PDA

View Full Version : Interesting Computer Color Experiment


Kathryn Wilson
06-13-2004, 01:10 PM
An interesting little experiment this morning - people had been commenting on how bright green this photo was looking, and I was a little concerned because I didn't see it quite that bright. I had participated in the Weekend Drawing Event (WDE) and what I was hearing was not what I was seeing

Soooo, hubby had me run the Adobe Gamma program on my computer and I am now seeing what everyone else is seeing - yikes! This painting is not this bright, contrasty green - so I this is a comparison of the two.

It might be a good investment of time to calibrate your monitor once in a while - :rolleyes: Now I wonder how you all have been viewing my paintings over the past year or so - :(

Khadres
06-13-2004, 03:11 PM
Which is which? The first one is very clear and nice, the other a more undecided looking. Hope I didn't guess wrong! :D

Kathryn Wilson
06-13-2004, 04:08 PM
The first one is the overly contrasted version - the second is closer to the real painting - a bit softer looking.

This presents quite a conundrum doesn't it Sooz - I can't see what you are seeing either, or on anyone else's computers. And are they all optimized? So are any of us seeing what each other's paintings look like in real life on Wet Canvas? So how can we accurately help each other - especially in the values questions? I turned the second one into grey scale and it does look weak in the value scale - yet in real life, it looks pretty good.

So from real life, to the camera, to the software program you use, to the software on Wet Canvas - could be quite a difference.

Sure makes me not want to step into giving advice on a painting I can't see in real life. :(

Deborah Secor
06-13-2004, 05:43 PM
I think you have to approach color and contrast with a certain amount of caution online, but my question is, has the advice given you over the last two years been of value despite the differences in monitors? It seems every once in a while we all say something--like 'that is one bright green!!!'--and it becomes clear that things are being seen differently by others. But I'd rather have all the advice, thoughts, suggestions and then take it to my paintings where I'll make the decision, wouldn't you?

We should all do our best to give good advice and agree that no one is seeing the real thing but the artist who painted it! Doncha think?

Deborah

Kathryn Wilson
06-13-2004, 05:46 PM
Yup, that's what we are here for - I guess we just have to say that IRL the painting looks differently and how is looks different. Of course the drawing portions of this painting are the same, but the depth is gone and the wonderful green is not the same. :(

prestonsega
06-13-2004, 06:04 PM
I too have noticed that particularly the blues don'y always translate exact...quite honestly, the repro is better than the real thing in some instances, so that can be a plus in evaluating my own work.....I can see a variation with out accessing a program....I too have wondered how others see my work due to their monitor adjustment. So far most all the color suggestions made about my work has been valid in my opinion. Even in real life the type and level of lighting is going to change how the brain interprets the hue and intensity... BTW I like the color equally in both examples you've posted. That's a true reflection of your artistic ability.

Kathryn Wilson
06-13-2004, 06:10 PM
I too have noticed that particularly the blues don'y always translate exact...quite honestly, the repro is better than the real thing in some instances, so that can be a plus in evaluating my own work.....I can see a variation with out accessing a program....I too have wondered how others see my work due to their monitor adjustment. So far most all the color suggestions made about my work has been valid in my opinion. Even in real life the type and level of lighting is going to change how the brain interprets the hue and intensity... BTW I like the color equally in both examples you've posted. That's a true reflection of your artistic ability.

Thanks Preston, I appreciate that. In real life, the painting is somewhere inbetween the two - but I can do only so much in photoshop - no magic fingers here - :D I'm just glad that this painting brought the discrepancy to my attention. I have been cautious in the past when looking at other paintings because I know this is a problem posting paintings for evaluation on the internet. The grey scale mode is something I'm going to use more often on my own paintings before I post.

Grasshopper
06-16-2004, 11:11 AM
Good to know.

I like your painting, period. This is not exactly a smooth segue: You mentioned checking your value; I have a question about photoshop & doing the grayscale - or any program like that, I guess. Is it better to desaturate or to do grayscale to check values? What's the diff? Thanks.

Laura Shelley
06-16-2004, 01:02 PM
Desaturate and grayscale are not quite the same thing, but give similar results in Photoshop. Usually, a raw scan or digital photo will be in RGB mode: i.e., displayed in thousands or millions of colors, depending on your monitor settings. If you convert to grayscale, you are converting to a simpler and smaller file format that can only display 256 gray levels. If you just desaturate, you still have an RGB file. Unless you are going to run filters on the pic or print it out, the difference doesn't really matter.

SweetBabyJ
06-16-2004, 01:28 PM
I disagree, although it is a quick and easy tool. Actually, converting to grayscale gives you the best range of values- this link explains and demonstrates how: http://www.inkjetart.com/tips/grayscale/

Not only do you still have a colour file when you desaturate, what you've done is lower the chroma- or intensity- of the colour, also. This, of course, will result in a less-than-true value range, especially in the mid-tones.

There's a lot of threads explaining and demonstrating the differences here on WC, too- run a search (and just remember many of the ones in the DigiManip forum are probably NOT talking about being able to see value range!)

Laura Shelley
06-16-2004, 08:10 PM
Hey, that's an interesting link--nice analysis of the process. I always adjust the gamma curves of my images by hand, however, so the results I get from desaturating are not noticeably different from grayscaling. I should recall that not everyone does that sort of thing. :)

Kathryn Wilson
06-16-2004, 08:39 PM
Sorry I haven't been getting back to you guys - this particular thread and some others is not sending me email alerts - I've spoken to Scott about getting gobs of email at least a day late, but he says the problem could be just about anywhere - but I apologize.

Not that I have anything to add - just reading with interest the comments of those who know so much more than I do about Photoshop. I don't do the auto-contrast or the auto-levels - I pretty much do the levels manually, balance out the color shifts, do a brightness/contrast thingee (which got me in trouble here) and a sharpen if it needs it. I do this in the large file format before I re-size it for WC. Anything else I should be doing?

SweetBabyJ
06-16-2004, 09:39 PM
Apply changes to colour to the full-sized file BEFORE cropping, as colours outside of your crop can still possibly affect the colours inside your crop. You may also wish to very gently clarify and adjust the colour temps- I do not recommend clarifying unless your pic came out kind of chalky in the first place- it will "lose" some of the nuance info, but get rid of the chalkiness. I very seldomly use a +1 clarify. Adjusting the colour temp helps if you took the pic under less-than-ideal lighting conditions (although not much helps a dead-on flash or over-exposure). (Always, always underexpose if you can- you can bring the brightness up and pick up detail in a dark area, but you cannot retrieve detail from a blown highlight.)

When you resize (and resample is not quite the same thing, but benefits from this technique, also), first sharpen, then bring the file-size down by about 10-15%, then sharpen again, and bring it down another 10-15%, again, and again, sharpening between each resize until you reach the desired file size. Reducing the file size all in one go loses A LOT of information as the program decides which pixels to compress most; and sharpening in-between helps to keep everything clear for the program to "read". (An "unsharp mask" sharpens outlines and the spaces between objects- colour/value masses-sometimes I alternate between the two as I resize.)

If you can see that a hue is waaaaay off, you can sometimes mess with the RBG channels to bring them up to speed, but it's tricky and mostly a matter of luck- for me, anyway. If a pic is that bad, might be best to wait and retake the shot in better lighting conditions.