Date   

Re: PPW Panel Documentation

Michael Demyan <mdemyan@...>
 

Hi Dan:

One other consideration - for the few of us using Windows, could you
insert '(alt)' after the 'option' key press.

Thanks,
Mike

On 3/4/2013 12:40 PM, Dan Margulis wrote:

Those who have been experimenting with the beta version of v3 of the
PPW panel know that its supplied documentation was never updated to
reflect the new features, because we did not have time to incorporate
the new information before releasing the beta.

We now have updated all 11 of the PDF documentation files, some
extensively, and they will be included in the final release. I see no
point on making all these PDFs available now; however one of them is
completely new, so I will put it out for comment. If somebody catches
any error by Friday, we'll be able to incorporate it into the final
release.

This PDF is about the combined MMM + CB action, including its new MMM
Saturation option and the new options window. It concentrates on a
single image of the famous Washington cherry blossoms. As those of you
who have seen them up close know, they are a delicate pink that is
very difficult to reproduce on paper, therefore a careful accentuation
of the color is imperative.

The tentative PDF is posted in our Files section,

http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/colortheory/files/

Title: MMM-CB

Comments and suggestions can be sent to me offline as well as to the list.

Thanks for any feedback.

Dan Margulis


Re: Retouching services for *how* much?

Hector Davila
 

I've seen those type of companies come and go through the years..
they seem to be...inexperienced...you know what I mean.

To put it clearly, they don't have an understanding of the market.

Just look at their website and see for yourself:
https://repixl.com/

Hector Davila

On 3/7/2013 4:55 PM, Dan Margulis wrote:

Offline, a list member sent me this:

From:
Date: March 4, 2013 4:31:37 AM PST
To: Dan Margulis
Subject: Repixl Launches Its Photo Retouching-As-A-Service

Hi Dan...

Another blow or an opportunity for professionals? Thought your list
might like (or dislike) to see this ...

http://techcrunch.com/2013/03/04/repixl/
Also take a look at their site -- the examples look like many NAPP
tutorials ... Seems to me that many businesses might go this route for
their images ...

The site he refers to is this:
https://repixl.com/about-repixl

The basic idea is that this service seems to be aimed at consumers and
small businesses; it will take care of setting up galleries, sharing,
and whatnot. It will also color-correct, 24-hour turnaround 24/7, for
prices that range roughly from $1-$10/image with an upfront quotation,
although it is not clear how the price would be determined.

My reaction is that these corrections are likely being outsourced to
countries where wages are a fraction of those in Europe or North
America. And why not? Transmission costs are nil, and there are plenty
of skilled people now in such countries.

Is it a blow? If so, it shouldn't be; we can hardly expect competitors
to refuse the advantages of modern technology to produce a good
product at a low price.

Is it an opportunity? Probably not for working with these people, who
will want their own cut of these very low prices. But we are seeing a
transition in our field from a time when most of us were supported by
companies who would pay very high prices for work on a single, very
important image, to a scenario where people wish to publish many
images and are looking for a reasonable price/quality relation.

I do agree with the correspondent that some if not many businesses
would go that route. In today's economy, companies are desperate to
reduce head-count and might not mind the presumed slight loss in
quality. And to that extent, of couse, it is a threat.

Dan Margulis




Re: What causes this blotching?

Michael Jahn
 

On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 2:30 PM, Hector_APR <amerphoto@...> wrote:

**


I don't know how 'color photos' before the digital age of computers
were....color corrected.
Well, I am old enough to tell you.

If there was a large budget - we did dye transfers -->
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dye-transfer_process

We airbrushed.

We used Durst Enlargers - they had heads that lets us 'tune' the exposure..

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=675737

We would make color separations, and we would wet etch - that is, we would
pull a proof, we would paint or pour an acid on a positive film to make
dots smaller, or make dots larger in an area by doing the same with a
negative. We would stop the processs by washing it with water, using a hair
dryer, then examining it with a loupe.

later on - for 500,000.00 - you could by a scitex Imager. - that is - in
the late 70's early 80s

http://www.fundinguniverse.com/company-histories/scitex-corporation-ltd-history/

where we scanned transparencies and did "photoshop" like things ( before
Photoshop existed )


Respectfully,

*Michael Jahn*
1824 Garvin Avenue
Simi Valley, CA 93065
*(805) 217-6741
*

<http://www.composeusa.com>


Re: What causes this blotching?

john c.
 

A good custom lab technician could look at a negative and tell within seconds what corrections it would need without even having to make a print and be nearly spot on over 90 percent of the time. It's a lost art now but it's nice to finally get the appreciation we deserved, albeit a decade or two after the fact! :-)

-----Original Message-----
From: Hector_APR
With all that dust in the air, how could you print from a negative?
Cleaning negatives and lenses is like having an OCD problem.

I don't know how 'color photos' before the digital age of computers
were....color corrected.


Retouching services for *how* much?

Dan Margulis
 

Offline, a list member sent me this:

From:
Date: March 4, 2013 4:31:37 AM PST
To: Dan Margulis
Subject: Repixl Launches Its Photo Retouching-As-A-Service

Hi Dan...

Another blow or an opportunity for professionals? Thought your list might like (or dislike) to see this ...

http://techcrunch.com/2013/03/04/repixl/
Also take a look at their site -- the examples look like many NAPP tutorials ... Seems to me that many businesses might go this route for their images ...
The site he refers to is this:
https://repixl.com/about-repixl

The basic idea is that this service seems to be aimed at consumers and small businesses; it will take care of setting up galleries, sharing, and whatnot. It will also color-correct, 24-hour turnaround 24/7, for prices that range roughly from $1-$10/image with an upfront quotation, although it is not clear how the price would be determined.

My reaction is that these corrections are likely being outsourced to countries where wages are a fraction of those in Europe or North America. And why not? Transmission costs are nil, and there are plenty of skilled people now in such countries.

Is it a blow? If so, it shouldn't be; we can hardly expect competitors to refuse the advantages of modern technology to produce a good product at a low price.

Is it an opportunity? Probably not for working with these people, who will want their own cut of these very low prices. But we are seeing a transition in our field from a time when most of us were supported by companies who would pay very high prices for work on a single, very important image, to a scenario where people wish to publish many images and are looking for a reasonable price/quality relation.

I do agree with the correspondent that some if not many businesses would go that route. In today's economy, companies are desperate to reduce head-count and might not mind the presumed slight loss in quality. And to that extent, of couse, it is a threat.

Dan Margulis


Re: What causes this blotching?

Chuck Gierhart <chuck.gierhart@...>
 

Prints were nothing compared to slides. You had to hit the exposure within ½
stop and know your craft well enough that you could color correct with
filters as you shot.



No, I don’t miss those days J



Chuck Gierhart



From: colortheory@... [mailto:colortheory@...] On
Behalf Of Hector_APR
Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2013 4:31 PM
To: colortheory@...
Subject: Re: [colortheory] What causes this blotching?
Importance: High





I'm surprised in this digital age photographers are still
having...'dust problems'. Dust was the biggest enemy of photographers in
the past. It created a 'spotting industry'.
With all that dust in the air, how could you print from a negative?
Cleaning negatives and lenses is like having an OCD problem.

I don't know how 'color photos' before the digital age of computers
were....color corrected.

Hector Davila

On 3/6/2013 11:14 AM, Nick wrote:

To add to the comments, if you really want to see how dirty your
sensor is, stop down to say f16 and do a slow shutter speed pan across
a fairly plain background, the resulting motion blur will separate the
background from the spots and reveal the full horror of what is on
your sensor.

Nick Tresidder

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Re: What causes this blotching?

Hector Davila
 

I'm surprised in this digital age photographers are still
having...'dust problems'. Dust was the biggest enemy of photographers in
the past. It created a 'spotting industry'.
With all that dust in the air, how could you print from a negative?
Cleaning negatives and lenses is like having an OCD problem.

I don't know how 'color photos' before the digital age of computers
were....color corrected.

Hector Davila

On 3/6/2013 11:14 AM, Nick wrote:

To add to the comments, if you really want to see how dirty your
sensor is, stop down to say f16 and do a slow shutter speed pan across
a fairly plain background, the resulting motion blur will separate the
background from the spots and reveal the full horror of what is on
your sensor.

Nick Tresidder


Re: What causes this blotching?

dlruckus
 

Hello Dan.
The effect actually looks to me as if it is coming from the camera lens rather than dust on the sensor. If one enhances the contrast significantly in the sky area and looks at 100% or better you can see that the blotches all have ,arguably, the same shape and there is a multiplicity of them of different densities making up the image.Your water drop on the lens is a pretty decent analogy I think.
I suspect it is a circle of confusion effect(similar to mirror lens doughnut highlights). What within or on the lens might be causing it is hard to say except that it appears at first glance to be an irregular shape so is more likely to be something to do with coatings or element cement etc or even an uneven flare effect from the lens or hood mechanics.
I still work primarily with film and can attest to the ease of bringing out extremely subtle defects with stressing an image.It's the bane of my existence and ranges from film and coating striations and defects to surface scratches and pressure marks from machine processing or the camera transport itself. Added to that are the defects generated by film scanners.

Best,
Duane Ruck

--- In colortheory@..., Dan Margulis <DMargulis@...> wrote:

I have a question for photographers about what causes a certain kind of defect that I am seeing more and more of.

The capture contains circular or oval areas slightly darker than their surroundings, almost as if a drop of water had fallen on the lens. But the effect is so subtle that it can only be seen in an otherwise very smooth area, normally the sky. And often it still can't be seen unless the area has been stressed, which unfortunately the PPW tends to do.

There's no sweat cloning the defects out, but I would be interested in knowing how it comes about. Is it a sensor issue? I've seen it in my own shots but more commonly in the work of very fine photographers using top-of-the-line equipment. And like I said, the problem seems to be a growing one.

An example of what I'm talking about is in the Sunrise folder in our Photos section that many of us have recently worked on. If the link below doesn't work, it's my own version, the one with the -dm suffix. I boosted the sky quite a bit and the defects are evident. Why are they in the file in the first place?

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/colortheory/photos/album/734361103/pic/1620921285/view?picmode=large&mode=tn&order=ordinal&start=1&dir=asc

Dan Margulis


Re: What causes this blotching?

Campo Weijerman
 

On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 8:14 PM, Nick <parnell.studio@...> wrote:

To add to the comments, if you really want to see how dirty your sensor
is, stop down to say f16 and do a slow shutter speed pan across a fairly
plain background, the resulting motion blur will separate the background
from the spots and reveal the full horror of what is on your sensor.
Actually, the more evenly lit this background is, the better you'll be able
to see the dust. Even a computer monitor will do as a subject, as long as
you add a bit of motion blur. Ideally, the resulting histogram will occupy
only 10 - 20%. Now open the image and apply auto levels or a steep curve.
If all you see is some faint blotches don't worry because they don't
represent real problems. If you do see some real bad cases, apply the
procedure just mentioned by Ron Kelly.
Regards,
--
Campo Weijerman


Re: What causes this blotching?

munkiboy
 

Hi All,

Just to confirm it was my durty old lens and the the spots are usually dust but in this case it came from visiting the seaside previously and what I think happened was that wetness from the salty air entered the lens and then dried leaving tiny bits of salt behind.

This was visible in the lens as white specs from the "wrong" end. It's difficult to fix lenses that have this problem so I picked up a new one instead. There is a strange liquid that people use to clean mobile phones that somehow dries instantly (or doesn't wet things) and that can be used to clean inside a lens I believe.

As others mentioned it's often dust on the sensor which is pretty easy to clean and should be part of a frequent routine for photographers.

The specks on the photos are usually easy to fix with the spot removal tool in ACR or that thing that looks like a sticking plaster in Photoshop (spot healing brush - just checked).

In the Nikon software - I don't use - you can take a "dust off reference photo" of a white board and it maps where the specks are and then automagically removes them from your images.

For more difficult ones you can usually clone them out.

I am a little embarrassed by my dirty photo but I did give you the uncleaned RAWs.

My friend took a bunch of pics once and the silhouette of a bug could be seen in most of them, yes it was inside the camera when the lens was attached.

All the best,

-andy blundell

--- In colortheory@..., Dan Margulis <DMargulis@...> wrote:

I have a question for photographers about what causes a certain kind of defect that I am seeing more and more of.

The capture contains circular or oval areas slightly darker than their surroundings, almost as if a drop of water had fallen on the lens. But the effect is so subtle that it can only be seen in an otherwise very smooth area, normally the sky. And often it still can't be seen unless the area has been stressed, which unfortunately the PPW tends to do.


Dan Margulis


Re: What causes this blotching?

RK Beautyseen <ron@...>
 

Dan

Count me in; I'd say it's dust on the sensor. I would also agree with some who've said that the self cleaning
functions of most modern cameras help, but do not eliminate, the eventual need for manual sensor cleaning.
Those of us who change lenses "in the real world" as opposed to a clean room in a microchip factory are going
to get dust where it's not wanted.

Contrary to some opinions expressed, I think it's possible to clean your own sensors. I recommend:

1. LED lupe to examine the sensor before and after.
2. Battery powered brush.
3. If necessary, swabs with the special cleaning fluid for spots that won't come off with brush only.
4. Careful technique; follow the directions of the manufacturers *exactly.*

This will cost upwards of $100-$150 but it's the price of doing business in the digital age. You'll get your
money back in the time saved.

Sincerely,
Ron Kelly

On 03-06-2013, at 9:19 AM, Dan Margulis wrote:

I have a question for photographers about what causes a certain kind of defect


Re: Response Time

Hector Davila
 

It's about Love. Wanting to give back to someone who has giving so much
of themselves.

It's their way expressing the words "I love you Dan Margulis."

Hector Davila

On 3/6/2013 9:13 AM, pmarr33 wrote:

I smiled when I saw the response timing to Dan's question. Just shows
a small sample of how many list members are in front of a computer.
Here is a sample (ignore the hour):
8:44, 8:46, 8:47, 8:48, 8:50, 8:50, 8:51, 9:;05, 9:05

Paul Marriner


Re: What causes this blotching?

Nick Tresidder
 

To add to the comments, if you really want to see how dirty your sensor is, stop down to say f16 and do a slow shutter speed pan across a fairly plain background, the resulting motion blur will separate the background from the spots and reveal the full horror of what is on your sensor.

Nick Tresidder


Re: What causes this blotching?

Chris Corich
 

As many have already said, it's sensor dust; as paul says below, it's usually a small (large f-stop numeric value) aperture. One other factor is a longer focal length. I've not experimented in depth, but it's absolutely horrible on a shot taken at 400mm vs a wide angle shot at the same aperture. The example was taken at 50mm (75mm equivalent) at f/9.0.

When I'm cleaning my sensors (after one road trip where i didn't, and spent days futzing with dust spots), I check it by overexposing clear blue sky at 400mm f/32.


Chris Corich

--- In colortheory@..., Paul <pmarr@...> wrote:

Almost certainly sensor dust. You can see the most prominent one (upper
right) in the original. Auto sensor cleaning helps but there's always
some left. Generally they are most prominent at small apertures. I
frequently shoot at f16 - f32 and they're a bear to eliminate from any
uniform light background.

Paul Marriner

On 06/03/2013 12:19 PM, Dan Margulis wrote:
I have a question for photographers about what causes a certain kind of defect that I am seeing more and more of.


Re: Response Time

Henry Davis
 

That's why I didn't respond right away.

Henry

On Mar 6, 2013, at 12:13 PM, pmarr33 wrote:

I smiled when I saw the response timing to Dan's question. Just shows a small sample of how many list members are in front of a computer. Here is a sample (ignore the hour):
8:44, 8:46, 8:47, 8:48, 8:50, 8:50, 8:51, 9:;05, 9:05


Re: Response Time

Laurentiu Todie
 

One of the no answers from 8:45 was mine.

On Mar 6, 2013, at 12:13 PM, pmarr33 wrote:

I smiled when I saw the response timing to Dan's question. Just shows a small sample of how many list members are in front of a computer. Here is a sample (ignore the hour):
8:44, 8:46, 8:47, 8:48, 8:50, 8:50, 8:51, 9:;05, 9:05

Paul Marriner

Laurentiu Todie
lt@...


Response Time

pmarr@...
 

I smiled when I saw the response timing to Dan's question. Just shows a small sample of how many list members are in front of a computer. Here is a sample (ignore the hour):
8:44, 8:46, 8:47, 8:48, 8:50, 8:50, 8:51, 9:;05, 9:05

Paul Marriner


Re: What causes this blotching?

jimbean wcc
 

hello dan,

I have not seen your example... sounds to me that you are discussing dust on a camera sensor.. mostly out-of-focus, soft...low contrast-no detail... if you could view consecutively created images, you would see those spots in the same location on each image...


my best guess.

regards, jim bean


Re: What causes this blotching?

Marco Diodato
 

Hi Dan,
this kind of blotches is due to some dust on the sensor surface, usually
the dust reach the sensor while changing the lens on a DSLR. This is the
most common situation.

It could be also a very little drop of grease (on the sensor again) if the
camera has got issues regardindg the shutter.

It could also be dust on the lens (or worst, IN the lens), not on the front
lens of the objective but on the bottom lens, the one that screws in the
mount of the camera body.

Best regards,
MD

--
Marco M Diodato
marco.diodato@...
+39 347 15 95 677
via Valpantena, 73 - 37142 Verona
P.IVA 03890370236
C.F. DDTMCM83C01L781M
Comunicazione visiva - Graphic design - Consulenza - Formazione
Adobe Certified Expert | Photoshop
Adobe Certified Instructor | Photoshop
www.cygnusdesign.eu
www.marcodiodato.com


Re: What causes this blotching?

Mark Morgan <mark@...>
 

Dust spots. I have seen this problem when I fail to clean the sensor often
enough. Some of my older cameras, which lack the auto sensor cleaning
function are more problematic.

I recently did an art gallery exhibition job for the artist and failed to
check the sensor first. The gallery, with walls of evenly lit neutral grey,
made the images to much trouble to clean up - it was quicker to retake them.



Mark Morgan

-----Original Message-----
From: colortheory@... [mailto:colortheory@...] On
Behalf Of Dan Margulis
Sent: Wednesday, March 06, 2013 11:19 AM
To: colortheory@...
Subject: [colortheory] What causes this blotching?

I have a question for photographers about what causes a certain kind of
defect that I am seeing more and more of.

The capture contains circular or oval areas slightly darker than their
surroundings, almost as if a drop of watejob for a r had fallen on the lens.
But the effect is so subtle that it can only be seen in an otherwise very
smooth area, normally the sky. And often it still can't be seen unless the
area has been stressed, which unfortunately the PPW tends to do.

There's no sweat cloning the defects out, but I would be interested in
knowing how it comes about. Is it a sensor issue? I've seen it in my own
shots but more commonly in the work of very fine photographers using
top-of-the-line equipment. And like I said, the problem seems to be a
growing one.

An example of what I'm talking about is in the Sunrise folder in our Photos
section that many of us have recently worked on. If the link below doesn't
work, it's my own version, the one with the -dm suffix. I boosted the sky
quite a bit and the defects are evident. Why are they in the file in the
first place?

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/colortheory/photos/album/734361103/pic/1620921
285/view?picmode=large&mode=tn&order=ordinal&start=1&dir=asc

Dan Margulis

7861 - 7880 of 33589