Views
1386
Replies
13
Status
Closed
I’m looking for a reliable method for *identifying* (and removing) a cast.
The traditional method of setting the black, white and gray points, is not always applicable as not every image has a black, white and gray point! Clipping histograms is also unreliable because in some cases it can actually introduce a cast rather then removing it.
Besides, in spite of all color profiling etc. I just don’t trust my eyes because human perception is very "flexible" and malleable depending on the context. For example, I can create several "corrected" versions of the same image by setting B, W & G points (depending on where I click) and yet they all look "OK" in their own way… Considering I have my complete slide, negative and photo collection to scan, I can’t spend hours on each image tweaking ad nauseam and yet never being completely satisfied with the result.
So, what I’m looking for is an *objective* method that would take me (the unreliable step) out of the equation. Also, I want to streamline the procedure so I can finish all the scanning before the end of this millennium…
Even though I’ve been at this for a few months already and have read a lot, I’m still a relative newbie, so assume nothing… As they say: "Nothing is foolproof because fools are so ingenious!" ;o)
Thanks!
Don.
The traditional method of setting the black, white and gray points, is not always applicable as not every image has a black, white and gray point! Clipping histograms is also unreliable because in some cases it can actually introduce a cast rather then removing it.
Besides, in spite of all color profiling etc. I just don’t trust my eyes because human perception is very "flexible" and malleable depending on the context. For example, I can create several "corrected" versions of the same image by setting B, W & G points (depending on where I click) and yet they all look "OK" in their own way… Considering I have my complete slide, negative and photo collection to scan, I can’t spend hours on each image tweaking ad nauseam and yet never being completely satisfied with the result.
So, what I’m looking for is an *objective* method that would take me (the unreliable step) out of the equation. Also, I want to streamline the procedure so I can finish all the scanning before the end of this millennium…
Even though I’ve been at this for a few months already and have read a lot, I’m still a relative newbie, so assume nothing… As they say: "Nothing is foolproof because fools are so ingenious!" ;o)
Thanks!
Don.
Related Tags
How to Improve Photoshop Performance
Learn how to optimize Photoshop for maximum speed, troubleshoot common issues, and keep your projects organized so that you can work faster than ever before!