Fernando Gonzalez Gentile wrote:
> well, Moose - until now, 03:47 a.m., I've been struggling for a better
> version.
> No way, v.2 is horrible, and is travelling to the Trash right now.
>
> hats off - how did you manage that sky? - not only details in the clouds, but
> a more real blue.
I did three things that affected the sky.
1. I used NI grain/noise reduction on the bright triangle on left side.
I thought the 'clumpiness' in those clouds made the tonal problems more
obvious.
2. I applied the Highlight part of Highlight/Shadow tool to make top end
tonal graduations wider. I did a little bit more of this after #3.
3. Image=>Adjust=>Hue/Saturation=>Edit: Magentas. I then used the
dropper and +dropper to select all the areas I thought had excessive
magenta in them. This limits the action of the tool to those colors. I
then lowered Saturation a fair amount and moved Hue slightly toward blue
until things looked more natural to my eye.
> Think I didn't nail with the amount of yellow, blue resulted even more
> 'electric', but yours is quite like the Provia ... even in my monitor ! :-)
>
Good, that's what I was trying for. In an image like this, where only
part of it is the wrong shade, making overall adjustments to color
channels is always likely to end badly.
I'm not sure why you would be adjusting yellow & blue, as the problems
are in the area between blue & red. The selective abilities of the
Hue/Saturation tool are very useful for such problems. Being able to
work with just magenta is much easier than trying to separately adjust
two colors. The little sliders on the bottom allow tuning of the color
range affected and how it fades into other colors.
> I'm taking notes on the magentas and purples (those in the R-C-B triangle,
> the 'non spectral colors' as said my old Sears-Zemansky physics book).
>
> Someday I will be able to do what you did by myself.
It's not that hard, but does take some practice to learn which of the
main photographic image tools actually do what.
I have to agree with C.H. that it looks like something went wrong in the
original scan. I know nothing about the scanner or NikonScan, so can't
add/comment on his recommendations.
It's good you have started over with a new scan. That's one reason I
scan to a "RAW" file in VueScan. It gives me an unprocessed file on disk
that I can 'scan' with different settings without the time and trouble
of further physical scan(s). I don't have to do it often, but once in a
while I just get one wrong. :-)
Moose
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|