[size=+1]Date for practice set #1 comparisons?[/size]
. . . What times are good/bad for people who want to do this? This evening could work, but maybe too soon? Tomorrow evening is out for me. Thanksgiving is probably bad for everyone. Friday late afternoon or evening can work for me.
... but this is an example of where it's overdone.
Crawford (AKA Edgework), it's great to have a real pro here. I especially like the color blend with the original and selective color at the end.
For the record, I captured the curves which are equivalent to Dan's self overlays. You can pick them up here: http://www.chezrutt.com/rutt/overlaycurves.acv
Both the A and B curves look like this:
Very steep near the center and flattening out at the ends. An alternative to using the overlays is to start with these curves and customize. I suppose using the MFM technique is similar to this.
Idiot that I am. I take all that back. I've been using Overlay noise layers for years, precisely because Overlay mode stops working as you move to highlights and shadows. So of course the curves look like that. Sometimes you end up with technique confusion.
....But I love the idea of substituting MFM curves at this point in the process. Really the overlay curves are just MFMs curves of the feint of heart.
Sorry men, please be gentle with me, I'm lost : what does mean MFM curve ? ...
Edgework, I'm loving the suggestion of using MFM instead of overlay curves. I have a few ballet shots where it really did just what I wanted and more.
Here's my approach to one of the early images posted by Rutt. ...
Working through the steps detailed in this very helpful post, I realize that while the steps are clear, exactly how to carry them out sometimes is not always clear to me. Here are some example stepsCopy the green channel into a new layer and set the layer to luminosity mode.
Duplicate a layer to a new image
Copy the real black plate of a CMYK image to an active image and turn it into a layer mask (inverting first).
Overlay a channel onto itself
I have figured out how to do each of these, but I suspect my solutions are not the most direct. For example, in another thread, rutt comments
I was thinking that this was a good place for a little mission statement. Our purpose here isn't to replace Dan's wonderful book. Our purpose is to help each other work through it and master its techniques (and improve on them where possible.) Go buy yourself a copy. You'll be glad you did. Dan is fun to read as well as being very useful.
... Hope that helps.
... Go buy yourself a copy. You'll be glad you did. Dan is fun to read as well as being very useful.
I tried Margulis' recommendation of using blendif to hide the changes from the dark red parts of the image, but that blocked the effect from parts of the face too (where there is lots of red) and I had ot get the blendif slider almost to the middle in order to restore the red hair piece.
I think this is exactly the same thing as Apply Image in this case (please correct me if I'm wrong) except I can see what this is doing and the result is in a visible layer and I can change the opacity on it any time. And, more importantly, I can keep this change independent of other changes later.
So, I make a dup of the image, flatten it, convert to LAB and proceed to steps 7-9.
Now, here's the real benefit of this method over Margulis'. Margulis' technique requires you to guess what percentages to use in Apply Image, sometimes using different ones for the A and B blend. If you follow his technique and your first guess isn't right, you can't change it. You have to undo and redo it. If you use the adjustment layers, you just tweak either the A channel, the B channel or both. No undo. No starting over.
Copy a merged version of this image to the clipboard and paste it in as a new layer into the original image. Finish the image there.