Photoshop CS2 vs D300 LCD Color, Contrast, and Exposure

[VTEC_EATER]

Hey all. Ive been trying to tune my D300 to get the rear LCD display to show what my computer will show when it opens the images, and no matter what settings I try to change, I can never get it to look even remotely close. Here is the problem:

Take a photo with the D300, check the histogram, adjust exposure to get my histogram to look how I want it. Yay! Exposure looks great. My white balance looks how I want it to in the LCD display, so I assume that there should be minimal adjustments in post to get the photo how I want it...

Wrong.

I open the photo in Photoshop and it starts as a dull, washed out, gray looking mess. The photo is typically on the dark side (histogram remains the same however) and it lacks a lot of contrast. In general, the photo looks like poo. In the end I have to do a lot of tweaks with levels, saturation, color balance, exposure, etc. to get the photo to look like it did on the LCD, which I was how I wanted it.

The question is, how do I fix this problem? The D300 doesn't have a lot of controls to adjust the LCD. I can adjust its brightness, but no contrast. The white balance issue cant be changed unless I take the same photo with a different white balance.

I think the problem lies with Photoshop and how it interprets the image when it opens it. If so, what settings should I change in Photoshop to get the image to look like it does on the LCD of the D300?

In general, I'm getting tired of making the exact same adjustments to all my images because my photos look dull and boring when I put them in Photoshop.

[rawpaw18]

Are you shooting raw? I know with my camera and the Older Lightroom, they look like you describe when I open them in LR. Everything looks pumped up on the camera display when I shoot raw. Poo is right until I can tweak.
I do not use photoshop.

[jcon]

If youre using presets in camera, PS2 wont read them... atleast I think anyway.

[Prospero]

I am not sure what is causing this, but is it perhaps a colour profile thing? If you are using Adobe RGB in your camera, and photoshop assumes you are using SRGB, you will indeed get a dull, flat, gray looking mess (this is also what happens when you post a picture on a website without converting to SRGB. If the browser doesn't support profiles, the browser always assume you are using SRGB)

[XaiLo]

This is an Adobe issue in one respect... (Nikon and Adobe appear to be trying to play nice as evidenced in Adobe's camera profiles for ACR and Lightroom.) but where PhotoShop is concerned according to Eric Chan it has to do with the DNG specification in relation to CS2. I haven't read up on it enough to figure out how and why ACR and PhotoShop are tied to a specific specification. Curious though is that. ACR 4.7 is the last one that is compatible with CS3 yet I can not find anywhere so far that denotes a specification change from DNG 1.2.0.0. Eric Chan stated when confronted by a user about the CS2 to CS3 "The issue is DNG 1.2. Earlier versions of CR do not support DNG 1.2 and hence cannot handle the new extended profile format." While that explains issue within CR plugins themselves it does little to explain how that in turn relates to Photohop. The user contended it was a way for Adobe to force users to upgrade their version of Photoshop and make more money. And in leiu of a DNG specification change from CS3 to CS4 I have to agree.

[VTEC_EATER]

This is an Adobe issue in one respect... (Nikon and Adobe appear to be trying to play nice as evidenced in Adobe's camera profiles for ACR and Lightroom.) but where PhotoShop is concerned according to Eric Chan it has to do with the DNG specification in relation to CS2. I haven't read up on it enough to figure out how and why ACR and PhotoShop are tied to a specific specification. Curious though is that. ACR 4.7 is the last one that is compatible with CS3 yet I can not find anywhere so far that denotes a specification change from DNG 1.2.0.0. Eric Chan stated when confronted by a user about the CS2 to CS3 "The issue is DNG 1.2. Earlier versions of CR do not support DNG 1.2 and hence cannot handle the new extended profile format." While that explains issue within CR plugins themselves it does little to explain how that in turn relates to Photohop. The user contended it was a way for Adobe to force users to upgrade their version of Photoshop and make more money. And in leiu of a DNG specification change from CS3 to CS4 I have to agree.

Oh... Okay............

[K1W1]

I open the photo in Photoshop and it starts as a dull, washed out, gray looking mess. The photo is typically on the dark side (histogram remains the same however) and it lacks a lot of contrast.

Try another desktop monitor before you go too far into blaming the camera or the software.

[VTEC_EATER]

Try another desktop monitor before you go too far into blaming the camera or the software.

It happens both on my personal monitor (19" Dell (digital)) and on my work computer (30" Samsung 305t (digital)). Both run CS2 and both are set up for digital, which means I have no control over contrast, only brightness. Its kinda strange.

When the photos are adjusted, they look just fine on both a digital and analog monitor, but when they first load up into Photoshop they are total crap.

Now, Im almost 100% sure that I have my camera set up for Adobe RGB colorspace and not the standard sRGB. So it seems strange that its messed up like that.

[K1W1]

Have a look at this article (http://www.bythom.com/qadraw.htm). It may help a bit.

Don't forget that what you are seeing on the camera LCD is the jpeg version of the file and what you see on your Desktop is the interpretation of the RAW file as seen by Adobe camera raw.

Why not try an experiment.

Take 4 shots of the exact same scene.

1. jpeg
2. RAW Abobe RGB
3. RAW sRGBII
4. RAW sRGBI

no changes at all in the camera other than the colour space then see what each image looks like on screen.

[Visual Reality]

I didn't think CS2 ACR supported the D300?

I didn't see where you said you were shooting RAW or JPEG - if its RAW I'm sorry, you're going to need CS3 or just get Lightroom. You can download a 30-day trial for free and it is worth looking at.

You also should play with the Camera Calibration presets, they can very closely imitate your LCD results.

If you are shooting in JPEG, have you tried reverting to sRGB? It would help to see some samples also.

[K1W1]

I didn't think CS2 ACR supported the D300?


That's a very good point. I missed that one.

[Visual Reality]

I'm not sure though if it opens them incorrectly, or doesn't open them all. Don't have experience with that...

[DownByFive]

wait, maybe someone said this already, but no version of Photoshop applies any in camera color settings to RAW images, so what you get using Photoshop is a really bland looking picture...the image you see on your camera LCD is a preview version with all those presets applied. In order to get those applied to your RAW image when you open it up, you gotta use Capture NX. At least that's my understanding and experience....

[Visual Reality]

wait, maybe someone said this already, but no version of Photoshop applies any in camera color settings to RAW images, so what you get using Photoshop is a really bland looking picture...the image you see on your camera LCD is a preview version with all those presets applied. In order to get those applied to your RAW image when you open it up, you gotta use Capture NX. At least that's my understanding and experience....
This is true for .NEF, unless you use a Camera Profile preset with Camera Raw or Lightroom. If he is using JPEG it won't matter...

[jcon]

wait, maybe someone said this already, but no version of Photoshop applies any in camera color settings to RAW images, so what you get using Photoshop is a really bland looking picture...the image you see on your camera LCD is a preview version with all those presets applied. In order to get those applied to your RAW image when you open it up, you gotta use Capture NX. At least that's my understanding and experience....


Yep, someone did :D:p

[VTEC_EATER]

Hey guys, sorry its been so long.

Anyways, I shoot most of my stuff in jpeg mode as I need to get a new copy of Bibble Pro to work in RAW. I would love to work in RAW for any professional looking shots, ie. portfolio work, but for my everyday stuff, I shoot jpeg. All of my shooting banks are set up for Adobe RGB, not sRGB, so I would think Photoshop would be cool with this.

If the case is that CS2 does not support something that the D300 does then I will need to get some updated program that does work with the D300. I am not too willing to go to Lightroom as it has taken me so much time to learn Photoshop that I just don't want to learn more photo editing programs. I guess I'm stubborn that way.

But, I really want to get this situated as I feel I am not progressing in my photography when my LCD screen is falsely representing my shots.

[rawpaw18]

IMO no learning required for Lightroom, its features are so user friendly.

Download trial and take a look.

[Visual Reality]

I agree. I spent a lot of time learning how to tweak photos in Photoshop also, but its all pretty much thrown out the window once you start working with RAW in Lightroom. You will never go back except for a few rare advanced adjustments.

I would shoot in sRGB and set Photoshop also to sRGB also (North America General Purpose 2 is what preset I use). Let windows use whatever color profile you have, of if none, none. If that doesn't solve it then I don't know what it could be...

However if you want accuracy CNX or LR may be worth a try. I have LR2 looking 99% like my D300 LCD. I can hold them side by side and I have to pixel peep to see the differences. This is using the Neutral Profile in the camera, with the Neutral Profile in Lightroom 2 (Neutral has the best shadow and highlight handling by far).

[K1W1]

This is using the Neutral Profile in the camera, with the Neutral Profile in Lightroom 2 (Neutral has the best shadow and highlight handling by far).

Aren't these new camera profiles in Lightroom just the bees knees and now they have the dodge and burn tool thingy almost working properly the need for Photoshop is diminishing all the time. :D

BTW: I seem to recall reading that Lightroom internally uses something called ProRGB as it's colour space. I'm sure that if anybody is really interested they can Google it.

[jcon]

BTW: I seem to recall reading that Lightroom internally uses something called ProRGB as it's colour space. I'm sure that if anybody is really interested they can Google it.

I think CNX also has that color profile too.

[Dread Pirate Roberts]

It happens both on my personal monitor (19" Dell (digital)) and on my work computer (30" Samsung 305t (digital)).

Holy handgrenade batman. What job do you have during the day Vtec to get a 30" monitor? I struggle with a 17" at work and I'm passably senior with my employer!

[Visual Reality]

Aren't these new camera profiles in Lightroom just the bees knees and now they have the dodge and burn tool thingy almost working properly the need for Photoshop is diminishing all the time. :D

BTW: I seem to recall reading that Lightroom internally uses something called ProRGB as it's colour space. I'm sure that if anybody is really interested they can Google it.
Yup that's correct, it uses ProPhoto RGB which is the largest color space available.

VTEC, is your camera LCD brightness changed from it's default +0?

[VTEC_EATER]

Holy handgrenade batman. What job do you have during the day Vtec to get a 30" monitor? I struggle with a 17" at work and I'm passably senior with my employer!

Im an Architect by day. My boss somehow got sold on the idea that we need 30" monitors to do our work. Oh yeah, those old 19" monitors we had lying around are for our emails now... I wont get into the ridiculousness of his decision or even try to explain just what the man was thinking, but the 30" monitors are not necessary for my job. We were doing just fine with our 19" monitors. I do, however, really appreciate them for Photoshop.

My LCD brightness is set for +1, but even then, that has no affect on the colors. Its just brightness, and as long as my histogram looks good, Im not that concerned about tweaking that. My biggest problem are my colors. They just look flat and dull when I open the photos in Photoshop. They are nothing like they look on the LCD screen. That is the most annoying part. I'm constantly readjusting and tweaking my saturation to get it back to what it looks like on the camera.

I will take a look at Lightroom and see just what it does. I tried a trial copy a year or so back and I just wasn't convinced. Now with the D300, Photoshop is just not working properly. The D50, sure everything looked great. D300... no go. Stupid Photoshop.

[K1W1]

I will take a look at Lightroom and see just what it does. I tried a trial copy a year or so back and I just wasn't convinced. Now with the D300, Photoshop is just not working properly.

Lightroom 2.2 with camera profiles is an entirely different product from what you would have seen 12 months ago.

[Fiasco]

Yep, you'll need to upgrade photoshop if you want to keep shooting RAW.