Doug Kerr
Well-known member
I have recently released a new technical article, "The ColorRight MAX Color Correction Tool". It has not yet been indexed on The Pumpkin, my technical information site, but is directly available here:
http://pumpkin.annex.home.att.net/articles/ColorRightMAX.pdf
Ordinarily, I like to think that my technical articles give useful information, answer pertinent questions, and illuminate the connections between science, art, and technique.
I have some malaise about this article, largely owing to the unique circumstances of the product.
Many of you may know that in the past, when I have commented on color correction tools in the Color Parrot/ColorRight family, I have bemoaned the lack of theoretical concepts, either previously known to me or provided by the manufacturer, that could explain certain claimed properties of the tool (such as how does having a narrow acceptance pattern allow the unit to successfully take measurements of incident light chromaticity from the "camera position", and how does masking all but a small diameter of the diffuser bring about such a narrow pattern.)
The unique feature of the ColorRight MAX, compared to earlier/more basic products in the line, is that it allows the photographer to easily, while doing what would otherwise be considered white balance color correction in post processing, apply one of six predetermined chromaticity shifts to the image (shifts compared to the result of "theoretical" white balance color correction). The objective is to have a rendition of human skin that is "more pleasant" than would result from theoretical color correction. These shifts are suggested, two-by-two, for use in the case of three broad ranges of skin color, light, medium and darker.
Although of course skilled photographers are experienced in making such "adjustments" by manipulation of the color controls in postprocessing software, following certain strategies they have learned though long experience, the ColorRight MAX is said to make available a beneficial "quick fix" for the less-skilled, or less patient, photographer.
This at first struck me like a kit of six secret spices in a "stew improvement kit", two of them especially for beef stew, two for lamb, and two for chicken, where by putting in exactly one teaspoon of one of them we could expect to consistently improve the perceived flavor of the stew, whether it was originally too spicy, or too bland, or too sweet, for some peoples' tastes.
But of course the whole matter of the "beauty" of skin renditions is so subjective and complex that it is impossible to say, based on any "theoretical' grounds, whether the ColorRight MAX "stew improvement kit" should be considered a boon or a fad.
I have neither the resources nor the patience to take an extensive series of photographs of people with different skin types (we certainly have, in our extended family, a great roster of such), apply six (or perhaps only the suggested pertinent two) secret spices to each image, and present the results to various juries to opine on whether beautification had in fact been attained.
So I had to content myself with making objective determinations of what the ColorRight MAX would probably do to the image (yes, you get to see the accursed du'v' chart again), and leave analysis of the value of the product, and its process, to others.
I don't complain here about the lack of a "scientific rationale" underlying the asserted success of the ColorRight MAX in skin beautification, because it isn't that kind of a deal (although there may in fact be such a rationale, understood by those who have done research in this complicated area).
Just remember, adding enough monosodium glutamate will make any stew taste like chicken.
Finally, I have to marvel at the exquisite irony of the fact that, that now that (according to our tests) Drew Strickland has now apparently brought the neutrality of his color correction tool (in its reflective target portion) to a new level of precision, he reminds us that the "theoretical" color correction this supports is not really what we need for much of our photographic work, but rather the ability to depart from that result in a few predetermined ways.
But if that indeed constitutes forward motion, then bravo.
In any case, fans of Cherokee skin will be able to see a bit of it in the single photographic test included in the article.
http://pumpkin.annex.home.att.net/articles/ColorRightMAX.pdf
Ordinarily, I like to think that my technical articles give useful information, answer pertinent questions, and illuminate the connections between science, art, and technique.
I have some malaise about this article, largely owing to the unique circumstances of the product.
Many of you may know that in the past, when I have commented on color correction tools in the Color Parrot/ColorRight family, I have bemoaned the lack of theoretical concepts, either previously known to me or provided by the manufacturer, that could explain certain claimed properties of the tool (such as how does having a narrow acceptance pattern allow the unit to successfully take measurements of incident light chromaticity from the "camera position", and how does masking all but a small diameter of the diffuser bring about such a narrow pattern.)
The unique feature of the ColorRight MAX, compared to earlier/more basic products in the line, is that it allows the photographer to easily, while doing what would otherwise be considered white balance color correction in post processing, apply one of six predetermined chromaticity shifts to the image (shifts compared to the result of "theoretical" white balance color correction). The objective is to have a rendition of human skin that is "more pleasant" than would result from theoretical color correction. These shifts are suggested, two-by-two, for use in the case of three broad ranges of skin color, light, medium and darker.
Although of course skilled photographers are experienced in making such "adjustments" by manipulation of the color controls in postprocessing software, following certain strategies they have learned though long experience, the ColorRight MAX is said to make available a beneficial "quick fix" for the less-skilled, or less patient, photographer.
This at first struck me like a kit of six secret spices in a "stew improvement kit", two of them especially for beef stew, two for lamb, and two for chicken, where by putting in exactly one teaspoon of one of them we could expect to consistently improve the perceived flavor of the stew, whether it was originally too spicy, or too bland, or too sweet, for some peoples' tastes.
But of course the whole matter of the "beauty" of skin renditions is so subjective and complex that it is impossible to say, based on any "theoretical' grounds, whether the ColorRight MAX "stew improvement kit" should be considered a boon or a fad.
I have neither the resources nor the patience to take an extensive series of photographs of people with different skin types (we certainly have, in our extended family, a great roster of such), apply six (or perhaps only the suggested pertinent two) secret spices to each image, and present the results to various juries to opine on whether beautification had in fact been attained.
So I had to content myself with making objective determinations of what the ColorRight MAX would probably do to the image (yes, you get to see the accursed du'v' chart again), and leave analysis of the value of the product, and its process, to others.
I don't complain here about the lack of a "scientific rationale" underlying the asserted success of the ColorRight MAX in skin beautification, because it isn't that kind of a deal (although there may in fact be such a rationale, understood by those who have done research in this complicated area).
Just remember, adding enough monosodium glutamate will make any stew taste like chicken.
Finally, I have to marvel at the exquisite irony of the fact that, that now that (according to our tests) Drew Strickland has now apparently brought the neutrality of his color correction tool (in its reflective target portion) to a new level of precision, he reminds us that the "theoretical" color correction this supports is not really what we need for much of our photographic work, but rather the ability to depart from that result in a few predetermined ways.
But if that indeed constitutes forward motion, then bravo.
In any case, fans of Cherokee skin will be able to see a bit of it in the single photographic test included in the article.