Very helpful clip, thanks.

Having a BA in commercial photography and communications, I come at KZfaq like I approach sitcoms on TV.

There's some useful information here but it is too simplified and generalized. The "color drop method" is just one of many techniques to edit color but it will not "Improve ALL photos" as the title claims. What about landscapes? If I take digital photos in Redwood National Park, can I improve my capture by darkening the greens and dialing back the oranges? Not likely. That might resemble a "film look" but what film? Not one that most photographers would want. De-saturated redwood bark and ferns buried further into the shadows isn't what we're after. Back in the film days, I might have chosen a landscape chrome to do exactly the opposite. Velvia for example, was hugely popular with professionals. When I took special photos of my kids or a wedding, I learned to choose a pro portrait film optimized for skin tones (Caucasian tones more specifically). With film, you had 24-36 shots on a roll and a single ISO. If you didn't know about different professional film types, you probably shot an all-purpose Kodacolor or Fujicolor variant which also were prone to over-saturated skin tones. And unless you shot and viewed slides, the final product--the print--had a look potentially more dependent on the paper it was printed on and the quality of the chemistry the lab used than the negative film. Modern RAW captures offer a huge color gamut never available on film. So, good point here--how do you optimally edit that for a good image? There's no single answer. Most software gives you options to start off with a certain look. In Lightroom, one of the first UI controls in the Basic Develop panel is the Profile drop-down. There, you can choose portrait, landscape, and other options as a STARTING point, then go to the color mixer and other panels for fine tuning.

You are correct on Luminar. They have run around like headless chickens changing stuff drastically. Luminar 3 is different than Luminar 4 and then Luminar Neo is even more different. This company needs to come up with a solid direction and refine the software instead of changing it drastically making it buggy and confusing.

Got 1000% working solution - Dont buy Fuji

sooo,where do you stand with the colour science of any given camera.i.e Leica or even Hasselblad..are You shooting Fuji ?..then again Nikon has a different colour science altogether...or are you saying the editing software is oversaturating without 'authorisation'..?

It's always nice to be reminded of subjectivity, like I was while watching this. I really don't like the look of the images you used as examples, I would personally never edit a photo to look like any of the ones you showed in the first 3min. Does that mean they're bad pictures, or that you're a bad photographer? Nope, but it definitely reinforces the fact that opinions and tastes very by a lot. The advice itself is good, just thought it's interesting how wildly different the end product can be while using the same advice.

Blue is sad. Bright yellow is happy. Three awesome colors together, with an Eagle defending its land against a snake, are; green, white, and red. Dios les bendiga hermano.

nice!

Thanks my D800 so green

Great stuff!!! Going to try it!

I often find that reducing the "blue primary" in the calibration section will help produce more neutral and natural looking colours. I usually start there to get a more balanced histogram before moving on to fine tuning the colour in my images.

Darkroom. Use Sigmoid or filmic raw processing. No colour shift. Behaves like film . It’s not digital. Its shit software

Hi Gavin, I enjoy your videos, thanks for them... blues, yes - next you need to get rid of that purple LED light - Yuk!

They should be sued for for making Capture One Express for Fuji version unusable. It's one thing to not support it anymore but to completely disable it is cruel and unethical.

Olympus gets this. The white balance fine tune is two colours, amber and green.

Well, your Green/Orange tip worked out very nicely indeed, so I'll play with this one! Thanks! 👍

is this one of those "click-here-to-get-free-stuff-but-signup-first-so-I-can-nag-you-everyday-about-puchasing-my-crap"-type of link?

I am using DXO recently on a macbook. What really annoys me is that I cant move files or virtual copies from and to projects. It only copies. Does anyone has a solution (alt, shift + drag doesnt seem to work).

FYI ‘technique’ is misspelled in your thumbnail.

Does filmist2 work in Pixelmator pro?

Not necessary if you shoot Fuji digital cameras …just use one their film simulations tweaked for pleasing skin tones.

You said luminance but chose saturation.

This is really fascinating. I dialed down the green in a test photo and it did look more natural. I Googled an image of a Canon camera sensor diagram and it showed a block of pixels: Red - 9 pixels, Blue - 4 pixels, Green - 12 pixels! No wonder green is so prominent.

3 minutes before you got to any useful information.

Lol i am so guity

Have you tried or/and reviewed Nitro?

Very interesting. Some weeks ago I was experimenting with desaturating green.

How do I do this on Capture One? Over there there is no color sliders but a color selection. And if I remember correctly that doesn't change the color channel but the color you see. I might be wrong, please help.

Had a question since you were using Olympus cameras and you can dial down the green and the control panel. Can you do that? Have you tried that and is that better than having to bring it in to Lightroom or any other program where you can just do it in camera?

Often when we think of a “raw image” we’re actually thinking of an image with color correction and gamma applied in accordance to some factory profile that has nothing really to do with what was captured, but rather what the manufacturer considers accurate and appealing. If you look at digital raw files without any color correction applied at all it is overwhelmingly green - to the point it visually appears monochrome. This is because color temperature (and gamma, which is linear directly off the sensor) are applied post-exposure. The green bias is because green is in the center of the visual color spectrum, so by biasing toward green you have the greatest range of color sensitivity regardless of lighting. Likewise the sensor itself (behind the mask) is naturally more sensitive to red and infrared. As a result reds tend to get more exposure. It’s for these reasons I don’t even trust exposure warnings or histograms in camera. They’re wildly inaccurate often pointing to over exposure a solid 1-2 stops under.

Finally, some actual good editing advice. Thanks for the video man!

I don't use Photolab 7, but I do use DXO PureRaw 4 to render the Raw file into a .DNG before making simple edits in Apple Photos using Photomator. The quality of image PureRaw pulls out of the Canon 6D Raw file is exceptionally good using the DeepPrime XD 2 option. First rate rendering, lens distortion, chromatic aberration and lens softness corrections all feature in PureRaw 4, so presumably also in the Elite version of Photolab 7 (?).

​Instead of digging in and doing the testing properly, you feign not to understand to justify the weak review. If you won't take the time to learn a piece of software, you shouldn't be reviewing it. You can do better. (this is a comment buried in replies above; it should be top-level)

Who doesn't care what platform or device you are using to work on? Adobe. Who only works with a computer and a very few iPads? Everyone else. Being dependent on a computer for working, is like still living in mom's basement.

I've been learning myself that if you want a color to stand out more, increasing saturation isn't always thr move. Sometimes it will actually look more impactful if you tweak something else like reducing the luminance

I'm red green color blind... I'm like, what green? 😅

I can't stand the over saturation of all the in camera picture styles so created my own with 2 of the 3 custom spots with one for landscape and the other for portraits and both are as far negative as can go(-3) and for the most part after a lot of experimenting believe it or not ended up dialed in to a very good starting point and yes I'm aware what you see on the rear is a jpeg but thats what i save images as anyway once fully edited

Excellent method. Thank you!

Thanks for the video it was quick but I think when you added the second control point it might have been grouped/linked with the first one since the masked seemed to still show the jumper.

I’d consider myself still an amateur and I’m red-green colorblind but I’ve been addressing my oranges and greens like this for a couple years now so thank you for this much needed ego boost haha

No preset can ever "work for every photo" simply because each camera offers different starting points in term of sensor and color gamut (not just color balance). The best you can achieve is a color profile (not a preset) that could work for a specific combo of sensor/lens. This is precisely why things such as color targets exist. And no, a mere shift of the sliders or color balance won't be enough. The kind of results you want to achieve require some tools such as 3D LUT creator using that kind of procedure kzfaq.info/get/bejne/bMuikrN6nb7Vpn0.html.

When you apply color theory from classical painting, to photography, you can think in terms of depth, yellows and greens, blues and oranges, how and why we perceive things the way we do from a distance. The more information you pile on,, the more cluttered and 2D it will appear. The color wheel applies to photo images too when editing. In the sense that, color influences composition and vice versa, And how you can create more depth without making something look fake. You have to also take into account the character of your camera sensor and color science (I do) some cameras have nice blues with some magentas, some have terrible greens etc,,(I have different camera's for different type of images) but indeed, you build up from less to more, from background to foreground ... I do alot using luminescence, exposure, contrast, highlights, whites, curve (and perhaps a dial or two in the camera itself) to get a workflow going. ... now for B&W if do use presets or film styles,, because I'm not very good at consistently tuning and being aware, of what to look for, and to get the most out of each image, it's hard, the way information presents itself in tone values and contrast , I always doubt myself ,,, I can apply basic correction of course, but to get a consistent style and workflow and shoot beautiful images (you need a camera also with nice transition and microgradation) ,, anyway :-)

YOUR PICTURE MUST LOOK LIKE FILM, DO NOT TAKE ADVANTAGE OF DIGITAL SENSORS AND RAW COLOR DATA!!!! THAT IS WRONG AND UNLESS YOUR PHOTOS LOOK LIKE BOUDOIR PINUP TRASH YOUR PHOTOS NEED TO BE DELETED

Why You didn't mention a word, about C1 one of best features, which is: linear response film curve (where You have access to all DR from Your sensor), and luma curve??

How do you do this in Gimp ?

Is there a way to do this in camera...so that it becomes a SOOC thing instead of post editting? I have a Sony A7III....

HSL has a huge problem: it doesn't know how to mix colors, it is so selective with green that if you have an out-of-focus background where green grass and cyan water mix, HSL will break the transition zone, generating two perfectly defined blocks of color. It is extremely unnatural and ruins the whole point of the tool. They are like Clarity halos, but with color instead of light.

Hello Seim, I appreciate the tips. If you ever get the time labeling the videos that apply to shooting film would be extremely helpful. Thank you

I literally discovered this by accident this morning colour correcting a digital render of people in a forest. I took down the orange a little and the green a lot and suddenly it looked real. It’s brilliant.