# R5 colour science and skin tones.



## Chris.Chapterten (Aug 6, 2020)

After watching quite a bit of video footage and seeing images shot with the R5, I've noticed a difference in the colour science and skin tone rendering when compared to the EOS R or 5D Mark IV. I have always loved the colours I've gotten out of the EOS R and 5D Mark IV, so it was a little disheartening to see Canon decided to make changes to the R5's colour science. Skin tones and neutrals now seem to have a magenta cast.. similar to what the 5D Mark II and Mark III had.

If anyone who owns the camera has some more examples of skin tone rendering with the R5 I would love to see them!


----------



## StoicalEtcher (Aug 6, 2020)

Chris.Chapterten said:


> After watching quite a bit of video footage and seeing images shot with the R5, I've noticed a difference in the colour science and skin tone rendering when compared to the EOS R or 5D Mark IV. I have always loved the colours I've gotten out of the EOS R and 5D Mark IV, so it was a little disheartening to see Canon decided to make changes to the R5's colour science. Skin tones and neutrals now seem to have a magenta cast.. similar to what the 5D Mark II and Mark III had.
> 
> If anyone who owns the camera has some more examples of skin tone rendering with the R5 I would love to see them!


Bear in mind Chris that I'm not sure the software is properly there yet to deal with R5 files is it? Don't have one myself yet, but I didn't think Adobe CS was ready yet (or maybe only just now) - so I wonder how much rendering is still being done using proxies from other cameras (such as 5Div) which may not be spot on?

May be worth asking if anyone has yet been processing files using whatever is your go-to software, and see how those compare, if yet available?

Cheers. Stoical.


----------



## Viggo (Aug 6, 2020)

I use a ColorChecker always and make my own profiles to match, so it’s not always that important . However, the more the profile changes the raw the more noise you get, so it will be interesting to check out when I eventually get my hands on an R5.


----------



## Chris.Chapterten (Aug 6, 2020)

StoicalEtcher said:


> Bear in mind Chris that I'm not sure the software is properly there yet to deal with R5 files is it? Don't have one myself yet, but I didn't think Adobe CS was ready yet (or maybe only just now) - so I wonder how much rendering is still being done using proxies from other cameras (such as 5Div) which may not be spot on?
> 
> May be worth asking if anyone has yet been processing files using whatever is your go-to software, and see how those compare, if yet available?
> 
> Cheers. Stoical.



I think that's a fair point for the RAW files of photos. I'll have to wait and see how they look once adobe camera raw fully supports the files. However the thing that has me a little concerned is the magenta cast I'm seeing in the video files (which has nothing to do with RAW converters etc.).

Very curious what R5 owners think about the skin tones in video too. Cheers


----------



## analoggrotto (Aug 8, 2020)

Always felt reds were difficult on the 5D Mark IV. Really had to spend time in post to get them right.


----------



## Chris.Chapterten (Aug 8, 2020)

analoggrotto said:


> Always felt reds were difficult on the 5D Mark IV. Really had to spend time in post to get them right.


Interesting, I never noticed that personally, but I also didn"t shoot many red subjects. What did you usually have to do to correct them?


----------



## analoggrotto (Aug 8, 2020)

Chris.Chapterten said:


> Interesting, I never noticed that personally, but I also didn"t shoot many red subjects. What did you usually have to do to correct them?



I usually start with temperature then the R-G-B calibrations at the very bottom of the lightroom panel. I iterate next to the individual saturations. I also have never read any tutorials or watched any youtube videos (unless pewdiepie would do one lol), just kept at it by myself until the results were satisfying. And they are.


----------



## Act444 (Aug 8, 2020)

I don't like the way the 5D4 renders reds either. the 5DSR is MUCH better in this regard (as was the 5D3). Unfortunately, based on the DPReview tests, the R5 appears to be even worse.

(If anyone knows any color profiles in DPP that allow 5D4 or Rx files to mimic 5D3 colors, I'm all ears)


----------



## analoggrotto (Aug 8, 2020)

The 5DS/R was the last of Canon's non Dual Pixel, offboard ADC, sensors. Much changed after that. 

If I ever get my hands on an R5, I'd love to put it to the test.

Also, I tried shooting in AdobeRGB versus sRGB and it just did not work out.


----------



## Act444 (Aug 9, 2020)

I think the change in color science may be somehow tied to the Dual Pixel technology. Cameras with DP have the duller, flatter native color output (compared with previous generations). This started with the 5D4/M5/M6 generation. Now, with DP II hitting the scene with the R5/R6 generation of cameras, I'm seeing a further erosion in color reproduction of yellows and greens (and to a lesser extent, reds). Still much better (IMO) than the yellowish cast present on Sony's cameras, but a bit disappointing nonetheless to step backwards. I probably wouldn't even bother to mention it if it were easy to replicate the old colors in post, but it has proven to be a bit tricky, as a poster above pointed out. 

Think that's what helps make the 5DS/R my favorite portrait-type camera thus far (apart from the resolution); the RAW files need only minimal tweaking (in most cases), very sharp and the strong OOC reds and yellows make for nice warm skin tones.


----------



## privatebydesign (Aug 9, 2020)

analoggrotto said:


> Chris.Chapterten said:
> 
> 
> > analoggrotto said:
> ...



Technically reds can be difficult on all regular Bayer array sensors because the red channel normally clips first which means you get blocks of red rather than subtle tonal transitions, just watch your RGB histogram for clipped red channel issues. The hue is easily and very quickly dealt with by using a ColorChecker passport, no guesswork, no wasted time, just accurate color.

The car above is a perfect example of clipped red channel blocking, open it in PS or LR and run the dropper tool over it and see how much of it is red channel 255, way too much.


----------



## privatebydesign (Aug 9, 2020)

analoggrotto said:


> The 5DS/R was the last of Canon's non Dual Pixel, offboard ADC, sensors. Much changed after that.
> 
> If I ever get my hands on an R5, I'd love to put it to the test.
> 
> Also, I tried shooting in AdobeRGB versus sRGB and it just did not work out.


If you shoot RAW and use Lightroom capturing in AdobeRGB or sRGB makes no difference to the image, Lightroom uses it's own colorspace in which to process RAW files. Having said that the choice will impact the in camera preview and the in camera histogram. If you want to use your channel histogram to warn about channel clipping then set the camera to AdobeRGB as it will give you a better and more accurate indication than sRGB will.


----------



## analoggrotto (Aug 9, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> Technically reds can be difficult on all regular Bayer array sensors because the red channel normally clips first which means you get blocks of red rather than subtle tonal transitions, just watch your RGB histogram for clipped red channel issues. The hue is easily and very quickly dealt with by using a ColorChecker passport, no guesswork, no wasted time, just accurate color.
> 
> The car above is a perfect example of clipped red channel blocking, open it in PS or LR and run the dropper tool over it and see how much of it is red channel 255, way too much.


If it is too much, it is deliberate. I wanted to match my memory of how I thought I saw the car; which of course is subjective. But I'll give your advice a shot.


----------



## privatebydesign (Aug 9, 2020)

analoggrotto said:


> If it is too much, it is deliberate. I wanted to match my memory of how I thought I saw the car; which of course is subjective. But I'll give your advice a shot.


I'm certainly not criticizing, merely trying to point out a different way to process so there is no need to _"Really had to spend time in post to get them right." _If we can't help each other out with stuff other than how fast the R5 overheats then the forum will be a very negative place! 

The Porsche in your picture is Guards Red, here is the official picture from Porsche of a Guards Red 911.



If you put it into Photoshop and make a colored fill layer on top with red at 255 and set the blend mode to 'difference', in an optimally exposed red channel image you will see a little black but mostly gradations, you don't want blocks of black.

It will look like this. Small black patches on the tops of the fenders hood, C-pillar etc but quickly fading to nice gradations.



With the same fill layer your image looks like this. Large black patches on the three fenders, the hood the roof and the front bumper.



To be clear, there are two different aspects at play, one is WB which as you say is personal to the day and specific light source, that accounts for the differing hue, but the blocking (lack of tonality) is due to a clipped red channel which can only be fixed by less exposure at capture it can't be fixed in post.

Sorry if I have made a pain of myself, truthfully I consider this a learning site and with there having been so much negativity here recently I thought it appropriate to try to give out some positive comments. Reds are defiantly an issue for many digital cameras and knowing how to get them right if and when we need to can make a huge difference and save a ton of time.


----------



## SteveC (Aug 9, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> I'm certainly not criticizing, merely trying to point out a different way to process so there is no need to _"Really had to spend time in post to get them right." _If we can't help each other out with stuff other than how fast the R5 overheats then the forum will be a very negative place!
> 
> The Porsche in your picture is Guards Red, here is the official picture from Porsche of a Guards Red 911.
> View attachment 192024
> ...



I found this educational, but of course the person whose work is being critiqued can oft-times be uncomfortable with the honor. I just try to remember when I am the one who is on the hot seat that at least my effort was worth trying to improve on, rather than hopeless. I've been the critiquer in some endeavors a number of times, and I hate when something is so bad you don't know where to begin. (I am reminded of a specification I wrote at work...it went to someone for review and came back with nearly 200 annotations--good ones. When I went to go see the guy to ask a question about one of them, he actually mimed patting me on the head--in spite of the two hundred comments he thought I had done a good job.


----------



## analoggrotto (Aug 9, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> Sorry if I have made a pain of myself, truthfully I consider this a learning site and with there having been so much negativity here recently I thought it appropriate to try to give out some positive comments. Reds are defiantly an issue for many digital cameras and knowing how to get them right if and when we need to can make a huge difference and save a ton of time.



Absolutely not, I too found your explanation and exhibits to be helpful. I agree about the clipping, and probably pursue some further investigation when I find the RAW file for that picture. Thanks for taking the time for that.

When I get my R5, if it does not light ablaze and kill the mail carrier, sending me in federal penitentiary, I'll start out with it set to AdobeRGB.

Cheers

(edit, minor typos and w/c)


----------



## Chris.Chapterten (Aug 10, 2020)

It looks like a big reason for the red clipping in the Porsche photo is because it has been shot in direct sunlight. The official porsche picture is under studio lights which would no doubt be much softer than direct sun and would have allowed for those gradations in the paint.

After receiving my R5 and taking a few portraits, I am less concerned abou the magenta cast I had noticed previously. After converting the images with the Adobe DNG converter and using the "adobe color" profile, moving the green/magenta slider to 0 or +5 seems to have removed the colour cast completely (default starting point was +14 magenta).

I'll be doing some more testing in mixed lighting conditions to get a better feel for the camera... will let you know how I get on.


----------



## privatebydesign (Aug 10, 2020)

Chris.Chapterten said:


> It looks like a big reason for the red clipping in the Porsche photo is because it has been shot in direct sunlight. The official porsche picture is under studio lights which would no doubt be much softer than direct sun and would have allowed for those gradations in the paint.


No, the light source is irrelevant the exposure is the important part whatever the lighting and for a very saturated color it is critical to look at the channel histogram to get the optimal exposure. The studio shot will have had complete control over the lights that is true, but the blended layer illustrates that they created that light and subsequent exposure optimally for their red channel.

Put another way, in the studio they had complete control over both the lights and exposure, for the sunlight shot you can only control the exposure, ergo any problem is an exposure problem.


----------



## Chris.Chapterten (Aug 10, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> No, the light source is irrelevant the exposure is the important part whatever the lighting and for a very saturated color it is critical to look at the channel histogram to get the optimal exposure. The studio shot will have had complete control over the lights that is true, but the blended layer illustrates that they created that light and subsequent exposure optimally for their red channel.
> 
> Put another way, in the studio they had complete control over both the lights and exposure, for the sunlight shot you can only control the exposure, ergo any problem is an exposure problem.


That's true..

Another thing to keep in mind with the official porsche image is that a lot of the gradients we are seeing are probably created in post. Very common to do so in Automotive photography. Unwanted reflections and highlights are often cloned out.


----------



## Chris.Chapterten (Aug 11, 2020)

Well I have tested the R5 in some different lighting conditions while taking portraits. Initially I felt the colours were quite neutral but upon further testing there is definitely a magenta colour cast. This colour cast is present to the same extent whether using the Adobe DNG converter (set to 'Adobe Color' in camera raw) or Canon DPP4 (set to 'camera neutral')

I tested using natural window light and a Litepanels Gemimi 2x1 LED panel set to 4000k (a setting in which the light is completely neutral in terms of green / magenta shift). I found with the DNG file through Adobe DNG converter I was having to dial in -15 magenta (+15 green) on the slider to neutralize the colour cast. In DPP4 I was having to dial in +5 green (out of a maximum 10).

Overall I would say the magenta colour cast is less than what is present on the 5D Mark II but about the same as the 5D Mark III.

Honestly I'm a little dissapointed with this as I really loved the colour rendition on my 5D IV and EOS R, I found them to be very neutral for portraits. I will keep doing some further testing.. but for now I have the R5 set to +5 green in the cameras white balance settings to account for the magenta shift and it seems to be doing the job for me. My only concern is that if the Magenta cast is mostly affecting skin tones and not background / foreground elements then I may introduce a green colour cast to other areas of the image as a consequence of correcting for the skin.

I'll report back once I've had a chance to test the R5 on a fashion shoot under even more varied lighting conditions.


----------



## Chris.Chapterten (Aug 11, 2020)

Here are a couple of quick test shots that demonstrate the most extreme difference I have been able to find between EOS R and R5 in terms of colour (magenta cast).

Left image is EOS R set to 'adobe color' (f1.2, 1/200 sec, ISO 100)
Right image is R5 set to 'adobe color' (f1.2 1/200 sec, ISO 100)

Lighting is Dedolight DLED7 set at 2800k from camera left and Litepanels Gemini 2x1 set at 10,000k from directly in front.

Another interesting finding is that the R5 files are looking quite a bit darker than the EOS R files at the same setting when viewing in Adobe Camera Raw as a DNG. When opening the R5 files in DPP they are much brighter. In the below example the lights are set to the same power and at the same distance, but in the EOS R image I actually decreased exposure by 0.3EV to make them a little more comparable. Found that a bit strange.

When using the lights set at 4000kelvin the difference between the two cameras still exists but it is a bit more subtle...


----------



## Viggo (Aug 11, 2020)

Did you just trust the Kelvin setting on your lights, or is this measured, then how? Or sampled from gray card etc?


----------



## Chris.Chapterten (Aug 11, 2020)

Viggo said:


> Did you just trust the Kelvin setting on your lights, or is this measured, then how? Or sampled from gray card etc?


In those particular examples the Litepanels Gemini was set to 10,000 kelvin. I doubt it is very accurate at that setting and unfortunately I don't own a colour meter to get a bettet idea of what is going on. I wanted to push the colour temperature difference to the extreme to see how the different sensors would react to a more challenging situation.

When the Gemini is set to 4000k it is accurate to within +-50k and has a 0 DUV measurement (no green or magenta cast) so I trust it at that particular setting. I set the R5 to +5 green in camera when using the light at 4000k and the magenta cast was mostly gone. It also rendered my 5500k Broncolor studio flash quite neutral with the same +5 green setting. So I'm inclined to just leave the camera set to +5 green permanently.

I will be doing some more tests soon to see what is going on. I'm eagerly awaiting full camera raw support from Adobe to see if that makes a difference too..


----------



## Chris.Chapterten (Aug 11, 2020)

Here is a test shot with the front light set to 4000k (Gemini) and the side light set to 2800k (Dedolight). The camera was set at 4000k with a +5 green value

Second image is using natural window light with the same in camera +5 green value and set to 5000k


----------



## SecureGSM (Aug 11, 2020)

Chris.Chapterten said:


> In those particular examples the Litepanels Gemini was set to 10,000 kelvin. I doubt it is very accurate at that setting and unfortunately I don't own a colour meter to get a bettet idea of what is going on. I wanted to push the colour temperature difference to the extreme to see how the different sensors would react to a more challenging situation.
> 
> When the Gemini is set to 4000k it is accurate to within +-50k and has a 0 DUV measurement (no green or magenta cast) so I trust it at that particular setting. I set the R5 to +5 green in camera when using the light at 4000k and the magenta cast was mostly gone. It also rendered my 5500k Broncolor studio flash quite neutral with the same +5 green setting. So I'm inclined to just leave the camera set to +5 green permanently.
> 
> I will be doing some more tests soon to see what is going on. I'm eagerly awaiting full camera raw support from Adobe to see if that makes a difference too..


Shoot a quick message to Canon Australia. Let them know. This should have been quite easy to correct via a firmware update. I think.


----------



## Chris.Chapterten (Aug 11, 2020)

SecureGSM said:


> Shoot a quick message to Canon Australia. Let them know. This should have been quite easy to correct via a firmware update. I think.


I might contact them, thanks for the suggestion. I'm not very confident in it being addressed in a firmware update as it would be quite a major change to the camera. My own testing and all of the sample images I've seen so far all seem to have a noticeable magenta bias. It seems that for some reason Canon has reverted to it's older colour science... quite different to the 5Div and EOS R which I loved for colour!


----------



## stevelee (Aug 11, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> Reds are defiantly an issue


Autocorrect sometimes makes you say things you didn't Nintendo. But in this case, it might be appropriate.

I take it that the moral of your story is that when photographing well-lit expanses of color, particularly red, underexposing a bit can help preserve gradations in that color. Is that about it? And one can use the in-camera histogram as a rough guide, realizing that it is a representation of the JPEG the camera would do on its own?

I would have never thought of that. So it is useful to have one more thing to keep in mind in adjusting exposure and making compromises. In the Porsche picture, there need be little concern for preserving shadow detail in the dark corners of the background. In situations where more issues are in question at the same time, bracketing can be in order, I'd expect.


----------



## stevelee (Aug 11, 2020)

I'm not sure I follow all the ins and outs here. I mean, if the default setting is +16 Magenta, why is it a surprise to have a magenta cast? Wouldn't this say more about the conversion software than about the camera per se? Wouldn't just changing the default in Lightroom take care of the problem, or am I missing something?


----------



## analoggrotto (Aug 12, 2020)

Chris.Chapterten said:


> It looks like a big reason for the red clipping in the Porsche photo is because it has been shot in direct sunlight. The official porsche picture is under studio lights which would no doubt be much softer than direct sun and would have allowed for those gradations in the paint.
> 
> After receiving my R5 and taking a few portraits, I am less concerned abou the magenta cast I had noticed previously. After converting the images with the Adobe DNG converter and using the "adobe color" profile, moving the green/magenta slider to 0 or +5 seems to have removed the colour cast completely (default starting point was +14 magenta).
> 
> I'll be doing some more testing in mixed lighting conditions to get a better feel for the camera... will let you know how I get on.



Another reason could be that I boosted the reds in LR, switched to PS for some background trickerly, reverted to LR and boosted the reds even further. I really should go back to the source files and figure out what was going on. All I know is that it was quite satisfying in the end and I dont even really like Porsche.


----------



## Chris.Chapterten (Aug 13, 2020)

stevelee said:


> I'm not sure I follow all the ins and outs here. I mean, if the default setting is +16 Magenta, why is it a surprise to have a magenta cast? Wouldn't this say more about the conversion software than about the camera per se? Wouldn't just changing the default in Lightroom take care of the problem, or am I missing something?


On the EOS R, the default in Adobe Camera Raw is around +17 magenta and those files have no magenta cast. I am finding on some R5 files I am having to go -10 to sometimes -20 magenta to correct for the magenta cast. There is a massive difference between R raw files and R5 raw files in this sense.

I should also point out that this magenta cast is also present when using the canon DPP4 software which by default is set to 0 +- green/magenta. Using DPP4 I am having to go to +5 green and sometimes as much as +10 green (maximum setting) to correct the colours.

I have no idea why Canon decided to change the colour science so much... but the EOS R is much more to my liking in all of my tests so far...


----------



## sobrien (Aug 13, 2020)

Lots of people complained that the 5D4/R images were producing skins tones that were too green. You can’t please everyone when it comes to colours!


----------



## Chris.Chapterten (Aug 13, 2020)

sobrien said:


> Lots of people complained that the 5D4/R images were producing skins tones that were too green. You can’t please everyone when it comes to colours!


That's very true, it is subjective after all. Personally I loved the colours of the 5d4 and EOS R and was hoping they would continue into the R5..


----------



## stevelee (Aug 13, 2020)

Chris.Chapterten said:


> That's very true, it is subjective after all. Personally I loved the colours of the 5d4 and EOS R and was hoping they would continue into the R5..


So why don't you set your own Lightroom and ACR defaults accordingly?


----------



## Act444 (Aug 13, 2020)

sobrien said:


> Lots of people complained that the 5D4/R images were producing skins tones that were too green. You can’t please everyone when it comes to colours!



If I’m honest, I think a red tint is easier to deal with on skin than a green one. Red can be worked with, but green just looks....unnatural. IMO. That’s a change I lamented going from the 5D3 to the 5D4. Of course, no color cast at all would be ideal, but if one _had_ to be picked...

It’s the blandness that I dislike though, not so much the tint. It seems to be challenging at best to replicate older colors, at least in DPP.


----------

