2019 P52 - 1st Qtr - Sandy(Skitterbug)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Manfred M

Merle has suggested the first solution that I tend to rely on when I want a dark background in a studio setting.

An artificial light source that is large, relative to the subject, will provide light is soft and diffuse. This means that the light is very close to the subject. In much of my work my lights are either just outside of the camera frame but sometimes I need to retouch bits of it out. With this setup, one has an added benefit when it comes to light falloff (also known as the inverse square law), as the light toward the background just drops of quite quickly. The farther the light source is from the subject, the slower the drop off is.

If you set up your lighting and camera correctly, your background will come out black, without any need to manipulate it in PP. Using a black background will help, but if one has the distance in a dark room, any background will come out looking dark.

---

To Manfred and Merle - I appreciate the information and it gives me a place to start my next attempt. I don't have decent lighting and wonder if there may be suggestions about equipment to use? I looked at B&H Photo but ended up looking at cost and confusion about what would be best considering I am not a studio but a person trying to refine the photography skill.

Thanks for replying! :)

Hi Sandy,

I don't know how the colors looked in reality or how you wanted them to look, so I can completely wrong, and I might be splitting hairs now . In the end it is you picture, your call..... Because a picture speaks a thousand words…see here my try...I included yours first for easier comparison..HTH

1.: your version in post #34:
http://i65.tinypic.com/2duidqo.jpg

2: my try
http://i68.tinypic.com/2hghjxj.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skitterbug

... suggestions about equipment to use?

---

Sandy

The first step is to address the fundamentals, and I have found this book to be superb. The link is to the publisher's information on the 4th edition, but there is an updated 5th edition too . It is available in paper and ebook formats.

(I should add that I have the ebook version of the 5th Ed. We all have our quirks and one of mine is to to stay as far away from Amazon as possible and although a general search may make it appear that the only way to get the e-version is as a Kindle download, there are other options).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skitterbug

Hi Rudi - I have a white balance card but didn't use it for this project. I also have to admit that I don't see the bluish cast that you do. I struggle with inside projects so I'll pay attention to the next time I try this.

---

Sandy, I don’t recall whether you profile your monitor. I do mine occasionally but should do it more frequently. It’s possible that your not seeing a blue cast is because your monitor needs profiling.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by billtils

Sandy

The first step is to address the fundamentals, and I have found this book to be superb. The link is to the publisher's information on the 4th edition, but there is an updated 5th edition too . It is available in paper and ebook formats.

(I should add that I have the ebook version of the 5th Ed. We all have our quirks and one of mine is to to stay as far away from Amazon as possible and although a general search may make it appear that the only way to get the e-version is as a Kindle download, there are other options).

---

Thanks Bill. I'll take a look at it! :) I appreciate the link and the info!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cantab

Sandy, I don’t recall whether you profile your monitor. I do mine occasionally but should do it more frequently. It’s possible that your not seeing a blue cast is because your monitor needs profiling.

---

Hi Bruce - How do you do a monitor profile? iMac has several different profiles listed in the color display preferences but I've been using the default one that the computer had loaded. Sign me puzzled! :)

Hi Rudi - I can see a subtle change in the in the "blackness"of the background as well as a bit more red added to the leaves. Your version looks good. What steps did you do to achieve your changes?

I do agree though that often what I see isn't the same as others see. <chuckle>

Thanks for taking an interest in this project! :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skitterbug

... How do you do a monitor profile? iMac...

---

Sandy

To do it properly you will need to purchase some hardware such as the x-rite ColorMunki.

However, if you want to have a go without that, there is information right here in CIC, at https://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tu...alibration.htm :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skitterbug

Hi Rudi - I can see a subtle change in the in the "blackness"of the background as well as a bit more red added to the leaves. Your version looks good. What steps did you do to achieve your changes?....

---

There are several ways to correct a color cast,
First I used a treshold adjusment layer combined with a curves adjustment layer to set the white point. As described in the following tutorial by Jimmy McIntyre : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7nzc82SCrzA.
The same technique can be used to remove the yellow color cast in the image in post#25. After that it is much easier to handle the reds... Keep in mind that this technique does not work for every image though..

Than I set the blackpoint by choosing a dark point with a bluish cast. And that's it.

I have no idea how you do that in Affinity (I am using photoshop). But I am sure others can point you in the right direction. HTH.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by billtils

Sandy

To do it properly you will need to purchase some hardware such as the x-rite ColorMunki.

However, if you want to have a go without that, there is information right here in CIC, at https://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tu...alibration.htm :)

---

Sandy, the CiC tutorial referenced by Bill has a lot of useful information. Although I use the Spyder profiling equipment/tool, I often see references to the xrite Colormunki.

Profiling is important as without it, the chances are not good that what you see on your monitor is what anyone else will see on their monitor — or what will turn up on a printed copy of the photo.

Do not be overwhelmed by the depth of detail on the CiC tutorial. I’ve found using the Spyder profiling tool to be very straight forward.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rudi

There are several ways to correct a color cast,
First I used a treshold adjusment layer combined with a curves adjustment layer to set the white point. As described in the following tutorial by Jimmy McIntyre : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7nzc82SCrzA.
The same technique can be used to remove the yellow color cast in the image in post#25. After that it is much easier to handle the reds... Keep in mind that this technique does not work for every image though..

Than I set the blackpoint by choosing a dark point with a bluish cast. And that's it.

I have no idea how you do that in Affinity (I am using photoshop). But I am sure others can point you in the right direction. HTH.

---

Rudi - I use a very similar method to this from time to time to do colour corrections, but without the gray point; just the black and white point.

The one thing worth noting is that this method only works if the chosen points are actually black and white. If they are not, then a colour cast will be introduced because this technique forces the sample points to be pure black and pure white. If they are not, all of the colours will be off.

In the video example, the person making the video chooses a bright area in the clouds as the white point and an area that is completely in shade as the black point, so the technique works. If there is no true black or true white in the image it will not work.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Manfred M

An artificial light source that is large, relative to the subject, will provide light [that] is soft and diffuse. This means that the light is very close to the subject. In much of my work my lights are either just outside of the camera frame but sometimes I need to retouch bits of it out. With this setup, one has an added benefit when it comes to light falloff (also known as the inverse square law), as the light [moves?] toward the background [it?] just drops of quite quickly. The farther the light source is from the subject, the slower the drop off is.

---

May I add a little clarification? As the light source gets larger compared to the subject, the inverse square law just applies less and less.

See http://kronometric.org/phot/lighting...20handbook.pdf

P25 & 26 refer ...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xpatUSA

May I add a little clarification? As the light source gets larger compared to the subject, the inverse square law just applies less and less.

See http://kronometric.org/phot/lighting...20handbook.pdf

P25 & 26 refer ...

---

Thanks for the pdf. I am going to enjoy reading it.

Yes. A lot of the physics is based on theoretical constructs; point sources, black bodies, etc. so when real life hits the theory is never a perfect match.

When I choose a key light source, I tend to look for one that is about the same size as the subject so that I can get reasonable performance out of the source (light quality) and controlled drop off. In this case diffuse light for the flower with rapid fall of so that the background is not distracting would be close to black.

I've been looking at the info offered about Spyder and X-rite as well as CiC's tutorial. I haven't checked Ted's PDF link yet but I have a feeling the information will be 'over my head'. :)

So even if I did invest in something offered by Spyder, doesn't it all come down to a judgement call by what I see on my screen? How would I even know the best choice to make?

I found an app on my system called ColorSync Utility (Adobe product v4.14) that seems fairly detailed about setting choices. But it'd still be up to me about the final settings I'd make and I could make things worse rather than better.

I'm definitely confused about screen calibrations and best ways to deal with it.

Screen image of ColorSync
https://photos.smugmug.com/photos/i-...GLxjJg5-XL.png

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skitterbug

I've been looking at the info offered about Spyder and X-rite as well as CiC's tutorial. I haven't checked Ted's PDF link yet but I have a feeling the information will be 'over my head'. :)

So even if I did invest in something offered by Spyder, doesn't it all come down to a judgement call by what I see on my screen? How would I even know the best choice to make?

I found an app on my system called ColorSync Utility (Adobe product v4.14) that seems fairly detailed about setting choices. But it'd still be up to me about the final settings I'd make and I could make things worse rather than better.

I'm definitely confused about screen calibrations and best ways to deal with it.

Screen image of ColorSync

---

It all starts with your screen displaying the colours correctly Sandy. If the colours that your computer screen displays are "wrong", then any corrections that you do in your post-processing work will be based on the incorrect colour information that you see.

The ColorSynch profile that you show is nice, but all that tells us is what is being output to your computer's video card and your your computer screen, not what you are actually seeing. Those are controlled by your settings and the colour profile that your are using. If this is what Apple set in the factory, then it is not appropriate for post processing work. Most computer setups assume home or office use and straight out of the box, the screen is far to bright for accurate colour correction work. That is why we calibrate and profile.

Calibration and profiling using a device made by DataColor (Spyder line) or x-Rite (ColorMunki or i1 lines) take readings from a piece of hardware that sits on your computer screen during the test. It checks out your display brightness and contrast and compares them to a known standard and correct those settings accordingly. It then displays a set of known colours and measures what your computer screen is actually showing you and calculates the difference between the two and writes a new profile file that corrects these colour errors.

Once your display is showing colours correctly, you can make informed decisions on how you want the image to look and be reasonably sure that what you see are in fact the correct colours. Not only that, but anyone else that looks at your images using a calibrated and profiled computer screen will be seeing the same colours you are.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skitterbug

... doesn't it all come down to a judgement call by what I see on my screen?...

---

I don't know about Spyder, but ColorMunki results in an entirely objective calibration of your screen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by billtils

I don't know about Spyder, but ColorMunki results in an entirely objective calibration of your screen.

---

Hi Bill - So it will give me a profile without any interference from me? I'm guessing I load the program and then let it run and then choose the results? Sounds like a good plan to me! :)

Sandy, the PDF linked by Ted is of interest to those technically/scientifically minded but there's no need for you to read or understand it in order to profile your monitor.

Spyder and I assume Colormunki are both user friendly. They do not require you to have read or understood the CiC tutorial.

But as Manfred said, if you're adjusting colours based what you see on an unprofiled monitor, you are effectively working in the dark. That's because you have no idea whether what you see on your monitor are the "true" colours in the photo file you're working on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cantab

Sandy, the PDF linked by Ted is of interest to those technically/scientifically minded but there's no need for you to read or understand it in order to profile your monitor.

Spyder and I assume Colormunki are both user friendly. They do not require you to have read or understood the CiC tutorial.

But as Manfred said, if you're adjusting colours based what you see on an unprofiled monitor, you are effectively working in the dark. That's because you have no idea whether what you see on your monitor are the "true" colours in the photo file you're working on.

---

Hi Bruce - I reckon then that I'll best be doing something about this monitor and the color profile. After the hard work of capturing images that I feel worth keeping, I want to be able to do them justice. Post processing is mostly the aim for this year's project.

Thank you to you and everyone else who have taken an interest in keeping me on the "straight and narrow". :)

ps: added info - I'm still agonizing over the expense.... I did find an "expert mode" in ColorSync Utility app. to use that does incorporate some of the suggestions in CiC's tutorial. Hope it helps.

Week 2 - Behind already. I was thinking of making excuses but changed my mind. I'll just get caught up! <chuckle>

The dreary weather doesn't help motivate but we did venture out and I took my camera along. This was taken during a trip on Jan 10. It is a river that runs along a roadside park. I didn't have proper footwear so I couldn't get down as close to the edge as I would have liked. I doubt that hubby would have appreciated it if I'd slid into the river. <LOL>
Since my main focus this year is post processing, I'll post before and after images. Comments and help always welcome!

Camera settings used: f/8 - 1/100 - ISO100

Before editing:

https://photos.smugmug.com/photos/i-...cGp6KpL-X2.jpg

Steps used during editing - using Lightroom and Snapheal (external editor)

Import image to LR
First edit: Snapheal to rid the image of the out of focus branches and saved adjustments.
In LR: adjusted: exposure, blackpoint, highlights, shadows, clarity, vibrance, saturation, dehaze and curves.
Exported as jpg

After editing:

https://photos.smugmug.com/photos/i-...BJK4Cp6-X2.jpg