Pop Tutorial: New and Improved

[DavidTO]

I've reworked the POP tutorial, take a look at it here (http://dgrin.smugmug.com/gallery/2292454/1).

And use this thread for any discussion or questions!

[Andy]

Folks, this is by far the #1 thing any of you can do to improve your photos. If you learn nothing else, learn these basic moves :deal

[saurora]

Hi David...I'm going through the new tute and attempting to work on an old image as I go. I have never used Image>Adjustment>Threshold before...pretty cool. I've always just slid the curves over to opposite sides and worked them back gradually. Anyway.....after setting the points, etc. in curves when I choose "ok" and leave curves my image is still in the black and white screen. I have attempted it 3 times and I can't figure out what I'm doing. I use CS by the way. :dunno

[DavidTO]

Hi David...I'm going through the new tute and attempting to work on an old image as I go. I have never used Image>Adjustment>Threshold before...pretty cool. I've always just slid the curves over to opposite sides and worked them back gradually. Anyway.....after setting the points, etc. in curves when I choose "ok" and leave curves my image is still in the black and white screen. I have attempted it 3 times and I can't figure out what I'm doing. I use CS by the way. :dunno


Thanks for debugging my tute!

My bad. Don't OK the threshold, just cancel. :D You're just using it to see the threshold, not set it.

I'm on my way to fix it.

[saurora]

Ah! Thanks David! Glad I asked before driving myself nuts! :D

[DavidTO]

Ah! Thanks David! Glad I asked before driving myself nuts! :D


Let's see how it worked out! :D

[Stustaff]

Feedback - working through this and it could use a tiny bit of clarification I have higlighted in Bold below from your text, It says "In the curves dialog" which one? I have two already one for black and one for white!
You need to add "Open another new curves layer you will see that there is a line running at 45... etc"

"Again, click OK in the curves dialog, and save the new target colors as default.

It's looking much better, eh?

What we've done so far is to make sure that this image is using the full range of values that are available: from black to white.

But we can do better.
(http://dgrin.smugmug.com/gallery/2292454/2/119806394/Large)
In the curves dialog there is a line running at 45°. This is the curve. When it's straight it's telling you that what goes in, is what comes out. The curve is not changing any values.
"

[gefillmore]

yes folks, davidto has the nicest tutes (http://dgrin.smugmug.com/gallery/2292454/1) I've ever seen-

[Stustaff]

After following tute, what do you think?

Before
http://stuarthill.smugmug.com/photos/98558735-M.jpg

After
http://stuarthill.smugmug.com/photos/119849641-M.jpg

[DavidTO]

After following tute, what do you think?




I think you've got to be more careful about where you set your black and white points.

[Stustaff]

I think you've got to be more careful about where you set your black and white points.

Ok can you clarify a little, where would you set them?

[DavidTO]

Feedback - working through this and it could use a tiny bit of clarification I have higlighted in Bold below from your text, It says "In the curves dialog" which one? I have two already one for black and one for white!
You need to add "Open another new curves layer you will see that there is a line running at 45... etc"



I tell you to open the curves in the next pane. In this pane, I just want you to look at the curves I've got there for you. I'll think about how to make that clearer.

Thanks!

[Stustaff]

Ah I see it now, just me reading too quickly I think.

[DavidTO]

Ok can you clarify a little, where would you set them?

Well, personally, I think this shot already has a black point. That is, I think that the area that IS black is significant to the shot, so you don't need to go shopping for another, lighter point to set to black.

And for the smoke, you need to find a brighter target in it, because wherever it was that you set the white point in there, it lost detail in the highlights.

Ultimately, with this shot, i think that you can skip to step 3, which is adding contrast with the "S" curve. Your black and white points are already pretty good. Whatever you do, you have to be very careful of those highlights in the smoke, because they are definitely significant to this shot. Don't blow out the detail there!

Make sense?

[Stustaff]

Well, personally, I think this shot already has a black point. That is, I think that the area that IS black is significant to the shot, so you don't need to go shopping for another, lighter point to set to black.

And for the smoke, you need to find a brighter target in it, because wherever it was that you set the white point in there, it lost detail in the highlights.

Ultimately, with this shot, i think that you can skip to step 3, which is adding contrast with the "S" curve. Your black and white points are already pretty good.

Make sense?

Perfect. cheers

[DavidTO]

Perfect. cheers


One clue to that is that when you open the threshold dialog box on that original image, the histogram goes from all the way on the left to all the way on the right...you're already using the full spectrum of values.

Look to practice on shots that obviously need it, to start.

[badtz]

Just one question, whats the advantage to setting the white and black point via multiple layers as opposed to copying a new layer and using levels? Otherwise nice tutorial, thanks for writing it up.

[DavidTO]

Just one question, whats the advantage to setting the white and black point via multiple layers as opposed to copying a new layer and using levels? Otherwise nice tutorial, thanks for writing it up.


You're always better off using adjustment layers instead of copying the whole layer. And yeah, you could use Levels if all you're doing is setting the black/white points, but I just never use Levels. They're too limited. But in this case, yes, there would be no difference.

[Duffy Pratt]

You're always better off using adjustment layers instead of copying the whole layer.

There is an exception to that rule. If you make a move in RGB, and you want to limit it with "Blend if..." in LAB, you will have to make the change on a duplicate layer because the adjustment layer won't survive the color space change.

Also, I think he was asking why you used different adjustment layers for both the white and the black point. And for that, I think the only answer is for clarity in the demonstration. You can just as easily set the white point and the black point in a single layer. If you want, you can set white point, black point, and write the curves all within the same adjustment layer with no difficulty at all.

Duffy

[DavidTO]

There is an exception to that rule. If you make a move in RGB, and you want to limit it with "Blend if..." in LAB, you will have to make the change on a duplicate layer because the adjustment layer won't survive the color space change.

Also, I think he was asking why you used different adjustment layers for both the white and the black point. And for that, I think the only answer is for clarity in the demonstration. You can just as easily set the white point and the black point in a single layer. If you want, you can set white point, black point, and write the curves all within the same adjustment layer with no difficulty at all.

Duffy


True on the first point. You can most often, however, set the blend-if on the underlying layer, so an adjustment layer is still preferable in that case.

On the second, it can go either way. Sometimes for the white point, especially, I want to back off on the correction it's made, so having it in its own layer where I can adjust the opacity is a good thing.

[Duffy Pratt]

Your right about the opacity, of course. It's just that with a black or white point I tend to think that there is a right and a wrong. So, if I didn't get it right the first time, I would go back and do it again, and not just back off the opacity. Unlike other moves, I never deliberately overdo the endpoints and then ease off with opacity. But, like other things I've never done, it might work for a whole lot of pictures, and better on some.

Duffy

[DavidTO]

Your right about the opacity, of course. It's just that with a black or white point I tend to think that there is a right and a wrong. So, if I didn't get it right the first time, I would go back and do it again, and not just back off the opacity. Unlike other moves, I never deliberately overdo the endpoints and then ease off with opacity. But, like other things I've never done, it might work for a whole lot of pictures, and better on some.

Duffy


I was just working on some engagement pictures on the beach at sunset, and there was no point that I wanted white. I go by the formula in the tutorial, so I suppose I could custom find the white point. But I'd rather just find the white point by the numbers, and if the change is too extreme, then dial it back.

But mostly I'll put both on one layer, like you do. :D

[badtz]

Thanks for the responses, Im still learning (mostly) basic photoshop stuff at this point, and have been in the habit of doing pretty much what you described using levels. Thanks again for the article.

[Scott_Quier]

David,

I read your contrast tute a while ago and was so ignorant that I didn't understand what I was reading. Now I have more experience and I get it:clap and, more importantly, why it works.

Being the OCD type that I am, I like to know how to do stuff, but I REALLY like to know why something works.

OK, the questions:

In the last pane of page 1 and the first of page 2, you set the black value to #070707 and the white to #f7f7f7 (247, 247, 247). Why did you choose these values?
And, why is the black point not, for example, 248, 248, 248 (which would be 7 off of white - 255, 255, 255)?
Is there something magical about the number 7 (as in offsetting from full black by 7)?Thanks again for the tute and TIA for the answers to the above questions.

[AZsnapper]

This is pretty good. I read this a while back. I kinda started getting away from this method after reading Dan M's Professional Photoshop book.

My only comment on the 'after' picture in this turorial is that the backfround now seems to have to much 'pop' - is that just me?

[DavidTO]

This is pretty good. I read this a while back. I kinda started getting away from this method after reading Dan M's Professional Photoshop book.

My only comment on the 'after' picture in this turorial is that the backfround now seems to have to much 'pop' - is that just me?


Maybe. I wasn't really all that concerned with getting the photo just right. I was more interested in the concepts.

[DavidTO]

OK, the questions:

In the last pane of page 1 and the first of page 2, you set the black value to #070707 and the white to #f7f7f7 (247, 247, 247). Why did you choose these values?
And, why is the black point not, for example, 248, 248, 248 (which would be 7 off of white - 255, 255, 255)?
Is there something magical about the number 7 (as in offsetting from full black by 7)?Thanks again for the tute and TIA for the answers to the above questions.


Those are numbers I picked up from Welcome to Oz (in our book review section, if you're interested). Most books will suggest numbers that are similar. In Oz he says that those numbers are tied into the Zone System, and basically they are the numbers that are the limit of being able to see texture.

[Scott_Quier]

Those are numbers I picked up from Welcome to Oz (in our book review section, if you're interested). Most books will suggest numbers that are similar. In Oz he says that those numbers are tied into the Zone System, and basically they are the numbers that are the limit of being able to see texture.Oh, goody - another book to read!!

Has anybody but me come to realize that the depth of resources on DGrin is nearly endless. Just when I think I have expored it completely, someone shows me where I've failed. This is so much fun!!

[Duffy Pratt]

Margulis recommends using 15,15,15 for the black point, unless your output device can handle detail with lower numbers. And he suggests 245, 245, 245 for the white point.

The white point number is close to Versace's, but the black point difference is very large. There probably is considerable room for disagreement on this. Versace also recommends that you use the first catchlight, whatever it is, as the white point. I think that advice is off base.

Duffy

[DavidTO]

Margulis recommends using 15,15,15 for the black point, unless your output device can handle detail with lower numbers. And he suggests 245, 245, 245 for the white point.

The white point number is close to Versace's, but the black point difference is very large. There probably is considerable room for disagreement on this. Versace also recommends that you use the first catchlight, whatever it is, as the white point. I think that advice is off base.

Duffy


I'll have to look, but that is not at all my recollection of Versace's white point advice re: the first catchlight. His advice for the white point is the same as for the black point--go to the first significant area of either to set your point.

Either set of numbers work, it depends on your technique for finding the black point, and how far "in" you go, IMO. If I had 15,15,15 set as my black point, my choice for the point would shift a bit to accomodate.

[Duffy Pratt]

I read the first chapter of the Versace book in a Barnes & Noble this weekend. I'm pretty sure he recommended setting the white point on a catch light on the woman's eye, and saying that this sort of thing was generally good practice. But of course, I could be wrong.

I don't particularly like the Threshold method of looking for B&W points. Instead, I open up a curve, slide the bottom endpoint to the right, then shift click on something important and neutral. Slide the point back to the bottom left. Then do the same with the top right point of the curve, sliding it to the left. For me, this lets me judge the picture a bit better as I do the sliding.

Duffy

[DavidTO]

I read the first chapter of the Versace book in a Barnes & Noble this weekend. I'm pretty sure he recommended setting the white point on a catch light on the woman's eye, and saying that this sort of thing was generally good practice. But of course, I could be wrong.

Yes, you are mistaken.


I don't particularly like the Threshold method of looking for B&W points. Instead, I open up a curve, slide the bottom endpoint to the right, then shift click on something important and neutral. Slide the point back to the bottom left. Then do the same with the top right point of the curve, sliding it to the left. For me, this lets me judge the picture a bit better as I do the sliding.

Duffy

I've done it both ways, and I like threshold because I believe it's more accurate. I often turn off preview if I need to find my way around.

That being said, version one of the pop tutorial did just what you said, slid the curves all the way to one end or the other.

[Duffy Pratt]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Duffy Pratt
I read the first chapter of the Versace book in a Barnes & Noble this weekend. I'm pretty sure he recommended setting the white point on a catch light on the woman's eye, and saying that this sort of thing was generally good practice. But of course, I could be wrong.


Yes, you are mistaken.
I went back to Barnes and Noble. On page 12 Versace says that setting the white point is different than setting the black point, because with the white point you are not looking for the first significant area of white, but instead are looking for the first pixels that are white and darker than 255,255,255. He then says, in a note on the same page, that the white point on the picture of the woman is a catchlight in her eye.

He makes a distinction between significant white and "visible" white. As I understand him, the first visible white will often be lighter than the first significant white area. I don't believe that Margulis would ever set a white point based on a catchlight in someone's eye. So I think this is a real difference in method.

I haven't read Versace's entire book, so I can't say that his approach to setting endpoints wouldn't work given his overall method. Judging from his pictures, I have to assume that his overall method does work (even though I dislike his first example with the fake lighting on the portrait). But with my knowledge, I could not use his approach to setting the white point and have as good results getting a full dynamic range and killing casts.

Duffy (p.s. I did this checking to make sure that my brain still functions, and because I'm interested in the topic, and perhaps in buying the Versace book. I'm not trying to show anyone up.)

[DavidTO]

I went back to Barnes and Noble.....


I've worked through that tutorial. The white point is set on either her shoulder, or cheek, where the highlight is. It's not a specular highlight, just the bright part of her shoulder or cheek.

I'll read through it and see what it is you're talking about, but the tutorial definitely does not set the white point on the catchlight in her eye.

[gus]

Anyone on a PC have trouble at this point 'Shift Click' ? David this is a Mac thing right ?

Shouldnt i be in a curves box to do this ?

[DavidTO]

Anyone on a PC have trouble at this point 'Shift Click' ? David this is a Mac thing right ?

Shouldnt i be in a curves box to do this ?


I don't think it's a Mac thing. Shift is shift, PC or Mac. It's Control, Option and Command that are wonky between the two.

[saurora]

Gus, when you shft-clk it leaves a little tracking mark on your image (you can see them in the above image you posted). After, you have made your selections in threshold, then you open up curves and match the black and white droppers to the appropriate marks, lining them up until they sort of disappear and then click.....voila! (Hope I got that right...)

[gus]

I don't think it's a Mac thing. Shift is shift, PC or Mac. It's Control, Option and Command that are wonky between the two.
Ok...now its time for you lot really see how little i understand of PS. At that very point i am still in whatever tool i used prior ie if i was clone stamping the previous photo then that is the tool that i have at that very moment..shift click does not bring up (i assume) an eye dropper to place over the darkest point :scratch

[DavidTO]

Gus, when you shft-clk it leaves a little tracking mark on your image (you can see them in the above image you posted). After, you have made your selections in threshold, then you open up curves and match the black and white droppers to the appropriate marks, lining them up until they sort of disappear and then click.....voila! (Hope I got that right...)


Oh, I see what might be the problem.

Follow the tutorial, setting the black and white points, cancel out of Threshold.

The little markers might disappear. Don't worry. When you open up the curves to set the black/white points with the droppers, the markers come back.

Yes, you could do it with curves, but I don't think it's as accurate, as you get all these different colors showing up in different places. I prefer the black/white of Threshold. I think it's more accurate. But you could use curves the whole way, if you wanted.

[DavidTO]

Ok...now its time for you lot really see how little i understand of PS. At that very point i am still in whatever tool i used prior ie if i was clone stamping the previous photo then that is the tool that i have at that very moment..shift click does not bring up (i assume) an eye dropper to place over the darkest point :scratch


I just tried it again, Gus. The reason I didn't tell you to be in eyedropper is that you don't need to. PS is smart enough to know that when you're in Threshold or Curves that you won't be doing any clone stamping. It changes for you.

[DavidTO]

Gus, if you're a mind to, let me know where/how you think I could make the tutorial more clear.

Here, or PM.

[saurora]

Oh, I see what might be the problem.

Follow the tutorial, setting the black and white points, cancel out of Threshold.

The little markers might disappear. Don't worry. When you open up the curves to set the black/white points with the droppers, the markers come back.

Yes, you could do it with curves, but I don't think it's as accurate, as you get all these different colors showing up in different places. I prefer the black/white of Threshold. I think it's more accurate. But you could use curves the whole way, if you wanted.

Can you expound upon that? I'm a PS dummy...what is the difference if I mark it in threshold, cancel, open curves and match up the marks with the droppers? I'm lost. I probably changed a step (unintentionally) while working with this stuff...BTW...I am learning alot this week from your tut and posts regarding Versace (got his book and read part of it last night). Also.......I just this morning read your tut on masking....which I have managed to avoid like the plague...guess I will have to give it a try! I have the perfect set of shots to work with!!! All backlit at the ocean!

[DavidTO]

Can you expound upon that? I'm a PS dummy...what is the difference if I mark it in threshold, cancel, open curves and match up the marks with the droppers? I'm lost. I probably changed a step (unintentionally) while working with this stuff...BTW...I am learning alot this week from your tut and posts regarding Versace (got his book and read part of it last night). Also.......I just this morning read your tut on masking....which I have managed to avoid like the plague...guess I will have to give it a try! I have the perfect set of shots to work with!!! All backlit at the ocean!


Gus was asking if he could do the work of finding the black point in Curves, instead of Threshold. The answer is, yes, you can. Just drag one end of the curves all the way over, find your black point, then drag the other end all the way over, find your white point. My post was explaining about why I prefer my method to doing it in curves. The advantage of doing it in curves is that you're doing it in curves, so that you don't need to change from Threshold to Curves, saving a step.

[saurora]

Gus was asking if he could do the work of finding the black point in Curves, instead of Threshold. The answer is, yes, you can. Just drag one end of the curves all the way over, find your black point, then drag the other end all the way over, find your white point. My post was explaining about why I prefer my method to doing it in curves. The advantage of doing it in curves is that you're doing it in curves, so that you don't need to change from Threshold to Curves, saving a step.

Gottcha....and I agree. Before reading this tut, that is exactly how I was taught to do it. It definitely is not as accurate....I am getting much better results for some reason, why I don't know, but I know it's working better! Like you said, there seems to be some color casts that slip through, my photos are much cleaner looking with working through thresholds. Thanks David! :barb

[gus]

Gus was asking if he could do the work of finding the black point in Curves, instead of Threshold. The answer is, yes, you can. Just drag one end of the curves all the way over, find your black point, then drag the other end all the way over, find your white point. My post was explaining about why I prefer my method to doing it in curves. The advantage of doing it in curves is that you're doing it in curves, so that you don't need to change from Threshold to Curves, saving a step.
no no no no...i assumed it was done in curves with the little eye dropper thing a me jig. Thats where i have seen it before...i thought thats what was needed ...not the point marker to which i now know there is a difference.

[DavidTO]

no no no no...i assumed it was done in curves with the little eye dropper thing a me jig. Thats where i have seen it before...i thought thats what was needed ...not the point marker to which i now know there is a difference.


It is. Threshold just gets the spot specifically. Then you actually set it in curves.

[gus]

It is. Threshold just gets the spot specifically. Then you actually set it in curves.
...i was talking about getting the marker ready to use (the rifle scope thing a me bob).

[DoctorIt]

...i was talking about getting the marker ready to use (the rifle scope thing a me bob).you referring to the very first step in the tute? if you don't have rifle scope, you must have the eyedropper - so you have to change your preferences to precise marker (step one).

if that's not what you mean, I don't get it. as soon as you open the curves or threshold dialog box and you mouse back over your image, the tool automatically changes to the marker/dropper.

[gus]

you referring to the very first step in the tute? if you don't have rifle scope, you must have the eyedropper - so you have to change your preferences to precise marker (step one).

if that's not what you mean, I don't get it. as soon as you open the curves or threshold dialog box and you mouse back over your image, the tool automatically changes to the marker/dropper.
Thats exactly what im doing..word for word however the last tool i used was the Brush Pencil with a red colour thus when i click on the blackest spot of the photo i get a bloody great red dot (which i know i can change in size) however i dont get the cross hairs with a number beside it at all.

I have followed the 'pref/cursers' direction & all is well there...its as if that particular part is not sticking...ie PS is not recognising that i have selected it.

[DavidTO]

Thats exactly what im doing..word for word however the last tool i used was the Brush Pencil with a red colour thus when i click on the blackest spot of the photo i get a bloody great red dot (which i know i can change in size) however i dont get the cross hairs with a number beside it at all.

I have followed the 'pref/cursers' direction & all is well there...its as if that particular part is not sticking...ie PS is not recognising that i have selected it.


The preferences change does not change the functionality of the cursor, just the look of it, so that it's more precise.

[gus]

All fixed ..thanks Doc. I was closing the 'Thresh-hold Dialog Box' & THEN trying to put my marker on the dark spot...i wasnt aware you had to leave that open.

[gus]

ok..so i did it & it did improve the photo..thanks. Now im left with a problem. I somehow got left with the photo that still has the 4 cross-hair points marked on it..and im not able to clone stamp over them. They appear to be on the photo perm :scratch

[DavidTO]

ok..so i did it & it did improve the photo..thanks. Now im left with a problem. I somehow got left with the photo that still has the 4 cross-hair points marked on it..and im not able to clone stamp over them. They appear to be on the photo perm :scratch


Whenever you're in one of those tools...threshold, curves, or if you're on the eyedropper tool, you'll want to alt-shift-click to make them go away.

I'll have to add that to the tute.

Thanks.

[gus]

Whenever you're in one of those tools...threshold, curves, or if you're on the eyedropper tool, you'll want to alt-shift-click to make them go away.

I'll have to add that to the tute.

Thanks.
Ok...any ideas as to how i get rid of those 4 markers from my jpeg now ? Clone aint toughing them.

[ginger_55]

Ok...any ideas as to how i get rid of those 4 markers from my jpeg now ? Clone aint toughing them.

Gus, I am just guessing here, but things like that have happened to me, too.

I learned to go in under VIEW and uncheck whatever turns on/off that thing that you don't want to see. Click on things, etc.

Smile, good luck,
ginger (not smart enough to use the keyboard as a faster method, slows me down. Plus, Mac keyboard diff. Might be Ctrl alt shift, whatever, click on a PC. Just too much to think about.

[DoctorIt]

Ok...any ideas as to how i get rid of those 4 markers from my jpeg now ? Clone aint toughing them.they'll never show up anywhere but within photoshop. do a save as or save for web if you don't believe me, and open them in your browser or some other app.

or: (1) open back up a dialogue (threshold) or (2) select the eyedropper tool and do the alt-shift-click, poof, gone!

[saurora]

I'm having the same experience, Gus. I go up to View and turn off click on "extras" and they disappear. Then I do "save as", and after I have saved while I'm still in the file........they come back. I just hope they are not viewable in the saved file. :huh

[DavidTO]

I'm having the same experience, Gus. I go up to View and turn off click on "extras" and they disappear. Then I do "save as", and after I have saved while I'm still in the file........they come back. I just hope they are not viewable in the saved file. :huh


option (or alt) shift click

I added the instructions to the tutorial. :D

Thanks for finding these things. It makes the tutorial better!

[Phyxius]

Yay! Some friends came over to ride this past weekend (mid to upper 70s in JANUARY). It's been raining and everythings been overcast too, expect for Saturday. Well, by the time we got back from our ride it was getting dark and I only had my Fuji FinePix with me. But I'm took some shots anyway and two that really suffered were of my friend, Sarah with the miniature donkeys. I attempted your "pop" tutorial and wowers! They still aren't great, but I can actually show them to my friends instead of immediately throwing them in the trash.

http://phyxius.smugmug.com/photos/122231218-M.jpg

http://phyxius.smugmug.com/photos/122196053-M.jpg

http://phyxius.smugmug.com/photos/122231442-M.jpg

http://phyxius.smugmug.com/photos/122196270-M-1.jpg

Thanks David!!

[DavidTO]

Christina,

If that isn't just the perfect pair of shots to show of what the POP tutorial can do...!

Nice job!

[draggin]

Having tried the tutorial I guess that it was written for Photoshop as opposed to photoshop elements.

Anyone know of a similar tutorial for elements??

Tim

[DavidTO]

Having tried the tutorial I guess that it was written for Photoshop as opposed to photoshop elements.

Anyone know of a similar tutorial for elements??

Tim


I moved your post to this thread, so it's all in one place. And maybe someone with the same question will see your post!

As for the answer, I'm working on it. :wink

[davev]

Hey Tim, See if this can help you out.

http://davev.smugmug.com/gallery/2324800

[draggin]

I moved your post to this thread, so it's all in one place. And maybe someone with the same question will see your post!

As for the answer, I'm working on it. :wink

I hate it when you do that................................I spent hours thinking I'm dreaming :scratch:scratch

It was only after I posted I found this thread.....................yes I know get your eye tested!!

DaveV

I had a quick look, and will have a play with the details tomorrow.

A quick question, if I have posted a picture which suggestions have been made on where should I post the updated picture?? Here or in the thread in question, I'm thinking that I will probably want some more instructions after my first play.

Tim

[schmoo]

You could always start a new thread with your results and questions in the Finishing School. Just make sure the subject is specific (http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=61064). :D

[BradfordBenn]

Thanks for the pointers. So much too learn so little time.
Sleep is optional, right?

[draggin]

Hey Tim, See if this can help you out.

http://davev.smugmug.com/gallery/2324800

A Quick question Davev, what format is the picture in when you open it in elements, is the picture in raw format? if so do you do any major tweaks to picture pre elements or it just as it came of the camera?

Tim

[davev]

A Quick question Davev, what format is the picture in when you open it in elements, is the picture in raw format? if so do you do any major tweaks to picture pre elements or it just as it came of the camera?

Tim

I shoot in jpg mode, so I don't have to convert a RAW file before hand.
Remember, this is just to get the colors to POP a little. There are other things that I do to a shot.
Things like USM (unsharpen mask) maybe add or remove some of the saturation, resizing, etc.

My little tute is just to help you get the basics. The best thing you can do is to work on a few shots and see what you come up with.
It took me a long time to learn how to get my shots to look OK.
Don't expect to learn it all over night.

BTW, what version of Elements are you using?
That info helps others help you.

[draggin]

I shoot in jpg mode, so I don't have to convert a RAW file before hand.
Remember, this is just to get the colors to POP a little. There are other things that I do to a shot.
Things like USM (unsharpen mask) maybe add or remove some of the saturation, resizing, etc.

My little tute is just to help you get the basics. The best thing you can do is to work on a few shots and see what you come up with.
It took me a long time to learn how to get my shots to look OK.
Don't expect to learn it all over night.

BTW, what version of Elements are you using?
That info helps others help you.

Hi Dave

Thanks for the reply

(In reverse order)

I have Elements v5

If I could learn to do it over night it would not be worth doing.

I was planning of having a tweak tonight but I unfortunately I am still working (waiting for a bug scan to finish on a Laptop at the moment which has to be cured by tomorrow morning). While I have tweaked some of my pictures I am probably being a little heavy handed, I need that little bit of knowledge to get me going so that I can start learning how to do it properly.

Tim

[craftgirl]

Hi, I am trying the tutorial, I have CS2, however when i get to the layers>new adust>curves my window doesnt give me a chance to change the values to 777 or 247. I dont get the same window. What am I doing wrong...lol

Thanks in advance for your help.

[DavidTO]

Hi, I am trying the tutorial, I have CS2, however when i get to the layers>new adust>curves my window doesnt give me a chance to change the values to 777 or 247. I dont get the same window. What am I doing wrong...lol

Thanks in advance for your help.


You have to double-click on the tool that you want to change the default setting for. So, if you were to double-click on the black eyedropper, you could then enter 777. :thumb

[SloYerRoll]

get to the layers>new adust>curves....
Don't forget about shortcuts!
To do the same thing you did above just on the keyboard:

CTRL + J (copy layer)
CTRL + M (curves dialog box)

(Substitute CMD for CTRL on a Mac)

-Jon

[craftgirl]

Awesome, thanks to both of you. I am so clueless. I am franticly scouring the internet to just get myself up to par with the simplest of CS2 stuff. I am starting from practically scratch with very little vocab too. I am so determined to learn though.....there is so much to learn and a lot of it I can learn here, so thank you sooooo much!

[SloYerRoll]

Then check this out too.

http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=80198

You may as well get started on the right foot! You'll find shortucts to be a HUGE timesaver.

[KED]

Awesome, thanks to both of you. I am so clueless. I am franticly scouring the internet to just get myself up to par with the simplest of CS2 stuff. I am starting from practically scratch with very little vocab too. I am so determined to learn though.....there is so much to learn and a lot of it I can learn here, so thank you sooooo much!
I'm in the same boat, not only for PS but also for LR. Check this out:

http://www.kelbytraining.com/online/all-classes.html

It costs a modest amount of money (you can subscribe on a monthly or an annual basis), but provides wealth of information running the gamut from absolute beginner to seasoned expert, with new stuff being added all the time. And the people who create the tutorials are al the big names in the Photoshop universe. I really like it and consider it to be a great value.

[craftgirl]

Thanks KED. I will check it out.

[miamilight]

I've reworked the POP tutorial, take a look at it here (http://dgrin.smugmug.com/gallery/2292454/1).

And use this thread for any discussion or questions!

I tried the POP Tutorial, but when I set my black points, the photo took on red color cast, and then when I set my white point, the photo took on garrish purple color cast. What have I done wrong?

[Duffy Pratt]

It's hard to say exactly without seeing the original and the adjustment.

If you want to adjust the black and white points to increase contrast, while holding colors fixed, then set the adjustment layer to luminosity. That might do the trick for you.

Duffy

[pathfinder]

I tried the POP Tutorial, but when I set my black points, the photo took on red color cast, and then when I set my white point, the photo took on garrish purple color cast. What have I done wrong?

I would suggest that the points you chose for your black and white points were not destined to be a neutral B&W, but were a dark or light color, and this threw off your color balance. You must use dark and light areas that you know should be neutral for your B&W points.

One way is to use the Threshold command in the LAYERS palette, and use the slider to identify the darkest important areas and the lightest white areas in your image to set your points. That is how I do it. Be careful not to use specular highlights also - they are way out of gamut and may not be truly white either.

[DavidTO]

I would suggest that the points you chose for your black and white points were not neutral B&W, but were a dark or light color, and this threw off your color balance. You must use neutral dark and light areas for your B&W points.

One way is to use the Threshold command in the LAYERS palette, and use the slider to identify the darkest and lightest areas in your image to set your points. That is how I do it. Be careful not to use specular highlights also - they are way out of gamut and may not be truly white either.


Not exactly true, as the setting of the points will force them to neutral, but they don't necessarily start out as neutral. That's how it removes a cast from your image. You want to select points that SHOULD BE neutral.

[pathfinder]

I suppose what you are saying is true, Dave.

I agree with "should be neutral", because - if you select points that are not neutral, and should not be made neutral, then you will make the color balance much worse using that point, will you not?

I use the Image Threshold command just like in your tutorial, and search for a good dark are that should be black - ok - I just called it black because that is what setting a Black point does - it DEFINES what is going to be black in the image. Same for a white point.

[DavidTO]

I suppose what you are saying is true, Dave.

I agree with "should be neutral", because - if you select points that are not neutral, and should not be made neutral, then you will make the color balance much worse using that point, will you not?

I use the Image Threshold command just like in your tutorial, and search for a good dark are that should be black - ok - I just called it black because that is what setting a Black point does - it DEFINES what is going to be black in the image. Same for a white point.


Right. But the point you select could easily be 7, 13, 9, and once you click it could be 7,7,7 and eliminate the cast that was evident in the shadows, and which affect the entire image.

[jjbong]

Right. But the point you select could easily be 7, 13, 9, and once you click it could be 7,7,7 and eliminate the cast that was evident in the shadows, and which affect the entire image.
This leads into cast correction methods that are way beyond what you cover in your tutorial (which is great, by the way). Margulis in his latest videos is advocating RGB curves in Color mode (or maybe Normal mode, depending on how they come out) to get the various parts of the image right color-wise. So far, seems to work well for me. The video on the subject more directly relevant to the discussion here (part 2 of the workflow) isn't yet available.

But in any event, his techniques are more advanced that what you've presented. I agree with andy's comment (way back in the thread) that just doing this will make a huge difference to most photos. I've always used curves explicitly to the the black and white points correct, and it hasn't been hard to correct a "white" point that's was actually, say, yellow. You just set the numbers more yellow (less Blue, or more Y, depending on where you're working).

[KED]

David -- You have put a tremendous amount of work into this and the results that folks are achieving speak for themselves. But I'm not gonna understand CS3 anytime soon, if ever (it's #3 on the list behind understanding photography and understanding LR). Is there a quick and dirty translation to LR?

[Duffy Pratt]

David -- You have put a tremendous amount of work into this and the results that folks are achieving speak for themselves. But I'm not gonna understand CS3 anytime soon, if ever (it's #3 on the list behind understanding photography and understanding LR). Is there a quick and dirty translation to LR?

I have ACR. not LR, but I understand that they work basically the same.

The quick and dirty translation is as follows.

Turn both highlight and shadow clipping on.

To set the white point, move the exposure to the point where the significant highlight clips, then back off a tad so that it no longer clips. (You can refine this some by using the recovery slider).

To set the black point, move the black (or is it called darkness) slider, its the fourth one down, until the significant shadow clips, and then back off from it so that its not clipping anymore. (You can refine this a bit with the fill slider, to restore shadows that have clipped. This is a less subtle tool than the recovery slider, in my experience).

The curve setting you can do exactly the same as in the pop tutorial.

In general, if you just use the sliders in the first tab, and the curve tab, you have more ability to make these sort of "pop" adjustments than what has been described in this tutorial.

Duffy

[DavidTO]

I have ACR. not LR, but I understand that they work basically the same.

The quick and dirty translation is as follows.

Turn both highlight and shadow clipping on.

To set the white point, move the exposure to the point where the significant highlight clips, then back off a tad so that it no longer clips. (You can refine this some by using the recovery slider).

To set the black point, move the black (or is it called darkness) slider, its the fourth one down, until the significant shadow clips, and then back off from it so that its not clipping anymore. (You can refine this a bit with the fill slider, to restore shadows that have clipped. This is a less subtle tool than the recovery slider, in my experience).

The curve setting you can do exactly the same as in the pop tutorial.

In general, if you just use the sliders in the first tab, and the curve tab, you have more ability to make these sort of "pop" adjustments than what has been described in this tutorial.

Duffy


This is not the same, it's close, but it does not neutralize the black and white points as the tutorial does.

[pathfinder]

Myself, I still set B&W points after popping the jpg out of the Raw converter ARC 4.3, seems to help make things look right:dunno

[KED]

I have ACR. not LR, but I understand that they work basically the same.

The quick and dirty translation is as follows.

Turn both highlight and shadow clipping on.

To set the white point, move the exposure to the point where the significant highlight clips, then back off a tad so that it no longer clips. (You can refine this some by using the recovery slider).

To set the black point, move the black (or is it called darkness) slider, its the fourth one down, until the significant shadow clips, and then back off from it so that its not clipping anymore. (You can refine this a bit with the fill slider, to restore shadows that have clipped. This is a less subtle tool than the recovery slider, in my experience).

The curve setting you can do exactly the same as in the pop tutorial.

In general, if you just use the sliders in the first tab, and the curve tab, you have more ability to make these sort of "pop" adjustments than what has been described in this tutorial.

Duffy
Well whatdya know -- that's what I do! Thanks -- validation is not unimportant.

[Diff]

I'm really new to PS CS3. I'm familar with the steps noted here. Question: It seems to me that most images will have a black point. What do you do if there's no white pt in you shot?

~ Thanks ~

[jjbong]

I'm really new to PS CS3. I'm familar with the steps noted here. Question: It seems to me that most images will have a black point. What do you do if there's no white pt in you shot?

~ Thanks ~
What you're looking for is the brightest significant point in the image (as in the tutorial). Not necessarily the brightest spot. If it isn't neutral, then the technique described in the tutorial doesn't work, and you have to use some other technique to set it to an appropriate value (curves work here). It would require a tutorial on the order of the original post to show how exactly to do this.

[Diff]

http://diffphotos.smugmug.com/photos/270178354_UdAZi-S.jpg

Reference: Pop Tutorial – New & Improved (May 2004)

Question: What do you use as a white point when there’s no specific “white” in your image? (See my photo.)

I’ve been putting in a few months of study with various PS CS3 workbooks. Now I’m trying to apply what I’ve learned to my images. Naturally, there’s a big gap between the images used in the workbook and my images. Questions begin streaming…

I’m familiar with the process used in the Pop Tutorial since it’s the same I practiced with CS3 workbooks. As in the workbooks, the photo used in the Pop Tutorial has a clear dark shadow area (or black target) and a white spot/target.

In my photo, the black target was with the bee. Works great when I go to color correct in curves. But the process doesn’t work (for me) for finding a white target that works. Oh, the shadow & highlight colors were set (As suggested in Pop Tutorial) with the Color Picker. If I try a highlighted target that is non-white in my photo, it simply doesn’t work inside Curves.

Is the solution within Color Picker? Does one have to set a different highlight color as close to the best highlight color in the photo?

Thanks!

[cardon]

Go to my blog www.craigstutorials.com/blog (http://www.craigstutorials.com/blog) and scroll down to find the tut called "The Precise way to use levels to get great colors" and there you will find how to the exact spot for your white point or your dark point. My example is for Levels but it works for curves as well.
Good Luck,
Craig

[jjbong]

Reference: Pop Tutorial – New & Improved (May 2004)

Question: What do you use as a white point when there’s no specific “white” in your image? (See my photo.)

Here's a way to do it with curves. The key is understanding what you want the "white point" to be in this picture. In DavidTo's tutorial, it's 247, 247, 247, or pretty much pure white. Here it obviously isn't. Using the Thresholds command described in the tutorial, the brightest point of interest is yellow in the flower. So you want the "white point" to be as bright a yellow as you can get. This means B=0 for sure. This particular yellow looks a little on the orange side, so we probably want R=247, and the only question is what G should be. I experimented until I liked what I saw (G=231). For the black point, it's easy, as the bee's body is the darkest spot and is indeed black. So we're aiming for R=G=B=5, or thereabouts. This is the curve I used to get there.

http://jjbong.smugmug.com/gallery/3647167_bXRaF#270901105_TrShr-A-LBhttp://jjbong.smugmug.com/photos/270901105_TrShr-M.jpg

which produced this

http://jjbong.smugmug.com/photos/270901291_URnBg-L.jpg

Then you can extend the contrast enhancement technique in the tutorial by curving the R, G, and B separately. The objective is to get contrast on each of the curves (steepen the curbes) in the areas of interest. The same technique applies as in the tutorial to find the area of the curves to steepen, and they won't be the same in each channel. For a picture like this, you don't have to worry about messing up the color in the process.

Here are the curves I used

http://jjbong.smugmug.com/photos/270901154_j96BL-M.jpg

to produce this

http://jjbong.smugmug.com/photos/270901229_Voxxd-L.jpg

An improvement, but not a major one. Somewhat better detail in the center of the flower and in the bee's body.

[Diff]

Thanks for all of your input. I'm a little behind in checking back. Ok, so I'm going to play with a few images and use what you've shared here.

[Diff]

Craig...

Your video is good and it the process I'm aware of using the Threshold to Levels route to set white & black pt. Help me out here...

This process only works if you have a well defined black & white pt in the image? I first used it on my image above & enhanced the black on the bee. However, since there's no white pt...

[Diff]

I’m going back over what you wrote & here is a few questions.

With the yellow flower (w/bee) image, there’s no “white point.” Under such circumstances, I still need to determine the brightest point using the Threshold command. In this case, the “white point” becomes getting the yellow as bright as I can. Got this part & here us were I get lost. My guess is that I need to understand the Color Wheel, or the color range variation in each channel, and/or the Info palette?

Blue Channel = 0 (O = Brightest yellow vs 255 = Blackest right?). You state this particular yellow looks a little on the orange side (I don’t have the experience yet to see this.) Therefore…

Red Channel = 247. How did you choose this value? This leaves what the Green channel out to be.

Green Channel = 231. Again, how did you know to come up with this value?

R, G, B = 5 for the black bee’s body. Why 5? I thought blackest value was 255?

~ Thanks ~

[jjbong]

I’m going back over what you wrote & here is a few questions.

My guess is that I need to understand the Color Wheel, or the color range variation in each channel, and/or the Info palette?


Yes. Here's one way to do it:
http://www.broadhurst-family.co.uk/lefteye/MainPages/a_challenge.htm

It randomly generates a color, and you try to get the values for the color in RBG, Lab, or HSB. Of course, you need some understanding of the color space before you do it, but having a basic understanding, it hones your skills in identifying colors.

Blue Channel = 0 (O = Brightest yellow vs 255 = Blackest right?). You state this particular yellow looks a little on the orange side (I don’t have the experience yet to see this.) Therefore…

Red Channel = 247. How did you choose this value? This leaves what the Green channel out to be.

Green Channel = 231. Again, how did you know to come up with this value?

You're correct about the Blue channel. You want it to be 0, as this is the brightest yellow. For a pure yellow, you would have Red and Green at the maximum (255, although many prefer to reduce is slightly - I was following the tutorial recommendation to 247). From here, you can just reduce the Red or Green values slightly, to see what gives you the result that looks right to you. I decided looking at it that it was more orange (that is, more red), and so the Green value needed to be reduced. You could easily play with reducing one or the other to see which looks better. In any event, you're going to end up with a high value in both channels. When I did it, 231 in Green just looked right.
R, G, B = 5 for the black bee’s body. Why 5? I thought blackest value was 255?


No. The brightest value in any RGB channel is 255, the darkest is 0. Pure black is R=G=B=0. Again, some prefer to derate it slightly, and I was following the tutorial and used 5 instead of 0. (CMYK is a different beast altogether, but I won't go there).

But as you noticed earlier, a bright yellow is a very dark blue, and so the Blue channel will be close to 0 for that.

[Diff]

> No. The brightest value in any RGB channel is 255, the darkest is 0.

Right! I was turned around thinking about the histogram associated brightest with being more saturated.

Posting these questions is very helpful!

~ Thanks ~

[Diff]

Okay, I've finished working on a new image & want to upload it to get some feedback. With this next image, I've added more CS3 techniques, going from "as shot," to what I say, a custom finish. My idea of finish is by no means, complete!

I do have a few questions before posting my next image, which will not appear here, but the main "Finishing School" forum.

1) Posting image - I've created a category in my area just for PS, before & after images. From there, I'm okay with posting the forum image from this category, right? Anything I need to do/know before I proceed?

2) Sharpening - Suggestions? I spend time today reviewing a number of articles (Bill Frazier stuff was very informative. There were a few from here.) I know there's a difference between posting an image on the web vs for printing. From what I've read, "Lab Color" process appears to be the "best?" I can continue this discussion in whatever (non ACR) sharpening tutorial or thread there is.

3) When I post an image for post processing review is there some specific information I ought to note?

You've been a BIG help!

~ Much Thanks ~

[gegjr]

I've reworked the POP tutorial, take a look at it here (http://dgrin.smugmug.com/gallery/2292454/1).

And use this thread for any discussion or questions!

I am sure this question is going to get a laugh but how do you use this tutorial in Paint Shop Pro? I tried just doing the first steps but there is no way to "mark" anything in the threshold dialog box in PSP X or X!.

Regards,
gegjr

[Marc Muench]

Great tute David:clap

Black and white points are simple yet complex:scratch
This is by far the single most important step in working an image in post:deal

Something I did not read anywhare in this thread, the reason it is so important when printing. Yes, it does make the image fill the dynamic range thus POP, but what the numbers corrilate to are drops of ink on the paper. In the 0 to 255 scale, 0 representing black and 255 rep white, any area with 255 in all three RGB values, will hold no printing dot, in other words NO INK! just white paper or not so white paper or not even close to white paper. 0 on the other hand is a bit easier and in most cases, I agree with Vincent and setting the numbers to 7. However, with a accurate RIP there will be tonal differences between 0 and 5:huh so I always set my black point to 3, which is a compromise.

Also, I dont think every image needs a white point or in some cases even a full dynamic range:wink This is why everything in photography, especially post, is IMAGE DEPENDENT. Therefore the black point is most important with the white point becoming cast-less less significant. I really wish ACR and LR would include RGB layers in the curves palette:cry

[Rocketlily]

Even though this is a very old thread, the tutorial here is timeless. I followed the tutorial, using CS2 and I'm very impressed with the results. Here's the before and after. Thank you for this tutorial.

Before:
http://wildelifephotography.com/Photography/APhotoADay/01-22-10-DSC03428-without/771253185_iQmgd-M.jpg

After:
http://wildelifephotography.com/Photography/Macros-and-Close-Up/01-22-10-DSC03428-without/771297602_Toemj-M.jpg

[pathfinder]

David,

I read your contrast tute a while ago and was so ignorant that I didn't understand what I was reading. Now I have more experience and I get it:clap and, more importantly, why it works.

Being the OCD type that I am, I like to know how to do stuff, but I REALLY like to know why something works.

OK, the questions:

In the last pane of page 1 and the first of page 2, you set the black value to #070707 and the white to #f7f7f7 (247, 247, 247). Why did you choose these values?
And, why is the black point not, for example, 248, 248, 248 (which would be 7 off of white - 255, 255, 255)?
Is there something magical about the number 7 (as in offsetting from full black by 7)?Thanks again for the tute and TIA for the answers to the above questions.

On rereading this thread I see I missed this question Scott. Several people quoted Versace, Margulis and others, but did not really answer where they got their numbers. The best answer I have found is in "Fine Art Printing for Photographers" by Uwe Steinmuller and Juergen Gulbins published by Rocky Nook. I do like the books Rocky Nook publishes; they always seem to have the right blend of theory and downright practice. "Fine Art Printing for Photographers" really is quite worthwhile.

The white point and black point ultimately are derived from what you can print AND distinguish with YOUR printer and YOUR paper.

On page 79 there is a printer white point and black point test ramp (http://www.outbackphoto.com/booklets/resources/fap/) - essentially a stepped grey scale from 0,0,0 to 255,255,255 that you must print with your printer and identify exactly where in the stepped scale you can begin to see a difference between the steps. If your printer cannot print steps that you can see with careful examination under good print lighting, below say 7,7,7 - then, there is no point in including that range in your image. If you cannot tell the difference between 247,247,247 and 255,255,255 then you have found your white point for your system. That is why Versace's numbers vary from Margulis. I believe Versace usually is printing with a fine art inkjet printer, and Margulis' usual printer concern is a CMYK linotype style industrial printer.

After performing this exercise with my Epson 3800, I favor 5,5,5 and 250,250,250 when I am printing on a satin lustre paper. For a matte paper, I might prefer a different set of numbers.

This is what Marc was saying just above, in a much more abbreviated fashion I believe. As he mentions, to a certain point it is image dependent, since some images may not need a full contrast range or a white point at all. A picture of fog, might suffer is expanded to a full range of tones.

[Marc Muench]

I do like the books Rocky Nook publishes; they always seem to have the right blend of theory and downright practice.

Hey Jim

This is good to hear, as I am working on my book NOW for them:D

Your explanation regarding numbers is exactly what I was referring to.

[pathfinder]

Hi Marc.

I am looking forward to your book with great interest. I WILL purchase it as soon as it is available.

I did remember you mentioned that you were working with Rocky Nooke publishers. I do like the quality of the editing and printing they have in their books.

After I read the section on printing that I mentioned above, about where the white point and the black point numbers came from, image editing made more sense to me. But that is the only place I have ever seen it described so simply and clearly in print.