I won’t pass judgement on every image presented, I don’t think that’s my role. I’ll let users evaluate and personally see how “someone else” approaches the problem.
After a week or two (or more, or less), I’ll make a summary and comparative assessment of the various ways of approaching each image, remaining anonymous.
This will build up a collective feedback from which everyone can benefit.
I don’t know yet what form this will take, but maybe I’ll put it on Rawpedia - to make sure I can keep track of it. Perhaps I’ll ask each of the participants to write a brief text of a few lines - if of course he accepts, explaining “why these choices?”
IMG_0080.jpg.out.pp3 (60.2 KB)
This image shows several local adjustment areas using Color Adjustments CAM16 tools as gradient and iterative tests.
The upper two are duplicate spots. The lower left series are also duplicative and overlain, as are the two slug things on the lower right.
Several CAM16 spot spots were used to highlight Horse.
Some light blurring spots were added to the street and background, except the red street signs, in order to tone down the non-foreground textures.
Finally, Blue Horse was unblued with a Color Appearance CAM16 spot.
Overall boosts in lightness and contrast; a spot with CAM16 lightness set all the way down to black out the green tarp.
BTW @jdc I noticed Contrast Threshold (J & Q) will clip from black to white if you raise it too high with a sufficiently high Contrast level.
PS @jdc Sorry I jumped the gun on your whole “one week interval” idea…
PPS @ jdc Overall these CAM tools seem to work at a better dynamic range than other of the CAM16 implementations. I could easily process an entire photo using mostly only the local CAM16 spots.
Hello Richard,
I am pleased that you are using my picture here. But I still haven’t quite understood what you want to show with it. I’m already very curious.
Micha
Hello everyone and many thanks for your contributions. @HIRAM@priort
With the time difference, it’s a bit difficult to communicate. Let me remind you of the origin of this post
"The aim of this challenge is twofold: a) to allow you to familiarise yourself with Cam16 and the tools that have been integrated into the Local Adjustments “Color appearance (CAM16 & JzCzHz)” module. b) to validate the changes before merging into “dev".
I’ve chosen these 5 images because they all present a specific difficult character: high DR, noise, deep shadows, high contrast between background and center of the image, colorimetry, etc.
Of course they’re well known, and that’s one of the reasons we chose them.
I’d like to create a collective Feedback Report so that users have several ways of processing an image at their disposal. I don’t yet know what form this will take, but it presupposes that I include in a document :
the basic image (e.g. IMG_0080.CR2),
the various pp3, a summary of the processing,
and if possible a short text from the author describing “why he did it that way ?”.
In order to allow the same amount of time to work on each image, I suggested processing one per week, which would also make it easier for me to provide feedback.
But that doesn’t matter, and as Pierre de Coubertin, who organized the first modern Olympic Games, would say : “L’essentiel est de participer”.
If you can this week on the first image (IMG_0080.CR2) that would be preferable, but I’d rather have a messy participation than no participation.
Yes, without using “Log encoding” type functions, we easily arrive at a Dynamic Range of more than 20Ev, which is more than sufficient in 99% of cases (Maximum Cameras about 15Ev).
“Gamma - slope - based” a slider which allows you to simulate a “Tone mapping” (nothing to do with “Log encoding”, it’s near a Sigmoid), just a slider (and some settings) . I called him "Gray balance (Slope). Note the gamma TRC above = 5.95.
On the test image - TIF at 25Ev - with Cam16 Image Adjustments - Saturation = 73, we arrive at DR = 23Ev.
