Color Balance Module for colour adjustments -- I'm struggling

you can use color balance to achieve similar effect as in color zones if you make use of parametric masks - but you’ll need several instances …

1 Like

Thanks…okay…I’m going to have to practice more with parametric masks.

Thanks. And what if I want to change the hue a bit as well?

By the way:
What is the difference in use between lift, gamma, gain and slope, offset, power ?
Both work in linear RGB, the identical colour space and have exactly the same setting sliders (but without the auto optimizers in lgg).

IIRC, he does say that color zones is OK if you’re making small changes. The interface to color zones is great, IMO. If you just want to make subtle HSL changes to blues (sky), go ahead and use color zones, IMO, it’s much more user friendly.

Aurelien does recommend color balance if you want to make heavy-handed changes. An example would be changing the sky to red. To get a similar color-isolation effect as color zones, you need to add a parametric mask using chrominance (and possibly luminance) values to isolate the sky.

I think in the end people are a little too strict on their interpretation of the linear vs traditional workflow…even AP himself has said some things to that affect in the course of his web casts etc…basically if you can stay as linear as possible then you will stay as accurate to the original sensor data as possible how ever if you like the results you are getting with whatever tools and a small hue shift here or there does not bother you then just use the tools that give you the look you want…something that seems to be getting lost to me is this quest for the perfect edit based on the tools or the workflow…painters don’t all use brushes…some use their hands some throw cans of paint in the jet wash…the point its they manipulate in the way they desire to get the result they want…so I would stress not to be too obsessed with this…it is certainly good to know the tools and know the limitations when you apply them but that is where this rigid notion of what to use when should be relaxed…for example at some point in the past I used a 3 image base curve fusion to enhance an old dark JPG from a point and shoot camera from 15 years ago…it looked great…I was just messing around but what no base curve on a jpg…I broke the rules…For me CB module gets used to do WB , saturation/contrast and color casts (since it automatically applies a 180 degree shift) and I use the tone sliders much like levels sometimes but I always use color zones to tweak the colors it works much better for me so why would I struggle to conform to some “rule”…others might use the channel mixer with without masks etc etc…I would say as a last point if you are struggling to get a good result then there must be a better tool…keep experimenting …prioritize results over rules…


please dont mix the sRGB with the pro photo rgb version of LiftGammaGain.
both prophoto versions works linear: the “old” lgg and the new american one. and i cannot find a difference in the results.

Do we need two settings with the same results ?

@priort Wow, that is a run on wall of text!

@anon31514447 There is a difference because the implementation is different. What I want to know is how you are comparing the two. Show us by dragging and dropping sample images and give us the steps or sidecars that you used to process them. BTW, welcome to the forum!

I think this may better explain it…if DT works as Blender does on the math then there is a hard coded max and min in the lift gamma gain model but not the slope offset power…I’m not an engineer but the explanation sounds reasonable… cycles render engine - What is the the ASC-CDL node? - Blender Stack Exchange

@ afre Ya its a rant isn’t it…sorry…going Covid crazy but so many posts asking how to get my raw to look like the jpg , must I use this tool or that tool etc etc…what order …I just felt the need to make a suggestion to be less rigid and explore…so apology offered to all for the rant ha ha hope you are well…thanks for harpooning me…

1 Like

thx for our nice welcomes:

@prior: i think this is the point:

Difference with Lift, Gain and Gamma

Lift, Gain and Gamma vary in definition between different systems and manufacturers.

In the case of Blender’s color balance node, it is vaguely defined like this on the manual:

> Lift Increases the value of dark colors. Gamma Will adjust midtones. Gain Adjusts highlights.

There is no explanation on what that means, and where the thresholds for shadows or highlight begin or end.

and the american one is a standard one.

I agree and I think in many cases its like a lot of these issues for many images you will never tell the difference but there will be circumstance where you might…

Taking it one step further I think to some extent your question is on point with what is going on with ART the fork of RawTherapee…its interface (RT) is jammed with multiple tools that could possibly be used for the same results and I think with ART the author is trying to simplify, in some cases tweak but in the end remove/integrate functions to streamline the software…DT could benefit from some of this too possibly

i agree with your last post too: i am an experimental guy. i use all modules and test them if they work for me and if they give me the look of my images I have in mind. i am not interested in a special look. i want to have a natural look in my pics.

if you are interested in, have a look to my last yt videos. i scanned one of my first images linear in vuescan and edit it in a handful steps in DT. Thx to aurelien pierre again and again for his work and the changes in DT.

Love to check it out…do you have a link to your channel…meantime I will try to find it…

Found it


Wut, we’re critiquing paragraphing of posts now?

Which probably explains both the fat paragraph and the critique.

For better or worse, many new users see that as the objective, and the job of teaching new folks that the real objective is to do much better than the camera JPEG.

FWIW, Todd, I agree with the central point of your post. Do whatever you have to do to wrangle what you want out of a given image. Don’t misinterpret someone’s advice as orders. But do be aware that the advice given is probably backed by a lot of knowledge.

@elGordo no critique was meant for anyone’s advice if so another apology…I was simply struck by the example of the question asked and re-asked re using CB for color replacement. While you could certainly do it…I think most would agree that it is easier in something like color zones (again not the only way) …I think that was actually suggested however the comments continued and my take on the whole reason for the need to use CB as a tool for that image adjustment was to “stay linear” not because it necessarily made sense or is the result of some hard and fast rule. So my intent but not likely my result was to try to point out or relax this implicitly rigid approach about only using certain module because others will mess up the linear workflow. There are certainly caveats and consideration for the use of most modules but my intent was to try to convey the idea of using the tools at hand as you see fit and not being constrained to a subset because that is the “correct” way to do it…hopefully this clarifies my post and my silly rant …it was about the notion of correctness and not anyone’s particular advice or approach…