My Autopano Pro forum

Hello,

I have exactly the same issue. Both tiff and raw input outputs untagged tiffs with AutoPano.

I have met the developer at PhotoKina and he told me that, at least, Tiff input should produce Tiff ouputs with the metadata header copied. Same format for input/output allows a "simple" copy of the file header.

It must miss something because it still do not work for me as HerbChong.

Data :
- Mac OS 10.5.5
- Using Lightroom 2.1 RC
- APP 1.4.2

- Tiff input (from LR2): 16 bit, zip, ProPhoto
- raw input: Nikon D200 NEF

- Chosen output: Tiff 16 bit, zip

No metadata of any kind found in the output file.

It must say that in this era of "all about workflow and metadata catalogs", it should be useful to get a full color managed workflow and metadata (date/time, iptc,...) persistence.

Anyway, APP is a great tool that I still need to learn!

John.

my preference is to use RAW or 16-bit TIFF for input. JPG is not very useful to me.

Herb...

Paul Foley wrote:

Has this issue been resolved? Will APP2 be color managed? In other words will it maintain accurate color with color managed tagged files imported as 16 bit Tifs from either CS3/4 and Lightroom? Will it create a rendered file tagged with the profile supplied in the individual files (eg Adobe RGB 1998 or Pro Photo)?

I am new to APP (v1.4.2) and it changes the tone/contrast/color of my tagged files while rendering and then creates a file without a tagged profile. I have it set to do no color changes.

I can't use the program as is if it is not color managed. I guess I shouldn't have taken color management as a given. Then again it is a Pro program. I am quite upset at seemingly wasting all those Euros (at my lousy Australian $ exchange rate) especially as all other aspects of the program are so fantastic.

Cheers

I am tempted to ask why you did not discover this issue before you purchased the program?

Paul Foley wrote:

...APP (v1.4.2) and it changes the tone/contrast/color of my tagged files while rendering and then creates a file without a tagged profile. I have it set to do no color changes...Cheers

Should I understand here that there are 2 different subjects ?
+ color correction (LDR or HDR) with one/some fix (yellow) anchors and others anchors as 'transfert'... where APP is aiming to make a more uniform picture in levels or color across the panorama made from sources having different brightness / contrast / color balance. Using color correction means APP is doing 'color managment'.

+ rendered picture should include the same ICC profile (maybe your 'tagged' profile) as sources (and what if sources have different ICC profiles ? ). When APP doesn't transfert ICC profile to rendered picture means APP isn't doing 'color space' managment.

Hope this help.

Dear AlexandreJ, fma38 & marco-pano

I shoot all my images in Raw, convert in Lightroom after syncing exposure and white balance to be the same for all frames. Output in 16bit with ProPhoto RGB icc tag. I use a pano head and up till recently hand stitched the frames together.

I would probably not use AutoPano Pro for global colour corrections preferring to make final adjustments to the stitched 16 bit pano in PS. Ideally, I would like APP to be able to work it's stitching and blending magic on my balanced 16 bit files and export the stitched file with the original icc tag.

I have just received my GigaPan device (robot?) and wanted to use APP to stitch it's frames together so it is good to see that AlexandreJ indicates that it will be colour managed in the future (Tif is fine for my use).

I have since played around with opening the untagged files rendered by APP in Photoshop CS3 and find that having PS assign the Working RGB I use while opening gives colours close to the original frames as seen in the LR window. Because this is a 16 bit wide gamut colour space I can make contrast/tone adjustments (using a curves layer) without "jagging" the histogram.

Thanks for everyone's comments (and in the spirit of this new Barak Obama world even those made by Mr Mediavets who failed to notice my own self admonishment).

Cheers

Paul

fma38 wrote:

...* If all images are not in the same color space, they should be converted to the working space, a common space the user can choose.

Frédéric, I guess that it shouldn't happend that a user is mixing pictures having different color space. I agree that picture software should ask for a prefered working space and how to convert (perceptual, relative, absolute... as PS offers). It should also assign a color profile to picture without ICC tag and keep ICC profile from source to rendered pano (not so easy with TIF and PSD as explain by Alexandre).
Alexandre can certainly explain more but I guess that APP is not using the input ICC profile to change the R/G/B values of pixels when reading sources, APP is doing calculation / interpolation with the original R/G/B values. That's why transfering color space to final pano is interesting.
I didn't understand 'use input images profile to convert them to the monitor space'. I hope I've 'calibrated' my monitor and the graphic card receive specific icc profile and luminance transformation. Now, I don't know what is my 'monitor space', I prefer to stick to 'working color space'.

Oh, Alexandre post a reply while I was writing

Last edited by marco-pano (2008-11-06 09:14:56)

marco-pano wrote:

fma38 wrote:

...* If all images are not in the same color space, they should be converted to the working space, a common space the user can choose.

La théorie permet de concevoir un monde idéal. Dans ce monde idéal il serait possible :
- de convertir vers un espace de travail commun des images source ayant chacune leur profil propre (on peut même créer des profils pour chaque boîtier et chaque objectif dans le but de compenser leurs différences de rendu!)
- d'afficher les aperçus sur un écran en tenant compte de ses caractéristiques
- de calculer le rendu dans l'espace de travail choisi puis de le sauvegarder de manière à pouvoir l'imprimer sur n'importe quelle imprimante ou l'afficher sur n'importe quel écran avec toute la fidèlité dont chacun de ces "traducteurs" est capable...

Dans la pratique: !!! Il me semble qu'il y a énormément de cas de panoramas par assemblage où ces calculs fort subtils correspondent à une précision illusoire. Par exemple quand les variations de l'éclairage d'une photo à l'autre sont importantes (quand je lis que qu'une image traitée par Photomatix "est dans le même profil que l'image en entrée", je ne peux m'empêcher de  !) Plus important: on voit trop souvent des photos prises avec l'appareil "réglé sur Adobe RGB parce que c'est mieux" mais pas converties en sRGB avant d'être montrées sur Internet: dans ce cas c'est jamais mieux mais souvent beaucoup plus   D'un autre côté il n'y a pas de raison que ceux qui maîtrisent suffisemment ces questions pour arriver à de meilleurs résultats ne disposent pas d'outils prévus pour gérer les choses au mieux...
___

Sorry, but the above includes some humor attempts I can't translate from French. Inspiration coming from sulphurous http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/adobe-rgb.htm