Ah, I also get weird initial color profiles with a5100. I usually try to match the jpeg. I might try to generate a custom ICC then. I have a color checker card. I forget what is the best software to do that.
> On May 5, 2018, at 2:55 AM, Sarge Borsch <sausagefacto...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Regarding the copyrights question: > The ICC profile that I got as the result of the conversion is 536 bytes, at > least 29 of which are the ASCII name string that is equal to "Sony ILCE-5100 > Adobe Standard". > It contains only the following tags: > desc, > cprt (= "Copyright, the creator of this profile (generated by DCamProf > v1.0.5)"), > wtpt (1 XYZ tuple), > rXYZ, rXYZ, rXYZ, (the most important and probably the only part we actually > need — the color matrix), > and tone response curves which are just straight lines. > > As I see, the only thing in the final ICC profile that could possibly be > non-trivial enough to raise copyright questions is the 3x3 color matrix. > > >> On 4 May 2018, at 22:10, Sarge Borsch <sausagefacto...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> So, I tried to edit an ICC file in a hex editor to put the values from that >> website, and, just as expected, got nonsensical results. >> >> After that I tried another idea to snatch better color profiles — I searched >> the web for Adobe Camera Raw package, extracted the profiles from it (they >> are in .dcp format), and figured that it's possible to convert them to ICC >> by dcamprof. >> They seem to work very well — better than the currently built-in input >> profiles for sony a5100 in darktable. >> Now what do you think about the copyright status of these converted ICC >> profiles? Can they legally be distributed with darktable, or should I keep >> them only for myself? >> They are a lot smaller than the source .dcc files, probably because they >> don't keep nothing valuable except the color matrices. So are 3x3 numeric >> matrices copyrightable? >> >> If you think these profiles can be officially added to darktable, I may fix >> the name tags and submit a pull request. >> >>> On 4 May 2018, at 17:14, Sarge Borsch <sausagefacto...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> Hi. >>> I see that there are measured color responses at >>> https://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Sony/A5100---Measurements >>> Hence the question: is it a good idea to try to take the built-in profile >>> and replace the primaries with these measured values, in order to get >>> closer to the in-camera JPEG color rendering? (or are they already used?) >>> >>> I'm asking that because I've noticed that none of the built-in input color >>> profiles for sony a5100 allows me to get close to the in-camera JPEG colors. >>> The 2 of them which are the closest to the correct rendering (that is, >>> matching camera JPEG, which is quite good when judging by eye) are the >>> "standard color matrix" and "linear Rec2020 RGB". >>> Both of them wildly differ from the in-camera JPEG in deep blue colors: >>> "standard color matrix" causes them to be clipped and to look really >>> unnatural, and "linear Rec2020 RGB" looks more or less natural, but the hue >>> is obviously different (blue gets moved to cyan). Hence I started to wonder >>> how easy is it to get a better color profile. >>> >>> I know that ideally this should be done with a color chart, but I don't >>> have one and don't have spare money for it at the moment. >>> >>> Also I can share a shot of the example object (Raw + JPEG) which has such >>> problematic color if anyone wants to test it, too. > > ___________________________________________________________________________ > darktable developer mailing list > to unsubscribe send a mail to darktable-dev+unsubscr...@lists.darktable.org > ___________________________________________________________________________ darktable developer mailing list to unsubscribe send a mail to darktable-dev+unsubscr...@lists.darktable.org
