#Cobalt color professional#

I am pretty sure all the suppliers of such profiles have a scan of a color negative where their profile gives a near perfect match, but as soon as you change the developer, scanner or lighting situation it will most likely not be the case anymore. Where does this leave us? First and foremost I think there are too many variables involved that are making it impossible to create “one-click-profiles” that give you results indistinguishable from pictures taken with the actual film under any kind of circumstances. But all are meant to emulate Kodak Gold 200, so the results will look roughly the same, right? Not at all, as you can see from this comparison: So now I have Kodak Gold 200 presets from three different suppliers. The quality of these presets varies greatly though. Ding 50mm 1.1 | f/1.1 | Cobalt Portra 800īut even if you are not using a Fuji camera there are plenty of options, if you use Lightroom you can find presets and profiles helping you to emulate pretty much every film stock that ever existed (also have a look at my article Emulating FIlmlook for further reference). Fuji is still using its film heritage with great success, offering such film emulations mimicing Fuji film stock (even discontinued ones) directly in camera. Still, emulating the look of film has been a big topic for a long time.

#Cobalt color professional#

With professional digital photography a mostly “neutral” or “true-to-life” (whatever that may mean) color rendition was and still is what many camera manufacturers aim for – at least with their standard picture profiles.

The Cobalt Image Kodak Emulation pack contains profiles for Ektachrome, Ektar 100, Gold 200 as well as Portra 160, 400 and 800. In a way the look of these neon highlights when using the Cobalt profiles reminds me a lot of what I am getting out of the Silbersalz 35 color negative films. With neon signs I found this especially noticeable, but I guess when taking pictures of colorful flowers under the sun it will also be visible. With rather complicated lighting situations I did notice some clear benefits using the Cobalt profiles though, as they bring out better color detail in the highlights. To be honest with you: in many scenarios I didn’t see a notable difference between the Adobe Standard and the Cobalt camera specific profiles. Sony A7III | Sigma 180mm 5.6 | f/8.0 | Cobalt Portra 400īut what does different color science mean here and does different equal better? And usually additional white balance adjustments need to be made as well. The latter generally does work very well – when using the same lens on these cameras.

They can make pictures taken with different cameras look exactly the same, which is needed for their film and digital emulation packs to give consistent results.

You can have a look at a detailed explanation here.

These Cobalt profiles are using a different color science compared to the Adobe Standard profiles.

The basic profiles are camera specific and serve two purposes:

I was approached by Cobalt Image to have a look at their portfolio and afterwards they provided me with the Basic Profiles for my three cameras as well as their Kodak Film, Leica Monochrom CCD and Leica M Digital emulations packs.