Chuck Norcutt wrote:
> You lost me here. Explain: "I simply set ACRS to retain all the
> detail in the RAW file within the output range. I then processed that
> one image as usual."
Sure. With this image, settings were:
The result is not a particularly good looking image, quite dark. But,
there are only a few clipped brightness values on either end. So the
data may not be correctly arranged, but it's all there. I suppose it
would be possible to do some of the further adjustment in ACRS, with
Curves in 3.3 and whatever may have been added since, but I am simply
more experienced and comfortable with the tools in PS and some are
unique to it.
You can see what's going on in these examples. I've refined the clipping
identification Actions to roughly equal what shows in ACRS. You can see
the large amount of clipping at both ends in the default version. In the
custom version based on the above settings, although it is dark overall,
you can see that there is only one small area of blue in the cave and
that there are a few irretrievably lost highlights at the top of the
falls and in a couple of spots at the base. (The differences in the size
and shape of the red areas in the custom and final versions are not
'real', but the result of applying the Action at full size on one and to
the downsized version on the other, sorry.)
Notice also how many small blown areas there are on the default rock
face, altering its color as channels top out unevenly.
In the current version, I've let some areas of shadow go black in
processing for the effect I like, but you can see that is not necessary
from the custom ACRS version.
One thing that I think has to be learned to get the most out of PS is
that some steps make the image look worse, before later ones make it
look better. If you want improvement at each step, you limit what you
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx