If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Increase in saturation can DECREASE contrast (gurus refuted)
It is mind-boggling, judging from the opinions presented on the
internet, the lack of understanding regarding color saturation in photography. Most of the so-called experts seem to be mindlessly reciting mantras they have heard somewhere without understanding the topic. They all self-confidently proclaim that an increase in saturation INCREASES contrast. In reality, when two colors are similar in that in both colors the same element of the RGB (red-green-blue) components dominates, an increase in saturation DECREASES contrast between the two colors; but when two colors are dissimilar in that in one color one element of the RGB dominates while in the other color another element of the RGB dominates, an increase in saturation INCREASES contrast between the two colors. This is important because so many photos of persons are wrecked by an excess of contrast between two similar colors such as on a person's face. In digital photography colors are composed of a mix of R for red, G for green, and B for blue values. I here prove to you that when two colors both feature the R value being dominant, or when two colors both feature the G value being dominant, or when two colors both feature the B value being dominant, an increase in saturation results in a DECREASE, not an INCREASE in contrast between the two colors; and when two colors feature in one color one of the rgb values being dominant and in the other color another of the rgb values being dominant then saturation INCREASES contrast between the two colors. All except one of the definitions of saturation I found on the internet I found to be incomprehensible; they all sounded as if someone was reciting a mantra he had memorized that he did not understand. The definition I found to be comprehensible was: "What is saturation, and why it is so important? The saturation defines the level of pureness or a color. All the colors derives by a mix of the tree primary colors - red, yellow and blue (or Red, Green and Blue in the common RGB color space). The more a color is saturate, the more it is close the one of the primary colors : theoretically, if you raise the saturation to its upper limit the photo would be composed by just red, green and blue." -- http://www.juzaphoto.com/eng/article...management.htm From my personal experience I have seen how an increase in saturation makes a color in which the R value is dominant more red. From working with HTML I have seen what the photography gurus seem to fail to understand, which is that in shades of gray, the R G and B values are equal. The photography gurus all agree that as saturation is decreased the colors draw closer to being shades of gray as you can see working with saturation in a photo editor. Thus when there is zero saturation, or shades of gray, that means that in each color, the difference between r and g and b, is zero, ie rgb(192, 192, 192), rgb(127, 127, 127), rgb(67, 67, 67). This means (my personal inference) that as saturation is decreased, the differences in the r and the g and the b in the color decrease as the r g and b values all draw closer to an average of the r and the g and the b values in the color. As saturation is increased, the difference between the r g or b element that is strongest in the color and the other colors in the RGB trinity is increased, as I can tell from my own personal experience and from the quotation from www.juzaphoto.com included above. Thus, an increase in saturation will DECREASE the contrast between two colors both of which have say the R component amongst r g and b dominating the g and b components; and an increase in saturation will increase the contrast between two colors when one color has say the r component dominating the g and b components, and the other color has say the b component dominating the r and g components. Take for example two colors found in a man's face. One is rgb(210,131,118); the other is rgb(233,164,135). In both colors the r dominates. The difference between the r's is 23, between the g's is 33, between the b's is 17 for a total differential of 73. If, increasing saturation, you push the r's half way to the maximum 255, and the g's and the b's half way to the minimum of 0, you end up with the first color being 232,65,59 and the second color being 244, 82, 67 so that the difference between the colors has declined from 73 to 37, a decrease in contrast. Check out what these colors look like in even a simple program the internet gurus are too good for such as Microsoft Paint and you can see the decline in contrast with your own eyes. Again, take for example two numbers 249 and 55; the difference between the two is 194. Push 249 half way to 255 and you get 252, push 55 half way to 255 and you get 155; the difference between the two numbers declines from 194 to only 97. Yet again, take for example two numbers 150 and 100; the difference between the two is 50. Push 150 half way to 255 and you get 202, push 100 half way to 255 and you get 177; the difference between the two numbers declines from 50 to only 25. Now take two colors, with one featuring the R or red component dominating the G and B components, and the other featuring the B or blue component dominating the R and G components, say rgb(210,131,118) and rgb(55,85,121). The difference between the r's is 155, between the g's is 46, and between the b's is 3, for a total differential of 204. If you increase saturation pushing the first color's dominating r value half way to 255 and the first color's g and b values half way to zero you change the first color to 232,65,59. If you increase saturation pushing the second color's dominating b or blue value half way to 255 and the second color's r and g values half way to zero, the second color changes to 27,42,188. The overall differential between the two colors becomes 205 in the r's, 23 in the g's, and 129 in the b's for a total of 357, whereas previously the total differential was only 204, and the contrast INCREASES instead of decreases because in this case in one color the R value dominates and in the other color the B value dominates. I find it significant and incredible that the digital photography world has apparently failed to understand this key point, that increasing saturation decreases contrast between two similar colors while increasing contrast between two dissimilar colors. Many of my photos of humans were unacceptable using a digital camera that a short while ago sold for $600 but now sells for only $100 (I wonder why?)--until I cured the hyper-contrast in the faces of the subjects by increasing saturation and then brought the tint back to normal. Using said camera, my photos of a person would make the person look like a different person from photo to photo. Photos of humans can be wrecked by hyper-contrast between two similar colors in a person's face resulting from a lack of saturation, but all you ever hear from the internet photography gurus is that increasing saturation INCREASES contrast. I confess to being proud that I, an amateur dabbler, have been able to figure out how a lack of saturation can result in hyper-contrast, without any help from anyone, so as to put down the photography gurus who proclaim that increasing saturation increases contrast. Too bad employers are so mindlessly concerned with credentials, experience, and coddling those whom the rude label as 'dorks', that they de-emphasize all kinds of important qualities and--since hyper-emphasis of one thing leads to de-emphasis of other things--under-value persons such as myself. @2006 David Virgil Hobbs http://www.angelfire.com/vincemoon |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Increase in saturation can DECREASE contrast (gurus refuted)
Did someone get up on the wrong side of the bed this morning. You are
ranting against a non-problem. To start with, I don't remember "all" of those experts going on as you said. If I did see it, it went in one eye and out the other because I don't necessarily believe everything I read. Contracts, saturation, everything is sort of picture-specific. That's why you have the ability to adjust it by hand. Sometimes I up it. Sometimes I lower it. It all depends. So go have another cup of coffee and calm down. David Virgil Hobbs wrote: It is mind-boggling, judging from the opinions presented on the internet, the lack of understanding regarding color saturation in photography. Most of the so-called experts seem to be mindlessly reciting mantras they have heard somewhere without understanding the topic. They all self-confidently proclaim that an increase in saturation INCREASES contrast. In reality, when two colors are similar in that in both colors the same element of the RGB (red-green-blue) components dominates, an increase in saturation DECREASES contrast between the two colors; but when two colors are dissimilar in that in one color one element of the RGB dominates while in the other color another element of the RGB dominates, an increase in saturation INCREASES contrast between the two colors. This is important because so many photos of persons are wrecked by an excess of contrast between two similar colors such as on a person's face. In digital photography colors are composed of a mix of R for red, G for green, and B for blue values. I here prove to you that when two colors both feature the R value being dominant, or when two colors both feature the G value being dominant, or when two colors both feature the B value being dominant, an increase in saturation results in a DECREASE, not an INCREASE in contrast between the two colors; and when two colors feature in one color one of the rgb values being dominant and in the other color another of the rgb values being dominant then saturation INCREASES contrast between the two colors. All except one of the definitions of saturation I found on the internet I found to be incomprehensible; they all sounded as if someone was reciting a mantra he had memorized that he did not understand. The definition I found to be comprehensible was: "What is saturation, and why it is so important? The saturation defines the level of pureness or a color. All the colors derives by a mix of the tree primary colors - red, yellow and blue (or Red, Green and Blue in the common RGB color space). The more a color is saturate, the more it is close the one of the primary colors : theoretically, if you raise the saturation to its upper limit the photo would be composed by just red, green and blue." -- http://www.juzaphoto.com/eng/article...management.htm From my personal experience I have seen how an increase in saturation makes a color in which the R value is dominant more red. From working with HTML I have seen what the photography gurus seem to fail to understand, which is that in shades of gray, the R G and B values are equal. The photography gurus all agree that as saturation is decreased the colors draw closer to being shades of gray as you can see working with saturation in a photo editor. Thus when there is zero saturation, or shades of gray, that means that in each color, the difference between r and g and b, is zero, ie rgb(192, 192, 192), rgb(127, 127, 127), rgb(67, 67, 67). This means (my personal inference) that as saturation is decreased, the differences in the r and the g and the b in the color decrease as the r g and b values all draw closer to an average of the r and the g and the b values in the color. As saturation is increased, the difference between the r g or b element that is strongest in the color and the other colors in the RGB trinity is increased, as I can tell from my own personal experience and from the quotation from www.juzaphoto.com included above. Thus, an increase in saturation will DECREASE the contrast between two colors both of which have say the R component amongst r g and b dominating the g and b components; and an increase in saturation will increase the contrast between two colors when one color has say the r component dominating the g and b components, and the other color has say the b component dominating the r and g components. Take for example two colors found in a man's face. One is rgb(210,131,118); the other is rgb(233,164,135). In both colors the r dominates. The difference between the r's is 23, between the g's is 33, between the b's is 17 for a total differential of 73. If, increasing saturation, you push the r's half way to the maximum 255, and the g's and the b's half way to the minimum of 0, you end up with the first color being 232,65,59 and the second color being 244, 82, 67 so that the difference between the colors has declined from 73 to 37, a decrease in contrast. Check out what these colors look like in even a simple program the internet gurus are too good for such as Microsoft Paint and you can see the decline in contrast with your own eyes. Again, take for example two numbers 249 and 55; the difference between the two is 194. Push 249 half way to 255 and you get 252, push 55 half way to 255 and you get 155; the difference between the two numbers declines from 194 to only 97. Yet again, take for example two numbers 150 and 100; the difference between the two is 50. Push 150 half way to 255 and you get 202, push 100 half way to 255 and you get 177; the difference between the two numbers declines from 50 to only 25. Now take two colors, with one featuring the R or red component dominating the G and B components, and the other featuring the B or blue component dominating the R and G components, say rgb(210,131,118) and rgb(55,85,121). The difference between the r's is 155, between the g's is 46, and between the b's is 3, for a total differential of 204. If you increase saturation pushing the first color's dominating r value half way to 255 and the first color's g and b values half way to zero you change the first color to 232,65,59. If you increase saturation pushing the second color's dominating b or blue value half way to 255 and the second color's r and g values half way to zero, the second color changes to 27,42,188. The overall differential between the two colors becomes 205 in the r's, 23 in the g's, and 129 in the b's for a total of 357, whereas previously the total differential was only 204, and the contrast INCREASES instead of decreases because in this case in one color the R value dominates and in the other color the B value dominates. I find it significant and incredible that the digital photography world has apparently failed to understand this key point, that increasing saturation decreases contrast between two similar colors while increasing contrast between two dissimilar colors. Many of my photos of humans were unacceptable using a digital camera that a short while ago sold for $600 but now sells for only $100 (I wonder why?)--until I cured the hyper-contrast in the faces of the subjects by increasing saturation and then brought the tint back to normal. Using said camera, my photos of a person would make the person look like a different person from photo to photo. Photos of humans can be wrecked by hyper-contrast between two similar colors in a person's face resulting from a lack of saturation, but all you ever hear from the internet photography gurus is that increasing saturation INCREASES contrast. If many of the pictures were unacceptable, it shouldn't have taken you long to figure out how to adjust you camera to make them acceptable. Most cameras allow you to adjust contract and saturation inside the camera. They do that for a reason, ya know. And maybe you shouldn't be using a $100 camera Again, who are these "internet photography gurus". And just because their theory doesn't work for your particular circumstance doesn't mean it doesn't work for most people most of the time. I confess to being proud that I, an amateur dabbler, have been able to figure out how a lack of saturation can result in hyper-contrast, without any help from anyone, so as to put down the photography gurus who proclaim that increasing saturation increases contrast. Too bad employers are so mindlessly concerned with credentials, experience, and coddling those whom the rude label as 'dorks', that they de-emphasize all kinds of important qualities and--since hyper-emphasis of one thing leads to de-emphasis of other things--under-value persons such as myself. @2006 David Virgil Hobbs http://www.angelfire.com/vincemoon I'm glad you got the whole saturation/contract thing figured out. Now if you could just figure out the whole URL thing on your link so that it works, you'd be doing good. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Increase in saturation can DECREASE contrast (gurus refuted)
David Virgil Hobbs wrote:
snip unprovoked rant What brought that on? Rich |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Increase in saturation can DECREASE contrast (gurus refuted)
Sorry for snipping most of that enormously long, mindless drivel, but..
it was enormously long mindless drivel... David Virgil Hobbs wrote: They all self-confidently proclaim that an increase in saturation INCREASES contrast. Strong words. Name the 'gurus' you refute. In reality, when two colors are similar in that in both colors the same element of the RGB (red-green-blue) components dominates, an increase in saturation DECREASES contrast between the two colors; but when two colors are dissimilar in that in one color one element of the RGB dominates while in the other color another element of the RGB dominates, an increase in saturation INCREASES contrast between the two colors. Well done, Einstein! The post could have ended there. This is important because so many photos of persons are wrecked by an excess of contrast between two similar colors such as on a person's face. "so many" - f'rinstance? All except one of the definitions of saturation I found on the internet I found to be incomprehensible Maybe that was because they were right. The one you quote is horribly flawed. "What is saturation, and why it is so important? The saturation defines the level of pureness or a color. No. It is the intensity of the colour. 'Pureness' is a very loose term and could simply refer to the colour's accuracy or closeness to the original. All the colors derives (sic) by a mix of the tree (sic) primary colors - red, yellow and blue (or Red, Green and Blue in the common RGB color space). Only when using the RGB model. Colors are actually defined by different wavelengths and mixtures of wavelengths. The RGB, CMYK, LAB, etc models are simply ways to try to represent colours using available technology or to simulate the operation of the eye. The more a color is saturate (sic), the more it is close the (sic) one of the primary colors : theoretically, if you raise the saturation to its upper limit the photo would be composed by (sic) just red, green and blue." I disagree strongly with this interpretation. For example, if the colour had equal blue and green components, this definition suggests it would have to become 'more close' to *one* primary - so it would have to become *either* more blue or more green, in order to become more saturated. Stupid. I find it significant and incredible that the digital photography world has apparently failed to understand this key point 'Apparently' is the key word here. It seems so to you, yet you haven't posted a single example. And the example you post as gospel is flawed. Maybe when the rest of the world thinks one thing, and you think another, there could be an alternative to the thought that *you* are the only correct one.. Many of my photos of humans were unacceptable Gee, really? ..until I cured the hyper-contrast Which you most likely introduced, either by excessive post-processing or bad camera settings. .. and then brought the tint back to normal. Gee, again. Maybe you should ask why you *had* to bring them back to normal? I confess to being proud that I, an amateur dabbler, have been able to figure out how a lack of saturation can result in hyper-contrast, without any help from anyone, so as to put down the photography gurus who proclaim that increasing saturation increases contrast. Aha, there we have it - is this an attempt at an ego trip? Sorry. You missed. Too bad employers are so mindlessly concerned with credentials, experience, and coddling those whom the rude label as 'dorks', that they de-emphasize all kinds of important qualities and--since hyper-emphasis of one thing leads to de-emphasis of other things--under-value persons such as myself. oh. uhuh. umm..... Maybe you might get a bit less 'under-valued' if you stopped slanging off at imaginary others, waffling on forever, and making out there is a problem when none exists. Yes, some amateurs (and pseudo pro's) aren't very good at post processing and may screw up colours, contrast, and skin-tones with that. Indeed if you want to see saturation and contrast gone wrong (not many flesh tones though), try http://www.kenrockwell.com/gallery.htm ... (O; But no 'experts' I have seen have made any misleading claims. We await, with breath baited, all your examples to the contrary. (O; PS - maybe you should fix your homepage link... |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Increase in saturation can DECREASE contrast (gurus refuted)
....couldn't we all just get along?
Come on everyone, there is nothing quite as entertaining as a good old fashioned rant in a public place. It's kind of like watching a husband and wife going three rounds in the grocery store over which brand of jam to buy, break out the snacks, sit back and enjoy... and when said rant gets copyrighted... whoa Daddy! I can just see all those gurus gnashing their teeth now that they have been so ultimately and finally refuted on that oh so topical saturation debate! The fate of the universe may very well have been settled right here in this very forum... take that you so called saturation experts (shake clenched fist at retreating lab coated, bespecked experts scrambling back under the rocks from whence they came)! The saturation gurus are likely all down at the local bar muttering under their breath trying to figure out how to get around that blasted copyright statement... personally I can hardly wait for the fireworks to begin! |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Increase in saturation can DECREASE contrast (gurus refuted) | David Virgil Hobbs | Digital Photography | 9 | December 31st 06 01:04 PM |
Increase in saturation can DECREASE contrast (gurus refuted) | David Virgil Hobbs | 35mm Photo Equipment | 4 | December 30th 06 03:35 PM |
Increase in saturation can DECREASE contrast (gurus refuted) | David Virgil Hobbs | Digital SLR Cameras | 4 | December 30th 06 03:35 PM |
contrast and saturation in camera or software | mike regish | Digital SLR Cameras | 25 | April 13th 05 07:14 PM |
contrast and saturation in camera or software | mike regish | Digital Photography | 11 | April 12th 05 11:58 PM |