Natalia_Taffarel wrote:
Reading everything here...

I think the important thing about ANY technique is not to use it for everything.

This is a very powerful and useful technique for a lot of things, but u can't rely on any single technique to retouch an entire image.

Different "problems" ask for different solutions.

Just my 2 cents.

x

thanks!
i am just learning and it is so easy to feel comfortable with a new skill and use it for everything. hoping my discerning skills grow with retouching and shooting skills proportionately!!
sue

Natalia_Taffarel wrote:
Reading everything here...

I think the important thing about ANY technique is not to use it for everything.

This is a very powerful and useful technique for a lot of things, but u can't rely on any single technique to retouch an entire image.

Different "problems" ask for different solutions.

Just my 2 cents.

x

Screw that thought! This stuff is like Parmesan cheese... use it on everything, and empty the bottle while doing so!

Robert Randall wrote:

Screw that thought! This stuff is like Parmesan cheese... use it on everything, and empty the bottle while doing so!

Well every rule has its exceptions Parmesan cheese is surely worth it.

x

Koray wrote:
I hate parmesan cheese

No way.  Parmesan (especially the expensive stuff) is like heaven.

Brian T Rickey wrote:

No way.  Parmesan (especially the expensive stuff) is like heaven.

you mean high-end parm cheese...I cant afford that on pizza

Koray wrote:

you mean high-end parm cheese...I cant afford that on pizza

Agreed, after all, how much is a Tombstone worth!

navid sohi wrote:
Thanks, now I can retouch in less than 1/2 time to achieve same result.

wow! u should make a tutorial on this image. help a noob out. thanx.

Natalia_Taffarel wrote:
Reading everything here...

I think the important thing about ANY technique is not to use it for everything.

This is a very powerful and useful technique for a lot of things, but u can't rely on any single technique to retouch an entire image.

Different "problems" ask for different solutions.

Just my 2 cents.

x

Good point although I swear at least half the people here think dodge and burn can fix everything. It's right up there with "Get it right in camera."

I can just see it now a client calls and says "Hey theres a guy in the background of my image that needs removed. Can you help me out?" Retoucher says "Sure, I'll just dodge and burn him out."

BTW this method can be used for something like whats mentioned above.   Because like Bob said it's like parmesan cheese.

Photons 2 Pixels Images wrote:
OK. The latest in my playing around with this separation technique. It was completely done in the form of a script so I apologize to anyone who prefers actions. This is an intermediate step toward what I hope will become something very useful. As of now, I use it mostly for sharpening or enhancing/filtering out details in frequency bands. It is similar to syd's graphic equalizer I suppose.

http://www.nunuvyer.biz/Photoshop/Sharpen.jsx

You will only be presented with one GB dialog. This is your main separation and should be of sufficient value to separate out all detail. By all detail, I don't mean make it a blob of a blur. This will perform 3 separations on 3 HF layers (HF1, HF2, and HF3).

HF1 is the initial separation using your GB radius.
HF2 is the second separation using 1/2 your GB radius.
HF3 is the third separation using 1/4 your GB radius.

Each HF layers is clipped with a curves adjustment layer. HF1, and HF2 are set to 50% opacity.

Adjust opacity and curves to suit your taste. Remember, you can add a "negative feedback" from one of the HF layers by using an inverse S curve to lower contrast.

Eventually, I'm working toward a more user friendly interface, savable options for repeating this, and a refresh option to see the end results before applying all settings. Also, I'm thinking of allowing for more separations and a customizable step for each one instead of the set 1/2 and 1/4.

I ran the script and wound up with an interesting file, however, I received an error message at one point that told me i might not have access to the tool because of the level of PS I use, which is CS3.

Any ideas what that might be?

Edit... I ran it again... the error says

Error 8800: General PS error occurred.
This functionality may not be available in this version of PS

-The parameters for command SET are not currently valid.
Line:280
->   executeAction(PSEvent.Set, desc1, dialogMode);

Robert Randall wrote:

I ran the script and wound up with an interesting file, however, I received an error message at one point that told me i might not have access to the tool because of the level of PS I use, which is CS3.

Any ideas what that might be?

Edit... I ran it again... the error says

Error 8800: General PS error occurred.
This functionality may not be available in this version of PS

-The parameters for command SET are not currently valid.
Line:280
->   executeAction(PSEvent.Set, desc1, dialogMode);

Let me boot up my CS3 and see what I can figure out. Sorry about that. I should have tried it out in other versions first.

Photons 2 Pixels Images wrote:
I found the error. Now I'm embarrassed. I uploaded the wrong script. That was another script I was working on.

I replaced it with the proper script. Sorry about that. If you don't mind and want to, can you go back to that page and refresh it and then grab it again?

I have a feeling you may find some interesting uses for this.

I'm going to go hide in a corner now.

You're going to hide in a corner for a mistake you made on something I can't even begin to comprehend? I'm the one that should be hiding.

Robert Randall wrote:
You're going to hide in a corner for a mistake you made on something I can't even begin to comprehend? I'm the one that should be hiding.

Edit: Once again, I goofed. In the script I have it set to look for a curves preset file that I'm fairly certain none of you have. I uploaded the fixed version or if you want, take out the 3 lines that have "...CS4/Presets/Curves/Sharpen.acv" in them. The ... denotes stuff before it and not actual .'s. To edit the file open it in the Extend Script Toolkit (or any other text editor) and do a search for "Sharpen.acv" and on each line that has it, delete the line or put // in front of it. Sorry again. And remember, this is for 16bit mode. I'll incorporate 8bit when I get time to go back through and tidy it up a bit.

I'll come out of my corner after I know it's working for people and get some feedback on what I can do to make it even better. I'm really enjoying using it. As for sharpening, I've brought some images back that I thought were beyond saving. But, this has a lot more potential uses beyond just sharpening

As a quick comparison using this for sharpening (and I pushed it somewhat beyond normal for an example) see below.

Original:


Sharpened:

Photons 2 Pixels Images wrote:

Edit: Once again, I goofed. In the script I have it set to look for a curves preset file that I'm fairly certain none of you have. I uploaded the fixed version or if you want, take out the 3 lines that have "...CS4/Presets/Curves/Sharpen.acv" in them. The ... denotes stuff before it and not actual .'s. To edit the file open it in the Extend Script Toolkit (or any other text editor) and do a search for "Sharpen.acv" and on each line that has it, delete the line or put // in front of it. Sorry again. And remember, this is for 16bit mode. I'll incorporate 8bit when I get time to go back through and tidy it up a bit.

I'll come out of my corner after I know it's working for people and get some feedback on what I can do to make it even better. I'm really enjoying using it. As for sharpening, I've brought some images back that I thought were beyond saving. But, this has a lot more potential uses beyond just sharpening

As a quick comparison using this for sharpening (and I pushed it somewhat beyond normal for an example) see below.

Original:


Sharpened:

Interesting... did you notice how the over sharpening aged the subjects? I wonder how you would incorporate masking and blur in an automated sense to control and specifically limit the effect of the aging aspect?

Like you don't already have enough to do.

If I download the old link, are the new edits in place?

Robert Randall wrote:

Interesting... did you notice how the over sharpening aged the subjects? I wonder how you would incorporate masking and blur in an automated sense to control and specifically limit the effect of the aging aspect?

Like you don't already have enough to do.

If I download the old link, are the new edits in place?

Yes, the old link is the new edit of the script.

It does appear to have aged the subjects. However, the poor focus to begin with actually made them appear younger so the sharpening kinda brought that back. Their actual appearance is somewhere in between the two.

I added extra punch to it so the effect was more easily seen. It's simple enough to back off with some curves adjustments. I have a feeling that in the end, this can be effectively used for noise reduction with a lower contrast S curve on the highest frequency layer if separated at the proper level. And if I add in the option to allow for more separated frequency layers, this would become an easier thing to do.

For the aging aspect, for now anyway, the curves and opacity of the HF layers is manually selected which will either add to or take away from that effect.

Davepit wrote:
Why does your script create three high pass layers instead of one? All the jargon went over my head

Sorry about that. I figured whoever downloaded it has already downloaded some of the actions I've posted that do somewhat of the same thing.

The 3 HF layers are separated at different spatial frequencies. As it is now, but will be changed as I further develop this line of thought, they will separate based on one Gaussian Blur setting. HF1 is separated from whatever radius you select for your initial GB. HF2 will be separated from 1/2 that first radius. HF3 is separated at 1/4 that first radius.

You will notice that HF1 and HF2 are initially set at 50% opacity and that all three HF layers have a curves layer clipped to them. Between the opacity and the curves, you can fine tune the effect that each spatial frequency has on the resulting image. Suppose you have a lot of noise at the highest frequency (HF3). You can set the clipped curves on that layer to lower the contrast to filter out the noise. If you had only 1 HF layer, this would effectively blur the image. Between the other 2, though, you can still adjust for higher contrast and still maintain a sharpness in the image. By also adjusting the opacity, you have a way of specifying also how much of an overall effect that layer has on the resulting image.

It's something that might take some playing around to get the way you want it. All I can say is go from what I posted here and try a few images out and see what it can do for you.

If you notice in the images I posted, there is a shrub behind the couple. To their left, you will see a red berry. Compare the top image to the bottom. In the top (original) it almost can't be seen. In the bottom, it's easily seen. To get it this sharp using other methods I've tried would leave some nasty halos and artifacts to be cleaned up. The only thing I did from the top image to the bottom was run this script and adjust the curves layers, nothing more. Granted, I oversharpened. But the other nice thing is, the curves layers have masks that can be used to tone down areas that you may not want affected as much as others.

Robert Randall wrote:

Interesting... did you notice how the over sharpening aged the subjects? I wonder how you would incorporate masking and blur in an automated sense to control and specifically limit the effect of the aging aspect?

Like you don't already have enough to do.

If I download the old link, are the new edits in place?

And, I was just thinking about this, too. Any mask or selection would have to be made manually but once done, could be duplicated on all 3 curves masks or maybe I can make an overall mask for them by grouping them and set a mask on the group.

Photons 2 Pixels Images wrote:

Sorry about that. I figured whoever downloaded it has already downloaded some of the actions I've posted that do somewhat of the same thing.

The 3 HF layers are separated at different spatial frequencies. As it is now, but will be changed as I further develop this line of thought, they will separate based on one Gaussian Blur setting. HF1 is separated from whatever radius you select for your initial GB. HF2 will be separated from 1/2 that first radius. HF3 is separated at 1/4 that first radius.

You will notice that HF1 and HF2 are initially set at 50% opacity and that all three HF layers have a curves layer clipped to them. Between the opacity and the curves, you can fine tune the effect that each spatial frequency has on the resulting image. Suppose you have a lot of noise at the highest frequency (HF3). You can set the clipped curves on that layer to lower the contrast to filter out the noise. If you had only 1 HF layer, this would effectively blur the image. Between the other 2, though, you can still adjust for higher contrast and still maintain a sharpness in the image. By also adjusting the opacity, you have a way of specifying also how much of an overall effect that layer has on the resulting image.

It's something that might take some playing around to get the way you want it. All I can say is go from what I posted here and try a few images out and see what it can do for you.

If you notice in the images I posted, there is a shrub behind the couple. To their left, you will see a red berry. Compare the top image to the bottom. In the top (original) it almost can't be seen. In the bottom, it's easily seen. To get it this sharp using other methods I've tried would leave some nasty halos and artifacts to be cleaned up. The only thing I did from the top image to the bottom was run this script and adjust the curves layers, nothing more. Granted, I oversharpened. But the other nice thing is, the curves layers have masks that can be used to tone down areas that you may not want affected as much as others.

Great explanation... thank you.

Photons 2 Pixels Images wrote:
Sorry about that. I figured whoever downloaded it has already downloaded some of the actions I've posted that do somewhat of the same thing.

The 3 HF layers are separated at different spatial frequencies. As it is now, but will be changed as I further develop this line of thought, they will separate based on one Gaussian Blur setting. HF1 is separated from whatever radius you select for your initial GB. HF2 will be separated from 1/2 that first radius. HF3 is separated at 1/4 that first radius.

You will notice that HF1 and HF2 are initially set at 50% opacity and that all three HF layers have a curves layer clipped to them. Between the opacity and the curves, you can fine tune the effect that each spatial frequency has on the resulting image. Suppose you have a lot of noise at the highest frequency (HF3). You can set the clipped curves on that layer to lower the contrast to filter out the noise. If you had only 1 HF layer, this would effectively blur the image. Between the other 2, though, you can still adjust for higher contrast and still maintain a sharpness in the image. By also adjusting the opacity, you have a way of specifying also how much of an overall effect that layer has on the resulting image.

It's something that might take some playing around to get the way you want it. All I can say is go from what I posted here and try a few images out and see what it can do for you.

If you notice in the images I posted, there is a shrub behind the couple. To their left, you will see a red berry. Compare the top image to the bottom. In the top (original) it almost can't be seen. In the bottom, it's easily seen. To get it this sharp using other methods I've tried would leave some nasty halos and artifacts to be cleaned up. The only thing I did from the top image to the bottom was run this script and adjust the curves layers, nothing more. Granted, I oversharpened. But the other nice thing is, the curves layers have masks that can be used to tone down areas that you may not want affected as much as others.

Robert Randall wrote:
Great explanation... thank you.

I've found that the HF3 layer is off-the-hook for painting in local sharpness to things like eyelashes and other fine detail.

Incredible, really!

Robert Randall wrote:
Great explanation... thank you.

Smedley Whiplash wrote:
I've found that the HF3 layer is off-the-hook for painting in local sharpness to things like eyelashes and other fine detail.

Incredible, really!

Davepit wrote:
Thank you very much. I get it now Using healing brushes on the high frequency layers and imagenomic portraiture on the low frequency layer got some really nice results.

After using it and playing with it for awhile, let me know if you feel there could be a use for further separations along with allowing for more precise control of the GB radii vs the set r, 1/2r, and 1/4r.

I could effectively write the script to do as many separations as a person wants. I'd have to sit down and do some math, but I could probably set them to calculated opacities on each layer which would give a post-separated file that looks exactly like the original or close to it. I can see this in my mind, but explaining it is harder. I just have to do some real-world testing to figure it out.

And, I'm going to put this into a GUI dialog to make it easier.

Robert Randall wrote:

Interesting... did you notice how the over sharpening aged the subjects? I wonder how you would incorporate masking and blur in an automated sense to control and specifically limit the effect of the aging aspect?

Like you don't already have enough to do.

If I download the old link, are the new edits in place?

The Photon Action called "Others" has a sharpening layer that is masked. It's very well adjusted. Even 100% white on most things (not skin) bring it to a nice level of sharpness without over sharpening.

Also you can mask the Low Frequency layer and paint it out for abusively intense sharpness. Good for metal / Rubber etc. I just finished a retouch on a girl wearing a rubber dress. I hyper sharpened the highlights and reflections in the rubber - then selectively blurred to really give it a nice finish.

Tip - convert to 16 bit before separating. I notice there is a small shift in the overall image after separating and flattening. So Im interested to see how accurate Photon can make the conversion.

Virtuoso Skins wrote:
The Photon Action called "Others" has a sharpening layer that is masked. It's very well adjusted. Even 100% white on most things (not skin) bring it to a nice level of sharpness without over sharpening.

Also you can mask the Low Frequency layer and paint it out for abusively intense sharpness. Good for metal / Rubber etc. I just finished a retouch on a girl wearing a rubber dress. I hyper sharpened the highlights and reflections in the rubber - then selectively blurred to really give it a nice finish.

Tip - convert to 16 bit before separating. I notice there is a small shift in the overall image after separating and flattening. So Im interested to see how accurate Photon can make the conversion.

Photon's action is for 16 bit images. Doing a separation on 8 bit images is quite a bit easier, and is detailed at the beginning of the thread.

"The proposed alternative technique for working with 8bit image data is as follows:

  1.) Start with two copies of the image to be separated.
  2.) Working on the bottom copy, run the gaussian blur filter at the intended pixel frequency (same as you would input into the HP filter).
  3.) Selecting the top copy, choose Apply Image from the Image menu at top (Shift+Ctrl+A on PC; Cmd+Shift+A for Mac).
  4.) In the Layer dialog, select the bottom layer which you blurred in step 2.
  5.) In the Blending dialog, choose Subtract.
  6.) Enter '2' into the Scale box, and '128' for the Offset.
  7.) Preserve Transparency, Mask, and Invert should not be checked.
  8.) Choose OK.
  9.) Your top layer will now look much as a HP result, albeit a bit flatter.  Set the Blend Mode to Linear Light.  Opacity should remain at 100%. "

Virtuoso Skins wrote:
The Photon Action called "Others" has a sharpening layer that is masked. It's very well adjusted. Even 100% white on most things (not skin) bring it to a nice level of sharpness without over sharpening.

Also you can mask the Low Frequency layer and paint it out for abusively intense sharpness. Good for metal / Rubber etc. I just finished a retouch on a girl wearing a rubber dress. I hyper sharpened the highlights and reflections in the rubber - then selectively blurred to really give it a nice finish.

Tip - convert to 16 bit before separating. I notice there is a small shift in the overall image after separating and flattening. So Im interested to see how accurate Photon can make the conversion.

Davepit wrote:
Photon's action is for 16 bit images. Doing a separation on 8 bit images is quite a bit easier, and is detailed at the beginning of the thread.

"The proposed alternative technique for working with 8bit image data is as follows:

  1.) Start with two copies of the image to be separated.
  2.) Working on the bottom copy, run the gaussian blur filter at the intended pixel frequency (same as you would input into the HP filter).
  3.) Selecting the top copy, choose Apply Image from the Image menu at top (Shift+Ctrl+A on PC; Cmd+Shift+A for Mac).
  4.) In the Layer dialog, select the bottom layer which you blurred in step 2.
  5.) In the Blending dialog, choose Subtract.
  6.) Enter '2' into the Scale box, and '128' for the Offset.
  7.) Preserve Transparency, Mask, and Invert should not be checked.
  8.) Choose OK.
  9.) Your top layer will now look much as a HP result, albeit a bit flatter.  Set the Blend Mode to Linear Light.  Opacity should remain at 100%. "

I keep updating the action set. The latest is here:
https://www.modelmayhem.com/po.php?thre … st10668592

It includes 3 versions of the action set. 8 bit, 16 bit and for those using older versions of Photoshop back to version 7.

The action set was more of an attempt to set things up for general retouching. This new script was meant more to be a tool that can be used for a variety of tasks. The most prevalent would be sharpening. You'll also notice if you play around with it some that you can effectively tone down a specific range of spatial frequency so it blends in much better while still sharpening that which you want.

Enjoy.

Virtuoso Skins wrote:
Thanks guys.

Photon and Sean are seriously my heros.

I use the script you linked all the time now Photon.

Ill have to tweek the settings and try that noise diminishing technique someone mentioned.

The converted image shifting is not a huge deal to me. I stamp and save a copy of my file before separating. Then I compare the two after I'm done with the separation - and if parts shifted in a way I dont like - I just mask it out and keep the parts I do.

I mainly use it for sharpening and to manipulate tones without disturbing HF detail. I dont really like the soft light D&B - tends to screw with my saturation. I prefer curves adjusted to the image or screen/multiply layers. I messed with the tones layer a bit but prefer a broader set of smoothing filters. Also tried Grahmz smoothing but I guess im more of a manual sort of guy.

So photon - do you think its possible to get blanket set of calculations that would be universally accurate on all images?

If so you could likely just have 1 working action/file to do it all if you planned your work flow right.

Actually it's funny you mention this last bit. I'm also currently working on a version that will work on any bit depth. As for the different modes I've thought about it and will give it a shot.

These are all steps toward a goal I have in mind.

Natalia_Taffarel wrote:
Don't let this one die!

x

No way! I'm still working on some goodies for this technique. I'm spending more time on this than I am on retouching images from recent photoshoots.

I'll open one of them up and start on it then start wondering "what if I did this....or this...." and try a bunch of different things with it. 3 hours later I'll finally start actually working on the image. I finish that one and open up the next and....it starts all over again.

And here I am doing it again.

Photons 2 Pixels Images wrote:
Actually it's funny you mention this last bit. I'm also currently working on a version that will work on any bit depth. As for the different modes I've thought about it and will give it a shot.

Are you working externally in a defined bit depth for this, or have you found a calculation mode which is equally accurate in both depths?

Sean Baker wrote:

Are you working externally in a defined bit depth for this, or have you found a calculation mode which is equally accurate in both depths?

Right now I'm working on the 8 bit and 16 bit as you presented it. I'm still experimenting to find a way to make them equally accurate but so far the only way I can do this is to convert to 16 bit when running the calculation. 8 bit doesn't seem to play quite as nice.

I have been trying all kinds of combinations within the Apply Image dialog and I'm still going at it. I have an action now that runs me through the testing and I'll probably write a script to fully automate it. So far no luck with 8 bit.

But on a side note, I spent most of yesterday writing up a script that I think you'll find useful. It's just another step toward my project and most was written from scratch since I didn't have the code snippets laying around.

https://www.modelmayhem.com/po.php?thre … st11166541

But now that I have this....as I said...it'll be easier for me to write up a script to go through iterations of Apply Image using different settings to compare.