EM10 RAW lightroom issue

Discussion in 'Image Processing' started by JulietMikeBravo, Oct 5, 2014.

  1. JulietMikeBravo

    JulietMikeBravo New to Mu-43

    7
    Oct 2, 2014
    Hi,

    I recently purchased a EM10 and continued one of my photography subjects namely concerts. I am mostly satisfied with the output, but I came across this picture that looks completely messed up in LR and is hard to correct:

    http://i.snag.gy/Btewy.jpg

    However, the preview from the RAW in Windows Explorer looks much better:

    http://snag.gy/kWR4m.jpg

    The preview in the camera itself shows a similar picture.

    In LR, it only seems that I can make a usable picture by converting to BW. There is no way of gettting the same picture as in the previews when using color, the blue channel seems totally blown out. What could I be doing wrong or is there some issue with LR processing of Olympus RAWs?
     
  2. mattia

    mattia Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 3, 2012
    The Netherlands
    Honestly, it's probably user error. The embedded JPG (what explorer shows you) is what Olympus Viewer will give you. I find Lightroom is not the easiest RAW engine/interface to coax optimal quality images from RAWs, and sometimes other converters work better for specific images. My personal preference at the moment (and for the past years) has been DxO Optics pro. If you want us to take a shot at it in Lightroom (or another engine), why not upload the RAW?
     
  3. JulietMikeBravo

    JulietMikeBravo New to Mu-43

    7
    Oct 2, 2014
    Here is the raw file:

    https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bz5VxWLMUqZ-SS1QOEZyaXpYWHM/view?usp=sharing

    Also downloaded DxO optics, currently trying it out.
     
  4. DennisC

    DennisC Mu-43 Regular

    76
    Jan 24, 2010
    Cheshire UK
  5. mprazoff

    mprazoff New to Mu-43

    6
    Oct 5, 2014
    Kailua HI
    The image only looks messed up using the using the Adobe Standard Profile under Camera Calibration. Switch to any of the OM-D E-M10 specific profiles, e.g. Camera Natural and the image is much more like the jpeg preview. I just got an E-M10 as well, and get even better results in Lightroom using the Huelight camera profiles for the E-M10. Well worth the $15 dollars they cost- they do a better job at giving you something between the Olympus processed colors and reality, especially for skin tones. I also discovered that Olympus RAW files in Lightroom need some additional sharpening and noise reduction, out of the box. With a simple preset, my photos import requiring minimal further processing. Let me know if the switch from the Adobe Standard Profile works for you.

    regards and enjoy the E-M10,

    Mark
     
  6. JulietMikeBravo

    JulietMikeBravo New to Mu-43

    7
    Oct 2, 2014
    I will try the camera profiles later on, DxO optics also displays the image correctly. Also less bloated software than LR. Thanks for the tips!
     
  7. mattia

    mattia Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 3, 2012
    The Netherlands
    DxO is less bloated (because it's less fully featured) but it is slower to render. I just like the results. I apparently need to update the ACR engine to open the E-M10 files, but DxO's default rendering is very similar to the ooc jpeg in terms of lighting and detail.
     
  8. GBarrington

    GBarrington Mu-43 Veteran

    Looks fine with ACDSee Pro as well. . .
     
  9. SojiOkita

    SojiOkita Mu-43 Top Veteran

    617
    Feb 23, 2014
    France
    Photos taken in "extreme" conditions sometimes need a little tweaking...
    I tried your RAW file.

    Lightroom default rendering is awful:
    PA030265_0_adobe_default.

    Olympus Viewer gives this:
    PA030265_1_olympus.
    Far better.

    However there are several solutions in Lightroom.

    1) In the camera calibration tab, set Blue Primary saturation to -20
    PA030265_2_adobe_satblue-20.

    2) Choose the Camera Natural profile (in my example blue saturation is 0 but it seems even better on -15)
    PA030265_3_camera_natural.

    3) Use Huelight profile (standard on my example - same comment as above. I used blue saturation 0 but it looks better with -15).
    PA030265_4_huelight.


    I think all 3 lightroom solutions offer a good starting point.
    (you've got to set white balance, saturation, highlights, and so on...)

    Full size pictures are here:
    http://dl.free.fr/re3nIZiEJ
    (I set noise reduction to 0 in Olympus Viewer, but it's amazing how all detail still seem to be gone) But it's better to experience it on Lightroom with the example RAW files.
     
  10. Just Jim

    Just Jim Mu-43 Top Veteran

    941
    Oct 20, 2011
    used Capture One Pro 8

    [​IMG]Low Key by slimmerjim, on Flickr

    I could recreate the LR mess with White balance

    hmm. I must have used a preset export and renamed the image, I was shooting Low Key still lifes the other day. I bet a file got over written. that's annoying. Just got C1 pro8. still wrapping my head around exports, and cataloging. Worth checking C1 out, as much as I love Adobe products, Capture One is better where it counts, the image.
     
  11. SojiOkita

    SojiOkita Mu-43 Top Veteran

    617
    Feb 23, 2014
    France
    I've compared C1 and LR several times, I always ended up in 90% images I like most with LR. I'm often clueless about what to do with my images with C1. I'm often not happy with the default rendering, and I'm not happy with what I get when I try to tweak the settings.

    I'm not saying LR is better. Both are great.
    It's just that in the end, what counts is what YOU can do with the software. It's a personal choice.

    However, I totally agree that C1 is worth checking out.
    There are so many good RAW software available, all of them have trial periods and it's easy to test several before buying.
    Sometimes... you just have a good feeling with one software and then everything is easier and faster.
     
  12. Just Jim

    Just Jim Mu-43 Top Veteran

    941
    Oct 20, 2011
    I'd agree with you on version 7 and before it was so slow and the user experience was terrible to the point of being just to dense and awkward. Version 8 that came out this year is swaaaaanky. The cataloging is still wonky, although improved to being usable. ...and obviously exporting is still wonky, coming from LR anyway.

    Mind you I've used LR from version 2 and am very well versed in LR, and before the current version of C1, I'd say anyone not using Adobe or the past few years was nuts. Now I'm trying to understand how to remove myself from the all in one DAM, raw converter, editing, output program. I want a real DAM(not an enhanced file browser), C1(or ACR if they can pick up their game), to PS. What I want isn't cheap ;.; Mostly the DAM part, because I want the ridiculous luxury of being able to bounce between raw converters.
     
  13. SojiOkita

    SojiOkita Mu-43 Top Veteran

    617
    Feb 23, 2014
    France
    I've always read that C1 has the best colors since version 3 (I think).
    I've tested every version since (not 8 yet), I even own 2 licences (3.7 LE from sandisk, 6 from digital photographer, both free) and never found the results better than what I have with my current RAW software (which has changed over the years, I used Canon RAW Image Task at first in 2005... then Bibble... then Lightroom from 2007/2008).
    Maybe it's just a matter of taste and that I don't like C1 colors... I think we all see colors our own way.

    Anyway, I'll try it, because I like to try RAW softwares... like I tried every version of dxo and never found a reason to switch. (I was pretty close twice).

    The good thing about Capture One is their upgrade policies.
    The software is expensive (229€) I can buy it for only 69€ with any of my old free licences codes.
     
  14. SojiOkita

    SojiOkita Mu-43 Top Veteran

    617
    Feb 23, 2014
    France
    I tried C1... it doesn't even regonize my GM1 RAW files. That's strange because it's not a new camera, but anyway I won't buy a RAW software that can't manage one of my two bodies.
    I wasn't impress by default color rendition on my E-M10, especially for skin tones, but as I only played with it a few minutes, that won't be fair to give a judgement here.
     
  15. JulietMikeBravo

    JulietMikeBravo New to Mu-43

    7
    Oct 2, 2014
    I did some more photographing and developing in LR, setting the camera profile to "Natural" and saving the default settings for import largely solves the problem. Still see some slight blue oversaturation but it is much, much better.
     
  16. SojiOkita

    SojiOkita Mu-43 Top Veteran

    617
    Feb 23, 2014
    France
    Yes, there is indeed a little too much blue saturations.
    I often go to the HSL tab and lower blue saturation a little.
    That's not specific to the E-M10, I already did that with my Canon 40D.