Hi Bob, I find that it's often the results that count, not the process. Somebody very technically adept with Photoshop for instance may do a 3-step process to make a correction and might indeed have a good reason for doing so. If I use a quicker route to achieve the desired effect or correction, not knowing there might be a technically better way... well who knows when looking at the end photo how a particlar rendering was arrived at? With no reference for comparison, one generally accepts that the image displayed is as desired.
By way of example, Shel suggested his image had a bluish cast. I saw it, but I might not have recognized it at all, except for power of suggestion. Others did not see a color cast at all. IMO, the filter is there for a reason, it produces a desired effect with possibly a great saving of time. In my mind, it's identical to putting a filter over the lens instead of changing the lighting itself. I agree that the more knowledge of the process and therefore control one has the better. I don't know what the filter is doing behind the scenes, maybe a process similar to what would be done manually without using the filter. If one simply wants the entire photograph to be rendered slightly differently, there's often a quick route that's not necessarialy destructive and produces the desired result. How would a color negative exhibiting a bluish cast be corrected when printing??? Rhetorical question. Tom C. >From: "Bob W" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <pdml@pdml.net> >To: "'Pentax-Discuss Mail List'" <pdml@pdml.net> >Subject: RE: Color Cast Question >Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2006 20:32:39 +0100 > >This is an interesting thread for me, and an interesting reply from >Tom. I have been mulling whether to ask something about colour >correction, but I can't readily formulate a question at the moment. > >As you know, I am going to buy a new printer soon, and intend to use a >fully colour-managed workflow. Now, like many men I am red/green >colourblind - to the extent that I get all the flash cards wrong in >colour-blindness tests, so I don't trust the evidence of my own eyes >when colour is involved. Therefore for a colour-managed workflow I >will need to work by numbers. I have dug out and re-read "Color >correction by numbers" by Dan Margulis. > >http://www.ledet.com/margulis/PP7_Ch02_ByTheNumbers.pdf > >It's a very interesting process - you don't even need a calibrated >monitor, or a colour monitor even. Just by picking the brightest white >where you want to hold detail, and the darkest black ditto, then >setting them to some combination of CMYK (in the article, but later he >shows it with RGB apparently - I don't have the book yet) you should >be able to make everything else fall into its rightful place, >colourifically. This relies on some assumptions, of course, but you >should be able to select an area that ought to be white, or black, >look at the relationships between the numbers as against the 'correct' >numbers for the white you want, and determine from that what type of >cast there is over the whole picture. > >No doubt there are drawbacks to this technique, but it seems like a >reasonably good way of getting an objective answer to your question, >and a more balanced approach than applying a quick fix filter. > >-- >Cheers, > Bob > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > > Behalf Of Tom C > > Sent: 06 July 2006 17:32 > > To: pdml@pdml.net > > Subject: RE: Color Cast Question > > > > Yep... too cool, IMO. Might try one of Photoshop's warming > > filters as a > > quick fix. > > > > > > > > >From: "Shel Belinkoff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > >Does this pic have a bluish cast to it? > > > > > >http://home.earthlink.net/~morepix/sunrabrunch.html > > > > > > > > >Shel > > > >-- >PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >PDML@pdml.net >http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
