Re: Auto-Levels Question for Dan


sj_90000@...
 

Okay, here’s two more cents - One of Dan’s points is: if you find things that are “impossible colors”, like blue skin or green hair, those *need* to be corrected. And the *only* objective way to see what’s going on is “by the numbers”. Your vision is constantly adapting. You might wonder how fast is this adapting is happening, well if it wasn’t happening by the micro-second you would be “blind” - vision relies on change. There are many optical illusions that take advantage of this phenomena. Also if working in a dark room the tendency is to make adjustments that are too dark – to adapt to your surroundings, and conversely working in an overly bright room makes your image look dark so you brighten it – again to adapt to your surroundings. But neither of these is correct because your vision is adapting and once that happens all bets are off. That’s the benefit to “working by the numbers” – adaption’s irrelevant. If I can be a bit presumptuous, I think what Dan’s saying is DON’T RELY  ON YOUR VISION for correct color, it’s way too malleable. The auto-ThisOrThat is just an objective sanity check – “objective” being the operative word! Nothing more. But if you see a large difference as a consequence, you should check your work because odds are that something’s not right. But of course, ultimately it’s your decision how far to stray from “norms”. Dan’s techniques just provide a tool set that deal with a number of issues when translating the camera’s captured data into a image that most would agree better meshes with our memories. At least that’s my take on it.
 
I also thank Dan for the enormous amount of time he’s devoted to educating us. I can’t repay that though, I’m not that rich. Let’s just say, “He’s opened my eyes!”
 
Steve J

Join colortheory@groups.io to automatically receive all group messages.