Reading mode: Light Dark

Linearsharpen D60 beta 2

Go to last post
Pekka Saarinen said:
Leo Reinhard said:
Pekka thanks for the comparison. I can clearly see the finer detail
of the clothing and pavement pattern. I have used LS Beta2 with
Yarc and BB with quite good results. I am going to try it with
Canon RAW converter II to see if I can detect any difference. Since
Yarc and BB both use the same SDK as Canon converter, why should
there be any difference?
Click to expand...
They use Canon SDK, which is a base code library - that can be
altered to taste I'm sure.
Pekka Saarinen said:
Also could you please clarify one item for me--should the converted
tiff be assigned Adobe 1998 rbg before running your action.
Click to expand...
Yes, that should be done.

1. Your working space is AdobeRGB
In this case (in PS7) you should activate "RGB: Convert to working
space" in color management dialog's section "Color Management
Policies" and tick on "ask when opening". Now, PS asks you to
choose each time you open a linear TIFF. The reply is easy: all
choices are equally correct.

2. Your working space is some other than AdobeRGB
In this case you should activate "RGB: Convert to working space" in
color management dialog's section "Color Management Policies" and
tick on "ask when opening". Now, PS asks you to choose each time
you open a linear file. The reply should be:
TICK ON "Assign profile:" and choose "AdobeRGB (1998)" from
dropdown menu. Then UNTICK "and then convert document to working
RGB".

--
Pekka
http://photography-on-the.net
Click to expand...
Pekka, (or anyone else)

Ok now a little confused...just to be sure...please correct if I'm off the track...I'm using PS7:

I have in Color Management Policies:

RGB: Preserve Embedded Profiles (default)...I would like to leave it that way if possible.

Once I open the linear tiff:

Assign profile Adobe RGB (1998), and then convert to working RGB.
OR
Assign Working RGB: Adobe RGB(1998)

which one is correct?

--
Home page - http://home.attbi.com/~lozoyad
 
David Lozoya said:
Pekka Saarinen said:
Leo Reinhard said:
Pekka thanks for the comparison. I can clearly see the finer detail
of the clothing and pavement pattern. I have used LS Beta2 with
Yarc and BB with quite good results. I am going to try it with
Canon RAW converter II to see if I can detect any difference. Since
Yarc and BB both use the same SDK as Canon converter, why should
there be any difference?
Click to expand...
They use Canon SDK, which is a base code library - that can be
altered to taste I'm sure.
David Lozoya said:
Also could you please clarify one item for me--should the converted
tiff be assigned Adobe 1998 rbg before running your action.
Click to expand...
Yes, that should be done.

1. Your working space is AdobeRGB
In this case (in PS7) you should activate "RGB: Convert to working
space" in color management dialog's section "Color Management
Policies" and tick on "ask when opening". Now, PS asks you to
choose each time you open a linear TIFF. The reply is easy: all
choices are equally correct.

2. Your working space is some other than AdobeRGB
In this case you should activate "RGB: Convert to working space" in
color management dialog's section "Color Management Policies" and
tick on "ask when opening". Now, PS asks you to choose each time
you open a linear file. The reply should be:
TICK ON "Assign profile:" and choose "AdobeRGB (1998)" from
dropdown menu. Then UNTICK "and then convert document to working
RGB".

--
Pekka
http://photography-on-the.net
Click to expand...
Pekka, (or anyone else)

Ok now a little confused...just to be sure...please correct if I'm
off the track...I'm using PS7:

I have in Color Management Policies:

RGB: Preserve Embedded Profiles (default)...I would like to leave
it that way if possible.

Once I open the linear tiff:

Assign profile Adobe RGB (1998), and then convert to working RGB.
OR
Assign Working RGB: Adobe RGB(1998)

which one is correct?

--
Home page - http://home.attbi.com/~lozoyad
Click to expand...
--
Home page - http://home.attbi.com/~lozoyad
 
JasperF wrote:

thanks thousand times for your generous efforts. My question is that do you have to convert it to sRGB for web viewing from adobe 1998 RGB. Also the good thing is that your method is bringing out rich colour

Yes "convert to sRGB" step is neccessary in order to get colors right on unprofiled systems (like web browsers). LS includes "to web" actions which do this for you.
JasperF said:
digital photography is digitized perception of reality
Click to expand...
How do you know that life itselt is not in the end digital? :)

--
Pekka
http://photography-on-the.net
 
David Lozoya said:
Ok now a little confused...just to be sure...please correct if I'm
off the track...I'm using PS7:

I have in Color Management Policies:

RGB: Preserve Embedded Profiles (default)...I would like to leave
it that way if possible.

Once I open the linear tiff:

Assign profile Adobe RGB (1998), and then convert to working RGB.
OR
Assign Working RGB: Adobe RGB(1998)

which one is correct?
Click to expand...
Your working space seems to be AdobeRGB so in your case both answers are equally correct.

--
Pekka
http://photography-on-the.net
 
WalterK said:
Ken W. said:
Here are some comparisons between the original RAW conversion, the
original with an aggressive USM applied (to match Pekka's action
somewhat), and Pekka's LS action. (ISO 200)
Click to expand...
Am I correct in understanding that your images on the left are the
original RAW conversions, the middle images your USM'd versions,
and the rightmost images are the result of Pekka's action?

--
Walter K
Click to expand...
--
Ken W.
http://www.quantumarts.com
http://www.quantumarts.com/photography
http://www.mywhistler.com
 
Pekka, I noticed the Beta Preview handles the red faces better that the D60 is prone to then the Beta 2. Was wondering if you changed anything when tweaking the colors?

Thanks
Tom
Pekka Saarinen said:
Yes "convert to sRGB" step is neccessary in order to get colors
right on unprofiled systems (like web browsers). LS includes "to
web" actions which do this for you.
Pekka Saarinen said:
digital photography is digitized perception of reality
Click to expand...
How do you know that life itselt is not in the end digital? :)

--
Pekka
http://photography-on-the.net
Click to expand...
--
Tom
 
Pekka Saarinen said:
Yes "convert to sRGB" step is neccessary in order to get colors
right on unprofiled systems (like web browsers). LS includes "to
web" actions which do this for you.
Pekka Saarinen said:
digital photography is digitized perception of reality
Click to expand...
How do you know that life itselt is not in the end digital? :)

according to roger penrose the physicist who discovered black hole and who thought steven hawkin says that AI will never make up the answer to human with quantum capability, I am one of his follower
--
Pekka
http://photography-on-the.net
Click to expand...
--
digital photography is digitized perception of reality
 
Tom C said:
Pekka, I noticed the Beta Preview handles the red faces better that
the D60 is prone to then the Beta 2. Was wondering if you changed
anything when tweaking the colors?
Click to expand...
Hi Tom,

Yes, each version has changes in color reproduction - improvements I hope. I think beta 2 handles skin color much better than preview (and Canon conversion) and lacks reddish tint found in beta preview version. Maybe I missed something. Could you post a demo shot?

--
Pekka
http://photography-on-the.net
 
I was concerned when I read Pekka's note that his Linearsharpen D60 beta 2 action was tested only with the Canon RAW converter II. I use BB for converting CRW files to linear tiffs. I just ran a comparison on one 'problem' image that I have and learned several things.

1. In this test, the linear file generated with BB converts with Pekka's
action pretty much identically as the Canon RAW converter II
generated linear tiff.

2. I get better results with Pekkas conversion action than I've been
able to achieve with the Fred Miranda D60 LPBatch Adobe RGB
conversion action on this problem file.

3. The Canon RAW converter II software is pathetic compared
to BB with regards to user interface design and documentation.

Once again, Thanks to Pekka for creating such a great
tool!

-JimD
-----------------
Pekka Saarinen said:
Two notes:

Linearsharpen is developed and tested with Canon RAW converter II
only. Results with linear TIFFs generated using other converters
can differ (in you example it looks a bit too dark). Yarc and
Breezebrowser conversion compatibility is NOT tested.

Reason for the perceived highlight darkness is that LS will protect
highlights as you see and it can be tweaked using levels.
Click to expand...
 
First shot is Preview and the second is Beta2. I ran a test on another pic and now i'm not so sure, Beta2 looks better then Preview and LP batch.
You can see the difference in this shot though.




Pekka Saarinen said:
Tom C said:
Pekka, I noticed the Beta Preview handles the red faces better that
the D60 is prone to then the Beta 2. Was wondering if you changed
anything when tweaking the colors?
Click to expand...
Hi Tom,

Yes, each version has changes in color reproduction - improvements
I hope. I think beta 2 handles skin color much better than preview
(and Canon conversion) and lacks reddish tint found in beta preview
version. Maybe I missed something. Could you post a demo shot?

--
Pekka
http://photography-on-the.net
Click to expand...
--
Tom
 
John,

It took 2min 41sec to do a Convert + Sharpen High action. I have a 1.3GHz with 1GB RAM. Not fast, but I think it is worth the wait if the photo is a keeper. Humm, maybe I should get me one of those 3GHz machines...
Charles
John Davis said:
John
Charles Pfeil said:
APS is dead and so is all film for me (well if someone offered me a
large format system, I could be persuaded to change my mind). I
just love the Linearsharpening software. This is a shrunken jpg,
the TIFF file simply looks AWESOME.

http://www.pbase.com/image/11293668/original.jpg
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top