Lumariver Profile Designer

Creating Capture One Pro Camera Profiles with Lumariver (Podcast 618)

Note that in September 2020 I updated this tutorial as a new post here. The process has become much easier and less error-prone following some updates, so please follow the later tutorial. Following on from the previous episode, this week we look at creating camera profiles for Capture One Pro using a product called Lumariver Profile Designer. This is a video again, so the audio player is basically redundant, but I'll include it anyway. I'll leave my notes below, for those that prefer to read, but this really is an episode that requires you to watch the video to not...

Thank you for visiting!

Martin Bailey has been releasing weekly podcasts and blog posts since 2005! Almost all of the 760+ posts here contain a full text article with photographs and illustations, and take at least one day, sometimes three to four days to produce.

You are welcome to listen to the Podcast with the audio player and follow along with the images discussed below.

If you value what we do, please consider a Patreon contribution of $3 or more to unlock the full text of more than 760 posts and gain access to the exclusive MBP Community. There are also higher tiers with various benefits, some including one-to-one Mentorship.

Please visit our Patreon site for full details, and take your photography to a whole new level! Become a Patron!
Existing Patrons please login to access posts and benefits. Thanks for being awesome!

';

Image Gallery

To view this content, you must be a member of Martin's Patreon at $3 or more
Unlock with Patreon
Martin Bailey
Martin Bailey is a nature and wildlife photographer and educator based in Tokyo. He's a pioneering Podcaster and blogger, and an X-Rite Coloratti member.
39 Comments
  • Luis Gabriel
    Posted at 09:07h, 28 May Reply

    Hello!
    So lets say I take a photo that shows in camera white balance as 6000k even though my profile was done with the same strobe and softbox and white was measured as 5200 from the Colorchecker patch.
    Do you adjust the White Balance to 5200 for the photo then or leave it as the camera determined with the AWB? I am guessing you move it to what you measured when doing the profile or adjust to meet my preference. But would like to hear your opinion.

    Thanks!!!

    • Martin Bailey
      Posted at 10:01h, 18 June Reply

      Hi Luis,

      Sorry for the late reply. I’ve just got back from Namibia.

      In this situation, you would definitely adjust to the white balance measured from the ColorChecker Patch. That will be more accurate than the camera’s AWB.

      Cheers,
      Martin.

  • Preben Bruus
    Posted at 18:21h, 09 July Reply

    Hi Martin

    I use Capture One and Colorchecker Passport for doing my profiles in LumaRiver.

    Is it a good idear to set WB manualy in camera to correspond with the scene ( example 5200K for a flash photo), and then later check and perhaps adjust it ( to 5200 ) using Color Picker in Capture One’s White Balance Tools before making the Low and the Curve files ?

    Thanks

    • Martin Bailey
      Posted at 00:29h, 10 July Reply

      Hi Preben,

      Until a few years ago, I’d have said yes, without hesitation, but Auto White Balance is now so good that I think you’d be fine to use an automatically set White Balance, then adjust to the accurate White Balance using the Color Picker as you mentioned.

      It won’t hurt at all to set it manually before you shoot the target, but I personally don’t think it’s necessary for regular lighting. If you were working in very strange lighting that confuses the camera’s AWB, then I’d be more likely to try to set it manually.

      I hope that makes sense.

      Regards,
      Martin.

  • Preben Bruus
    Posted at 02:27h, 10 July Reply

    Hi Martin

    Yes, it make sence…..thank’s for answering 😉

    Regards
    Preben

  • Aleksander
    Posted at 02:51h, 28 August Reply

    Awesome, made me buy it and I love it. Using CaptureOne here and Lumariver. Thanks.

    • Martin Bailey
      Posted at 08:47h, 28 August Reply

      That’s great Aleksander. I’m pleased you found this useful.

  • Olivier Gisiger
    Posted at 00:27h, 09 November Reply

    Hi Martin,

    Great video. Made me bought a license.
    But I have a question: in your video, you measure the white patch and make the white balance on a non linear image.
    In the manual, they state:

    Make sure the target is well-exposed. As a rough guide the white patch should end up around value 220 (with the linear curve) inside Capture One.

    Are both ways correct?

    With kind regards,

    • Martin Bailey
      Posted at 09:04h, 09 November Reply

      Hi Oliver,

      I think I mentioned that difference at some point, but if I recall, when you follow the manual and do what they say, you end up with a profile that is too bright and requires a lot of messing around to actually bring your image back to something pleasing, and that is too much work for me. Plus it just feels wrong, as though I’m causing myself to have to rescue the image.

      If you have the software now, try it for yourself in both methods and compare your results, but in my own tests, I had to use the settings that I specified.

      I hope that helps.

      Regards,
      Martin.

      • Olivier Gisiger
        Posted at 18:28h, 09 November Reply

        Hi Martin,

        You are absolutely right!

        I made new tests and the profile made following your suggestion is more balanced.
        As in your examples, I could also see a shift in the reds between the normal ICC profile and the 3D reproduction one, the latter being nearer to reality..

        Will now make further profiles for different lens combinations.

        Kind regards,
        Olivier

  • Preben Bruus
    Posted at 19:23h, 09 November Reply

    Hi Oliver ( and Martin )

    My workflow:

    I take some pictures in the light condition with different apertures

    I open CP1 and choose the picture where I measures about 220 in the first patch on the left in the portrait row, or the middle patch on the landscape row with the white balance pipette when No color correction AND linear response curve is chosen. (just like it says in Lumariver manual)

    Remember to set Curve mode to ADD to Base Curve or else you new camera profile will be too bright.

    With this workflow my new camera profile is perfect.

    kind regars,
    Preben

    • Martin Bailey
      Posted at 20:05h, 09 November Reply

      Hi Preben,

      I do everything that you say, except the Linear response curve, but I wonder, do you Load a Custom Curve for your camera from Capture One Pro, as I mention at around 7 minutes into the video? If not, that could be the reason you are getting good results with a linear curve. If you did, I wonder why there’s a difference in our findings.

      Personally, I tried it according to the Manual and it didn’t work well for me, which is why I am showing the method that I settled on.

      Regards,
      Martin.

      • Gert Engman
        Posted at 02:50h, 07 March Reply

        Martin! I just found your review and I have the following question. I träbro follow your instructions and the profiles come out OK except that they are quite a bit darker, in spite of the fact that I use “add” and not replace. What I find strange is that, when I watch your video and see the color differences between the various profiles, you seem to use Auto curves. When I do that I see no difference between the profiles, including the generic one. I have to use a linear curve for the difference to show up. Am I correct or are you using linear curve also.

  • Preben Bruus
    Posted at 20:51h, 09 November Reply

    Hi Martin

    Yes…I load the default camera profile from CP1 Color Profile/camera.under Tone Curve and Drop Custom Curve……and then use Add to Base Curve in Curve Mode…..this is important or else you get a profile that is not good.

    Regards,
    Preben

    • Martin Bailey
      Posted at 22:01h, 09 November Reply

      Hi Preben,

      I know this is important. That’s why I followed these steps in my video above.

      I’m trying to figure out why you get a good profile following the manual when I could not.

      Regards,
      Martin.

  • Preben Bruus
    Posted at 22:59h, 09 November Reply

    Hi Martin

    I folllow the manual…so it’s a good questing why it works for me ?

    I have made a profile for Daylight/Speedlight ( 5000K ) and one for Incandecent light ( 2850k ) and these profiles ar better than CP1’s default profiles.

    Regards,
    Preben

    • Martin Bailey
      Posted at 01:00h, 10 November Reply

      Hi Preben,

      If you follow this thread back to Olivier’s question, that you also answered, you’ll see that Olivier was questioning why I showed something different to what the manual says, and I explained in my reply that when I follow the manual I do not get pleasing results. You are saying that you do get good results, so I’m wondering why. That’s all.

      Regards,
      Martin.

  • Preben Bruus
    Posted at 03:21h, 10 November Reply

    Hi Martin

    I apologize if you feel that i am attacking you….that was and is not my intention !
    I have always got very good respons from you !

    I have now tried to maked a profile with following settings.:

    I used a correct exposed picture mesuring 226 with settings ICC: No color Correction and Curve: Film Standard V2 ( NIkon D3S) and then exported it as pict_curve.tiff.
    Then I have change Curve to Linear Response and exported it as pict_linear.tiff.
    I have then make a profile in LumaRiver with these to files and my camera specific curve in Custom Curve and Add to base curve….just as your video explained.

    I can’t see any difference to the profile I have made earlier make on the LumaRiver manual when I’am comparing these two profiles ?

    Regards,
    Preben

    • Martin Bailey
      Posted at 10:24h, 10 November Reply

      Hi Preben,

      Not at all. I’m just having a hard time figuring out what your point is if you were not simply telling me that for you, this process works according to the manual.

      But, from the process that you wrote above, it looks like you are doing exactly what I explained in the video, so I’m still a little confused, but not to worry.

      Regards,
      Martin.

  • Preben Bruus
    Posted at 17:59h, 10 November Reply

    Hi Martin

    Glad to hear that….

    I also apologize for my writing in english….I am living in Denmark 😉

    I have tried following the video again and again and I can’t figure out where I might failed.

    Regards,
    Preben

    • Martin Bailey
      Posted at 01:27h, 11 November Reply

      Hi Preben,

      No, you didn’t fail at all. It’s just that at first I thought you were saying that you did something different and were correcting my steps, but now it seems like you are doing the same procedure as me, so we’re on the same page. All is good! 🙂

      Regards,
      Martin.

  • Preben Bruus
    Posted at 19:26h, 11 November Reply

    Hi Martin

    Thanks 😉

    By the way….when I was reading the manual from LumaRiver again I fell over this “Lumariver Profile Designer’s profiles will never exceed the ProPhoto color space.”.

    I normaly use ProPhoto Colorspace in my workflow in CP1 and later in Photoshow if further adjustments is necessary..

    Do you know if my new cameraprofiles maked in LumaRiver therefore will decrease the colorspace in my pictures ?

    Regards,
    Preben

  • Martin Bailey
    Posted at 19:43h, 11 November Reply

    Hi Preben,

    If you haven’t seen this, take a look at this video, especially shortly after 5:30 when I show just how large the ProPhoto Color space is. If Lumariver is using ProPhoto RGB we don’t have anything to worry about.

    https://vimeo.com/96582689

    Regards,
    Martin.

  • Preben Bruus
    Posted at 21:12h, 11 November Reply

    Hi Martin,

    Yes…and it was because of your great video I decided to buy the software 😉

    I see you are talking about Gamut Compression at about 7:40……..I think it is this you mean ?

    I have allready written that I am pleased with the result of my new camera profiles maked by the LumaRiver software…….and it was just because I fell over the notes in the LumaRiver User manual under “Inspector color spaces” saying
    •ProPhoto — ProPhotoRGB color space, use gamma 1.8 if you want its traditional gamma. Lumariver Profile Designer’s profiles will never exceed the ProPhoto color space.

    Regards,
    Preben.

    • Martin Bailey
      Posted at 11:05h, 12 November Reply

      Hi Preben,

      I’m now in an airport with flaky WIFI so I can’t check, but are you referencing the LumaRiver video? I linked to a video that shows how wide the ProPhoto color space is. The Lumariver Profile never exceeding the huge ProPhoto workspace is not a problem, I assure you.

      Regards,
      Martin.

  • Olivier Gisiger
    Posted at 22:53h, 11 November Reply

    Hi Martin, Hi Preben,

    Here is my 5 cents to the conversation 😉

    Until I discovered Martin’s video, I was working with Christophe Metairie from CMP Color (http://www.cmp-color.fr/).
    After watching the video, I decided to see if it would be possible to recreate the profiles made by Christophe. That was the goal of the following trials:

    The CMP color profile as a reference:
    http://swissimages.com/ColorProfiles/D850_CMP.jpg

    The default Capture One profile:
    http://swissimages.com/ColorProfiles/D850_CO-D850-Generic.jpg

    The LumaRiver profile following the user guide:
    http://swissimages.com/ColorProfiles/D850_LR-D850-UserGuide.jpg

    The LumaRiver profile following Martin’s video:
    http://swissimages.com/ColorProfiles/D850_LR-D850-Martin.jpg

    The LumaRiver 3D profile:
    http://swissimages.com/ColorProfiles/D850_LR-D850-3D.jpg

    To compare them, I focused on the wood door rendering and the color of the sky.
    What I noticed is the difference of luminance on the wood door between the user guide way and the Martin’s way. As we use the Auto curve, it could be possible that it adds a bit too much lightness which is corrected if you choose to measure the patch after adding the Auto curve.
    What I also notice is the differences of hue in the reds and in the blues (sky). Capture One Generic, CMP and LumaRiver 3D are more reddish and turquoise where user guide and Martin’s way are more orange and more realistic blue.
    I wasn’t able to recreate the quality of CMP’s profile but the 3D one is really close.

    What Christophe states is that default profiles from Adobe, Phase One, DxO have tendencies to crush the highlights, that is maybe the reason why the 3D profile is closer to his profile.

    What do you think about it?

    Regards,

    Olivier

    • Martin Bailey
      Posted at 13:15h, 20 December Reply

      Hi Olivier,

      Sorry for my very delayed reply here. I was busy or traveling when you first posted this, and figured I needed more time to take a look and then forgot about it.

      I’d say that your investigation is spot on. I have found that my ICC profile, especially the 3D version, can be a little bit on the bright side. I always expose to the right in the field, but then when I import my images and use the Lumariver profile, sometimes the images are a little overexposed, and I have to pull them down a little. If I switch back to the Capture One Pro default ICC profile, the images are not over-exposed, so it’s definitely due to the profile.

      I’d really like to create a profile somewhere between what I get by following the instructions, i.e. too dark, and my current profiles, which are a tad too bright. I’ll revisit this as time allows and report back if I find anything new to add to the conversation.

      Regards,
      Martin.

  • Preben Bruus
    Posted at 20:16h, 12 November Reply

    Hi Oliver, Hi Martin

    Very good examples…thanks.

    Clearly there is a difference between default, LR and LR 3D
    And I can see the very little difference i luminosity in the door between userguide way and Martin’s way ( picture 3 and 4 )….but I can’t see any difference in values and curves in CP1’s panels ?.

    Martin:
    Yes….it is your LumaRiver video I am refering to……I can’t see the other link ?
    But I’m glad to hear you saying that there is no problem with ProPhoto colorspace and LumaRiver.

    Regards,
    Preben

  • PrebenBruus
    Posted at 18:49h, 13 November Reply

    Hi Martin,

    Now the link is working for me…thanks.

    Very good video !

    Regards,
    Preben

  • William David
    Posted at 00:19h, 20 December Reply

    Hi Martin,
    Nice video, thank’s for this useful great job!
    I’m a french studio product photographer and I use 3 Tilt/Shift lenses with my Canon camera.
    I would like to know if I must create 1 ICC Profile for each lenses for studio with flash and 3 others ICC Profil for outdoor for architecture photos? And if so at what °K color (5500, 6400)?
    If I thake architecture pictures indoor with tungsten or Fluorescent Lamp lights should I make another profiles?
    Best regards
    William David

    • Martin Bailey
      Posted at 13:08h, 20 December Reply

      Hi William,

      You’re welcome, on the video etc. I’m pleased you’ve found this useful.

      I don’t think it’s necessary to create a different profile for each lens. The lens itself doesn’t affect the color enough to warrant this in my opinion.

      You would probably benefit from creating a different profile for light sources that differ as much as say daylight and tungsten or fluorescent lighting. I’ve been using the same profile for daylight, including cloudy, sunny etc. but for completely different light, it’s worth creating a different profile. With regards to the color temperature, I’ve been using the same profile for ranges between 4000 and 6500 and they all look fine, so there is quite a lot of leeway in a single profile.

      I hope that helps!

      Regards,
      Martin.

      • William David
        Posted at 20:19h, 20 December Reply

        Hi Martin,

        Thank’s for your quick answer, it helped me a lot!

        To create a 3D LUT (Look Up Table) what version of Lumariver are you using? Lumariver Profile Designer Pro Edition (100 Euros) or Lumariver Profile Designer Repro Edition (240 Euros)?

        In my studio the Flashs colors temperature are 5500°K (±100°K), in Lumariver why you choose Illuminant D50 5000°K instead of 5500°K?

        Regards and have a nice day
        William

        • Martin Bailey
          Posted at 21:00h, 20 December Reply

          Hi William,

          I’m using the Profile Designer Repro edition, but I believe the regular Pro Edition is all that you need to do this stuff.

          I use 5000 K because the majority of my images are closer to 5000 than 5500. If your flashes are 5500, then select that for your own profiles.

          Thanks. You have a nice day too!

          Regards,
          Martin.

          • William David
            Posted at 22:24h, 20 December Reply

            Thank you very much for sharing us your professional experiences

            I look forward to reading you again
            Regards,
            William

            • Martin Bailey
              Posted at 08:14h, 21 December Reply

              You’re very welcome, William.

              Thanks for stopping by, and I look forward to interacting again at some point.

              All the best with your photography!

              Regards,
              Martin.

  • Gert Engman
    Posted at 02:56h, 07 March Reply

    Martin! I just found your review and I have the following question. I träbro follow your instructions and the profiles come out OK except that they are quite a bit darker, in spite of the fact that I use “add” and not replace. What I find strange is that, when I watch your video and see the color differences between the various profiles, you seem to use Auto curves. When I do that I see no difference between the profiles, including the generic one. I have to use a linear curve for the difference to show up. Am I correct or are you using linear curve also

    • Martin Bailey
      Posted at 12:13h, 17 September Reply

      Hi Gert,

      Thanks for checking out my review, and apologies for the very late reply here. I just made the time to check the latest version of Lumariver, and found that they have made a few great changes that make the process easier. I will create an updated review for release this week. Please check back in a day or so.

      Regards,
      Martin.

  • Kaizer
    Posted at 12:57h, 23 February Reply

    hello martin,

    appreciate the great work
    and all time and effort invested,
    you may not know how many people
    you may have inspired

    best regards
    kaizer
    new delhi
    india

Post A Reply to Martin Bailey Cancel Reply