Color Management ??

Bilsen

Hi all,

My real question is "Are My Eyes Screwed Up"??

I shoot RAW and I've started using a gray card for WB control. When it works, it makes my PP workflow worlds easier. However, about 1/2 the time it does things I don't think work.

Here's an example of the latter.

Image # 1 is SOOC. NOTHING done to it except a crop.
Image # 2 is also SOOC BUT in ACR I click the white balance adjustment smack in the middle of the gray card.

Does ANYONE else see a yellow/green cast to her skintones? Are my eyes just totally not seeing bad skin tones??

IMAGE 1


IMAGE 2

zoomer

Increase the exposure on the second shot where you clicked on it, it is probably pretty close, but won't look right underexposed as this photo is.....may still be a smidge warm....depending on how you like it.

No card can tell you what looks right to you....it will help you get in the ballpark if you are having trouble. Exposure affects your white balance with skin.

BinaryFx

The white balance tool in ACR/LR is designed to be used on a non specular white region, not a gray region.

So, I would try the middle white card, not the black or midtone gray. That being said, you could also go against conventional wisdom and use the white parts of her singlet top to set white balance, rather than using the card (if this produced a better result, who cares about the conventional wisdom of using a card).

One could use the other two cards for fine tuning in Photoshop where one can apply separate channel curves.


Best,


Stephen Marsh

http://binaryfx.customer.netspace.net.au/ (coming soon!)
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~binaryfx/
http://prepression.blogspot.com/

Bilsen

Thanks binary. Since I have the white card in there, I'll try it.

pathfinder

She is standing in the shade in a forest - I would expect blue,green tones in this environment. Sky yields blue light ( as in shade ) and green leaves filter in the green light from sunlight. That is how the scene looks, what you are searching for is how you want it to look. I prefer the second image.

When I read the pixel data in the first image with my Digital Color meter, the white card in the first image reads 190, 208, 230, the grey card reads 130, 157, 178, and the black reads 40, 56, 71. These are not neutral colors at all, but favor blue and green tones as expected in the shade in a forest. The white is too dark, and there is no good black point.

In the second image the white card reads 211, 210, 216, the grey card reads 159, 159, 159, and the black card reads 61, 59, 60. These readings are much closer to neutral, but your white is still under exposed, the grey is too bright, and the black is still too grey. You can fix each of theses issues with a curve adjustment.

In the end, color balance is neither right or wrong, but the artists choice.

I think part of your issue is that the greenery in the background is brighter than she is, and hence she is under exposed. I suggest selecting the background and pulling down its brightness a bit, to let the young lady stand out more.

Here is my quick attempt at color balance, using your first image to start with. I read the white card in my image at 251, 250, 248, the grey at 183, 181, 182, and I read her pants at the bottom of the frame at 6, 6, 6. Not great but a reasonable place to start.

Bilsen

Thanks a TON pathfinder.
The "by the numbers" approach my be my next reading assignment.

pathfinder

You're quite welcome.

Have you seen this page? http://www.smugmug.com/help/skin-tone - and another http://dgrin.smugmug.com/gallery/1091766

Calibrated monitors help us evaluate images, but it really pays dividends to have a modest understanding of what numbers to expect for neutral tones, and for skin tones. Frequently we can't really SEE the cast, until we see the image without the cast to compare to

BinaryFx

JohnGalt_ny wrote: »

Thanks binary. Since I have the white card in there, I'll try it.

John, that is what works best in theory, as the white balance tool is for a bright white area (not blown out by overexposure).

That being said, I have seen cases where I thought that the white balance tool worked better on a gray area, rather than white!

So, if you like the tool on the white card, use that. If you prefer it on the gray, use that instead. If you prefer it on the "white" stripes of the models singlet top - use that and theory can be forgotten.

The beauty of the WB tool in ACR/LR is that one can easily apply the same setting to all of the photos shot under the same lighting condition/time. This is fast and easy as it is just a metadata setting.

If you bring images into Photoshop, one can tweak the image using white, gray and black eyedroppers or separate channel curves that balance these separate colour ranges "by the numbers". With actions, one can record these moves and apply them to multiple images shot under the same conditions (not as fast or easy as using metadata "edits" in ACR/LR)

Some links to working "by the numers" here:

http://www.ledet.com/margulis/Makeready/MA21-Defanging.pdf
http://www.ledet.com/margulis/PP7_Ch02_ByTheNumbers.pdf
http://www.eddietapp.com/PDFs/ccmethod_cs.pdf
http://www.adobeevangelists.com/pdfs/photoshop/tipsandtricks/CorrectByNumbers.pdf
http://www.digitalphotopro.com/technique/software-technique/curving-rgb-color.html


Stephen Marsh

http://binaryfx.customer.netspace.net.au/ (coming soon!)
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~binaryfx/
http://prepression.blogspot.com/

BinaryFx

John, in a similar review to the one performed by Pathfinder...

Original SOOC photo: This measures for neutral cards as a little bit green and quite a bit blue.

WB performed on gray card: This measures for neutral cards as a very tiny little bit blue. However, the singlet top "white" stripes are now warm and yellow.

If one makes the models white singlet top stripes white with a simple channel curves eyedropper move, then the gray card becomes a little bit yellow.


Stephen Marsh

http://binaryfx.customer.netspace.net.au/ (coming soon!)
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~binaryfx/
http://prepression.blogspot.com/

pathfinder

I felt the stripes in the singlet were cream, not white. Its stripes are a deep black, I am certain.

John, what color are the stripes, as you saw them?

Thank you for those links, Stephen. I use the WB eyedropper in LR or PS on any neutral, but tend to have more success with light greys and whites, than darker tones, which frequently hide a deep blue or green cast.

Bilsen

Thanks to all so far. I've got a lot of reading to do to learn "the numbers".

Both my monitors are calibrated (Huey Pro)

Path, her top was straight black and white. In the sun it would have been a nightmare.

pathfinder

Wow, John, the light stripe in her blouse is no where near as white as the white card in the WhiBal set. You're sure is was not a light cream?? In your SOOC shot, the white stripe is actually a little darker than the grey card to my Digital Color meter reading.

I call those WhiBal blouses

Bilsen

You may be correct pathfinder. The numbers do look darker than white.

I thought it was flat white but then again, I don't get out much.

pathfinder

When you get your images re-edited, please post your result here so we can all appreciate your improvements.

Bilsen

For better or worse, http://bilsen.zenfolio.com/cindym

Bilsen

Here is an attempt at correction using the suggestions above.

This is in no way a finished image but I think the base corrections look way better. Let me know what y'all think.

1) The overall exposure is adjusted and then the background is pulled way back to highlight Cindy more.

2) Cindy is color corrected using CMYK mode and a Curves adjustment suggested in the smugmug article.

BinaryFx

JohnGalt_ny wrote: »

Here is an attempt at correction using the suggestions above.

This is in no way a finished image but I think the base corrections look way better. Let me know what y'all think.

1) The overall exposure is adjusted and then the background is pulled way back to highlight Cindy more.

2) Cindy is color corrected using CMYK mode and a Curves adjustment suggested in the smugmug article.

John, I'll check out the image later, however I would just like to make a quick point.

One does not have to convert to CMYK mode. The image can stay in RGB and the info palette/colour sampler readings can be changed from the default current colour mode to display in CMYK. So the readings are CMYK and the image is in RGB. When performing separate channel curve/level edits, red=cyan green=magenta and blue=yellow (of course there is no blacK channel in RGB).


Regards,

Stephen Marsh

http://binaryfx.customer.netspace.net.au/ (coming soon!)
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~binaryfx/
http://prepression.blogspot.com/

johnbriner

I must agree that color in a picture is really hard to manage, and looking at your altered versions, it was real hard to decide which is the best. But my personal choice is the 3rd photo(from the very first photo posted). I like the contrast, it looks very alive.

arodney

One indeed doesn’t need to convert to CMYK nor for that matter even use CMYK values (which are entirely based upon whatever CMYK profile is loaded and they greatly differ)!
For working in Lightroom which provides RGB percentages, its quite easy to develop a numeric system while there, without resorting to CMYK. See:http://digitaldog.net/files/LR_Skintone_Ratio.jpg
There’s a numeric pattern here which is quite easy to use.

And last of all, white balance is quite subjective and often requires seasoning to taste.

MJRPHOTO

Here is my stab at it