0
I know, this problem is known, but I cannot actually find a solution for this. I am using Topaz JPEG to RAW. The output, I selected, is .tif. So a 4:3 4k image is a proud 80MB large. Now I need to convert it back to JPEG (I used the AI just for noise removal.)
The output is darker. It is. Many claim, it is not darker, it is just something with the raw .... whatever. I have the source, before it became raw, in my hands. I know, it is to dark. So, how to fix it? My command is the following:
Code:
C:\Users\Ultron\Downloads\rescale\ffmpeg_win64-shared\bin\ffmpeg -start_number 100136 -i "E:\remaster\JPEG_TO_RAW\episode_01_01\rescale-%06d-edit.tif" -start_number 100136 -pix_fmt yuv420p -qscale:v 1 E:\remaster\FFMPEG_TIF_TO_JPEG\episode_01_01\rescale-%06d.jpg
I also tried it without -pix_fmt yuv420p with identical output. So what to try next?
HeartOfGermany
Posted 2019-07-26T14:02:23.960
Reputation: 11
Why don't you do it in a graphics package so you can actually see what's going on? – Tetsujin – 2019-07-26T14:28:36.263
Well, how? All I want is a standard conversion from 1 format to another. All I can say is, that the *.tif has all of the amazing colors. After conversion - even with the filter ' -vf "eq=brightness=-0.05,eq=gamma=2,eq=contrast=1.6" '
The image never improofes in a usable way. I don't even know, why the contrast filter does not increase the strenght of the color - in gimp this would make red... well... more red. However, colors stay washed out - only the black and white gets affected in a meaningful way. – HeartOfGermany – 2019-07-26T15:19:52.937
I'm really not sure what you think will happen, punching in random numbers without any real profile information. You do know a tif isn't a raw, don't you? Raw isn't a 'picture' at all, it's a set of possibilities that need interpreting. Once interpreted that will then be exported with 'hard' values as a tif. The tif's icc profile then needs converting, usually to sRGB to arrive at a reasonably portable jpg. if you do this in Photoshop or Gimp etc, you can see what's happening. – Tetsujin – 2019-07-26T15:23:33.133
Another workaround: Gimp is in fact able to import the picture correctly. It also exports it correctly to jpeg - is there a way, to batch process that process? It also asks, if the colorspace should get converted to srgb, which i just accept. Any workaround in that way? Needs to be freeware. – HeartOfGermany – 2019-07-26T15:24:58.827
I don't know Gimp well enough - Ps will batch that type of conversion, maybe Gimp will, idk. You would also need to tell us your platform. – Tetsujin – 2019-07-26T15:26:02.897
You probably want Software Recommendations if all you actually need is a platform-specific bulk file converter.
– Tetsujin – 2019-07-26T15:27:11.427Tetsujin: I know, what a RAW is. tif is just like avi a container in this respect.
Software, that correctly interprets it: windows picture and fax viewer, Gimp.
Software that does not: windows picture and fax viewer in diashow/fullscreen mode (Why is this different???), Paint, FFMPEG. What now? – HeartOfGermany – 2019-07-26T15:28:02.273
The ones that do will be the ones that can correctly read & interpret the icc profile. The ones that don't will be the ones that always assume sRGB. The rest I've no idea, as I'm not on Windows - which additionally has major issues with being able to adequately interpret display profiles even in high-end graphics packages like Ps. – Tetsujin – 2019-07-26T15:30:39.397
Well, I actually would prefer FFMPEG - one, that rules them all. But if no one finds a workaround, I am screwed. I think, the proper fix would be, to tell FFMPEG, that the input uses colorspace xyz and the output basically is limited to yuyv422 anyway, if using JPEG - at least it always defaults to that. So there is no way, to improove. The documentation of FFMPEG does not help AT ALL. NONE. NADA. Nothing... – HeartOfGermany – 2019-07-26T15:30:41.837
... then good luck. – Tetsujin – 2019-07-26T15:31:16.460
Gimp says, the profile is "ProPhoto" after research, i also come accross the name "ROMM RGB" from Kodak. Now I know the profile - how do I use that information? – HeartOfGermany – 2019-07-26T15:34:26.067
I've no idea in ffmpeg. I do all my image editing in graphics packages... so I can see what's going on. One clue, though... don't try to save jpgs in yuv, that's a video format. ProPhoto is your input [which btw is probably a far wider gamut than your monitor can display, so you're already not seeing the real image] sRGB should be your output [which at least most monitors aim to be able to get close to, sometimes.] If you ever tackle this from the beginning again, use sRGB all the way through, leave pro formats alone, as you can't see them on a regular monitor. – Tetsujin – 2019-07-26T15:41:33.583
Well, the RAW got created from a JPEG with artifacts. Thought I can not see all informtaion, that got artificially ADDED, I precicely know, how it is supposed to look - only on my monitor, because that is the reference of course. It needs to look like the JPEG beforehands, but with much less artifacts.
Solution - also Free: I downloaded "XnConvert", imported a whole folder (it is batching), added a Filter: Convert Color Profile - I downloaded the profile with the name: "ISO22028-2_ROMM-RGB.icc" - now the colors come out perfectly. This program exists for Mac aswell and propably wine emu. – HeartOfGermany – 2019-07-26T15:52:11.900
Why are you still using a non-standard icc profile? Use sRGB & save a lot of grief later. – Tetsujin – 2019-07-26T15:57:07.590
It is not possible in any other way. The program I use only works with DNG and TIF/TIFF - likely the tif and tiff is identical. You cannot specify the ICC profile in "Topaz - JPEG to RAW AI". I also would like to export it to JPEG - but the name of the program stands against such logic. If you have a better alternative, to remove artifacts from JPEG and AI Upscaling, tell me. It is a very slow rendering process - upscaling with Gigapixel AI is much faster. But it leaves those artifacts - absolutely worth the time and power, running the resized jpg through the filtering AI. – HeartOfGermany – 2019-07-26T16:04:11.637
You are entirely missing the point, but I give up. You do it your way - or ask in more detail on https://graphicdesign.stackexchange.com/questions as to why you are creating problems for yourself.
– Tetsujin – 2019-07-26T16:07:10.333I have no problems left. My solution does not use FFMPEG, but works just as good, also is free. And I have no alternative. I am required, to go that route. I know, why I go through that effort. I am remastering episodes of an old series, that was developed in 4:3 TV times. I am scaling it up to 1080p and than removing those artifacts through neuronal network. It is absolutely not MY fault, that there is no comparable software, that improofes on my workflow. Proof me wrong - good luck. But, the result of the work is just amazing. I absolutely love it - apart from 48 hours of rendering for 20min – HeartOfGermany – 2019-07-26T16:21:26.900
Also: It does not matter, what profile I use - first of: it is ISO profile - so it is a standard, 2nd, since I refuse to buy anything related to DNG and it makes no difference for my workflow, I get 0 disadvantage over using a standard DNG file. The files have identical size, render the same time - it makes no sense to investigate a new format, if I have one, that works 100% PERFECTLY fine (well now). – HeartOfGermany – 2019-07-26T16:23:50.087