Very interesting. I was very pleasantly surprised by how well it worked. Based on my experience, DeNoise AI seems optimized for use on digital files straight out of a digital camera. On scans of my

We had more trouble with pattern reduction in this exercise than might be hoped for. Part of the reason was that many people were using the Dust & Scratches filter for this purpose, but their notes

Dan - Thanks for taking the time to comment on all the entries. Mine is #706, and your reminder to double-check everything with a quick Auto Tone is valuable. Auto Tone is a nice

To the Color Theorists, A couple of months ago I noticed the thread here about the classic and out-of-print Agfa "Postscript Process Color Guide." Well, in doing some unpacking after a recent move

Here are my notes on this set. Where names are used, the person has already identified himself in a post to the list. 701 The yellowish feeling is deliberate on the part of Gerald Bakker, who calls

Applied Color Theory list https://groups.io/g/colortheory General Description and Rules (This document is posted monthly) THE MOVE TO GROUPS.IO In November 2019, this list moved from yahoogroups to

Regarding the pattern suppression approach, re-running the process (FFT then dust and scratches filter) I see that the second step adds more softness than the first. So if some noise is acceptable

My entry is 710. Interesting that quite a few of us used the Pattern suppression/FFT filter yet ended up with a wide variety of results. I too used the Pattern suppression V2 macro. My earlier efforts

Thanks for the instructive and direct evaluation of my image. It is amazing that the obvious is not so obvious when you are immersed in a problem. Normally, I have problems with too much magenta or

I tried to grab a copy of #726 and do the Luminosity thing but it didn't work for my #719. So, I did a little of #726 improvement and came up with this:

Hi James, I played around with DeNoise AI also, and was quite disappointed. It seemed to work reasonably well on parts of the image, then not at all in other areas. Had to run it multiple times on

Ah, color. Here's something I've been thinking about. I deliberately went for a warmer color look in my version (715) - you know, pleasing skin tones & all that. But... I know that film in 1978 would

Exactly right Dan, thank you for pointing this out. I need to learn more about these kinds of blending techniques. I'm curious about #726 - the best overall sense of sharpness (IMHO) and the texture

Dan, Thanks for the very specific advice. I have not yet attempted to go back and create an alternate version or to just color correct the final image. I did try auto color on the image. Yes, it

Pleas excuse the double post. Thomas Hurd, MD

Cyan, really, but you don’t have to see it, you can measure it, just as James could measure the magenta cast in his #721, #1 stone in wall, to left of child’s knee EXPECTED: possibly 0a0b, more

This is an example of how not to evaluate color. You have looked at objects that are important but whose color can’t be determined. The range of acceptable fleshtones is wide particularly under

Re luminosity blends, I too use them frequently, but it only partially restored Dan’s facial features in my finished version. This afternoon I tried on my finished version 723 adding noise,

Just a normal USM, in two layers, one for the darkening halos, one for the lightening halos. But I had to use a really large radius in combination with a not-too-large amount to avoid accentuating the

Correction: mine is 727, unintended typo put "726" in prior message. Robert Wheeler