Free Download Picture Style Canon

[Candy Belmont]

The picture styles do not affect the RAW image. What they do is provide metadata that tells the photo editor how to bias the settings. In DPP (Canon's photo editor) you can simply change the settings to whatever you want. I'm not familiar with how Lightroom works, but the fact that your images come out differently with different picture styles would seem to indicate that LR at least sees the metadata and knows how to interpret it.



Free Download Picture Style Canon

DOWNLOAD https://t.co/c598xewZx2






If you open the image in Canon DPP you will also see it's a RAW image (but with some caveats). The RAW file actually contains all the color data, but since DPP is a Canon app, it respects the meta-data setting that tells it you used a monochrome picture style ... so it applies the monochrome picture style in DPP. But you can change this in DPP and it'll show you the image as whatever style you set.


If you open it in something else (e.g. Adobe Lightroom) you'll see it's a COLOR image (you might briefly see it as monochrome as the image is opened.) This happens becasue a RAW image saves a thumbnail "preview" image as a JPEG embedded in the RAW and that preview image will be monochrome (or whatever picture style you set). Lightroom shows that preview as it processes the RAW data and as soon as it finishes processing the RAW, it switches from showing you the preview to showing you the RAW.


This isn't just true of picture styles... it applies to things like white balance, hue, etc. The RAW file contains what the camera *actually* saw ... without applying any tweaks (ohter than the ISO gain. ISO gain is always applied after the shutter closes but before saving the file.)


If the camera is set to a given picture style in one of the automatic or semi-automatic modes, it's conceivable that the camera could select a setting (aperture, shutter speed, or ISO value) that favors that picture style. But the impact, if any, on the resulting RAW file should be quite small and easily correctable in post-processing if you were to decide later to use a different picture style.






So far as I'm aware, no other camera setting will have any impact on the 'RAW' data itself. It will be noted that the setting was active in the 'meta-data', but it would be up to the post processing software to read that meta-data setting and apply the effect. When I do this in Lightroom, changes such as 'picture style' are not applied (I've tested this by setting the 'monochrome' picture style.)


Not all software respects all the meta-data ... specifically things like white balance and picture styles. Most will read in meta-data for EXIF data (so they know exposure settings, they know date & time info, etc. etc.)


The closest thing I can think of has to do with available custom "picture settings". There are 7 protected settings (XF-AVC) that affect gamma and dynamic range. There are additional placeholders which can be used for custom settings. Captured video can look different depending on the monitor or display you are viewing on. LUTs affect the output and are used in the color grading process in post.


I am new to video and by no means an expert. BT 709 and CLog3 should provide a good viewing experience, with Clog3 providing the most DR. Use what works best for you. Shoot in a controlled environment, record multiple clips noting the settings, then review and see which you like best. If you do decide to customize a preset, copy it and save as a different picture setting. This way you can abort if you don't like it and maintain your original file.


As I understand it Clarity uses a tone-mapping technique (as used in HDR imaging) to punch up contrast in areas where it's changing. It's kind of like an edge enhancement for contrast, but not as crude as sharpening. You can apply this in Adobe Camera Raw, for instance. It does make pictures look good -- I use it a lot in Camera Raw -- but it's essentially an artificial enhancement.


For some reason, Canon didn't preset the picture style settings for natural contrast straight out of the box. Perhaps they deliberately wanted to spur people on to play with the settings and understand how each works. Well it worked for me anyway. In a nutshell, the basic reason the colours are so plain is because the contrast setting is too high. There are some subtle colour differences between the different picture styles too. We'll have a look at tweaking each setting to getting more colour out of your shots.


For accurate colours with a bit more pop to blue skies, I can recommend the Autumn Hues picture style from Canon's Picture Style website. The skin tones from this picture style are more natural than any of the built in picture styles, with no overtones.


After setting the contrast we can adjust the saturation. Saturation is the intensity of colours. Straight out of the box the Standard picture style is Neutrally Saturated for most scenic shots, so increasing it to 1 pushes colours into vivid territory.


For even more vibrant grass and folliage I also have a customised Autumn Hues Picture style which can be downloaded from here and used in Digital Photo Professional or in-camera: Autumn Hues Extra Green 3


Great article!

I have just two question.

1. In all the setting, you have sharpness at 7, while in My Canon 50D the default Value is 3, For you it's better to set at 7?

2. In the end you say that autumn hues 7,-2,-1,0 is equal to standard set to 7,-2,0,0, this mean that autumn hues Picture style is equal to standard with +1 of saturation?


What are the Sharpness, Contrast, Saturation, and Color Tone values of your "Autumn Hues Extra Green 3" picture style? The pf2 file linked from the article is incompatible with my version (2.13.21) of the EOS Utility.


I've tried a number of picture styles (including my own) circulating around the internet for my 550D, and I found your Autumn Hues extra green to be the best. I've chosen it consistently from a range of test shots with different picture styles. Thanks for posting!


Likewise, you get the credit for giving me the clue about (-4) contrast. Before you tell me about it, my biggest complain against canon is that ugly WHITE SKY. Now I have all my camera (every brand) dialed at its lowest contrast.


Kodak's Super 8 Camera is a hybrid of old and new: it shoots movies using Super 8 motion picture film but incorporates digital elements like a flip-out LCD screen and audio capture. Eight years after we first saw the camera at CES 2016, Kodak is finally bringing it to market.


However, if the 60D is like the 30D I own, I will choose Neutral for people pictures and Standard for everything else. I find that Standard for people makes their skin a bit red and contrasty. Neutral for people makes their skin just a wee bit green, but it's much easier to correct than if I use the Standard Picture Style setting.


Everyone has a different taste, what works for me may not works for you. I have tried all the downloadable picture styles out there. Autumn Hue is probably one of the best because it is the only one that got the RED right.


What standard/modified Picture Style do you use by default? And to those who will say they shoot raw and don't care - if you use Canon's DPP the PS you have chosen will be your starting point so it may be worthwhile choosing one that requires the least amount/time of postprocessing. Also, if you need to send a picture immediately and directly from your camera, PS matters quite a lot.


Yeah, I also shoot raw and process myself later, so have a neutral picture style selected so it doesn't throw off my histogram with settings I am not applying.



I wouldn't recommend sharpness to be cranked up all the way, different subjects can require different levels of sharpening and some critters are easy to oversharpen and get bad artifacting on feathers or fur. If you apply max sharpening in camera, you are stuck with it and cannot remove it, so if you let the camera oversharpen an image it will be permanently ruined. I would experiment and see what setting gives you the sharpening you want without oversharpening anything. If you undersharpen a shot, it is only a few seconds work to add more later on, but you can't remove it if you oversharpen in camera.



I wouldn't choose a picture style simply to set a specific sharpness though. All those options you list change other things as well. Portrait is designed to bring out good skin tones, landscape has punchier greens etc., so something may not be right for the animal you are shooting.



You can easily set a picture style with all your own settings, just use a custom one and set the sharpness you want, along with contrast, saturation etc. to suit how you want images to look.



However, no picture style will ever be perfect for every shot, as parameters are affected by conditions. If you are shooting in very overcast (low contrast) conditions, you might want to punch the contrast in the PS to max to compensate, but if you then shoot in bright sunlight (high contrast) you may need to turn it down again or your pictures will have too much contrast, for example.



This is why the vast majority of users of this forum shoot raw, and then choose how the picture looks with more precision by processing it themselves, whilst viewing it on a monitor, to get it just right. Picture styles simply tell the camera roughly what you are trying to achieve and it makes a stab at giving it to you. LIKES 0 LOG IN TO REPLY

tzalmantzalmanFatal attraction.13,497 posts

Likes: 213

Joined Apr 2005

Location: Gesher Haziv, IsraelMore info Oct 24, 2011 07:01 #6

0aad45d008