Margulis LAB Color Book - Reading group

[rutt]

I finally have my copy of Dan Margulis' new book, Photoshop LAB Color : The Canyon Conundrum and Other Adventures in the Most Powerful Colorspace. This book is a runaway bestseller and I know that at least some dgrinners have it.

What about organizing a reading group to help us all get through it? We can rea a chapter a week (or two weeks?) and share questions applications of the ideas to our own shots, &etc. I think we are more likely as a group to get through it with good understanding than as indivituals.

Who is up for this? Anyone?

MOD edit: use this thread if you have any questions about the reading group, or the book in general. rutt will edit this post, right here, and add in the links to the discussions on each chapter.

Chapter 1: Basic LAB curve steepening. (http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=18308)

Chapter 2: Don't Panic; LAB by the numbers (http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=18549)

Chapter 3: Variations in the basic recipe (http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=18763)

Chapter 4: Changing/correcting the color balance (http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=19556)

Chapter 5: Noise reduction and sharpening (http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=20907)

Chapter 6: Myths, pitfalls, complexities (http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=20420)

Chapter 7: LAB Workflow (http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=20433)

Chapter 8: The Impossible Retouch; Fixing blown skies, facial highlights and more (http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=21648)

Chapter 9: The LAB advantage in selecting and masking (http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=22331)

Chapter 11: Retouching in LAB (http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=29980)

Chapter 12: The Man from Mars & Command, Control, Click (http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=21859)

Chapter 14: Once for Contrast and Once for Color (http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=26724)

Chapter 16: A technique for portraits (http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=22524)

Beside the chapter discussions per se, there are also some interesting related threads. In particular:

http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=19548
http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=19588

[DavidTO]

I finally have my copy of Dan Margulis' new book, Photoshop LAB Color : The Canyon Conundrum and Other Adventures in the Most Powerful Colorspace. This book is a runaway bestseller and I know that at least some dgrinners have it.

What about organizing a reading group to help us all get through it? We can rea a chapter a week (or two weeks?) and share questions applications of the ideas to our own shots, &etc. I think we are more likely as a group to get through it with good understanding than as indivituals.

Who is up for this? Anyone?


Allright, let me go order my copy...I'm in.

[pathfinder]

I'm in!! :thumb

[DavidTO]

Allright, let me go order my copy...I'm in.


Ordered. I'll let you know when I'm good to go.

[digismile]

I'm in!

My online order is suggesting it could take 3-5 weeks. I'll check other sources tomorrow. Looking forward to this ...

Brad

[rutt]

I started to read last night. It seems the first 5 chapters are easier and each is divided into practice and theory sections. So let's start chapter 1 and see what happens. We'll take it slow so those waiting for books can easily catch up.

There are exercises at the end of each chapter which suggests a possible way to work together on the materials from the chapter. Perhaps we should take turns summerizing the chapters which could also get things started and provide a nice online study guide? Other ideas?

[DavidTO]

Perhaps we should take turns summerizing the chapters which could also get things started and provide a nice online study guide? Other ideas?


Excellent idea.

[XO-Studios]

I'm in

XO,

[pathfinder]

Would we want to try to have a specific time for an online chat session here on dgrin?

[rutt]

Would we want to try to have a specific time for an online chat session here on dgrin?

I was imagining a longer timeframe, more like chess by mail. We'd spend a week on each chapter and discussions would span that time. It might make sense to find a time of day when most people will be able to participate so there would be quick turnover, but I think that will self adjust.

I read chapter 1 in two 15 minute sessions over the last two evenings. I was already very familiar with the concepts in this chapter and the technique it teaches is the most common element of my workflow, so perpbably I read it faster than some others will. Dan says the first 5-6 chapters are much easier than what follows and judging by Professional Photoshop there is no reason to doubt this.

Has anyone else finished Chapter 1? I could summarize it and we could get started on it.

Who besides Jim (Pathfinder) actually has the book already?

[ginger_55]

I finally have my copy of Dan Margulis' new book, Photoshop LAB Color : The Canyon Conundrum and Other Adventures in the Most Powerful Colorspace. This book is a runaway bestseller and I know that at least some dgrinners have it.

What about organizing a reading group to help us all get through it? We can rea a chapter a week (or two weeks?) and share questions applications of the ideas to our own shots, &etc. I think we are more likely as a group to get through it with good understanding than as indivituals.

Who is up for this? Anyone?

You promised me a review.

Is it easier, the same, or what, as the first book?

You know I could just copy your discussions, I would prefer to have the book.

But if it is really a prerequisite to read the first one, I will be free to never have the book, hysterical laughter, here.

What say you all on that? A book group could be the incentive I need to read the second book. And I could see where to get it cheapest: soonest.

ginger (I will let you know what I find on that.)

[rutt]

You promised me a review.


Now that I've read the forward, preface, and first chapter, I can tell you a little. I think everyone who is familiar with postprocessing in Photoshop will get something out of this book, especially the first few chapters. That was also true of Professional Photoshop. From what I can tell the difficulty curve of this book is at least as steep as Professional Photoshop, so I have no doubt that each of us will hit a wall at some point.

I think the basic LAB correction is much easier and more effective than any equivalent in other colorspaces, and Dan agrees. I wrote a tutorial for you, Ginger, more than a year ago: http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=2042
Chapter 1 basicailly teaches this technique, shows how to use USM in LAB and then gives some theory to explain why this adjustment is effective in making pictures look more realistic. Dan also explores some non-LAB alternatives to try to acheive the same effect and explains why they are both less effective and harder than the LAB technique.

So the first four chapters or so will be accessable to almost everyone (and very accessable to anyone who has followed my various LAB posts over the last year or so.) After that, well, we'll see.

Amazon has sme used and new, but this is a new book in hot demand, and I think you are going to pay a little more than $33 no matter what you do at this point.

I still think Chapter 1 of Professional Photoshop is essential reading. It explains Dan's basic philosopy of color correction. If you can't get on board with that, you are going to balk at his techniques over and over again.

[ginger_55]

I still think Chapter 1 of Professional Photoshop is essential reading. It explains Dan's basic philosopy of color correction. If you can't get on board with that, you are going to balk at his techniques over and over again.

___________________________

Thanks, I could do that, but I guess I just want to be one of "the guys".

Overstock has it, and the used/new part of Amazon says it has it in stock. Ebay has it.

It is the shipping that can hurt. Also I still have 5.00 credit at amazon from my challenge win.

don't know what I will do: I have a technique now that is working for me. And I could read your tutorial, but that would not make me "one of the guys".

g

[DavidTO]

Who besides Jim (Pathfinder) actually has the book already?


Mine's scheduled for delivery for Monday, 9/12.

[pathfinder]

I've read the first two chapters -

Getting my head around the a and b color spaces is slowly coming around. I still cna't really look at numbers and know the colors perfectly, but I can find blacks, whites, greys, and warm and cool tones.

I agree that the first chapter is a review of what rutt has been describing here over the last year - steepening the a and b curves, particularly for green scenes of vegetation.

[rutt]

Here is how I'd like to proceed. Let's make a thread per chapter and start each thread with a brief synopsis of the chapter. We can take turns writing that.

I'm game for Chapter 1, mostly because I've already done it a number of times. Sounds like Jim might be ready for Chapter 2. If Jim prefers, I'm happy to switch. After that, who's ready?

Does this seem OK to everyone who wants to play?

[rutt]

I've written summaries of chapters 1 and 2 to get discussion off the ground. DavidTo has volunteered to do the same for chapter 3 once he gets his book and has a chance to catch up.

How many people are following? How many have books? How far have you gotten? Any hands up for upcoming chapters?

I'm happy to write summaries, but I think the group will work better if we share this task. I've found that I get a lot out of it in terms of understanding each chapter. I'm also more than willing to help people with these offline...

[rutt]

David is pretty far along with a summary of Ch. 3. I expect he'll post the weekend or early next week. Noone has volunteered for Ch. 4 yet, but I think that would be a really good place for someone to jump in. Things are just getting interesting! What about XO? Or Sam? PF? Andy? Who else is lurking in this reading group?

After Ch. 4, it looks like things will be a little more challenging. Now is the time get in the water and start swimming.

[Rohirrim]

I'd like to join in, but I haven't even finished Chapter 1. Since the book only recently came out, maybe it would be better to slow down a little. Between work, home etc. I haven't had much time for study.

Just a thought, perhaps everyone else is caught up.

Regards,

[rutt]

It's a good point. I don't want to lose people by going too fast and I really don't want to prevent someone from writing a chapter summary. So plese, can I have a nose count? Who has a book and wants to follow? who will write a chapter summary eventually?

If we make these assignments well in advance, it should give everyone plenty of time.

[Rohirrim]

You can count my nose in :D I just need to catch up. I'd be glad to summerize a chapter, but the next few weeks for my are somewhat hectic, so I may be lagging behind the rest of the crew. I don't want anyone else to wait just for me.

[Nikolai]

I got it few weeks ago, I'm at the end of Ch3 now. Somehow I missed this thread..:-(
Any way - I'm in!:thumb

[XO-Studios]

W/o jumping too far ahead, I'd be curious to see if someone can elaborate a little more on the mounted policeman, coming up in a chapter soon (Custom Curves)

XO,

[rutt]

I got it few weeks ago, I'm at the end of Ch3 now. Somehow I missed this thread..:-(
Any way - I'm in!:thumb

How would you like to take Ch. 4 as an assignment, due in a week?

[rutt]

W/o jumping too far ahead, I'd be curious to see if someone can elaborate a little more on the mounted policeman, coming up in a chapter soon (Custom Curves)

XO,

I'm not there yet. What chapter? Want to take it as an assignment? I'll help to the best of my ability all you want, BTW.

[rutt]

Nik agrees to take on Ch. 4 and XO Ch. 5, both with 2 week deadlines (roughly). Nik might get done sooner.

OK, who else wants to do a chapter? Pathfinder? Come on, you could take three weeks to do Ch 6. And I promise to help if you want.

[gefillmore]

would like to join your group--

read about lab color and found this forum and group which convinced me to get the book--just got it yesterday--

am willing to take a chapter--

thanks
george

[rutt]

would like to join your group--

read about lab color and found this forum and group which convinced me to get the book--just got it yesterday--

am willing to take a chapter--

thanks
george

Chapter 6 is looking for an owner. Maybe 2 weeks from Monday. Can do?

[gefillmore]

Chapter 6 is looking for an owner. Maybe 2 weeks from Monday. Can do?can and will--

[andymillson]

bought the book yesterday, and have made it through chapters 1 & 2 but feel I need to go back through 2 again

As they say in the intro's this book will be one where you read back and forth a lot :rofl

[digismile]

I received my book 2 days ago and I am trying to quickly catch up.

I was at first a little put off by the introduction to Dan and his book. It was late at night and it read like an infomercial, that it would reduce my waist line and give me a six pack with only 5 minutes a day excercise :D . I guess I'm always a bit of a skeptic ...

But, it didn't take long to get hooked on Dan's book. The very first picture I tried with the lab curves was remarkable. Yet another tool ...

My question today is that on page 44, he says he prefers using Edit->Convert to Profile, instead of Image->Mode. Is Image->Mode the same thing, but without the dialog box with options?

Brad

[DavidTO]

Convert to profile allows you to avoid the dithering that PS does. Rutt and I have decided that it's not really a concern, since Margulis can barely justify it himself.

I just change mode. It's easy.

I've assigned a keystroke to it, and also for going back to RGB.

I received my book 2 days ago and I am trying to quickly catch up.

I was at first a little put off by the introduction to Dan and his book. It was late at night and it read like an infomercial, that it would reduce my waist line and give me a six pack with only 5 minutes a day excercise :D . I guess I'm always a bit of a skeptic ...

But, it didn't take long to get hooked on Dan's book. The very first picture I tried with the lab curves was remarkable. Yet another tool ...

My question today is that on page 44, he says he prefers using Edit->Convert to Profile, instead of Image->Mode. Is Image->Mode the same thing, but without the dialog box with options?

Brad

[rutt]

Pathfinder has agreed to summarize Ch. 7 with a due date of 2 weeks from Monday. Hooray.

Ch 7 is where Dan puts all the basic stuff together and describes a LAB workflow.

After that, the chapters start to be more specialized and more technical. I'll do Ch. 8 in hopes of keeping up our head of steam.

I still need volunteers for subsequent chapters. There's no harm in doing a second chapter. David, you did such a good job and got so much from Ch 3, maybe you'll be ready to do another in a month and a half?

I reserve Ch. 16 for myself. I felt the same way about Ch. 7, but offered to Jim as a cookie to get him in the water. But Chs. 9-15 need owners.

[DavidTO]

Pathfinder has agreed to summarize Ch. 7 with a due date of 2 weeks from Monday. Hooray.

Ch 7 is where Dan puts all the basic stuff together and describes a LAB workflow.

After that, the chapters start to be more specialized and more technical. I'll do Ch. 8 in hopes of keeping up our head of steam.

I still need volunteers for subsequent chapters. There's no harm in doing a second chapter. David, you did such a good job and got so much from Ch 3, maybe you'll be ready to do another in a month and a half?

I reserve Ch. 16 for myself. I felt the same way about Ch. 7, but offered to Jim as a cookie to get him in the water. But Chs. 9-15 need owners.

I'm in, just assign a chapter and let me know when you need it.

[rutt]

I'm in, just assign a chapter and let me know when you need it.

Choose between 9 and 10. They both look like a lot of fun. Let's see:

Monday, Oct 3 for Chs 4 (Nik) & 5 (XO)
Monday, Oct 10 for Ch 6 (George)
Monday, Oct 17 for Ch 7 (PF)
Monday, Oct 24 for Ch 8 (rutt)


We might get this thing read.

[rutt]

Nikolai has posted a summary for Chapter 4, here (http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=19556). So it's time for all those saved up questions about casts and more narrow targeting of color changes.

[Edit: fixed link.]

[pathfinder]

Nikolai has posted a summary for Chapter 4, here (http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=19541). So it's time for all those saved up questions about casts and more narrow targeting of color changes.
This link is not working for me.. Anyone else getting it to work?

[rutt]

This link is not working for me.. Anyone else getting it to work?

Sorry, link was broken in great fiasco a couple of weeks back. Try this:

http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=19556

[edgework]

Greetings. Just joined and am most interested in this discussion. I'm not a photographer, but have worked professionally as a color retoucher since Photoshop V.2 and have been heavily influenced by Dan Margulis' theories for most of that time. I've incorporated LAB in my own workflow for several years now and stumbled on his latest book, totally unaware that it was coming out, possibly the day Barnes & Noble first put it on the shelf. I've read it twice and can attest to the utility of the techniques offered. It's changed the way I approach my color work and, once I got out of the notion that now i had to "do it all in LAB" found that integrating the ideas into what I've already been doing expanded dramatically the scope of what is possible.

I have a lot of reading to get up to speed with the rest of this discussion, but if something occurs to me, maybe I'll pipe up.

Cheers.

[rutt]

George has posted Ch. 6 and PF has posted Ch. 7. XO promises to post Ch. 5 last Thursday, so I suppose that will be anytime.

I will summarize Ch 8, probably next weekend, but perhaps a little later. DavidTO volunteered for anything I assigned him, but has not yet chosen between 9 and 10. David, please choose.

OK, now we need more volunteers and also veterans to work on second and third chapters. I have dibs on 16 and am already trying to master its technique. I think we will find that from now on the chapters don't necessarily build on one another, so it's possible for you to peruse them and find something interesting and skip ahead and start playing with it.

[pathfinder]

I'd like to do Chapter 11. or 10. or 9 in that order of preference. Chapter 11 deals with rainbows and I want to use that technique on my sundog shot.

[rutt]

You have Chapter 11. I've always wanted better rainbows myself and you can tell us how.

[rutt]

In case anyone missed it, I posted a summary of Chapter 5 here. (http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=20907)

IMO, the most interesting thing here is HIRALOAM sharpening. See my second post and following.

[chrisjlee]

I finally have my copy of Dan Margulis' new book, Photoshop LAB Color : The Canyon Conundrum and Other Adventures in the Most Powerful Colorspace. This book is a runaway bestseller and I know that at least some dgrinners have it.

What about organizing a reading group to help us all get through it? We can rea a chapter a week (or two weeks?) and share questions applications of the ideas to our own shots, &etc. I think we are more likely as a group to get through it with good understanding than as indivituals.

Who is up for this? Anyone?

MOD edit: use this thread if you have any questions about the reading group, or the book in general. rutt will edit this post, right here, and add in the links to the discussions on each chapter.

Chapter 1 Discussion (http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=18308)

Chapter 2 Discussion (http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=18549)

Chapter 3 Discussion (http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=18763)

Chapter 4 Discussion (http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=19556)

Chapter 5 Discussion (http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=20907)

Chapter 6 Discussion (http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=20420)

Chapter 7 Discussion (http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=20433)

Beside the chapter discussions per se, there are also some interesting related threads. In particular:

http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=19548
http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=19588
Rutt in this sticky could you label what each chapter discussion with a short summary? I find myself having to look through each link to find what i need since i have terrible memory.

[DavidTO]

Rutt in this sticky could you label what each chapter discussion with a short summary? I find myself having to look through each link to find what i need since i have terrible memory.


That's a good idea.

[rutt]

Rutt in this sticky could you label what each chapter discussion with a short summary? I find myself having to look through each link to find what i need since i have terrible memory.

Buy the book. OK, OK, OK, I'll get around to it.

[chrisjlee]

Buy the book. OK, OK, OK, I'll get around to it.
Ha yeah i bought the book today. but i think i'll return it. i found a better price online than barnes and nobles.

[buzzard_nuts]

I bought the book and then stumbled into your great group discussion. Looking forward to discussing.

buzz

[mdavis]

This may get lost way down at the bottom of this thread, but hopefully it will be of some use to those who find it.

On my own work, with all the thousands of tools and techniques available to edit images, including Dan's 10 color channels, I find it helpful to sit on my hands and spend a few minutes just looking at the image on the monitor. Then I create a blank layer and begin to draw in comments of things I think should be "fixed" on the image. This forces me to break tasks down into pieces and arrange them in order of operation and importance, and to focus on which technique would be best to accomplish the task.

LAB corrections usually come out on the top of the pile for appropriate images, but not always, and it forces me to consider whether LAB is really the best way to begin. Sometimes, with a new awareness (LAB), everything starts there. But remember that when you have a new lawnmower, everything looks like grass.

[K.B.]

Count me in for lurking back here and just absorbing. You Guys are Great. Super Thread!:thumb Thanks for opening my eyes to LAB and the Margulis book. I used LAB on my avatar of my daughter doing a corner kick in her soccer game yesterday. Love those fall colors punched up a bit.

[Andy]

Count me in for lurking back here and just absorbing. You Guys are Great. Super Thread!:thumb Thanks for opening my eyes to LAB and the Margulis book.

:wave Welcome to dgrin, KB :D What Rutt's done here is sooo cool. A great resource and learning tool. Thanks Rutt!

[rutt]

I have posted a summary of Ch 8, here: http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=21648

David is signed up for Chapter 9. PF is signed up for Chapter 11. I will do Chapter 16 (maybe sooner rather than later.)

So once again we need volunteers.

[edgework]

Great project here.

If no one's claimed Chapters 12 and/or 14, I'm game.

[rutt]

Great project here.

If no one's claimed Chapters 12 and/or 14, I'm game.

I hate to sound greedy, but how about both? That would be awsome!

So here is the list of assigned chapters still to do:

Ch 9 -- DavidTo
Ch 11-- Pathfinder
Ch 12-- Edgework
Ch 14-- Edgework
Ch 16-- Rutt

I'm going to focus on writing up Ch 16 pretty soon, might have as soon as a week from Saturday. I've been playing with the technique for more than a month and might be getting it. Next week I'm going to take Dan's advanced 3 day course in San Diego and he promises to go over the portrait technique from Ch 16, so I'll either be totally confused or have a lot to say.

I'd like to see us on roughly a 2 week schedule -- at least one every two weeks.

Any volunteers for missing chapters?

[rutt]

David has posted a summary of Chapter 9 here: http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=22331

Personally, I think this is a great chapter, perhaps the most useful so far. If you have trouble making masks, if you slave with your tablet outlining objects for special treatment, learn these techniques and you'll be on your way to fast accurate masking and selection in many important cases.

[rutt]

There are two new discussion threads posted since last week:


Chapter 12: The Man from Mars & Command, Control, Click (http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=21859)

Chapter 16: A technique for portraits (http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=22524)

[Viking]

Just orderd this book. Seems to be a great book! Just a little expensive. But what a heck, its soon christmas! :thumb

Regards
Johan

[rutt]

Just orderd this book. Seems to be a great book! Just a little expensive. But what a heck, its soon christmas! :thumb

Regards
Johan

I'm having a blast with it. It really has opened up a set of new tools and helped me rethink my workflow.

[jhebert]

Hello! I'm new here... a search on the latest book by Dan Margulis sent me your way, and I've enjoyed the discussion and practical examples.

I have a question about chapter 11 where I think I've found an error. Pages 226-229 discuss the use of LAB to salvage a badly deteriorated photograph of Dan's great-great-grandmother. I have just such a photo to work on!

However, when I reach the first step on the top of page 229, I come up short every time. Here he refers the reader to perform Edit: Fade>Lighten. However, Lighten is not an available option from the Edit:Fade dropdown menu at this point. It's dimmed.

My guess is that there is another step (or steps) missing between the bottom of 228 and the top of 229. That, or I'm blowing this somehow, and I can't figure it out.

I wondered if someone else might try the steps on 228-229 and see if the problem is something I'm missing, or something missing from the book. And, if the latter, if there is some way to pass this on to Dan.

Thanks for your time and help!

James

[rutt]

OK, given the time of year and all, I thought I'd give people some time to get around to the first portrait set, but we don't seem to have any new players.

What time is good for people who have corrected at least some of these? Let's try to find a time when we can all do it and then figure out whether to use smugmug or IM or something else to communicate while we compare the versions.

[rutt]

If you report this directly to Dan via his colortheory yahoo group, you'll probably get a very quick answer and maybe even a thankyou for the errata.

Hello! I'm new here... a search on the latest book by Dan Margulis sent me your way, and I've enjoyed the discussion and practical examples.

I have a question about chapter 11 where I think I've found an error. Pages 226-229 discuss the use of LAB to salvage a badly deteriorated photograph of Dan's great-great-grandmother. I have just such a photo to work on!

However, when I reach the first step on the top of page 229, I come up short every time. Here he refers the reader to perform Edit: Fade>Lighten. However, Lighten is not an available option from the Edit:Fade dropdown menu at this point. It's dimmed.

My guess is that there is another step (or steps) missing between the bottom of 228 and the top of 229. That, or I'm blowing this somehow, and I can't figure it out.

I wondered if someone else might try the steps on 228-229 and see if the problem is something I'm missing, or something missing from the book. And, if the latter, if there is some way to pass this on to Dan.

Thanks for your time and help!

James

[RichardBrackin]

I've followed the LAB Canyon Conundrum book discussions and tutorials here for a while. I've been enlightened by a few of the techniques mentioned so I figured it a good investment to buy the book.

I can say this site and the tutorials that Rutt, et.al. provided have prompted me to go and buy the book. It'll be here tomorrow.

Dan really needs to give you guys some kudos for what you've done here.

that's all I wanted to say. :)

[Andy]

I have a confession to make.

I like LAB - used it tonight to correct an order for one of our pros. Will make a post in my blog about it soon.

Somewhere, I'm sure there's a teeny-tiny serving of Crow waiting for me. :eat

:food


http://sasksocialclub.com/sask_graphics/eat_crow.gif

[rutt]

I like LAB - used it tonight to correct an order for one of our pros. Will make a post in my blog about it soon.

And where is this blog?

[bugzie]

thanks rutt for all your encouragement to get this book. i've stopped buying application specific books for some years. a lot of them are so much rubbish to be thrown out with the next release of photoshop. this is a lovely book though. nice stock, well produced, and more to the point, something that'll be relevant for many years, and margulis writes very well.

i'd encourage others to buy the book. i've only read the first 2 chapters but there's a lot of subtilties to the "recipes" he gives. in fact, his recipes are a bit of a pedagogical carrot. i'm really enjoying reading it. read chapter 1 and said, ahhhhh, so *that's* the canyon conundrum...

margulis obviously knows a lot about colour. and even if you don't want to use some of his techniques or become a total convert to LAB forever and ever, it's worth reading this book to get some insight into colour in general. the more technical sections are definitely worthwhile persisting with.

i think dan should give rutt a commission. ;-)

[Andy]

And where is this blog?

Uhm look at the bottom of nearly every SmugMug page for a linky (http://blogs.smugmug.com/pros/) :wink

[DavidTO]

Where do we stand with the synopses of the remaining chapters?

[rutt]

Where do we stand with the synopses of the remaining chapters?

Pathfinder is singed up for Ch 11 and I have a draft from him. Edgework is signed up for Ch 14. That's all I know about that's outstanding. After the holidays, I'll try to reawaken the Ch 16 practice bakeoff, but this just doesn't seem to be the right time of year for it.

Is one of the ones that isn't spoken for interesting to someone?

[cunparis]

I just got the book for Christmas. So far I'm loving it, especially the second half of each chapter. I recently finished the Total Training for Photoshop CS (about 25 hours of video) and then started trying to extract some backgrounds and couldn't do it. That's one of the things that is really interesting about lab for me. I'm only in chapter 2 so I couldn't wait, I had to read the excellent summary by Rutt. When I first looked at the a & b channels they were so grey I thought there wasn't enough there to make masks. Rutt, you've explained it very well with your examples.

I got turned on to lab because I posted a message on dpreview about my workflow and someone said something like "that sounds complicated for each image, it would be must faster with lab". Since then I've been playing around and really having fun. Now that I have the book and this site I'm really looking forward to doing new things.

I'm curious, how many of you use lab as your primary colorspace? I mean you save your 'master' PSD file in lab and only convert to RGB to save as JPEG? I use a lot of adjustment layers and switching back and forth between lab & jpeg isn't possible, so I'm curious how people handle this. It sounds better to just stay in lab. Is it feasible?

Thanks everyone for a great resource!

-Michael

[chrisjlee]

I just got the book for Christmas. So far I'm loving it, especially the second half of each chapter. I recently finished the Total Training for Photoshop CS (about 25 hours of video)l
Goodness you sat through 25 hours of video. Please enlighten us on the fun things you've learned.

[cunparis]

Goodness you sat through 25 hours of video. Please enlighten us on the fun things you've learned.

I've used photoshop a bit in the past but never learned advanced things, I always used basic stuff. So there were some things that I knew in the training, but what was interesting was I was constantly learning new tricks and tips. Sometimes I fast forwarded through boring parts but overall I think the Total Training program is excellent. Overall I learned a lot of theory and practical uses, like the channels which I had never used before and the blend modes. I find now that learning new techniques is much easier now that I have a good foundation! For example I'm picking up l*a*b really quickly, and am getting good at extractions using channels (in lab mode).

-Michael

[DavidTO]

I've used photoshop a bit in the past but never learned advanced things, I always used basic stuff. So there were some things that I knew in the training, but what was interesting was I was constantly learning new tricks and tips. Sometimes I fast forwarded through boring parts but overall I think the Total Training program is excellent. Overall I learned a lot of theory and practical uses, like the channels which I had never used before and the blend modes. I find now that learning new techniques is much easier now that I have a good foundation! For example I'm picking up l*a*b really quickly, and am getting good at extractions using channels (in lab mode).

-Michael


Yeah, it's like once you learn spanish, italian is easy!

[ARCer63]

Darn, I just got my copy the 3rd of jan. Luckily I read a lot of the book at the bookstore. I actually haven't looked at it since I got it. I have been using LAB color since mid november. I love how it makes plain photos pop so much. I made this plain "portrait" of my little brothers toy amazing, well interesing at least. I know I went a lttle overboard but I like it.

[edgework]

I'm curious, how many of you use lab as your primary colorspace? I mean you save your 'master' PSD file in lab and only convert to RGB to save as JPEG? I use a lot of adjustment layers and switching back and forth between lab & jpeg isn't possible, so I'm curious how people handle this. It sounds better to just stay in lab.
-Michael

i work at an ad agency where everything ends up in CMYK. However, most of our images come in RGB. I have sometimes wound up saving three different PSD files, LAB, RGB and CMYK as a reflection of the actual sequence that I go through, LAB being the initial step with all the heavy lifting and either RGB or CMYK (or both) reserved for the types of subtle changes that aren't always convenient in LAB (which I sort of see as the atomic bomb of emage enhancement.) Which is not to say that LAB is incapable of subtlety. But If a face has overall good tone, but the highlights are pulling a bit yellow, there would be no point in trying to make that move in LAB since CMYK is perfect for such a shift.

[jfriend]

I finally have my copy of Dan Margulis' new book, Photoshop LAB Color : The Canyon Conundrum and Other Adventures in the Most Powerful Colorspace. This book is a runaway bestseller and I know that at least some dgrinners have it.

What about organizing a reading group to help us all get through it? We can rea a chapter a week (or two weeks?) and share questions applications of the ideas to our own shots, &etc. I think we are more likely as a group to get through it with good understanding than as indivituals.

Who is up for this? Anyone?

At Rutt's request, I'll write up Chapter 14 in the next few weeks.

[rutt]

At Rutt's request, I'll write up Chapter 14 in the next few weeks.

Thanks! How cool is that? We're almost finished. One more chapter -- 15, which I think Edgework has agreed to do. Two chapters I'm inclined to ignore -- the one about the client wanting it one color and then one about the universal exchange standard.

[ginger_55]

I have some really stupid questions, where can I ask them anonymously. Things I didn't understand in the first place and don't understand now.

For instance: the numbers...............I have no idea how anyone sees this zero number thing.

At the bottom left??? I have learned to use those numbers in my own way, but I am fudging. I have a lot of stupid things like that that I don't know.

I noticed on Rutt's explanation on my challenge thread, I thought, "uh, I don't want Rutt ever to know this, and I am sure I did something close to what he is talking about, but I have no idea "what he is talking about".

That kind of thing. Where can one be stupid and not be told to do homework and stuff. I remember David, way back at the beginning asking about why his numbers didn't match Rutt's, and I did not understand the answer, so "search" would not be an option now, I still would not understand.

I, uh, did my dog photos, which I am sure you all rushed to see here

http://dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=26019

were done almost entirely in LAB (blk and white started in LAB), without this stuff that I don't understand at all.

So, I can get by, fast and dirty, knowing little, but I feel a bit stupid.

ginger

[rutt]

This one is not really that stupid, but it does show that you haven't cracked those two books I know you have.

The numbers can be viewed with the Color Sampler Tool (http://www.plus2net.com/ps-tutorial/color-sampler.php). When you an image is in LAB, these numbers will naturally be represented in LAB. If A=0, and B=0, the sampled color is color neutral. If your image is not in LAB mode, you can still find out the LAB values of a particular point by reconfiguring the Info palette (http://www.arraich.com/ref/aapalette_info6.htm) to show LAB as one of the two readouts. Your sample points won't show LAB values, but if you mouse over a particular point, you'll be able to see them.

I have some really stupid questions, where can I ask them anonymously. Things I didn't understand in the first place and don't understand now.

For instance: the numbers...............I have no idea how anyone sees this zero number thing.

At the bottom left??? I have learned to use those numbers in my own way, but I am fudging. I have a lot of stupid things like that that I don't know.

I noticed on Rutt's explanation on my challenge thread, I thought, "uh, I don't want Rutt ever to know this, and I am sure I did something close to what he is talking about, but I have no idea "what he is talking about".

That kind of thing. Where can one be stupid and not be told to do homework and stuff. I remember David, way back at the beginning asking about why his numbers didn't match Rutt's, and I did not understand the answer, so "search" would not be an option now, I still would not understand.

I, uh, did my dog photos, which I am sure you all rushed to see here

http://dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=26019

were done almost entirely in LAB (blk and white started in LAB), without this stuff that I don't understand at all.

So, I can get by, fast and dirty, knowing little, but I feel a bit stupid.

ginger

[ratcheer]

I found this forum, yesterday, and I am fascinated by this thread. I am at somewhat of a disadvantage because I am working with the GIMP and everything doesn't translate directly (or easily, for me).

Here is a shot I have tried to apply some of the LAB concepts with. I often go way too heavy-handed with the LAB adjustments, so I tried to hold back some, this time. How am I doing?

The photo was taken by my son with a little Canon 2 MP P&S camera. It was at the Oregon coast in the spring.

http://www.bytephoto.com/photopost/data/500/478IMG_1690_b.JPG


http://www.bytephoto.com/photopost/data/500/478IMG_1690_b_lab.JPG
Thanks, Tim

[DavidTO]

I found this forum, yesterday...


Can you post them a tad smaller so they fit on most screens? :thumb

[cunparis]

I would like to see the sky with more constrast so the clouds come out more. You did a good job on the rocks. The white in the waves is blown out, and the water in the foreground just doesn't look right. I don't know if there's too much contrast or too much sharpening.

What did you do to it? Can you do a screen grab of your curves?

Also, if you can post smaller images that would help to compare them side by side (or top to bottom).

[ratcheer]

Thanks, DavidTO and cunparis. I only realized they were too large after I posted them.

I am working in the GIMP and it seems to lose the settings after you accept them. But, here is another stab I took at the same shot. I steepened the curves of the A and B layers and applied sharpening to the L layer. The colors look off, but the overall effect is nice.

I still don't understand how to apply a "good" curve to the L layer. I know how to do the curve, just not how to select the points to raise and lower.

Anyway, here is my next attempt:

[cunparis]

You didn't say if you're reading the book or not, if you don't have the book I highly recommend it. Steepening the curves is good, but in later chapters he explains how to bring out certain colors.

For the L curve, ask yourself if there is an area that you'd like to have more constrast than the rest of the photo. It could be that the entire photo is interesting and there is not one area that should be singled out. When you play with the L curve, you make one area more interesting but you sacrifice other areas in the process. So if you bring out the rocks, you might darken the water and sky and blow the water. If you bring out the water maybe everything else is darker. Sometimes you don't care, like if you have a bee on a flower, it's could be ok if the background gets darker. All depends on the image. For your image, I'm not sure, I'll make an attempt tonight from home.

I'm on chapter 16. The book has been fascinating. I've learned more about color correction than from anything else. I never knew how to use curves. Well I still don't but at least I know how to experiment to learn. :) I now need to go back and do the exercises and practice on the example images on the CD..

[Viking]

Hmm... I have not had any problem understanding the LAB book. But know am I at chapter #14 and its a bit hard to understand. I hope that the dgrin Lab-topic will add the 14th topic soon.

Hmm... If I have a picture, let say of a landscape with a blue sky, and the sky is a bit dull and need to be bluer. WHY use the Red channel? Maybe Im a bit lost in RGB color space. But the compliment color for Red is not Blue - right? Well, im sure I understand if I read the chapter again and again. Bu I want to get to chapter 16! So i can begin at my Professional Photoshop book!

One more question. In this picture. The Blue channel have most detail, right? And should be used for channel blending to get detail. This picture have I already blended the Bluechannel in Lighten blending-mode. Becous the cute cow where abit dark. I can post a high res if wanted, or the RAW file.

http://www.jlw.se/foto/_MG_6547.jpg


I hope everyone understand my english. If not, tell me and I will explain what I meant.

[jfriend]

Hmm... I have not had any problem understanding the LAB book. But know am I at chapter #14 and its a bit hard to understand. I hope that the dgrin Lab-topic will add the 14th topic soon.

Hmm... If I have a picture, let say of a landscape with a blue sky, and the sky is a bit dull and need to be bluer. WHY use the Red channel? Maybe Im a bit lost in RGB color space. But the compliment color for Red is not Blue - right? Well, im sure I understand if I read the chapter again and again.

Timely question. I'm working on the chapter 14 writeup for posting on dgrin now. I will hopefully be done in a few days. I suspect lots of folks have had trouble with chap. 14 (I did). It's got some pretty new concepts in it and I don't think it's one of his better written chapters. I will explain all your questions (hopefully) in the full writeup of the chapter. The reason for using the red channel to enhance the contrast in skies has absolutely nothing to do with color. It's because the red channel has the most contrast of the three RGB channels and the right kind of blend can take advantage of the contrast in the red channel to add more contrast to the sky. I'll have more explanation and examples in my writeup for chap. 14 soon.

[Viking]

Timely question. I'm working on the chapter 14 writeup for posting on dgrin now.

Great, and thank you. I must say this is the best way to read a book on! If someone is not understanding something - just post the question in a forum and you will get an answer within an hour, mostly.

I hope it will be more book topics like this one. Maybe when Dan's Professional book arrives. ;-) Must say, I realy love LAB. Only thing I miss in it is the neautral pipet in the curves/levels. But its in ACR anyway.

[rutt]

I have in mind to have another reading group for the new edition of Professional Photoshop, which Dan is sure will be out this year.

I the mean time, don't be afraid to post questions. Some of us do know the current edition of Professional Photoshop pretty well.

Great, and thank you. I must say this is the best way to read a book on! If someone is not understanding something - just post the question in a forum and you will get an answer within an hour, mostly.

I hope it will be more book topics like this one. Maybe when Dan's Professional book arrives. ;-) Must say, I realy love LAB. Only thing I miss in it is the neautral pipet in the curves/levels. But its in ACR anyway.

[rutt]

Hmm... If I have a picture, let say of a landscape with a blue sky, and the sky is a bit dull and need to be bluer. WHY use the Red channel? Maybe Im a bit lost in RGB color space. But the compliment color for Red is not Blue - right?

The red channel is good for contrast for blue skys with white clouds because the blue sky has very little red and the white clouds need a lot of it in order to be bright white. The blue sky often is a bit cyan and so may have a little green. But it cyan is the opponent of red, so you won't find any red there. Only at sunset, sunrise, in rainbows, &etc.

Green is good for contrast in faces because faces are basically red. Sometimes the blue channel has stuff you want, but usually you can just take the green for a good B&W of a face. Why green and not blue? Maybe someone else knows.

[john_opitz]

The red channel is good for contrast for blue skys with white clouds because the blue sky has very little red and the white clouds need a lot of it in order to be bright white. The blue sky often is a bit cyan and so may have a little green. But it cyan is the opponent of red, so you won't find any red there. Only at sunset, sunrise, in rainbows, &etc.

Green is good for contrast in faces because faces are basically red. Sometimes the blue channel has stuff you want, but usually you can just take the green for a good B&W of a face. Why green and not blue? Maybe someone else knows.

The blue channel can be a problem because of artifacting concerns…. when it comes to jpegs. Depending how compressed they are.
If the blue channel is clean, you can blend with that, or do a 50/50 blend with the green and blue into the composite channel. The blue has more contrast than the green when it comes to faces. The green is most of the time smoother (looks better).

[rutt]

Please don't use invisible (white) ink. Some of us use white backgrounds and white on white is invisible. Please just use default text colors unless you have a reason to do otherwise. Thank you.

[rutt]

For anyone who has missed it, we got a great summary of Chapter 14 (http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=26724) from JFriend. This isn't an easy chapter and John has done a really fine job with it. His results are very dramatic and show just how valuable it is to separate the treatment of color and contrast in your mind. When I took his class, Dan has very adamant about making sure we understood this.

TODO:

This leaves 4 chapters unsummarized.
Pathfinder has spoken for chapter 11 and I even saw a rough draft before Xmas.
I think Edgework volunteered for 15 some time ago. Maybe I'll try to collaborate with him to get it done.
Chapters 10 and 13 are a little dry, even by Dan's standards. I was thinking we'd skip unless Edgework or someone else can make a case.
Finish the portrait assignment. A handful of people did some of these before Xmas but we never actually figured out how to pull it together and comapre them in (semi) real time. I'd love to get this to happen. Thoughts?

[aphotoj]

I have in mind to have another reading group for the new edition of Professional Photoshop, which Dan is sure will be out this year.

I the mean time, don't be afraid to post questions. Some of us do know the current edition of Professional Photoshop pretty well.
Was a reading group ever established for this book? I just got it, and am trying to work my way through it. I think I understand the theory in the first two chapters, but for the life of me can not apply it. I have no earthly idea how Dan is moving the curves around. Obviously, I missing something.

After I convert my image to CMYK, I can not lay points down on the curve by Cmd clicking. Also, I want to use an adjustment layer, but when I do that, I can't lay points down either because it's sampling from the layer and not the background.

[DavidTO]

Was a reading group ever established for this book?


Yep. Read the first post in this thread. There's a link for each chapter discussion posted thus far.

[rutt]

Yep. Read the first post in this thread. There's a link for each chapter discussion posted thus far.

David, I think he's talking about Professional Photoshop, not Photoshop LAB Color.... There is reading group for the LAB book and David's right: look at the first post in this thread.

There is no reading group PP. I'd like to have one, but I'm waiting for a new, drastically revised, edition due by the end of the year.

If I were you, I'd read the LAB book now and wait for the new PP.

[DavidTO]

David, I think he's talking about Professional Photoshop, not Photoshop LAB Color.... There is reading group for the LAB book and David's right: look at the first post in this thread.

There is no reading group PP. I'd like to have one, but I'm waiting for a new, drastically revised, edition due by the end of the year.

If I were you, I'd read the LAB book now and wait for the new PP.


Oh.

[aphotoj]

David, I think he's talking about Professional Photoshop, not Photoshop LAB Color.... There is reading group for the LAB book and David's right: look at the first post in this thread.

There is no reading group PP. I'd like to have one, but I'm waiting for a new, drastically revised, edition due by the end of the year.

If I were you, I'd read the LAB book now and wait for the new PP.

Well, oops, just bought the PP 4th edition, so I'm not likely to get a new one this year...I can sit and read the LAB book at B&N but will I be jumping ahead.

BTW, I am distinctly female. ; )

[DavidTO]

BTW, I am distinctly female. ; )


:clap

[billc]

Thank you for hosting and parsing Photoshop Lab Color.
Question: Assume a Nikon .nef raw file. How much processing do you do in Bridge before transferring the image to Photoshop and using the LAB workflow? How does bridge, if at all, figure into the Lab raw workflow?

To date I have been following the guidelines of Bruce Fraser (Camera Raw with Adobe Photoshop CS2) in dealing with raw images..

Thank you for your assistance.
BillC

[Devin]

Hi Rutt and everyone! I just bought a copy of the "Photoshop LAB Color" book and I'm currently reading it. I just stumbled across your thread and I think it's an excellent idea to have our discussion for each chapters based on the summary assigned to a certain person.

I am curious if anyone is working on the summary for the following chapters:

10 - TBD
11 - Pathfinder?
15 - TBD

Thanks!

Devin

[GonzoBernelli]

...but I am a total NOOB to CS2 and LAB, having just migrated from PSE3, so I am limiting myself to the contents of the first 4 or 5 chapters....

I send DM an e-mail last evening asking how to get the triple curves window (see bottom of page 7 in "Conundrum"). If this is available in CS2, how to get it? Or is it part of some plug-in? Or it is something hacked into existence by Dan? Or is it just some fancy "chopping" just for the printed volume?

[Mike Lane]

...but I am a total NOOB to CS2 and LAB, having just migrated from PSE3, so I am limiting myself to the contents of the first 4 or 5 chapters....

I send DM an e-mail last evening asking how to get the triple curves window (see bottom of page 7 in "Conundrum"). If this is available in CS2, how to get it? Or is it part of some plug-in? Or it is something hacked into existence by Dan? Or is it just some fancy "chopping" just for the printed volume?

Just fancy screen grabbing methinks. But damn, it would be handy to have all 3 of them show up with the little reminder color blocks wouldn't it???

[DavidTO]

Just fancy screen grabbing methinks. But damn, it would be handy to have all 3 of them show up with the little reminder color blocks wouldn't it???


They have those reminders in blend options...yeah, it would be nice in curves, too. Wouldn't make sense in RGB, but in LAB it'd be nice.

[pathfinder]

Hi Rutt and everyone! I just bought a copy of the "Photoshop LAB Color" book and I'm currently reading it. I just stumbled across your thread and I think it's an excellent idea to have our discussion for each chapters based on the summary assigned to a certain person.

I am curious if anyone is working on the summary for the following chapters:

10 - TBD
11 - Pathfinder?
15 - TBD

Thanks!

Devin

Chapter 11 is here - http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=29980

[bbushe]

well, I read all your threads while waiting for the book to ship from the states. Obviously a lot of time and work has been spent in creating the chapter summaries, and I thank you all for sharing your work. This forum looks like a total treasure trove of ideas and knowledge!

regards,

bb

[BinaryFx]

Just fancy screen grabbing methinks. But damn, it would be handy to have all 3 of them show up with the little reminder color blocks wouldn't it???

Hi Mike, if you are a MS Win OS user - then there is a plug for Photoshop that will do that and more:

http://www.curvemeister.com/

I was a beta tester and feature request contributor for the v1 release, but that is my only professional affliliation with this vendor - this is intended as a public service message (the SW author is a fellow member of Dan's Applied Color Theory list).

Regards,

Stephen Marsh
members.ozemail.com.au/~binaryfx

[Mike Lane]

That looks interesting but yeesh it's $80! :nah

[BinaryFx]

That looks interesting but yeesh it's $80! :nah

Hi again Mike, yes, a little pricey...I guess it depends how much you use curves and different colour spaces. It is the only method I know that allows one to view and edit all the curves for separate channels at the same time. Perhaps if there was competition, the price would drop.

The links page at my website has some links to curves tutorials and tips:

http://members.ozemail.com.au/~binaryfx/

Best,

Stephen Marsh.

[hayzen]

LAB is a great way to enhance your photos.

Does anyone know if they can use this same LAB technique in other Adobe products like After Effects to enhance their videos? If not, at least a similar way?

[Tom K.]

I LOVE using LAB and this thread is phenomenal from top to bottom.

The only problem that I have using LAB on my photos right now is that the Reds frequently get so over-amplified that they can destroy a photo. For example I took a photo and there was a red ice chest in the background. It turned a radioactive red and I had to mask out that color because it stood out like a sore thumb.

How can I eliminate this Red overkill problem. If you fine folks can solve this one for me then I'll be one very appreciative and happy camper.

Thanks again for such a fine thread.

[DavidTO]

I LOVE using LAB and this thread is phenomenal from top to bottom.

The only problem that I have using LAB on my photos right now is that the Reds frequently get so over-amplified that they can destroy a photo. For example I took a photo and there was a red ice chest in the background. It turned a radioactive red and I had to mask out that color because it stood out like a sore thumb.

How can I eliminate this Red overkill problem. If you fine folks can solve this one for me then I'll be one very appreciative and happy camper.

Thanks again for such a fine thread.


Can you post a sample and let us know what steps you took to get there?

[pathfinder]

Tom K,

The ability of LAB to cause radioactive colors is feature, not a defect:): :wink

Use LAB color enhancement within an Adjustment Layer, and then adjust the opacity slider to modify the intense colors back to a more preferable level.

The Blend IF sliders can be used to limit the effect to just the magentas and avoid the greens or vice versa in the a channel, or the yellow or blues in the b channel. Or the Lightness channel can be used to select only the lighter or darker portions of the image as well.


http://Pathfinder.smugmug.com/photos/39902855-M.jpghttp://Pathfinder.smugmug.com/photos/40008515-M.jpg

[jfriend]

I LOVE using LAB and this thread is phenomenal from top to bottom.

The only problem that I have using LAB on my photos right now is that the Reds frequently get so over-amplified that they can destroy a photo. For example I took a photo and there was a red ice chest in the background. It turned a radioactive red and I had to mask out that color because it stood out like a sore thumb.

How can I eliminate this Red overkill problem. If you fine folks can solve this one for me then I'll be one very appreciative and happy camper.

Thanks again for such a fine thread.

It is not uncommon that if you have some strong colors mixed with some weak colors, the steepening of the A or B channels will overdo the strong colors. There are three basic approaches to dealing with this that I use:


Use Blend If settings to block the effect from the brighter colors. You can get really good at this to the point where it takes only a few seconds.
Change the shape of the curve on the A or B channel so that it doesn't change anything in the brighter colors and only steepens the curve in the mid-colors.
Mask off the effect from the objects that contain the brighter colors.I almost never use the third option because one of the first two is usually easier and more accurate, but anything can be masked as a backstop.

[Tom K.]

I thank you so very much Pathfinder. Superb advice that worked!

[Tom K.]

Many thanks jfriend. Advice like this is worth it's weight in gold.

[maggieddd]

I am almost finished with chapter 7 and I have a question. When I use shadow/highlight tool on the L channel, I noticed that the histogram changes (degrades) dramatically. Should I be concerned?

[jfriend]

I am almost finished with chapter 7 and I have a question. When I use shadow/highlight tool on the L channel, I noticed that the histogram changes (degrades) dramatically. Should I be concerned?

The histogram should change when you use shadow/highlights on the L channel. You're changing the luminance of some parts of the image - that should change the histogram.

Now, when you say that it "degrades", I'm not sure what you mean. If you can post a before/after screen shot of the histogram, we could definitely help you understand what's going on. Absent that, my advice is that there are only a few undesirable characteristics of a histogram. First, you usually shouldn't see pixels crammed up against either edge because this means that some tonal values were clipped (either forced to black or forced to white) and detail has been lost. Second, you probably don't want large empty spaces at either end of your histogram. These large empty spaces either mean your image is overexposed, underexposed or it's just really, really low contrast and thus doens't fill the whole tonal range. This second issue might just be the way the tonal values of your image are in nature or it might be an opportunity to mprove the image in post processing by "stretching out" the tonal values to fill the whole range.

Beyond these, the histogram is what it is, a view of how the tonal distribution of your image occurs in nature, nothing good or bad about it.
So, to offer any more advice, we'd have to know why you think the histogram has "degraded" and a picture would be worth a thousand words.

Here are two good sites to read on interpreting the histogram:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/understanding-series/understanding-histograms.shtml
http://www.outbackphoto.com/workflow/wf_41/essay.html

[rutt]

I am almost finished with chapter 7 and I have a question. When I use shadow/highlight tool on the L channel, I noticed that the histogram changes (degrades) dramatically. Should I be concerned?

And here is description of how to choose shadow/highlight parameters. (http://dgrin.smugmug.com/gallery/1777665)

[maggieddd]

The histogram should change when you use shadow/highlights on the L channel. You're changing the luminance of some parts of the image - that should change the histogram.

Now, when you say that it "degrades", I'm not sure what you mean. If you can post a before/after screen shot of the histogram, we could definitely help you understand what's going on. Absent that, my advice is that there are only a few undesirable characteristics of a histogram. First, you usually shouldn't see pixels crammed up against either edge because this means that some tonal values were clipped (either forced to black or forced to white) and detail has been lost. Second, you probably don't want large empty spaces at either end of your histogram. These large empty spaces either mean your image is overexposed, underexposed or it's just really, really low contrast and thus doens't fill the whole tonal range. This second issue might just be the way the tonal values of your image are in nature or it might be an opportunity to mprove the image in post processing by "stretching out" the tonal values to fill the whole range.

Beyond these, the histogram is what it is, a view of how the tonal distribution of your image occurs in nature, nothing good or bad about it.
So, to offer any more advice, we'd have to know why you think the histogram has "degraded" and a picture would be worth a thousand words.

Here are two good sites to read on interpreting the histogram:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/understanding-series/understanding-histograms.shtml
http://www.outbackphoto.com/workflow/wf_41/essay.html
actually, the histogram "degrades" after I do my things in LAB and then convert to RGB. I said degrades but maybe I am wrong. Maybe I should have said the image degrades accoding to the histogram.
Please take a look at the histograms

original image right after RAW conversion
http://members.cox.net/aye-aye/hist1.jpg

right after LAB conversion
http://members.cox.net/aye-aye/rightafterLAB.jpg

back to RGB after I made my LAB adjustments
http://members.cox.net/aye-aye/backrgb.jpg

[jfriend]

actually, the histogram "degrades" after I do my things in LAB and then convert to RGB. I said degrades but maybe I am wrong. Maybe I should have said the image degrades accoding to the histogram.
Please take a look at the histograms

original image right after RAW conversion
http://members.cox.net/aye-aye/hist1.jpg

right after LAB conversion
http://members.cox.net/aye-aye/rightafterLAB.jpg

back to RGB after I made my LAB adjustments
http://members.cox.net/aye-aye/backrgb.jpg

In the original histogram, I see a fairly broad distribution of tones that fills the tonal range. There aren't many shadows, but the few shadows that there are have lost detail. I don't see any blown highlights.

The LAB histogram always looks quite a bit different. I presume you're showing the thing they call the "composite" histogram from LAB mode. I have many images that have a histogram that looks like this in LAB mode. To tell you the truth, I don't know quite how to read the composite histogram. I think what you're seeing is that because LAB is a much, much larger color space, you're seeing a bunching of tones in the center of the color space.

The final histogram looks fine to me. Your edits pushed a few more tones into the shadows which, depending on the image, might be adding some pop, there are still no blown highlights and the overall tonal range is fairly evenly distributed. It looks like Photoshop may have changed the scale on the histogram too since it shows so much flatter and lower. I don't see anything wrong with this histogram. Looks fine to me.

I think this is all we need the histogram for. Nothing bad happend from the histogram point of view. Now, you just have to concentrate on what moves would make the image appear visually better. Did it get better? If not, then post the before/after image and tell us what you did and you're likely to get a range of different ideas here.

[maggieddd]

In the original histogram, I see a fairly broad distribution of tones that fills the tonal range. There aren't many shadows, but the few shadows that there are have lost detail. I don't see any blown highlights.

The LAB histogram always looks quite a bit different. I presume you're showing the thing they call the "composite" histogram from LAB mode. I have many images that have a histogram that looks like this in LAB mode. To tell you the truth, I don't know quite how to read the composite histogram. I think what you're seeing is that because LAB is a much, much larger color space, you're seeing a bunching of tones in the center of the color space.

The final histogram looks fine to me. Your edits pushed a few more tones into the shadows which, depending on the image, might be adding some pop, there are still no blown highlights and the overall tonal range is fairly evenly distributed. It looks like Photoshop may have changed the scale on the histogram too since it shows so much flatter and lower. I don't see anything wrong with this histogram. Looks fine to me.

I think this is all we need the histogram for. Nothing bad happend from the histogram point of view. Now, you just have to concentrate on what moves would make the image appear visually better. Did it get better? If not, then post the before/after image and tell us what you did and you're likely to get a range of different ideas here.
OK thanks. I wasn't sure what to think of the final histogram. Why would photoshop change scale on the histogram?
The image definitely looks better, at least in my opinion.

[maggieddd]

another question. How can I learn how to use Blend if setting?

[jfriend]

OK thanks. I wasn't sure what to think of the final histogram. Why would photoshop change scale on the histogram?
The image definitely looks better, at least in my opinion.
It probably changes the scale to try to accomodate the spike of pixels at the far left end of the final histogram and that made everything else look lower. The area under the histogram is constant at the same scale so when the area suddenly looks a lot smaller, Photoshop must have changed the scale.

[rutt]

another question. How can I learn how to use Blend if setting?

See chapters 7 and 8 especially. My summary of chapter 8 (http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=21648) might help.

[maggieddd]

See chapters 7 and 8 especially. My summary of chapter 8 (http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=21648) might help.
thank you. chapter 8 was very helpful.

[Myer]

another question. How can I learn how to use Blend if setting?

I've been slowly going through the book and wanted to get through all of this thread before jumping in. I'm becoming an LAB convert. Must be some sort of religion.

I read no more than 2-4 pages a day and many are re-read and re-read. I'm somewhere around page 225.

It took me a while to figure out Blend if. While I'm still not comfortable thinking/applying it, this is the way it works.

First, you can select either the L, a or b channels to apply.

Picture two layers; one above the other. The top layer is all you can see.

You'll notice that the end points of the upper and lower sliders are spread to their maximum width.

By pulling in either end point of the top slider towards the other side, you allow the bottom to peek through anywhere outside the two points on the sliders.

Splitting an end point merely makes the transition from top layer to bottom layer smoother.

Now, moving one or more of the end points of the lower slider works differently. When you move an end point of the bottom slider, you force anything not between the end points of the bottom to take precedence over the top layer.

Now, an example. If you have two layers. On the top layer you have a green letter "T" and a magenta letter "T". On the bottom layer use the same colors but the letter "B" in both colors. Top letter directly over bottom letters.

Call up the Layers Options (double click the layer). Select channel "a" (Green/Magenta).
You should see to letters "T" (green and magenta).

If you slide the top left hand end point to the middle, you should exclude the top green color and the green "B" should show through (you excluded anything outside the top end points. Now slide that end point back to the left end. You should see both letters "T".

Slide the bottom left slider to the middle. Now, you should see a green "B" and megenta "T" (you forced the bottom green letter to show through by forcing anything outside the two end points to take precedence).

The top slider is used to allow the bottom to show through outside the end points and the bottom slider forces the bottom to show through outside the end points. To me that sounds like reverse thinking.

Whew!!! I think I need something to drink.

[webwizard]

I'm blown away. I just ordered the book after discovering its existence in anothewr thread about blown out sky fixes. Today, I discovered this thread. What a great resource! Thanks all of you who contributed to this effort.

[asamuel]

I am bookless, so forgive my ignorance I try to get my finger in with the summaries.

Does everyone always have to flatten their images before moving on to RGB again? To me this seems like a disadvantage? No?

[cbcortez]

hi guys, i have the book. can i ask a simple question. In chapter 6, Dan outlines a summary on how he created his B&W version of the buildings. This is where he apply imaged to the red channel and then made the green channel a bit lighter and then he said it converts to the b&w version.

when he said it converts, what does he actually mean? what do you do to convert? do i just go to image -> grayscale?

thanks

[cbcortez]

no one has any ideas regarding my question above?

thanks.

[rutt]

no one has any ideas regarding my question above?

thanks.

Yes, he just does Image->Mode->Grayscale

[ginger_55]

LOL, it is those every day words used in a new context that can really confuse a person.

Glad to have read someone else with problems. I think my biggest problem in this stuff is learning the vocabulary. If I had it all down, I could zip thru a book or a tutorial.

ginger

[cbcortez]

thanks so much for the answer :)

Ive gone back to chapter one....LOL.

[I Simonius]

Had borrowed the book fro te library but decided to get my own copy.

Late to the aprtty but hope I can still join in:thumb

[jfriend]

If anyone wants a classic example of an image begging for a LAB retouch, go check out this thread (http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1006&message=21641469&changemode=1). The image isn't mine or I'd post it here, though I offered a classic LAB retouch on it in the thread.

Grab the original from that thread and try it yourself. You only need to know chapter 1 of Dan's LAB book to do really nice things to punch up this image.

The image starts out with low contrast and pretty dull colors, exactly what LAB is really good at punching up.

[Quitarita]

Had borrowed the book fro te library but decided to get my own copy.

Late to the aprtty but hope I can still join in:thumb

Me too! I just read the first 2 chapters and my head is spinning. :) Just practicing and trying to get the hang of it. How are you doing?

[Quitarita]

If anyone wants a classic example of an image begging for a LAB retouch, go check out this thread (http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1006&message=21641469&changemode=1). The image isn't mine or I'd post it here, though I offered a classic LAB retouch on it in the thread.

Grab the original from that thread and try it yourself. You only need to know chapter 1 of Dan's LAB book to do really nice things to punch up this image.

The image starts out with low contrast and pretty dull colors, exactly what LAB is really good at punching up.

Hi John,

I'm playing around with this image and also saw your take on this image in that thread you posted above. My colors are not as bright as yours. I was wondering by how much you brought in your A & B channels. Did you do it symetrically? I'd post my take here but I don't think that is a kosher thing to do since it is not my image, right? I brought them in by 10, then 15 then 20.

Gracias,

[jfriend]

Hi John,

I'm playing around with this image and also saw your take on this image in that thread you posted above. My colors are not as bright as yours. I was wondering by how much you brought in your A & B channels. Did you do it symetrically? I'd post my take here but I don't think that is a kosher thing to do since it is not my image, right? I brought them in by 10, then 15 then 20.

Gracias,

I brought them in quite a bit on that image, more than I usually do because of the character of the image. I don't remember exactly, but I suspect it was probably around 30% on each end, perhaps even more. You just have to use your own eyes to judge how far to go. What you need to avoid is unrealistic colors that either look like an artificial color or look too brilliant to fit in the scene. I usually start with 20 in on each end and then back off if that creates something unrealistic or go more if that's not enough.

For images that do not have a color cast and you want to keep them that way, you will want to keep the middle of the curve fixed in the middle because that keeps neutral things neutral. The easiest way to do that is to just bring the two ends in evenly and that's what I did on that image.

The reason this image is so perfect for LAB is that the colors in the original are very dull and there are no bright colors anywhere in the image. If you look at the histograms for the A and B channels in LAB mode, you can see how all the pixels are concentrated right near the middle of the range. The symmetrically steep A and B curves just spread those colors out across a wider color range. When you combine this color enhancement with a bit more contrast on the L-channel, you can make a startling difference.

A more common case than this image is that there are some bright colors and some dull colors in the image. In that case, it's a little more difficult to keep from overdoing the bright colors while still enhancing the dull ones, while still keeping everything realistic. That typically requires some more than symmetric curves and is the subject of many of the more advanced chapters in Dan's LAB book. I mentioned this image because the simple techiques work so well on it.

I think you're probably right that we shouldn't post derivatives of that image here without the author's permission. In my experience non-pros are usually pretty good about granting permission for this type of educational use when asked if you ever want to do that.

[Quitarita]

I brought them in quite a bit on that image, more than I usually do because of the character of the image. I don't remember exactly, but I suspect it was probably around 30% on each end, perhaps even more. You just have to use your own eyes to judge how far to go. What you need to avoid is unrealistic colors that either look like an artificial color or look too brilliant to fit in the scene. I usually start with 20 in on each end and then back off if that creates something unrealistic or go more if that's not enough.

For images that do not have a color cast and you want to keep them that way, you will want to keep the middle of the curve fixed in the middle because that keeps neutral things neutral. The easiest way to do that is to just bring the two ends in evenly and that's what I did on that image.
...


Hi,

Ok - I increase the steepness and it worked better. I guess I thought I was going too far but in reality I wasn't going far enough. So much to learn...

Thanks for the help!

[Duffy Pratt]

Try going overboard on the A and B curves, way beyond what you think would be any good. Then dial it back using the opacity slider for the layer. This is a simple way to get a feel for how far you can go. Dan says that he is using this technique more and more in his actual work.

Duffy

[Quitarita]

Try going overboard on the A and B curves, way beyond what you think would be any good. Then dial it back using the opacity slider for the layer. This is a simple way to get a feel for how far you can go. Dan says that he is using this technique more and more in his actual work.

Duffy

Cool! I hadn't thought of that. I'm going to try that from now on.

Gracias,

[Myer]

I'm not sure anybody is still here but I'll go ahead anyway.

Following reading the LAB canyon book, LAB has become my colorspace of choice for my standard corrections.

My regular approach is to:

Go into LAB

Steepen appropriate portion of L if there is not already a great deal of contrast.

Steepen A and B in the range of 10-15% (I find more usually results in over-saturated colors)

Select the L channel and:
Highlight/Shadows to bring back area that are very dark and reduce the highs. I find that reducing the highs is the most important part as it remoze haze and glare and add crispness to the end result.

Add some sharpenning to the L channel.
= = = = = =
I now place a high degree of importance on the Highlight portion and am considering moving this to the first step.
- - - - - - -
Any comments and experiences would be much appreciated.

[Manfr3d]

I just tried the LAB method and it works very well.
But how can I export an image to say sRGB for the Web?
When I try to do it all the color glory gets washed away.
What am I doing wrong?

[GJMPhoto]

I just tried the LAB method and it works very well.
But how can I export an image to say sRGB for the Web?
When I try to do it all the color glory gets washed away.
What am I doing wrong?

Are you using Convert to Color Space or Assign Color Space????

[Manfr3d]

I simply saved as jpg then tried to select sRGB colorspace
(like LAB via menu). How can I convert to a colorspace like
you mention?

[pathfinder]

When you have an image in the LAB color space, you need to go to Image>Mode>RGB.

Next, unless your working space is sRGB, you need to go to Edit>Convert to Profile> sRGB.

Then you can save your image that is destined for the web.

[Manfr3d]

When you have an image in the LAB color space, you need to go to Image>Mode>RGB.

Next, unless your working space is sRGB, you need to go to Edit>Convert to Profile> sRGB.

Then you can save your image that is destined for the web.

Now it works. Thank you very much! :thumb

[LAB.rat]

I now place a high degree of importance on the Highlight portion and am considering moving this to the first step.
Which would be good, because I believe Dan said it works better in RGB (the highlight part only).

[GJMPhoto]

Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy. - Benjamin Franklin
Did Franklin REALLY say that? Is there no end to how smart that man was???

[Iceway]

I'm in!
help each other

[Manfr3d]

Did Franklin REALLY say that? Is there no end to how smart that man was???

:D

Actualy I've never researched this question until now. But it seems that you can choose between two answers:

a) Be a scientist (http://www.beerinfood.com/Franklin.html)
b) Join the party (http://www.talkbacktees.com/NewFiles/06-003.html)
http://www.growbook.de/forum/images/reddreams/smilies/beer.gif

[Myer]

Is anybody here?

I'd really like to see a thread on LAB get revived.

I'll check in a few days to say if there are any signs of life.

[arodney]

Is anybody here?

I'd really like to see a thread on LAB get revived.

I'll check in a few days to say if there are any signs of life.

You can always go here and join the discussion (as they say on Frontline):
http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=41816&hl=