actually do have the experience to help. Maybe you need a forum that explains the art of listening.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Yeah, what should i say, have all that, and it shows me perfect how bad the R5 and the profiles for acr replicate colors, DPP is not usable, slow and bad workflow. We use an LG 34WK95U calibratet with i1 Pro and LG Calibration Studio.

As i say earlier, i also have Colorchecker Digital SG, Colorchecker Pocket and Xrite Greycard.

Color Checker is a worse product that is not pretty accurate, only if you measuring your specific target with a expensive colorimeter, otherwise its not really usable. Sadly enough you have to pay hundreds of dollar for third party software (Basicolor Input, also have that) to make the checker usable, the xrite software is a total joke. Xrite take enough of my money...

We have 80 of the 6500k 58w Bulbs, that makes really enough light.

Greatest problem is yellow. Most camears we tryed shows nearly orange and not yellow. Thats why cameras try to show better skin tones, not helpful. Question is, why phones have not the problem with that? Why they can show the matching color under same light conditions?


----------



## smoke665 (Mar 22, 2022)

360carstudio.de said:


> Greatest problem is yellow. Most camears we tryed shows nearly orange and not yellow. Thats why cameras try to show better skin tones, not helpful.



First off a camera sensor doesn't pull random colors out of thin air, it records reflected light and shadow. Canon uses a Bayer sensor array (at least for now),  which uses a simple strategy: capture alternating red, green and blue colors at each photosite, and doing it in a way that twice as many green photosites are recorded as either of the other two colors.  Values from these photosites are then intelligently combined to produce full color pixels using a process called "demosaicing". Every manufacturer has their own proprietary algorithm which might give slightly more favoritism to one or the other. My Pentax has a tendency to saturate reds and greens. If you're saving your files as JPEG, then your camera is using more proprietary algorithms to produce an image "it thinks" is correct. That's why it's important to save your files as RAW and edit post. Use a ProPhoto workspace and Adobe Color for the most accurate reproduction. Forget about trying to use a profile, because no two images will be the same.

To display an image on a device you have to first convert the RAW file to a sRGB JPEG. This image will be accurate when displayed on an _sRGB_-compliant device.” Given this information, and the profile of the display it’s to be shown on, it’s the job of the color management system to ensure the “best” (most accurate) colors result in the final displayed scene. The problem is that the device gamut may not be wide enough to display all the colors in the sRGB file (out of gamut). When that happens you get inaccurate color estimates. Cell phones use CMS which has both the display and image profile information, it “knows” the image was created expecting the sRGB color characteristics, and it also “knows” how the display differs from those. With that information, it can correct all of the RGB values in the image so they map to the correct colors. For accurate work you should soft proof your image before exporting it using an appropriate profile, I use the International Color Consortium (ICC) profile for soft proofing. You can also embed a profile in the sRGB file, but differing display devices may or may not work with it.

Second up, modern car finishes are chromatic, in that they change colors depending on how the light is reflected, and the intensity of the light. Sometimes that chameleon effect can be quite dramatic. In this example you have a car shot in two entirely different lighting scenarios, one studio, one ambient. With a color temperature of 9200 that's way to blue for normal ambient light. The normal temp for an ambient light shot at noon is 5500. Your brain automatically corrects for differing light temperatures....you know you're looking at a yellow car, your brain sees a yellow car. Your camera doesn't, it records the temperature of the the light reflected.




It's almost a given that accurate color rendering is going to require Color Grading. Now here is a rough example of a color graded photo, where I stole the color from one and changed the other. You really need a raw file to do this, so I didn't spend a lot of time, it's close but still could be tweaked, you get the idea. You are in charge of the edit that produces your final image, not the camera, not a profile.




In addition to the chromatic paint, cars are a mass of curves and bumps, each reflecting light differently. Color is a generic term, that encompasses Hue, Tint and tone. Hue refers to the dominant Color Family, Tint is any Hue with white added, and Tone is any Hue with gray added. How light is reflected from the shadows vs highlights will change the color. If you really want accurate color you need to first, set your WB using a target as your first shot EACH time your light changes. Open the WB image in LR, set the exposure so the histogram shows a full data file, then using your eye dropper, set your white balance. Now set the White point and Black point this is important for accurate color. Sync this to all the images in your series. Now you can adjust your other settings. Once you have the basic general edits in LR, take it into PS to color grade. If you can obtain the RGB readings from a paint sample, great. If you can't you use an image that you know is the correct color and sampling the the highlights, shadows, and midtones then average them, that will be your base line RGB reading, that you can then use to color grade your image.

Because of the issues noted above, most car photographers that I've seen will do a composite of multiple layers (I've seen as many 40-50 layers) of individual exposures of individual pieces of the car. They can then manipulate those individually and blend them.

Solving problems is like the old saying "How do you eat an elephant.....one bite at a time". I believe you have multiple problems ranging from lighting to exposure to editing. The only way to resolve them is to work on one thing at a time. You have to be willing to discard something if it isn't working, and try something different, but fix one issue before you move on. Getting accurate color is not that difficult, unless you make it so.


----------



## AlanKlein (Mar 22, 2022)

Jim Tellier said:


> As a former pro photographer, portrait studio owner and denizen of the darkroom - who happens to be partially COLOR-BLIND, I can offer my $0.02 worth of experience: First (and most importantly) you NEED to get an accurate color temperature meter, to be able to measure BOTH the color-temp of the Ambient light (illumination source) and the light Reflected from the subject.  Without that info, ANY camera (digital or film) and ANY light source is a complete CRAPSHOOT.  (In the case of film, you also need a good understanding of the Particular film's color response curves; digital sensors are a little more linear in that regard these days).  You also need Standardized color samples with which to calibrate your entire process.  Also, remember "there's no such thing as 'neutral' light" - that's an advertising buzzword; Measure that color temp!  When you get to Photoshop etc and a computer monitor - GET A CALIBRATOR!  Your eyes are NO real judge of what is Correct Color.  And, as others have alluded, white balance is important, but is likely Not the problem.  I strongly suspect you don't have a handle on the color temps of your light source(s).


Jim, Can you explain simple terms for a layman, the difference between White Balance and Color Temperature?  How do they inter-relate?  How do you know which one is correct or incorrect?


----------



## smoke665 (Mar 22, 2022)

@AlanKlein I learned yesterday that you and a friend of mine are neighbors. 

I'm not Jim, but I use Understanding White Balance  explanation, where WB correction removes the unrealistic color casts so that objects that appear white in person, appear white in your image. Color temperture describes the spectrum of the light (color). In person, your brain automatically corrects, it knows white is white, so you see white. A camera records reflected light, making no such adjustments.

As to how I know it's correct, it depends on the degree of accuracy I need. For every day stuff I use my eyes. For more precise work, I use a Colorchecker. It's important to note that before you set the WB you should adjust the exposure to a full histogram (Not blown or underexposed). Once you set the WB then set the White point and Black point.


----------



## AlanKlein (Mar 23, 2022)

smoke665 said:


> @AlanKlein I learned yesterday that you and a friend of mine are neighbors.
> 
> I'm not Jim, but I use Understanding White Balance  explanation, where WB correction removes the unrealistic color casts so that objects that appear white in person, appear white in your image. Color temperture describes the spectrum of the light (color). In person, your brain automatically corrects, it knows white is white, so you see white. A camera records reflected light, making no such adjustments.
> 
> As to how I know it's correct, it depends on the degree of accuracy I need. For every day stuff I use my eyes. For more precise work, I use a Colorchecker. It's important to note that before you set the WB you should adjust the exposure to a full histogram (Not blown or underexposed). Once you set the WB then set the White point and Black point.


DOn;t you set the histogram to full range by adjusting the black and white points?  Are those the same as adjusting Levels?


----------



## smoke665 (Mar 23, 2022)

AlanKlein said:


> DOn;t you set the histogram to full range by adjusting the black and white points?  Are those the same as adjusting Levels?



From above post " Color is a generic term, that encompasses Hue, Tint and tone. Hue refers to the dominant Color Family, Tint is any Hue with white added, and Tone is any Hue with gray added."  Setting the exposure first establishes the Bightness, and to some extent the Hues. The ideal file has 255 shades of tonal values , from 0,0,0 black to 255,255,255.   Setting the White Point and Black Point establishes a full range of tonal values, setting the Hue and Tone. 

The quickest way to set the White point in LR is to go to the White slider hold down the alt key (cmd on mac) and use the mouse to move the slider. The screen will go black. Move the slider to the right till you just see white specs poking through. You do the same on the Black slider. The screen will go white, move it to the left until you see black poking through.


----------



## AlanKlein (Mar 23, 2022)

smoke665 said:


> From above post " Color is a generic term, that encompasses Hue, Tint and tone. Hue refers to the dominant Color Family, Tint is any Hue with white added, and Tone is any Hue with gray added."  Setting the exposure first establishes the Bightness, and to some extent the Hues. The ideal file has 255 shades of tonal values , from 0,0,0 black to 255,255,255.   Setting the White Point and Black Point establishes a full range of tonal values, setting the Hue and Tone.
> 
> The quickest way to set the White point in LR is to go to the White slider hold down the alt key (cmd on mac) and use the mouse to move the slider. The screen will go black. Move the slider to the right till you just see white specs poking through. You do the same on the Black slider. The screen will go white, move it to the left until you see black poking through.


There was a conflict in your earlier post that I still don;t understand. "As to how I know it's correct, it depends on the degree of accuracy I need. For every day stuff I use my eyes. For more precise work, I use a Colorchecker. *It's important to note that before you set the WB you should adjust the exposure to a full histogram (Not blown or underexposed). Once you set the WB then set the White point and Black point."*


----------



## smoke665 (Mar 23, 2022)

AlanKlein said:


> There was a conflict in your earlier post that I still don;t understand. "As to how I know it's correct, it depends on the degree of accuracy I need. For every day stuff I use my eyes. For more precise work, I use a Colorchecker. *It's important to note that before you set the WB you should adjust the exposure to a full histogram (Not blown or underexposed). Once you set the WB then set the White point and Black point."*



The reason you set the exposure "before" the WB is that the brightness of the image will affect the Whites and to some degree the Blacks and colors in an image. For Example in this first composite the original on the left, and with the WB set in LR on the right. If you sample the white in the center of the original image, you get an RGB of 224.226.233. Sampling the white in the same spot on the image with WB corrected using the eyedropper you get 213.211.203, better but not pure white. Now sample the purple in the top right petal on the original you get an RGB of 132.33.156, while the same spot on the WB corrected side you get 154.23.163, so not only did your whites shift but you colors did as well.





Now what happens if your image is  if you bring the original down by a full stop. In this example sampling the white in the same spot, the original has an RGB of 169.171.176 and the purple in the same spot has an RGB of 109.60.128. Sampling the one on the right in the same spots for WB corrected image has a white RGB of 178.178.175, and a purple of 116.65.128. 




Finally lets go up a full stop from the original. Now when we sample the white on the left we get an RGB of 248.250.244, and a purple of 184.109.208, while on the side of the LR corrected WB we get for white 248.245.244 and for purple 203.126.210





Now do you see how dramatically colors can shift when trying to establish a WB correction????? That's why it's important to first set the exposure before you set the WB.


----------



## Rickbb (Mar 23, 2022)

The guy is still looking for what doesn’t exist, a camera the “sees” exactly what he thinks his eyes see.


----------



## RAZKY (Mar 23, 2022)

This WAS an interesting thread, until it got hijacked by a couple of uncaring individuals!


----------



## AlanKlein (Mar 23, 2022)

Does setting WB and points change when you're scanning film?


----------



## Rickbb (Mar 23, 2022)

RAZKY said:


> This WAS an interesting thread, until it got hijacked by a couple of uncaring individuals!


If I am one of those I sincerely apologize and the mods can remove any uncaring posts.


----------



## RAZKY (Mar 24, 2022)

Rickbb said:


> If I am one of those I sincerely apologize and the mods can remove any uncaring posts.


Not at all, Rick. Your comments have been on subject!


----------



## DelminaNucci (Apr 10, 2022)

You always have to manage the white balance/color balance between raw file and output. 

If you need really accurate colors, then you can use Photoshop to recolor or balance color for your car photo. You know that photoshop editing helps you to come up with a better photo color correction service and gives you a better result.


----------

