Why does PSE Filter/Stylize/Solarize reduce luminance values to maximum 128?

[Frans Waterlander]

Why? It doesn't make sense to me and the result without further editing looks like crap. I know it's rather easy to use Levels or Auto Levels to correct for this flaw, but that increases the chances of introducing banding/posterization because of the additional, major editing.

[digitaldog]

The same answer to the same question:
https://www.photo.net/discuss/threads/why-does-pse-filter-stylize-solarize-reduce-luminance-values-to-maximum-128.5530077/

Why? Think of 128 x 2 and levels (encoding) of an image....

Been this way since day one of the 'big boy" product (Photoshop) that predates PSE; you're just wondering today?

From 1995 "Adobe Photoshop Handbook" by Mark Siprut (I wrote the chapter for him on Filters, page 389, the photography of my dogs at the time).

This darker appearance is explained of course. And the 'fix' if you don't want the way the filter mimics this old darkroom process.
But please do show us your 'image' (Photo hopefully?) with and without Solarize, I'd love to see your idea of what 'looks like crap".

No flaw, by design. For like 30 years....

[Frans Waterlander]

An image that only shows levels 0 through 128 on a 0 through 255 scale looks like crap to me.

[digitaldog]

An image that only shows levels 0 through 128 on a 0 through 255 scale looks like crap to me.

Having never, ever seen even one of your images, I can't confirm or deny it has anything to do with the filter. Why the filter does what it does has been explained to you. What about those facts do you not understand???

[digitaldog]

I know it's rather easy to use Levels or Auto Levels to correct for this flaw, but that increases the chances of introducing banding/posterization because of the additional, major editing.

From a camera JPEG sure. Try raw, high-bit data if you can.....
More facts to the 'why' and luckily for us Photoshop users, Solarize can operate on that bit depth. Elements?
http://digitaldog.net/files/TheHighBitdepthDebate.pdf

[Frans Waterlander]

The image is RAW 12 bits and PSE can solarize that. The first shot is normal, the second solarized and the last one is solarized and leveled. The solarized, non-leveled image looks like crap to me. So there.
I can supply other examples if you like.

[digitaldog]

There what?
The Solarize filter and it's effect on brightness was explained to you.
Altering brightness after Solarize if desired, was explained to you.
What are you still confused about now?
I agree, the images are crappy but that's a subjective opinion and not a technical one (which is the topic).

[digitaldog]

I know it's rather easy to use Levels or Auto Levels to correct for this flaw, but that increases the chances of introducing banding/posterization because of the additional, major editing.

Seems you've now found out, that's often untrue:

The image is RAW 12 bits and PSE can solarize that.

The raw may be 12 bits but PSE doesn't handle the raw data and no ACR doesn't provide a Solarize filter.
And of course, one can render a 12 bit raw as less than 12 bits using ACR if such a user doesn't know how to use ACR.

[Frans Waterlander]

There what?
The Solarize filter and it's effect on brightness was explained to you.
Altering brightness after Solarize if desired, was explained to you.
What are you still confused about now?
I agree, the images are crappy but that's a subjective opinion and not a technical one (which is the topic).

I venture to say that most people, like me, would design the solarize filter to output 0-255 levels, not 0-128 on a 0-255 scale and would deem the solarized, non-corrected image crappy and wouldn't like the image degradation caused by the need to make a major correction after solarizing.
But, if you have nothing constructive to contribute or even admit that as designed the filter leaves much to be desired, then why don't you call it quits?

[digitaldog]

I venture to say that most people, like me, would design the solarize filter to output 0-255 levels, not 0-128 on a 0-255 scale and would deem the solarized, non-corrected image crappy and wouldn't like the image degradation caused by the need to make a major correction after solarizing.

People like you? By all means Frans, do design such a filter.
You asked a question about a specific filter. I provided that correct answer nearly 30 years ago.
Do tell us here, what Photoshop filters have you so far produced for our industry?
Here's my contribution, some of the technology can be found in Lightroom Classic and ACR: http://pixelgenius.com
What's the old saying about “those that can, do?...”

[digitaldog]

You might also attempt to study and attempt to understand the traditional Solarize techniques of which you have illustrated you are unaware of:

https://mitphoto2016.wordpress.com/2016/04/13/a-good-article-about-solarization-with-detailed-procedures-and-tips-on-how-to-do-that/

The major observable effects of solarization are a partial reversal of tones (light tones become darker, although dark tones don’t generally get lighter, although they may sometimes look darker because of the darkening of surrounding tones) and the creation of so-called Mackie lines: white outlines at boundaries between areas of different light/dark values. (“Mackie lines,” like “solarization” and even “Sabatier Effect,” is something of a misnomer

[Frans Waterlander]

I'm done with you. Anybody else have any inputs?

[digitaldog]

I'm done with you. Anybody else have any inputs?

IOW, any masochists want to take over? 
Will someone tell Frans what he wants to hear (the reason for his posting agenda**) even if it's a technically wrong to justify his crappy image?
** more of the same agenda and ignorance here:
https://www.photo.net/discuss/threads/why-does-pse-filter-stylize-solarize-reduce-luminance-values-to-maximum-128.5530077/#post-5967878

[TechTalk]

I'm done with you. Anybody else have any inputs?

Yes... A grown-up has given you a factual explanation of what the tool is designed to do. If you don't like it, don't use it. He's also given you a reasonable suggestion (study... the traditional Solarize techniques) and resources to help you do so.

Now... Please stop with the tantrums when speaking to adults or go sit back down at the kiddie table.

[digitaldog]

Anybody else have any inputs?

And the valuable input that will of course be ignored if not pushed back:

Yes... A grown-up has given you a factual explanation of what the tool is designed to do. If you don't like it, don't use it. He's also given you a reasonable suggestion (study... the traditional Solarize techniques) and resources to help you do so.

Now... Please stop with the tantrums when speaking to adults or go sit back down at the kiddie table.

[TechTalk]

So there.

I haven't heard that expression since elementary school.

[digitaldog]

I haven't heard that expression since elementary school.

Hopefully, he's now gone... until his next (monthly) exercise in LuLa carpet pooping. 💩

[fdisilvestro]

I'd like to comment about the stylize>solarize filter in Photoshop

Disclaimer:
- I agree with Andrew (Digitaldog) posted technical information about the filter.
- The comments below are based on PS.
- I know nothing of PSE, so I don't know what tools you have available.
- This explanation is based on an educated guess, I have no access to PS math.

All the solarize filter appears to do is to blend two images, the original and an inverted one, using the darken blend mode. I will use as an example the image below



First, I will just desaturate the image to get a B&W version:



Then I will apply the solarize filter to get the dull result below:



In the old darkroom days, the suggestion was to use the highest contrast B&W paper possible, because if you used mid contrast paper, you would get a result as dull as the straight result from PS.

Now, there are two ways to replicate the effect above

1.- Duplicate the layer, invert and select "Darken" as blend mode (note that I have just added an adjustment curve layer that affects only the image above with an inverted line):



This looks indistinguishable than the "Solarize" filter.

2.- The second way, is just to create a curve adjustment layer with a "custom" triangle shape:



Using this adjustment curve it is easy to see why the maximum value is 128.

One quick fix is to use a "modified" triangle custom curve to adjust the max values to 255:



But this gives the same result as to increase exposure after applying the solarize filter, as mentioned above, and I think you can do this in PSE



In any case, I would rater apply a custom curve, as in the example to the original color version below:



Thanks for reading.

[digitaldog]

I'd like to comment about the stylize>solarize filter in Photoshop
Thanks for reading.

Good analysis, and the filter in Elements is the same as Photoshop.
For those with open minds and interest in the actual topic, thanks for posting!

Otherwise, best case, silence from the OP. Worst case, pushback  :

Will someone tell Frans what he wants to hear (the reason for his posting agenda**) even if it's a technically wrong to justify his crappy image?

Nice shot of the bike!

[fdisilvestro]

Nice shot of the bike!

Thank you!