|
|
Post by Bailey on Dec 8, 2018 23:08:36 GMT
hmmmm...........to me it looks like running the Fade script for this scenario is just introducing extra steps in the processing.
You would still have to run the Equalise Filter. Once you have the Equalise Filter layer it would seem logical to me to then just adjust its opacity and blending mode directly. There would be no need to run the Fade script in this case.
But in any case, maybe I am missing something but I got the same result (extracting detail from the snow and sky) much quicker by simply using a single Levels Adjustment Layer and adjusting its sliders without having to fiddle with blending modes and opacity when I used the Equalise Filter.
I can see how the Equalise Filter might be useful in some cases, but for me based on my previous observations in this thread, using Levels is much quicker and easier for me. If for some reasons Levels doesn't give the result I am looking for, then trying the Equalise Filter would be my plan B.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sepiana on Dec 8, 2018 23:16:26 GMT
The example show that there is no artifacts or banding. Another reason to prefer it to layer works blending is that it has a strong effect on colors. If you don't want it, you can desaturate or use the layer copy in luminosity mode. Michel, I have to admit I haven't used the Equalize filter too often in my workflow. The results of your experimenting motivate me to give this filter a chance. Thanks!
|
|
|
|
Post by Bailey on Dec 8, 2018 23:43:11 GMT
Hi michelb The example show that there is no artifacts or banding. But as you mentioned earlier, the Equalise Filter is prone to introducing combing on the histogram which a warning sign for posterisation. ... In my experience, the equalizer filter is the most prone to combing. ... Any subsequent banding might or might not be seen on a screen, especially when not viewing at 100%. Many artifacts/anomalies can be hidden in an image when viewed in a browser that much more than likely has downsized the image from its original size. But those artifacts could jump up and bite you when making a print. Just something to be aware of if you are into printing. |
|
|
|
Post by Sepiana on Dec 8, 2018 23:45:09 GMT
Sepiana Thanks for the link ... I somehow missed that explanation.  Pete, you are most welcome! I had all but forgotten that post of mine. It was your post that made me remember it. We are even!  |
|
|
|
Post by Bailey on Dec 8, 2018 23:57:08 GMT
Thank you for allowing us to download your dng file michelb FWIW, this is what I came up with just some quick editing of the dng file in ACR with no other processing. Obviously I wasn't there when you took the photo but hopefully this is close to what you saw in real time. Yes, we can agree that it is a 'true' view, dull, flat and not too bright. In a way, our eyes do adapt to the luminosity as happens with the camera meter. The difference is we are 'scanning' over different parts of scene to perceive details both in shadows and highlights. We are combining different pieces in our minds with our own 'HDR' builtin feature... I am sure that in reality I did not see the additional depth in the snow parts extracted from the equalize filter. It was what I felt was missing and what I wanted to render. In the same way, there is no texture in most of the snow parts, and I miss that. That would mean adding noise or texture. However the interesting fact about the equalize filter is that it does not add or create anything, it reveals and enhances very slight differences present in the scene.
No problem michelb Being mainly into landscapes and events I try to always produce an image that represents what I saw at the time of taking the photo. I'm not really into art or special effects photography/post processing, although I do dabble a bit when I have a bit of "free" time. You say that Equalise doesn't add or create anything. I guess it depends on how you define add/create. To my understanding, the Equalise Filter takes the brightest pixel in the image and assigns white to it and black to the darkest pixel. All intermediate pixels are then redistributed "evenly" somehow by some algorithm. I am not convinced pixel RGB values are not changed. At least by using a Levels Adjustment layer to get the same result as I posted earlier, I am extracting detail non-destructively.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sepiana on Dec 9, 2018 21:16:20 GMT
Another personal challenge: Old style print effect using exclusively 16-bits tools in ACR and the editor:
Michel, I love this old style print effect! I noticed your layer stack shows two Gradient Map layers. Would you be kind enough to elaborate how you customized/edited the Gradient Maps to fit your project? And how they integrate with your use of the Equalize filter?
|
|
|
|
Post by michelb on Dec 9, 2018 22:14:25 GMT
Another personal challenge: Old style print effect using exclusively 16-bits tools in ACR and the editor:
Michel, I love this old style print effect! I noticed your layer stack shows two Gradient Map layers. Would you be kind enough to elaborate how you customized/edited the Gradient Maps to fit your project? And how they integrate with your use of the Equalize filter?
Sepiana, You mean my history panel, not layer stack, since 16-bit editing is not supported with layers...
Unfortunately, I have not kept the temporarty tiff version, so I can't recover the gradient settings. The gradient maps (in the filters menu) are used for more flexibility than levels or curves and also to add the final sepia toning. I wanted to: - set the white and black points not to max values - flattening the brightness of the darker parts (to keep the focus on the lighter parts (the snow) by simplifying the extreme shadows.) - Enlarging the tone range of the highlights by moving the middle tab to the right
Something like this:
I must say that I am puzzled by the look of the histogram with those two sharp peaks on the left. Probably the result of different settings in my two gradient maps steps.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sepiana on Dec 10, 2018 6:22:50 GMT
Sepiana, You mean my history panel, not layer stack, since 16-bit editing is not supported with layers...
Unfortunately, I have not kept the temporarty tiff version, so I can't recover the gradient settings. The gradient maps (in the filters menu) are used for more flexibility than levels or curves and also to add the final sepia toning. I wanted to: - set the white and black points not to max values - flattening the brightness of the darker parts (to keep the focus on the lighter parts (the snow) by simplifying the extreme shadows.) - Enlarging the tone range of the highlights by moving the middle tab to the right Something like this: Michel, sorry! I meant to say History panel.
Now I have a better grasp of the role of the Gradients Maps in your workflow. The screen shot of the Gradient dialog box helps a lot. I was having trouble setting the colors and the color stops. Thanks so much for your prompt reply to my request!
|
|
