RetouchPRO

Go Back   RetouchPRO > Tools > Software
Register Blogs FAQ Site Nav Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


Software Photoshop, Lightroom, Paintshop Pro, Painter, etc., and all their various plugins. Of course, you can also discuss all other programs, as well.

Auto White Balance Plugin for JPEGs is "almost" ready

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #11  
Old 09-05-2006, 11:36 AM
roger_ele's Avatar
roger_ele roger_ele is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Sacramento, California
Posts: 620
Quote:
Originally Posted by manta1900
roger_ele,

This is a beta version and it only fixes half the image and draws some diagonal lines. The full version will be available soon (I have to "lock" the filter to prevent the spread). I intend to sell the filter. Whoever will help will get the filter for free (Randy "recrisp member" already earned it and will be the first one to get it).


John
OK, then a little please about what makes it better and what would help?

The test I ran it looked good, no crashes of photoshop and no awful wierd colors. No choices in the interface to give feedback on ... without running it on lots of images and sending you copies of the ones that failed I don't know that there is much to do ...

Regards,
Roger
Reply With Quote top
  #12  
Old 09-05-2006, 11:44 AM
manta1900 manta1900 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by Syd
Okay, I have tried some more images and I have to say it really is pretty good. On each image it did a better job than Auto Color. Granted I only ran it on five images, so statistically it is not at all significant, but it is a good start. I don't pretend for a minute to understand how the code behind Auto Color works in Photoshop so, in layman's terms, how would you explain the difference between your filter and Auto Color. Specifically why does it produce better results. (Without giving away any trade secrets of course).
I think you have done a great job.

Sincerely Syd
Syd,

It "hopefully" gives better results because adobe's AutoColor does not take many things under consideration:

You cannot be sure that there is a grayscale point in the image (e.g. a sunset sky) so this is not what you are looking for.

The human eye preceives light different in the three color channels (Red Green and Blue) so changing the colors should follow the way our eyes can see.

You have to preserve as mutch as possible of the photo's information without changing the intended exposure.

Each of the above change significance depending on the photo.

And finally... I don't think that they spended months or work and research for this (IMHO).

Last edited by manta1900; 09-05-2006 at 12:26 PM.
Reply With Quote top
  #13  
Old 09-05-2006, 11:52 AM
manta1900 manta1900 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by roger_ele
OK, then a little please about what makes it better and what would help?

The test I ran it looked good, no crashes of photoshop and no awful wierd colors. No choices in the interface to give feedback on ... without running it on lots of images and sending you copies of the ones that failed I don't know that there is much to do ...

Regards,
Roger
roger_ele,

Indeed this is all someone can do if he/she wishes to help. Some comments of what's wrong would help a lot (cause I'm not a color expert... I'm just a computer programmer with photography as a hobby). That's what Randy (recrisp member) did and earned the filter... and to be mentioned in it.

John
Reply With Quote top
  #14  
Old 09-06-2006, 12:37 AM
roger_ele's Avatar
roger_ele roger_ele is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Sacramento, California
Posts: 620
John, Thanks, it makes a lot more sense to know you are a programmer. Anything you can share on the thought process of the plug-in, in as general as you need to to be comfortable you are not giving some other programer a heads up, might help us to pick images to test. My endurance for testing is not too many images ;-)

Roger
Reply With Quote top
  #15  
Old 09-06-2006, 04:03 AM
manta1900 manta1900 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by roger_ele
John, Thanks, it makes a lot more sense to know you are a programmer. Anything you can share on the thought process of the plug-in, in as general as you need to to be comfortable you are not giving some other programer a heads up, might help us to pick images to test. My endurance for testing is not too many images ;-)

Roger
Roger,

You can use images that:

1) Are severely damaged from wrong white balance (both cold and warm).
1) Are slightly damaged from wrong white balance (both cold and warm).
2) You think that they have an accurate white balance (to see if it spoils it or if it fixes it more).
3) RAW or TIFF images or any 16 or 32 bit RGB ones (I haven't tested these yet... though I support them in the code)
4) Are familiar with the photo's colors so as to be sure of what's going wrong.

You can send me the wrong ones to (manta1900(a)gmail.com) at maximum 640x480 resolution.


John
Reply With Quote top
  #16  
Old 09-06-2006, 07:07 AM
recrisp recrisp is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 53
Stuff...

The images I used in testing were all kind'a different.
I noticed that when I used it on an image that had black in it, for example, car tires, leather, and things like that, it worked perfect. Normally, if we see a shift in the shadow areas, most areas tend to go blue, this definitely helped in that.
I tried underwater images too, we know that underwater shots start losing color, and usually tend to go really blue, these were for the most part fixed. All images are different too, so some worked better than others.
I used this filter on metal too, raw metal, as in bolts, etc. This worked the best for me, 'cause the effect was so dramatic, and the outcome was perfect.

Green stuff like trees and grass were also affected, for the better, although, if you like brilliant (glowing) green trees and grass, it will make them more life-like, which means that it won't be the super bright green that might be your tastes. I don't mean this in a bad way at all, it makes the greenery look more real, that's all, which can be good, but some like to have bright greens, so take that into consideration when masking.
Skies are more realistic too, not as blue sometimes, but more true to what I see, and the good thing is, if you want a brighter this, or brighter that, you can always adjust with a mask, it's not a problem at all with me.
Flesh tones were for the most part unaffected, or the ones I tried it on were, and rainy day images always came out better.

I really don't color-correct images by the book anymore, I don't need to for what I do, I make them pleasing to my eye, but for me, I will use this, a LOT, I love it. My monitor's really close to what I am printing, so I am happy with the end results. (For these tests I did use INFO too though, so I didn't just go by my eyes only)
This filter might not be for everyone, but for the web, a novice, and quick shots that you don't want to spend the time on white-balancing, this is for you, I believe though that even a person that does this professionally could benefit from it, but there will always be people that wouldn't agree.
While it doesn't work on every image, (probably works on 95% of 'em though) I used this on many, many, many images, and not being biased at all, I would buy this filter, honest, I really like it, and I definitely see a use for this.
This is my opinion, and really, John could use more people to test it, 'cause I don't claim to be a genius about all of this, or a know-it-all, and I would like to hear others views myself. I think this is 'about' there, it might could use a slight tweaking, 'cause I gave all of the opinions I could, and your mileage may vary.

The black diagonal lines kind'a threw my eye off when I used the filter, so I always made a new LAYER to do the filter on, then I changed it to COLOR, that allowed me to see it better without the black lines. It will still be there, but just faintly, and it does 'sometimes' add a percent or two to the colors, but not enough that it threw it out of proportion.
While I don't recommend that one would use it like this as a true go-by, it does help you eye see the difference easier, then just change it back if needed.
Personally, I like the filter and I can find many images that I can use it on, my customers send me in pretty bad stuff most of the time, and so far, this is exactly what I needed, it's quick and easy, and, I'm lazy too! heheh
I could've really used this recently on a web site I made for a customer, the aforementioned "bolts" would've been fixed in a hurry had I used this filter.

Randy
Reply With Quote top
Reply

  RetouchPRO > Tools > Software


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Tutorial 05: Converting a Color Image to Black and White grayscale BW DannyRaphael Photo-Art 101 17 05-22-2011 05:55 PM
White Balance for Jpegs? princly Photo Retouching 14 09-11-2007 10:29 PM
Are Color Correction & White Balance the same? Photoshop_Tim Photo Retouching 2 10-30-2006 03:29 PM
White Balance for JPEG's manta1900 Photo Retouching 21 07-25-2006 09:18 AM
RAW v. JPEG and White Balance kcohn Image Help 6 08-17-2003 11:23 AM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:42 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright © 2016 Doug Nelson. All Rights Reserved