Building new UV setup; request for comments

[Andrea B.]

I've had problems in the past for UV shots with Adobe Camera Raw not giving me the same white balance I had in camera. And also with ACR not providing a good white balance for UV using the white balance dropper (which would be used on snow or asphalt or sidewalks in such a city scene). But I quit using PS and ACR long ago, so I don't know if the latest versions still screw up UV white balance.

 

Other converters I use seem able to preserve (or re-create) in-camera white balance: Photo Ninja, NX2, Iridient.

 

Anyone out there using ACR and PS who can provide some info about preserving in-camera WB for a UV scene? Is camera profiling required? Will the white balance dropper work now for UV? Thanks !!

 

 

********

 

Added: Read one store sign at first as "Glock & Hardware". groan.

Love these city scenes.

[OlDoinyo]

If one converts a file with the manufacturer's software, the final image will normally be rendered using the camera white balance. This is also true of some third-party tools such as the conversion utility in Breeze Browser. Importing directly seems to bypass this process.

 

Fresh snow is usually a pretty good standard for white balancing.

 

I see you were in the path of the storm as well--we got 16 inches where we live.

[Shane]

Anyone out there using ACR and PS who can provide some info about preserving in-camera WB for a UV scene? Is camera profiling required? Will the white balance dropper work now for UV? Thanks !!

 

It might be possible to use a custom DNG Profile for UV similar to that used for IR. Tutorial 4 on page 8 of the DNG Profile Editor documentation describes what to do for IR photos:

http://www.adobe.com/content/dam/Adobe/en/products/photoshop/pdfs/cs6/DNGProfile_EditorDocumentation.pdf

[Andy Perrin]

Thank you, Shane! That might be a possibility. I am also thinking seriously about getting Photo Ninja (which I'd actually never heard of prior to joining this forum) because it seems well-regarded here.

[nfoto]

Snap a picture of something UV-neutral and bring the RAW into PhotoNinja. One click sets the w/b and you can apply that to any other photo taken under the same conditions. Couldn't be easier. PN also does a good job of keeping the w/b set in camera, which is fine for e.g. the Panasonics, but not for the Nikons as they cannot do a proper w/b in UV. However, setting the w/b later against a UV-neutral subject will work for any camera [that I have tried so far].

 

If you have a "full spectrum" camera and wish to use it also for visible light, put on a good UV/IR blocking filter , shoot a Color Checker or Color Passport and build a session profile in PN. A few clicks and you are good to go. Do note again this step can be performed on the RAW files after shooting, no need to worry about the w/b in advance as long as you make the described reference shot.

[Andrea B.]

Photo Ninja is a converter and global editor.

Many times I have gotten an excellent photo from it without the need for further local editing.

 

But when local edits are needed, I use Photoshop Elements or Nikon Capture NX2.

In particular, Photo Ninja does not have a dust bunny removal tool.

[nfoto]

PhotoNinja is the *front end* of my processing work flow. The *back end* comprises Photoshop and archival storage routines. My processed files go into Photoshop for any final retouching, rescaling, and so on. Thus I don't fret about PN not having a dust bunny removal tool, because PS has better tools anyway.

[Andrea B.]

My main problem with PS was the tedious selection process and all those layers which you couldn't switch around.

So I gave up on PS years ago except for the little Elements used for titles or simple cloning.

 

Have PS selection methods improved in the last 3 years or so? Maybe I should get a subscription and try again.

[Andy Perrin]

That seems like a sensible way to work. First you do the global editing in PN and then final touch ups in PS, making use of the strengths of both tools. I think that's the way I'm headed.

 

Andrea, not sure what you mean by layers not being switchable? You've always been able to drag them around since they were first introduced. I'm actually using the last version of PS that existed before all this subscription nonsense started, just by way of FYI.

[nfoto]

Photoshop can be used at any level of proficiency. Develop some reliable routines that cater for the bulk of your requirements.

 

Layers you couldn't switch around in PS? I'm not following ... with PS you can do almost anything with and in layers. If you don't want the stupid subscription and see little use of Camera Raw, get CS6 while it is available.

[Andrea B.]

I was not saying what I meant!! It has been a while since PS days. Sorry 'bout that. Try again.

 

I was trying to ask something about the dependency of a top layer on preceding layers.

Can I turn off some imtermediate layer and have the remaining layers hold?

 

I'm not PS bashing, mind you. I just prefer other editors.

[Andy Perrin]

Can I turn off some imtermediate layer and have the remaining layers hold?

Yes, you can. You can drag them around, turn them off to see what the result looks like without that particular layer, lock them so you don't move them accidentally. Yeah, for the most part they aren't chained together. The background layer IS locked, but that's the background. You can always duplicate it and replace the background with something other than the original photo, like a solid color.

[Andrea B.]

Thanks!

[nfoto]

Even the background can be made into a layer ... then moved around. No need to copy it. Just double click in the layer menu, then OK.

[Andy Perrin]

Yes, I just found I could do that (after reading your comment) with a right-click and selecting the "Layer from Background" command, which I've somehow been missing for years. (Probably because I just got used to duplicating the background and deleting the locked layer.)

[Andrea B.]

Perhaps it is a restriction in Photoshop Elements which I am encountering.

For example I cannot sharpen on a separate layer in PSE and then turn it on and off.

I can perform levels and colour corrections, for example, on separate layers.

 

What about in CS6? Can sharpening be done on a separate layer?

[nfoto]

Andy: Double-clicking is faster ....

 

Andrea: you can do anything on a layer in CS6. Sharpen it or use as a selective mask or do funny stuff with curves or what have you. Opacity and fill factor can be adjusted. Only your insights into the program set a limit.

[Andy Perrin]

Oh I see what you are saying. That's conceptually not how PS layers work. When you sharpen an image, you directly affect the pixels at the time you do the operation. Once the sharpening has been carried out, you can't turn it off after the fact because the pixels have already been affected.

[nfoto]

If the sharpening is done to a layer, you can blend in as required. Selectively or global.

 

Undo using history/crtl+ Z or directly after an operation by crtl +shift+ F, then set the percentage that should remain.

[Andy Perrin]

I interpreted the question as seeing the layers as a list of commands, which are then applied to produce the image (like the Actions), which is not what they are. Yes, you can reverse things by undoing or history.

[Andrea B.]

OK. Hmmmmm........

 

But in NX2 I can do this. I can have a sharpen step independent of all other edits. And turn it on or off to see how it affects other edits.

 

But whatever nevermind!!! My fast-fading Photoshop skills are probably boring for everyone else to read about here. Sorry for getting way off topic. "-)

I think I would probably work on learning Affinity instead of going back to PS because of the problem with UV conversions. Affinity seems to handle them OK.

[Andy Perrin]

More playing around. I still don't have a Teflon square to white balance off of, but I have PhotoNinja now, and I used in-camera white balance off our remaining snow.

 

Graffiti, in my experience, often makes for interesting photos outside the visible. One of these days I plan to do a set of Vis/UV/NIR pics of the local artwork. I'm still learning how to use my camera, and also how to get consistent UV colors.

 

F/8(?), ISO200, 10 seconds, and the filter is that BG39/UG11 combo.

 

F/22, ISO200, 15 seconds, same filter.

 

I played around with all the "Exposure and detail" sliders in PN, and also upped the saturation.

[Andrea B.]

Andy, your location certainly lends itself to a great deal of interesting subject matter for what I'll call "UV Street Photography" for lack of a better term. And experimentation is the order of the day. UV alone will not carry a photograph. The photograph must stand on its own merits, yes? So practice exposures and composition. Figure out how to deal with highlights and shadows. Then any colour details can be sorted out last, if needed. That is to say, the UV-ness of such photography almost comes last in the list. :D

 

For artistic photography you need not worry about consistent colours unless you want that. If you do, then follow the mechanics of making white balance against a standard, store it in a preset and you're done.

 

Outdoors you can try setting an in-camera white balance against an asphalt or cement street. That should work. (Or snow, of course, as you have done.) Although I always recommend the additional making a quick photo of a white standard at the beginning of the shoot for later use. Takes no time. Always works.

 

I love the grafitti. Lots of possibilities there for interesting comparisons of Vis and UV. Cool shot.

The window, vines & bricks have interesting textures in UV, but I would like to see that done much closer.

 

No need to go all f/22. With these subjects, this close, f5.6-f8 is sufficient. Amp your ISO up a little higher for shorter exposures. I don't recall where noise starts with Sony Nexi, but I think ISO-800 wouldn't be too noisy. (You can always shoot an ISO series to determine that.)

 

Good work, carry on!

[Andy Perrin]

Thanks, this is very helpful. As you observed, I'm still learning control of the highlights and shadows. (That is, I have a rough idea of which way to turn the dials to get the effect I want, but it's not very fine-tuned, and I tend to push the dial all the way to the ends, because if a little is good, a lot is better, no? Don't answer that. :))

[Andy Perrin]

I tried an infrared and visible shot out my window of the same wall as above. Andrea, I did all the exposure fiddling with PN's black and white setting turned on, per your suggestion, for the visible image. (The IR was already desaturated at >1000nm.)

 

I wasn't worrying about composition at all for these, just trying to understand how to get the exposure right. I did my best to make sure nothing was being clipped on the histogram.

 

BTW, I'm continuing to post these here until I feel like I have proper control of the camera. I don't want to mess up the rest of the forum with my learning curve.

 

Visible pic was F/11, 1/200", ISO400, shot through just the BG39 2.5mm filter, then white balanced off of the "No parking" sign in the pic with PN one-click.

IR pic was F/8, 1/2", ISO100, with an off-brand nominally 1000nm filter from god knows where on eBay.

Steinheil Edixa-auto-cassaron 50mm, NEX-7 camera