Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Digital Image Processing => Topic started by: Anders_HK on December 31, 2007, 07:52:07 am
-
Hi, I shot Fuji Slides before, Velvia was a magic and I honest still enjoy use it and I do not feel like giving it up. Film is sort of magic , and with it to me one special aspect: the Colors. Perhaps you read http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index....970&hl=challeng (http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=20970&hl=challeng). There the digital captures look a little pale, or as one user posted there towards the end:
"Thanks for doing all this and sharing the images. The film scans have a real wonderful quality to them. While looking at these last 100% crops, I find that I'm really drawn to them and the ZD images that looked so great before look lifeless in comparison."
Please do not get me wrong here, I am not trying to compare film vs. digital or prove that one or other is better, I know they are different. I much like the medium format digital captures also. Although... I feel they lack in color. So, I am keen to improve my skills of color in processing. I currently use SilkyPix, Camera Raw & Photoshop CS3, and I do not think it is as simple as a saturation boost... I need much more advanced and appealing to my aesthetic eye.
Please point me to any advise or sources to improve on color in my digital captures to very pleasantly and appealing appoach... or to even exceed that of Fuji Slides
Thanks!
Regards
Anders
-
One approach would be to use the camera profiling function of Eye-One Match. You'll need to shoot the test chart with the film you wish to emulate, scan the film using the same output RGB space (ProPhoto, Adobe RGB, or whatever) as you use for your RAW output RGB space. Make the film profile from the scan in Eye-One, and save it as Velvia.icc or whatever.
Now all you need to do is convert your RAW captures to the film profile, then assign your working RGB space to the file, and you'll have exactly the same color "look" as the film.
-
One approach would be to use the camera profiling function of Eye-One Match. You'll need to shoot the test chart with the film you wish to emulate, scan the film using the same output RGB space (ProPhoto, Adobe RGB, or whatever) as you use for your RAW output RGB space. Make the film profile from the scan in Eye-One, and save it as Velvia.icc or whatever.
Now all you need to do is convert your RAW captures to the film profile, then assign your working RGB space to the file, and you'll have exactly the same color "look" as the film.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=164191\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Jonathan,
That is very truthful interesting, but... is it not that film is non linear while digital is linear? If we look at Velvia 50 as example, it captures one thing in bright light, but put it at a waterfall with dim lights in forest due overcast skies, it aborbs colors like nothing eles ...
Perhaps the answer is rather some 'magic' applied in PP, or??? Any suggestions?
Regards
Anders
-
That is very truthful interesting, but... is it not that film is non linear while digital is linear?
Only in the RAW capture data. Once you demosaic the RAW or convert the scan data to a standard RGB space (all of which are non-linear), digital color is whatever the profile in the RAW converter or scanner software makes it. So if you follow the procedure I outlined above, you can make any digital camera output Velvia color within the measurement accuracy of your spectrophotometer as long as the digital exposure is not clipped.
Linear/non-linear only affects how you expose for optimal image quality.
-
Only in the RAW capture data. Once you demosaic the RAW or convert the scan data to a standard RGB space (all of which are non-linear), digital color is whatever the profile in the RAW converter or scanner software makes it. So if you follow the procedure I outlined above, you can make any digital camera output Velvia color within the measurement accuracy of your spectrophotometer as long as the digital exposure is not clipped.
Linear/non-linear only affects how you expose for optimal image quality.
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=164294\")
Jonathan, thanks.
Jonathan and All,
Thus camera calibration and profiling per [a href=\"http://luminous-landscape.com/reviews/accessories/dig-calib-profil.shtml]http://luminous-landscape.com/reviews/acce...ib-profil.shtml[/url], but using Velvia and drum scan to digitally accurately reproduce the Gretag Macbeth Colorchecker (x-rite).
Alternative (and perhaps in combination) can be to use this http://www.rawfilmstyles.com/ (http://www.rawfilmstyles.com/) and not only for Velvia but other quick clicks to get pleasing colors and other aspects as an initial departure point for further PP.
Next step is to further tweak in postprocessing. Any good books or other readings to recommend, specifically on color, constrast and all other paramters? By all means not just a manual for Camera Raw or Photoshop but something that gets deeper. Film was developed over generations, and I guess I seek such expert advises on colors and other image rendering adjustments in digital captures.
Regards
Anders
-
A little off the subject, when I downloaded DxO's film pack I tried the looks of many films but I kept coming back to the 5D's "as shot" as the most appealing to my eye. I think you like whatever you are conditioned to like. Try Fuji Astia (much more accurate, I never cared for velvia) and make the comparion.
Marc
-
A little off the subject, when I downloaded DxO's film pack I tried the looks of many films but I kept coming back to the 5D's "as shot" as the most appealing to my eye.
Are you talking about the RAW files or the Canon's JPEGs, as with adjustable picture styles you can get very different looks with one's JPEG images out of camera? And those looks are usually how you first see the RAW file or the only way depending on how you are viewing the RAW file, as many programmes use the embedded JPEG for previews.
I think you like whatever you are conditioned to like.[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=164385\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I'd disagree with how you like, what you like, up to a point.
But that is in a sense how fashion works as you become accustomed to new fashions and what was once avant garde, beomes quotidian with repeated exposure and other prior styles suddenly look dated. But it doesn't mean you like it.
-
"Next step is to further tweak in postprocessing. Any good books or other readings to recommend, specifically on color, constrast and all other paramters? By all means not just a manual for Camera Raw or Photoshop but something that gets deeper."
On Amazon, you might investigate "Real World Color Management 2nd Edition" by Fraser, Murphy, and Bunting.
Although it is about color management, the first 100 pages is about what color is and the science of the perception of color. I've learned an amount about color that amazes me.
Another book that is very much about color is "Photoshop LAB Color" by Dan Margulis. Although I highly commend it, this book is extremely challenging that it may take multiple readings to get a handle on... Do a search (google, yahoo, et el) on the title of this book and you'll find a wealth of discussion about it.
I hope that helps. - Tom
-
Another book that is very much about color is "Photoshop LAB Color" by Dan Margulis. Although I highly commend it, this book is extremely challenging that it may take multiple readings to get a handle on... Do a search (google, yahoo, et el) on the title of this book and you'll find a wealth of discussion about it.[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=164494\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
There's been a lot of discussion here about Dan M by some regulars who seen to loathe him! But then some of them cannot countenance an alternative viewpoint/way of working, so hard to tell if they are correct about Dan M or simply raving.
-
Dan has some very strange notions about color management that are at odds with common sense and the consensus of color management experts. He doesn't beleive in the value of editing in 16-bit mode. And some of the sharpening methods he's devised recently are demonstrably inferior to many older, more established techniques. Dan got his reputation as a PS expert doing retouching, but his attempts to parlay that reputation into credibility in other areas have not fared well. Dan's other primary issue is that he tends to respond to criticism ad hominem instead of dealing with the actual issue being discussed.
-
A little off the subject, when I downloaded DxO's film pack I tried the looks of many films but I kept coming back to the 5D's "as shot" as the most appealing to my eye. I think you like whatever you are conditioned to like. Try Fuji Astia (much more accurate, I never cared for velvia) and make the comparion.
Marc
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=164385\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I had a very similar experience, that I preferred the 'as shot' look with adjustments to the film looks (by and large). But, I do like the DXo tri X look.
Mike
-
Dan has some very strange notions about color management that are at odds with common sense and the consensus of color management experts. He doesn't beleive in the value of editing in 16-bit mode. And some of the sharpening methods he's devised recently are demonstrably inferior to many older, more established techniques. Dan got his reputation as a PS expert doing retouching, but his attempts to parlay that reputation into credibility in other areas have not fared well. Dan's other primary issue is that he tends to respond to criticism ad hominem instead of dealing with the actual issue being discussed.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=164563\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Who Dan?? Me?? - No single person is perfect, nor should it be said that following the flow of most is correct, right?
I read Dan's book on Lab early last year, very good book and indeed I should go back to it. The method of moving end points of A and B channels inwards do give a punch. He also has Professional Photoshop Ed 5, dec 2006. Is that one worthwhile for what I seek?
My arrival today was Adobe Photoshop CS3 for Photographers by Martin Evening; I have alredy started read and it seems like excellent book to thouroughly teach me details on Photoshop. Yet it seems vaguely to touch on what I seek in this post.
Is there someone who has written specific on the color sensations similar to photographic impressions of film in digital? Granted it is not only color; the CS3 command for Shadow/Highlight is jaw dropping in what it can do. Yet... I still feel captures from digital appear pale in comparison to Fuji Slides.
Much thanks for further advises!
Regards
Anders
-
This is too simple; http://www.photonhead.com/photo-editing/ (http://www.photonhead.com/photo-editing/)
This one sounds very interesting (sort of Zone system Shadow/Highlight command on steroids???): http://www.digitalfilmtools.com/ozone/ (http://www.digitalfilmtools.com/ozone/) , http://www.digitalfilmtools.com/cs/csozone.htm (http://www.digitalfilmtools.com/cs/csozone.htm)
Anything more???
-
Who Dan?? Me?? - No single person is perfect, nor should it be said that following the flow of most is correct, right?
I read Dan's book on Lab early last year, very good book and indeed I should go back to it. The method of moving end points of A and B channels inwards do give a punch. He also has Professional Photoshop Ed 5, dec 2006. Is that one worthwhile for what I seek?
My arrival today was Adobe Photoshop CS3 for Photographers by Martin Evening; I have alredy started read and it seems like excellent book to thouroughly teach me details on Photoshop. Yet it seems vaguely to touch on what I seek in this post.
Is there someone who has written specific on the color sensations similar to photographic impressions of film in digital? Granted it is not only color; the CS3 command for Shadow/Highlight is jaw dropping in what it can do. Yet... I still feel captures from digital appear pale in comparison to Fuji Slides.
Much thanks for further advises!
Regards
Anders
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=164572\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Photoshop color correction by Michael Kieran is good and easier to follow than Dan's books Don't forget layer blend modes The key to good color is contrast and saturation together On the flip side highly saturated images aren't always the best
-
Photoshop color correction by Michael Kieran is good and easier to follow than Dan's books Don't forget layer blend modes The key to good color is contrast and saturation together On the flip side highly saturated images aren't always the best
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=164619\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Hi Stamper
You may have said the magic words: "Color Correction".
That book sounds very good but from 2002 and for Photoshop 7.0. Although basics perhaps are same, is it still very applicable to CS3?
I also found following titles:
Digital Color Correction
by Pete Rivard March 2006
Color Correction For Digital Photographers Only
by Ted Padova, Don Mason June 2006
Thanks for advise.
Regards
Anders
-
What you consider the look of film from what you've posted seems to not only involve increasing saturation but also injecting a color crossover effect between highlite white balance and shadow neutrality where whites are warmish and shadows are coolish. Pick complementary colors like yellowish whites and purplish shadows or orangish whites and bluish shadows.
This is an old renaissance master painter eyebrain trick to make an image "Pop". Study Maxfield Parish paintings to get an idea where film manufacturers came up with their film color palette.
Have you tried just using curves to do this in RGB. Working in Lab would be quite difficult adding apposing highlite/shadow color temps because the center of the curves controls neutrality for both of these regions.
-
Using the profiling method I described earlier will very closely duplicate any film look (including contrast changes, color crossovers, etc) with only 2 menu clicks in Photoshop, easily incorporated into a batched action. All of the other methods are going to be much more tedious and time-consuming.
-
Using the profiling method I described earlier will very closely duplicate any film look (including contrast changes, color crossovers, etc) with only 2 menu clicks in Photoshop, easily incorporated into a batched action. All of the other methods are going to be much more tedious and time-consuming.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=164788\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Not doubting your method would be the most efficient but correct me if I'm wrong but every color calibration target I've come across has been optimized for accuracy at the factory to NOT embue the color crossover inaccuracies many seem to love about film. I mean I have to wonder where this look of film originally comes from since its history shows that it can go through so many processing variables from the age, stock, brand of the film to whatever crackerjack operation chemically processed it.
I never saw any color crossover effects in an it8 target. Maybe there's other targets I'm not aware of that have this. They all have grayramps that are quite neutral.
After looking at restored motion pictures shot on negatives from the '60's and '70's ("Tommy" and "Blowup" on TCM comes to mind) I was surprised to find film can be made to capture a scene quite accurately but still look pleasing which I thought was impossible since I originally saw these films on crappy prints in reruns on TV. These restored films did not show these types of color characteristics posted here.
Do you have or can you link to any sample images where this type of calibration was performed on a DSLR to induce these kinds of color characteristics?
-
"One approach would be to use the camera profiling function of Eye-One Match. You'll need to shoot the test chart with the film you wish to emulate, scan the film using the same output RGB space (ProPhoto, Adobe RGB, or whatever) as you use for your RAW output RGB space. Make the film profile from the scan in Eye-One, and save it as Velvia.icc or whatever.
Now all you need to do is convert your RAW captures to the film profile, then assign your working RGB space to the file, and you'll have exactly the same color "look" as the film."
Hmmm... All you have to do is convert to the velvia profile. Scanner and Camera profiles from Gretag, which are essentially the same, are one way profiles. You can only convert from them, not to them. Have you actually done this or is just theory because I can only assign camera or scanner profiles to an existing image. Now, assigning my real Velvia profile, generated from a custom Hutchcolor target on my Howtek drum scanner, and made in PM5, does indeed change the character of the image, but not always for the better. Even if this would actually work, it's a one size fits all approach for a multi-faceted world. Curves in RGB and Lab color work more effectively on a image by image basis, but everyone has their own way of doing things and that keeps it interesting.
-
Hmmm... All you have to do is convert to the velvia profile. Scanner and Camera profiles from Gretag, which are essentially the same, are one way profiles. You can only convert from them, not to them. Have you actually done this or is just theory because I can only assign camera or scanner profiles to an existing image.
Eye-One camera camera profiles are basically a color transform from film color to calibrated accurate color, using the scanner's output space as a baseline. If your scanner outputs ProPhoto and you used a Velvia scan to build the profile, when you assign the Velvia profile to a Velvia scan and then convert to ProPhoto, you have converted Velvia's color palette to calibrated, accurate color. This is of course the opposite of what the OP wants.
Scanner and Camera profiles from Gretag, which are essentially the same, are one way profiles. You can only convert from them, not to them.
False. Just because that's the standard, "intended" use for such a profile doesn't mean it's the only way to use it. If you take a calibrated-color ProPhoto image, convert it to the Velvia profile, and then assign ProPhoto to the image (instead of assign, then convert), you have reversed the effect of the profile so that calibrated, accurate colors are converted to Velvia's color palette and tone curve, instead of the other way around.
You can expand this technique to give a shot made with one film the look of a different film (except for the grain pattern, of course). Let's say you have made profiles for your scanner and Reala and Velvia films, using ProPhoto as your scanner output space. You have an Reala shot but you wished you had used Velvia instead. Here's how you convert to the color look of the other film:
1: Assign the Reala profile to the Reala shot, which should be tagged with ProPhoto. Without changing the RGB values, this step redefines the meaning of the RGB color values so that they display as accurate, calibrated color.
2: Convert the image to the Velvia profile. This will alter the RGB values so that the color channel values are exaggerated, but simultaneously redefine the meanings of those RGB values so that accurate colors are still displayed.
3: Assign ProPhoto to the image. It will now have Velvia's color palette and contrast curve.
-
Still not getting how you're able to convert to your i1 camera profile, which is exactly the same as the Profilemaker ones I'm able to build. That's what you said you were doing in your original post, but those profiles only show up in Assign, not in Convert to Profile. Is this something you've done or is this in theory only?
-
I've done it, but it was quite a while ago. I'm currently at Walter Reed Army Medical Center getting some medical treatment, and my scanner and all of my computers and file servers (except my laptop) are in storage either in California or Germany and so I can't access them any time soon. I don't remember the created profiles being any more limited than the standard profiles like sRGB, ProPhoto, etc.
-
Well, I can tell you without a doubt that they are not the same. Workiing space profiles are simple matrix based (with Joe Holmes' table based exception) but all of the scanner and camera profiles are table based, but because they're designed only for converting to a working space, the reverse lookup tables are omitted. There may be exceptions to that rule with other brands of software, but this is definitely the case with all of the Gretag input profiles I've made in the last several years.
-
Now that I think of it, I may have used a different software package to make the profiles. It was a few years ago, and I haven't messed with film in a long time and haven't had occasion to do this sort of thing. If you can find a profiling package that creates the reverse lookup tables in its profiles, my technique will work. Is there any way to force Eye-One or Profile Maker to add them in? My spectro is in Germany right now, so I can't get into the program to look.
-
I have three applications for input profiles and can check the other two when I'm in the studio. We'll see if ScanOpen or CompassProfile are any different. I do remember that Gretag v4 scanner profiles actually had a usable Perceptual table which is not present on the current version.
-
The two Epson 4870 scanner profiles-reflective and tansmissive part of the scanner driver install are really odd and strange. I can both assign and convert to these profiles. Converting from a matrix working space to one of these darkens the image as if applying a linear RAW response.
They must be very wide gamut profiles because if I assign them to a JoRGB converted gamma encoded image it oversaturates and of course overly brightens it.
Their size is 200K and made by Seiko. Anyway I never can use them because assigning to a RAW scan produces god awful previews.
-
Dan has some very strange notions about color management that are at odds with common sense and the consensus of color management experts. He doesn't beleive in the value of editing in 16-bit mode. [a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=164563\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
As I said, he's not well thought of in these parts and if he does dismiss 16bit editing for retaining maximum quality, he is indeed a bit of a numpty.
But having said that, I don't think 16bit is the only road to true image salvation, as one can produce great images using 8bit, using film or by even by using a piece of charcoal on paper if you know what you are doing. Part of the 'niceness' of film comes from it's limitations, so possibly, by using digital and maximising the theoretical quality is exactly the opposite of what you want.
The simplest way to get film like images out of a Canon 5D is to use picture styles with a few tweaks. The colours are usually slightly better [IMHO] from the JPEGs than from the RAWs going through ACR/LR even with calibration. But the JPEGs aren't so good if you want to tweak the images, esp colour correction. I gather that you get the nice colours by using Canon's DPP RAW processing, but I've never liked the workflow with DPP.
-
In Film [moving pictures, not the capture medium] with post production in the grading suite, one does many of the things stills photographers do with LR/PS etc. And one of the things DoPs like to do is to crush the blacks, whether on film with the timing, with digital intermediaries, or with the digital footage. Crushing the Blacks is where you make the blacks, errr.. blacker, reducing shadow detail [ collective gasp of horror from LL pixel peepers ].
Why? Because it looks nice.
-
Please do not get me wrong here, I am not trying to compare film vs. digital or prove that one or other is better, I know they are different. I much like the medium format digital captures also. Although... I feel they lack in color. So, I am keen to improve my skills of color in processing. I currently use SilkyPix, Camera Raw & Photoshop CS3, and I do not think it is as simple as a saturation boost... I need much more advanced and appealing to my aesthetic eye.
Please point me to any advise or sources to improve on color in my digital captures to very pleasantly and appealing appoach... or to even exceed that of Fuji Slides
Thanks!
Regards
Anders
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=164187\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
It is normal for raw captures to often appear lacking in "punch"; however the colour depth is often there for the asking. The Vibrance and Clarity tools in Camera Raw 4.1/2/3 and judicious use of the Parametric Tone Curve as well as selected colour groups in the HSL tab can most often and most likely give you pretty much the kind of living colour you would like to have. Within Photoshop, and without converting between colour spaces, there are numeous techniques for further enhancing colours. Much of the information about how to do this is available free on the internet - in fact the resources are too numerous to call to mind here, but a Google search with some well-chosen keywords will bring up more than you probably want to read. Buying books for this may not be necessary.
-
Hi Stamper
You may have said the magic words: "Color Correction".
That book sounds very good but from 2002 and for Photoshop 7.0. Although basics perhaps are same, is it still very applicable to CS3?
I also found following titles:
Digital Color Correction
by Pete Rivard March 2006
Color Correction For Digital Photographers Only
by Ted Padova, Don Mason June 2006
Thanks for advise.
Regards
Anders
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=164655\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Some subjects are not directly linked to any specific version The information in this book could be used by someone using CS3 The problem with new books are they sometimes aren't backwards compatible Dan M's books can be used by anyone with CS3 Channel Chops springs to mind The new features of the latest version are mostly a different way of doing something that can be easily done by earlier versions For instance the shadow & highlight tool is a substitute for curves and masks which a lot of people think is not as good as curves Don't get caught up with the hype of the latest version I know a professional well regarded and successful photographer who has won awards who still uses version 5.5
A blurb in respect to Digital Color Correction
Digital Color Correction outlines a platform-independent, cross-disciplinary system for producing the best possible color images for print and the Web. One of the keys to professional success is developing transferable skills that outlast the software upgrade cycle. This is particularly true when it comes to the color reproduction process.
-
I agree with Stamper that Michael Kieran's book is good and its content is valid for everything it teaches using any version of Photoshop from the time it was published, and some time before that.
Newer books are backwards compatible to previous versions of Photoshop except for the content that explains the use of new features which weren't available when the book was written.
As successive versions of Photoshop bring new and improved ways of editing images, there are older techniques which become replaced with better and easier ways of doing essentially the same thing - and often more.
While the really classic titles survive successve versions of Photoshop, you do sometimes need the newer books to get on top of the new features in the new versions. But, as I mentioned yesterday, there is also a plethora of free resources on the internet.
As a footnote, I really like the way Ben WIllmore handled the process of up-grading books with versions of Photoshop. Since his CS Studio Techniques book, he authored two slim up-date books at much lower price targeted specifically on the new features of CS2 and CS3. He also wrote a CS3 version of Studio Techniques for those who want everything under one roof, but the slender up-grade approach remains most welcome. By the way, for Anders, with a specific interest in more effective color work, Ben also authored a set of two DVDs called "Mastering Color" published by KW Computer Training, available through NAPP (National Association of Photoshop Professionals), at NAPP (http://www.photoshopuser.com). Highly recommended for your purposes.
-
Only in the RAW capture data. Once you demosaic the RAW or convert the scan data to a standard RGB space (all of which are non-linear), digital color is whatever the profile in the RAW converter or scanner software makes it. So if you follow the procedure I outlined above, you can make any digital camera output Velvia color within the measurement accuracy of your spectrophotometer as long as the digital exposure is not clipped.
Linear/non-linear only affects how you expose for optimal image quality.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=164294\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Interesting technique. Bundle a bunch of film profiles in a package and you might have a good product there to sell when you get back from the service!
However I believe probably the one single most desired film characteristic for digital shooters is the non-clipping highlights (the tonal response of the knee). As you said your technique is limited to digital files which don't clip.
So to really make use of your idea you would want to build an undeveloped linear extended dynamic range negative from a bracketed series of digital shots and then somehow apply the profile. Of course at this point with all the dynamic range the shot will be underexposed so you will still need to develop the shot in the new "film" colorspace. I wonder how that would work.
Anyway I've got a bunch of undeveloped linear digital negatives with about 10-14 stops of dynamic range, so you or someone else has a profile build using the technique you posted, I would be happy to try it out and post the results in this forum!
-
Interesting technique. Bundle a bunch of film profiles in a package and you might have a good product there to sell when you get back from the service!
However I believe probably the one single most desired film characteristic for digital shooters is the non-clipping highlights (the tonal response of the knee). As you said your technique is limited to digital files which don't clip.
So to really make use of your idea you would want to build an undeveloped linear extended dynamic range negative from a bracketed series of digital shots and then somehow apply the profile. Of course at this point with all the dynamic range the shot will be underexposed so you will still need to develop the shot in the new "film" colorspace. I wonder how that would work.
Anyway I've got a bunch of undeveloped linear digital negatives with about 10-14 stops of dynamic range, so you or someone else has a profile build using the technique you posted, I would be happy to try it out and post the results in this forum!
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=165199\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Somewhat ironically given my earlier post, last night I used the DXo film pack plug-in to 'velviaise' part of a panorama I shot in the summer. I finished up running the filmpack filter (without grain - I just wanted the colour rendering) on a duplicate layer and then masking off the sjy as the filter turned the blues to cyan. I might post a copy in the forum later - if I dare:)
But, you could convert and HDR your undeveloped digital negs, tone map and convert to 16 bit and then run the DXo filmpack photoshop plugin on the output. That might work well for what you are talking about.
Mike
-
I've been playing around for a while coming up with my own technique for making digital look like film from examining color palettes of many film brand scan samples over at Les Sarile's site.
It's not made to look professional grade but typical of what most of us get at minilabs and from auto settings on consumer grade flatbeds. It might have its own novel charm some day, but I had an itch and had to scratch and came up with what I think film looks like from a sort of trailer dweller's perspective.
The sample at the bottom uses a multicolored gradient map made up of four different colors from maroon black, to cobalt blue mids to blue/violet quartertone to cream colored highlite taken from Les Sarile's film scan samples of desert landscapes. You can add more or other colors to this gradient map within the custom gradient dialog box and get a live preview as it maps to each tonal region adjusting the sliders on a layer set to Soft Light over the original digital capture.
Can anyone identify the film brand? I just remember this is how my family photos would always come back from the lab during the '70's into the '90's.
There's brief instructions at the bottom on how to do it.[attachment=4556:attachment]
-
What you consider the look of film from what you've posted seems to not only involve increasing saturation but also injecting a color crossover effect between highlite white balance and shadow neutrality where whites are warmish and shadows are coolish. Pick complementary colors like yellowish whites and purplish shadows or orangish whites and bluish shadows.
This is an old renaissance master painter eyebrain trick to make an image "Pop". Study Maxfield Parish paintings to get an idea where film manufacturers came up with their film color palette.
Have you tried just using curves to do this in RGB. Working in Lab would be quite difficult adding apposing highlite/shadow color temps because the center of the curves controls neutrality for both of these regions.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=164734\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I think this is one very important aspect;
Indeed it is something I normally use in SilkyPix, and indeed it causes some "Pop". In SilkyPix, in addition to Color Tempearture and Color Deflection (Tint) sliders there is also a slider for Dark Adjustment of shadows, precisely I frequent slide this one more from the green towards purplish as you imply. Its purpose is perhaps more to correct the dark zones of the scene for they should have slight different tone than permitted by setting WB globally, but I do use it also for the extra "Pop" I see.
Is there something like this that can be done in Camera RAW/Photoshop?? Can this be done with curves and how? Or is there some plug in?
Regards
Anders
-
Some subjects are not directly linked to any specific version The information in this book could be used by someone using CS3 The problem with new books are they sometimes aren't backwards compatible Dan M's books can be used by anyone with CS3 Channel Chops springs to mind The new features of the latest version are mostly a different way of doing something that can be easily done by earlier versions For instance the shadow & highlight tool is a substitute for curves and masks which a lot of people think is not as good as curves Don't get caught up with the hype of the latest version I know a professional well regarded and successful photographer who has won awards who still uses version 5.5
A blurb in respect to Digital Color Correction
Digital Color Correction outlines a platform-independent, cross-disciplinary system for producing the best possible color images for print and the Web. One of the keys to professional success is developing transferable skills that outlast the software upgrade cycle. This is particularly true when it comes to the color reproduction process.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=165160\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Stamper, your advises make perfect sense. I think I will follow and get that book and maybe one more. Also MarkDS's advise on Ben Willmore's DVD sounds good. But... first I better finish my two new books on Photoshop I have been using Photoshop only little in past, but this time I am diving deep and plan to see what I can accomplish with it on my posted subject.
Much thanks also to all other posts here. Many good replies. Jjj;s of increasing black point is also good one a'la velvia... same time now we often want more details... difficult + same time all makes me think what should achieve... perhaps not good to be too much stuck in computer pixel peeping!
Regards
Anders
-
I think this is one very important aspect;
Indeed it is something I normally use in SilkyPix, and indeed it causes some "Pop". In SilkyPix, in addition to Color Tempearture and Color Deflection (Tint) sliders there is also a slider for Dark Adjustment of shadows, precisely I frequent slide this one more from the green towards purplish as you imply. Its purpose is perhaps more to correct the dark zones of the scene for they should have slight different tone than permitted by setting WB globally, but I do use it also for the extra "Pop" I see.
Is there something like this that can be done in Camera RAW/Photoshop?? Can this be done with curves and how? Or is there some plug in?
Regards
Anders
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=165365\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Anders,
You have all of this control and more in Camera Raw 4.x. or in Lightroom. If you have CS3, you have Camera Raw 4.0. Up-date it to 4.3 (free) and play with it. If you want specific guidance on how to use it to full effect I highly recommend Jeff Schewe and Bruce Frasers's new book "Real World Camera Raw.."
-
But, you could convert and HDR your undeveloped digital negs, tone map and convert to 16 bit and then run [a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=165264\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
If you are thinking about any kind of HDR tone mapping or any localized HDR methods like PS's contrast adaption, then you are completely missing what I was talking about. Those HDR operations change the image in very unnatural ways, basically applying a tone curve which varies across the image and locally adapts to how the tonal distribution changes across the image. Something very un-film like!
My concept is to build a digital negative which simulates a large enough range of the actual light reaching the camera (without any highlight clipping or highlight non-linearities or noise in shadows) such that when you apply a film curve to the image that you have enough range to correctly handle the gradual highlight falloff in the typical film response to light. Also getting back to the primary topic, given this method you would also have enough range to handle simulation of film like saturation as well.
-
.... Film is sort of magic , and with it to me one special aspect: the Colors.
Please point me to any advise or sources to improve on color in my digital captures to very pleasantly and appealing appoach... or to even exceed that of Fuji Slides
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=164187\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
It’s unlikely that ‘digital film look’ could be based on a fix response like with classic film. At least, the main tone curve – translating from ‘native Raw’ to a pleasing tonality on screen – might have to be scene adaptive i.e. considering the scene dyn. range vs output.
Nonetheless, some tweaks for a pleasing rendition of memory colors - i.e. a deep blue sky, or, less vibrant but warmer green grass – are supposed to be more generally valid.
If you have an evening time, you might find some interesting readings and further links by google:
Hunt "preferred reproduction" "blue sky"
DPL
--