Thanks much, and follow.

Also thanks much for your exhaustive analysis of the database of variously retouched images. The results were very informative.

No new or updated book, I guess. Sigh.

First of all, thanks for the very kind words.

I don’t keep track of what Camera Raw is up to but can answer the question nevertheless. As you see I’ve been finding more and more use for averaging, where multiple good-faith efforts to improve the image, even if incompetently done, can be averaged to produce something better than any of the parent versions.

What I am about to say applies only to color, and not what is referred to variously as tonality/luminosity/detailing. In those areas, the chance of any raw module being competitive with PPW are poor. But PPW doesn’t have much of an inherent advantage in correcting color deficiencies. I would like to think that if I am careful with curves I should be able to do better than a mindless automatic correction in a raw module. And in fact that is true most of the time but not always. What is true most of the time is that my own work is improved if I blend in, say, 20% of the color produced by the automatic correction. The reasons for this unlikely result are suggested in this and some other posts.

Therefore if I am about to work on several raw images I batch-acquire them in several different ways. My preferred start-point is a dull, flat version, but I also acquire with Camera Raw’s Auto feature, and if there is some new automated correction available I’d acquire that way, too. Batch-acquiring takes zero time and comparing the extra versions at the end of the process is well worth the few seconds that it takes. If they can’t improve my color, then I feel good because I am so clever, and if they can improve it then I feel good because nobody will know that my work wasn’t that great beforehand.

My question is about the book’s workflow suggestions regarding raw modules, specifically Camera Raw and Lightroom. In the book, you say to adjust the tone curve with your preset, consider using the highlights recovery, and turn off default sharpening. In recent days, Adobe has added a new profile capability and an optional “neutral” profile that supposedly is better for “further processing”.

Do you have any different ideas (now vs the book) about how to go from, say, Lightroom/Camera Raw to PPW?

Bill

PS. Again hoping your have plans for updating this book and/or new book. Will preorder 2 if a new book of yours shows up on Amazon.

In the wait for receiving your answer, I kept trying to find the right way and through a handmade course I finally achieved success, which I expose below in case it would be of your interest.

Your method uses a simple but profound knowledge of the operations in Photoshop, since it makes each new layer have the RGB content of each original channel and then in each layer it turns off, with advanced fusion, the components of channels other than the channel that was the source of each layer. This way drives Photoshop to generate a general composition with the interaction of those three layers that is identical to the appearance of the base layer.

My approach has also been to duplicate the base layer, three times, one for each channel and in each of those layers I have black colored channels other than the selected channel to represent that layer. This path does not generate interaction between the active layers; only the top layer prevails, as a solution I have provided the two top layers with ‘Screen’ blending mode and so achieving the desired success.

Best regards,

To do this you must first go into Color Settings and be sure that your grayscale gamma matches that of your RGB. If you are using sRGB or Adobe RGB the grayscale gamma must be 2.2.

Having done this,
1) Duplicate the background layer four times making a total of five layers. I assume that you will want to retain a real copy of the original image in addition to your four demonstration layers.

2) Fill the second layer with whatever you like, 50% gray is as good a choice as any.

3) Activate the top layer. With all three RGB channels available, Image: Apply Image, Source=Background, Channel=Red, Mode=Normal, Opacity=100%. You have just made all three of the channels into copies of the red, so that you appear to have a grayscale image because all three RGB channels are equal.

4) Activate the fourth layer and do the same thing with the green channel; activate the third layer and do the same thing with the blue channel.

5) Re-activate the top (red) layer and call up Blending Options. In the Layer Style dialog, under Advanced Blending, there are checkboxes for each of the three channels. By default all three are checked. Uncheck G and B so that the layer only affects the red channel.

6) On the fourth layer, by the same process, uncheck everything but G, and on the third layer, uncheck everything but B.

You now are able to demonstrate every possible combination of channels by making one or more layers invisible. I’d suggest starting with all three of the top layers invisible so that only 50% gray is available. Then expose the layers one by one to demonstrate the impact of adding each real channel.

Thanks, I recognize your standards of responsibilities with your readers through your responses and I sincerely appreciate it.

“Weight” in this sense is roughly interpreted as “more darkness” but it must not be understood as darkening either the highlights or the shadows. If you and I separately correct the same image and compare the results, probably our highlight and shadow settings will be the same, and both will be attractive, yet one version may seem significantly darker than the other. We would then say that the darker one has more overall weight. With curves we can add weight to the midtones, to the quartertones, etc.

Thanks again for your prompt and very tight response on complementary colors.

I take advantage of this opportunity to request your definition for the term “overall weight” used in your book on more than one occasion (case of Bottom line of Chapter 5). English dictionaries and Google have not provided me with lights of what is meant by “weight” when talking about images.

Cheers,