RAW Processing (Color issues)

[zxspectrun]

Hi!

I don´t know how to explain this here we go...

I have a Google Pixel 3 phone and take RAW (DNG) pictures using Adobe Lightroom Mobile, then I export them as Original and open them in my Computer with Affinity Photo.

The results processing the photo in Lightroom Mobile directly is way better than doing it in Affinity Photo, do not get me wrong, I am NOT saying Lightroom Mobile is better, I am saying that Affinity is not reading the image appropriately, I already tried adjusting "Assistant Manager" and actually improved a little bit after changing the image to "32 bit HDR" and deactivating "Tone Curve"

The image looks even better if I open it with the Windows Photo Tool: and as you can see, I already tried with the last Beta version(1.9.2.1005) and got the same bad results

 

Here you have the best example I could give you, look at the miniatures, one of those is a DNG that was processed directly in Adobe Lightroom Mobile and then exported and the second TIF file is just the same but exported in this format:

If I open both in affinity then the DNG file looks like the left/Above image and the TIFF like the right/Below one

I attached the original RAW file (1) and the other one that was processed and then exported as a DNG (2) if it helps

Please let me know if I am breaking any rule, it was really hard building all this post and I have searched a lot in google and Affinity Photo Community but without success

Regards,

LRM_20210128_174302_(1).dng LRM_20210128_174302_(2).dng

Edited March 17, 2021 by zxspectrun

[zxspectrun]

Anyone can help me with this, I have all my work frozen and I have been waiting almost over a week
@Dan C @Patrick Connor @AdamW @Leigh @Lee D @Callum @Chris B@Ben

I am on Windows 10

 

Edited March 21, 2021 by zxspectrun

[James Ritson]

Hi @zxspectrun, from examining your attached RAW file I would say this is to be expected—Photo is actually reading your RAW files as intended, it's just not applying any kind of adaptive starting point. I'm unfamiliar with Pixel RAW files, but I would assume they either have some EXIF tags that can be read so that RAW development software can emulate processing, or LRM is simply applying the same adjustments as a starting point that you would get with in-camera processing.

There's no need to use 32-bit—this just opens you up to issues if you're not familiar with unbounded pixel values and linear vs non-linear colour space editing. You don't have to remove the tone curve either really—you can get close to how the image looks by making a few adjustments in the Develop Persona.

To clarify—the original RAW data from the Pixel is underexposed so as to avoid completely clipping the bright detail from the sun. It needs some reasonably aggressive shadow tone enhancement and also some highlight compression/remapping to squeeze out what little dynamic range the phone's sensor actually has. Noise isn't actually too bad considering, but the background tree detail has unfortunately suffered from the underexposure.

If you try adjusting the settings like this, you can get close to the in-camera image:

It won't look the same, but I would objectively argue that it's nicer in some aspects. The processing that's applied in LRM (and presumably to the in-camera image) has ugly haloing around the background tree line and mountain regions from local contrast enhancement. The processed version does have some more intense reflections in the water, and the highlight reconstruction is slightly more successful however.

That said, if you develop the image and then simply do a small amount of work with HSL (targeting Red/Yellows) and Curves adjustments, you can make the colours in the image richer and enhance that warmth from the sun:

 

As for Windows Photos looking even better, that is probably just reading an embedded JPEG rather than decoding the RAW data.

I hope the above helps! I know it's not ideal, but this is pretty much the Photo workflow—you start with a flat RAW file and use all the editing tools available to craft something to your taste, rather than having a series of suggested adjustments automatically applied.

[zxspectrun]

Hi James,

 

Thanks for your reply, it helps me to understand some stuff, I would like to discuss deeper this with you but I can´t seems I am not a professional but someone who likes to learn from internet instead.

something that I have been noticed is that LRM is more compatible with Pixel RAW files, for instance, if I turn hightlights,shadows,etc down it changes only ¨hightlights,shadows¨ but it is not the case with Affinity Photo where it changes the whole image instead.

I hope I am explaining myself, so, for this reason Affinity Photo is useless for me, this is sad since i only have my Pixel 3  and not a professional camera.

I cannot consider your suggestion since there are image data that I cannot recover if AP does not process the image as it should, for instance the details in the Sun, please see the TIFF exported from LRM

I would be more than happy if you all includes compatibility with Google Pixel Phones (I saw some but not mine)

Stay tuned

LRM_20210128_174302.tif

[zxspectrun]

thanks for nothing.... lol I hate this kind of support

@Dan C @Patrick Connor @AdamW @Leigh @Lee D @Callum @Chris B@Ben

 

[Alfred]

4 hours ago, zxspectrun said:

thanks for nothing.... lol I hate this kind of support

You created this thread on March 21 and then bumped it half a week later with a post saying

On 3/21/2021 at 7:29 PM, zxspectrun said:

I have been waiting almost over a week

@James Ritson replied two days later, but despite the fact that it took you a whole four days to acknowledge his reply you’ve now bumped the thread with a post that doesn’t tag James but instead tags eight other Serif staff members, two of whom are developers for the other Affinity apps.

[NotMyFault]

8 hours ago, zxspectrun said:

thanks for nothing.... lol I hate this kind of support

@Dan C @Patrick Connor @AdamW @Leigh @Lee D @Callum @Chris B@Ben

 

I must admit that it drove me a bit jealous that James waisted some of his precious time answering your question, all the more I’m sure the majority of the forum users would prefer to do without your total lack of respect to others. 

[DrBob53]

Perhaps not directly relevant, but i found this article by Lightroom expert Martin Evening comparing Lightroom and Capture one very helpful in understand why different raw procesors give different results

http://4bcokm12bvu948gi7312gnab-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/Lightroom vs Capture One Pro.pdf

[zxspectrun]

12 hours ago, Alfred said:

You created this thread on March 21 and then bumped it half a week later with a post saying

@James Ritson replied two days later, but despite the fact that it took you a whole four days to acknowledge his reply you’ve now bumped the thread with a post that doesn’t tag James but instead tags eight other Serif staff members, two of whom are developers for the other Affinity apps.

Hi, I not going to reply offtopic discussions...

8 hours ago, DrBob53 said:

Perhaps not directly relevant, but i found this article by Lightroom expert Martin Evening comparing Lightroom and Capture one very helpful in understand why different raw procesors give different results

http://4bcokm12bvu948gi7312gnab-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/Lightroom vs Capture One Pro.pdf

Hi @DrBob53 this article help me a lot, now I understand that Affinity Photo interprets my RAWs very bad, such a shame...

[James Ritson]

19 hours ago, zxspectrun said:

thanks for nothing.... lol I hate this kind of support

@Dan C @Patrick Connor @AdamW @Leigh @Lee D @Callum @Chris B@Ben

 

Having read your previous reply, I’m not entirely sure what response you might have wanted—long term, RAW development functionality may improve, but it seemed from your post that you had already decided the Affinity Photo workflow wasn’t for you, which is fair enough. I did already explain and demonstrate that you can achieve comparable results just by tweaking a few sliders. Unfortunately, analysing and adapting RAW development settings for individual cameras (especially camera phone models) isn’t realistic given the team size. If you’re willing to adapt an open mindset, you can get some very good results with Photo, but it won’t give you an instant starting point like other software that matches the in-camera processing. Therefore, perhaps the software simply isn’t for you as it stands currently, and your needs are better served by other software? I gather that you do not really want to be working with much manual editing or processing?

 

1 hour ago, zxspectrun said:

Hi @DrBob53 this article help me a lot, now I understand that Affinity Photo interprets my RAWs very bad, such a shame.

I’m not sure that’s the take-away from the article. It simply highlights how two RAW development applications will differ in their initial treatment of RAW files, then points out some small strengths and weaknesses between them. Affinity Photo treats the majority of RAW files very well—camera phones like the Pixel however need more initial work to look acceptable, which Photo can absolutely do, it just doesn’t present any of those suggestions by default. Again, this just goes back to my point above about whether the software is suitable for your requirements.

For example, regardless of what camera I’m using, I want minimal interference with my RAW development—I want the starting point tonally flat so that I can develop the image then build up the image using layers in the main Photo Persona. That’s my way of working, and I’ve become so used to it that I now find it very difficult when software offers me suggestive starting points for my images (especially AI/machine learning-powered functionality). So in a way, it doesn’t bother me if an image comes in looking underexposed, lacking in colour, having too much contrast etc. I will always adapt an image to be flat so that I can work on it further with non-destructive layers.

That approach works really well because it also plays to the strengths of Affinity Photo. It can be adapted for many other workflows and approaches, of course, but how it currently functions may simply just not work for you, and that is something that can’t be addressed overnight. In the future, however, we may be able to expand the RAW development functionality and also ‘friendliness’ as regards to how it handles various outlier RAW files (especially from camera phones).

[zxspectrun]

42 minutes ago, James Ritson said:

Having read your previous reply, I’m not entirely sure what response you might have wanted—long term, RAW development functionality may improve, but it seemed from your post that you had already decided the Affinity Photo workflow wasn’t for you, which is fair enough. I did already explain and demonstrate that you can achieve comparable results just by tweaking a few sliders. Unfortunately, analysing and adapting RAW development settings for individual cameras (especially camera phone models) isn’t realistic given the team size. If you’re willing to adapt an open mindset, you can get some very good results with Photo, but it won’t give you an instant starting point like other software that matches the in-camera processing. Therefore, perhaps the software simply isn’t for you as it stands currently, and your needs are better served by other software? I gather that you do not really want to be working with much manual editing or processing?

 

I’m not sure that’s the take-away from the article. It simply highlights how two RAW development applications will differ in their initial treatment of RAW files, then points out some small strengths and weaknesses between them. Affinity Photo treats the majority of RAW files very well—camera phones like the Pixel however need more initial work to look acceptable, which Photo can absolutely do, it just doesn’t present any of those suggestions by default. Again, this just goes back to my point above about whether the software is suitable for your requirements.

For example, regardless of what camera I’m using, I want minimal interference with my RAW development—I want the starting point tonally flat so that I can develop the image then build up the image using layers in the main Photo Persona. That’s my way of working, and I’ve become so used to it that I now find it very difficult when software offers me suggestive starting points for my images (especially AI/machine learning-powered functionality). So in a way, it doesn’t bother me if an image comes in looking underexposed, lacking in colour, having too much contrast etc. I will always adapt an image to be flat so that I can work on it further with non-destructive layers.

That approach works really well because it also plays to the strengths of Affinity Photo. It can be adapted for many other workflows and approaches, of course, but how it currently functions may simply just not work for you, and that is something that can’t be addressed overnight. In the future, however, we may be able to expand the RAW development functionality and also ‘friendliness’ as regards to how it handles various outlier RAW files (especially from camera phones).

Hi James,

First of all, my apology for the previews comments, I may be wrong with my thoughts about AP and will start over editing RAW files without comparing Software apps since they are totally different.

 

Greetings

 

[R C-R]

@zxspectrun, if you have not already seen it you may find the Raw Actually Affinity Spotlight article worth a look.