Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos HDR Creation 
Thread started 06 Apr 2018 (Friday) 00:19
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Struggling mightily with luminosity masks

 
dfinn
Senior Member
301 posts
Likes: 301
Joined Jan 2012
Location: SLC, UT
     
Apr 06, 2018 00:19 |  #1

At one point last year I tried out luminosity masks and was able to merge 2 exposures into a pretty decent picture. I didn't mess with it again until recently and now I can't seem to get them to work for the life of me. I'm using Jimmy McIntyre's easy panel 2.0. I create the luminosity mask, select which # I want, apply the mask but the blended portions of the image end up looking fake and cartoony. My blending mode is set to normal. I'm wondering if I could possibly have some other setting in Photoshop not set correctly? I'm using CS6. Any help would be much appreciated.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
dfinn
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
301 posts
Likes: 301
Joined Jan 2012
Location: SLC, UT
Post edited 10 months ago by dfinn.
     
Apr 06, 2018 00:26 |  #2

Here's an album which contains the original 2 images that I was trying to blend and the cartoon result of blending them using luminosity masks

https://www.flickr.com …07/sets/7215768​9564799880 (external link)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Picture ­ North ­ Carolina
Gaaaaa! DOH!! Oops!
9,108 posts
Likes: 144
Joined Apr 2006
Location: North Carolina
Post edited 10 months ago by Picture North Carolina.
     
Apr 06, 2018 07:44 |  #3

By "Easy Panel" I assume you mean the free one.

I would probably recommend a paid LM app.

I used McIntyre's Raya Pro for a while. Ultimately upgraded to the new 3.0. However, after reading many reviews and testing myself, I ultimately dropped Raya Pro and went with Greg Benz's product: Lumenzia. Works well, top rated, and tons of free training videos. But check compatibility with your CS6


Website (external link) |

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Left ­ Handed ­ Brisket
That's my line!
Avatar
9,246 posts
Gallery: 12 photos
Likes: 2047
Joined Jun 2011
Location: The Uwharrie Mts, NC
     
Apr 06, 2018 09:05 |  #4

Id go with lumenzia too. I have not worked with it though, just done lots of looking around.

Benz's website offers good info not just on his paid product, but on all aspects of L.M.


PSA: The above post may contain sarcasm, reply at your own risk | Not in gear database: Auto Sears 50mm 2.0 / 3x CL-360, Nikon SB-28, SunPak auto 322 D, Minolta 20

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kirkt
Cream of the Crop
5,719 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 572
Joined Feb 2008
Location: Philadelphia, PA USA
Post edited 10 months ago by kirkt. (6 edits in all)
     
Apr 06, 2018 10:23 |  #5

In your image, you are basically trying to combine the foreground of the lighter exposure with the sky of the darker exposure. When you do this with a luminosity mask and the luminosity levels in the image you base the mask on have similar levels in the sky and the foreground, you end up making complex selections in the sky for example, instead of just selecting the entire patch of sky equally and making the mask pure white to composite the sky into the foreground. A pure white mask for the sky (versus one with varying levels of gray based on luminosity) lets the contrast in the sky of the darker image remain unchanged, instead of reducing it significantly as in your "cartoonish" image.

Instead of using a luminosity mask, use the blue channel of the lighter image as the basis for your mask. It has the best contrast between the sky area and the foreground. Using levels on the grayscale image that represents the blue channel, bring the the black and white points in toward the center of the histogram to force the sky to white and the foreground to black. You will observe that the histogram of the blue channel grayscale image has two humps - one on the dark end and one on the light end. These humps represent the foreground and sky areas respectively, more or less, so bring the black point to the right of the dark hump and the white point to the left of the light hump. See what happens?

Once the Levels operation is done, you will have a pretty good binary mask, but there will be light patches of pixels in the foreground area and vice versa - you can paint these areas out by hand. If you set the paint brush to OVERLAY mode, you can paint along the edge where the sky meets the foreground, with black for example, and the dark foreground of the mask will get darker, without darkening the light sky area of the mask. You can also refine this edge with the refine edge (mask, selection tool, whatever it is called now) and get the edge to appear natural when you composite the sky on the foreground image.

You can blend the darker sky image with the original sky to get the relative exposures of the two areas to look natural and then go about with your normal processing to get your final image. You can dodge/burn the rocks, for example, to create the effect of sunlight grazing across the tops of the rocks and the path, etc.

In this case, where you only have two images and the areas of the two images in the composite are large and well-defined, luminosity masks are unnecessary overkill and cause damage to the contrast if not used properly.

kirk


Kirk
---
images: http://kirkt.smugmug.c​om (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
dfinn
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
301 posts
Likes: 301
Joined Jan 2012
Location: SLC, UT
     
Apr 06, 2018 11:47 |  #6

kirkt wrote in post #18601281 (external link)
In your image, you are basically trying to combine the foreground of the lighter exposure with the sky of the darker exposure. When you do this with a luminosity mask and the luminosity levels in the image you base the mask on have similar levels in the sky and the foreground, you end up making complex selections in the sky for example, instead of just selecting the entire patch of sky equally and making the mask pure white to composite the sky into the foreground. A pure white mask for the sky (versus one with varying levels of gray based on luminosity) lets the contrast in the sky of the darker image remain unchanged, instead of reducing it significantly as in your "cartoonish" image.

Instead of using a luminosity mask, use the blue channel of the lighter image as the basis for your mask. It has the best contrast between the sky area and the foreground. Using levels on the grayscale image that represents the blue channel, bring the the black and white points in toward the center of the histogram to force the sky to white and the foreground to black. You will observe that the histogram of the blue channel grayscale image has two humps - one on the dark end and one on the light end. These humps represent the foreground and sky areas respectively, more or less, so bring the black point to the right of the dark hump and the white point to the left of the light hump. See what happens?

Once the Levels operation is done, you will have a pretty good binary mask, but there will be light patches of pixels in the foreground area and vice versa - you can paint these areas out by hand. If you set the paint brush to OVERLAY mode, you can paint along the edge where the sky meets the foreground, with black for example, and the dark foreground of the mask will get darker, without darkening the light sky area of the mask. You can also refine this edge with the refine edge (mask, selection tool, whatever it is called now) and get the edge to appear natural when you composite the sky on the foreground image.

You can blend the darker sky image with the original sky to get the relative exposures of the two areas to look natural and then go about with your normal processing to get your final image. You can dodge/burn the rocks, for example, to create the effect of sunlight grazing across the tops of the rocks and the path, etc.

In this case, where you only have two images and the areas of the two images in the composite are large and well-defined, luminosity masks are unnecessary overkill and cause damage to the contrast if not used properly.

kirk

kirkt, that makes sense, thanks for the explanation. I'm not too familiar with how I'd create a mask from the blue channel, could you give a little more info on getting started with that?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kirkt
Cream of the Crop
5,719 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 572
Joined Feb 2008
Location: Philadelphia, PA USA
     
Apr 06, 2018 14:14 as a reply to  @ dfinn's post |  #7

In the channels panel you can inspect the R, G and B channels of any layer in your document. Make the background layer active by selecting it in the Layers panel (or the layer that contains the lighter exposure if you have both images in a single document) and then, in the Channels panel, click on the blue channel - the keyboard shortcut is CMD-5 (CTRL-5 on the PC). The result should be a grayscale image. This image is a representation of the blue in your image. If the image is tinted blue, then go to your preferences and change the preference to NOT show channels in color - Preferences > Interface uncheck the box that says "Show Channels in Color."

One way to work with the grayscale image for making a mask is to simply select all (CMD-A), copy (CMD-C) and paste the grayscale image into a new layer in your document. Then you can go about working on it to make your mask.

There are a bunch of ways to do this, but this method is pretty straightforward if you are not familiar with channels, etc.

kirk


Kirk
---
images: http://kirkt.smugmug.c​om (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ejenner
Goldmember
Avatar
3,696 posts
Gallery: 67 photos
Likes: 585
Joined Nov 2011
Location: Denver, CO
Post edited 10 months ago by ejenner.
     
Apr 06, 2018 22:30 as a reply to  @ kirkt's post |  #8

Kirk, I wish I'd known what question to ask you 4-5 years ago to get an answer like that.

dfinn, I suggest you go though Kirk's answer carefully, there are a number of things in there that are useful for a lot of situations, especially refining masks with levels and using OVERLAY blend mode with the brush.

If you want to get even more refined, after you have created the mask, I would save it and then you can adjust it if the edge is too sharp. In the 'refine edge' (under Select) I often apply a 1.0-1.5 px feather and at the same time shift the edge by +5 - +10. I find this pretty good at creating a smooth transition between sky and foreground especially for rocks and mountains - you may need to adjust slightly.


Edward Jenner
5DIII, 7DII, M6, GX1 II,M11-22, Sig15mm FE,16-35 F4,TS-E 17,Sig 18-250 OS Macro,M18-150,24-105,T45 1.8VC,70-200 f4 IS,70-200 2.8 vII,Sig 85 1.4,100L,135L,400DOII.
http://www.flickr.com/​photos/48305795@N03/ (external link)
https://www.facebook.c​om/edward.jenner.372/p​hotos (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Left ­ Handed ­ Brisket
That's my line!
Avatar
9,246 posts
Gallery: 12 photos
Likes: 2047
Joined Jun 2011
Location: The Uwharrie Mts, NC
     
Apr 07, 2018 08:00 |  #9

dfinn wrote in post #18601345 (external link)
kirkt, that makes sense, thanks for the explanation. I'm not too familiar with how I'd create a mask from the blue channel, could you give a little more info on getting started with that?

>>>

Left Handed Brisket wrote in post #18601234 (external link)
Benz's website offers good info not just on his paid product, but on all aspects of L.M.

Kirkt has pointed you in the right direction, it sounds like you need to poke around a little and gain a better understanding of how the process works.

https://gregbenzphotog​raphy.com/luminosity-masking-tutorial/ (external link)


PSA: The above post may contain sarcasm, reply at your own risk | Not in gear database: Auto Sears 50mm 2.0 / 3x CL-360, Nikon SB-28, SunPak auto 322 D, Minolta 20

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bcaps
I was a little buzzed when I took this
Avatar
803 posts
Gallery: 67 photos
Best ofs: 16
Likes: 1721
Joined Jun 2003
Location: Bay Area, CA
Post edited 10 months ago by Bcaps. (7 edits in all)
     
Apr 08, 2018 00:18 |  #10

When you are trying to blend two images you should look at where the "transition" is between the image you are blending from, and the image you are blending to. In this case it's where the water and land meet. You want to try and get the tonality at the transition very similar in both images before trying to blend them. In your case if you take the very bright image for the foreground, and darken it quite a bit so that the transition point in that image is much closer to the other image, it is now a piece of cake to blend them.

This type of image is one of the easiest to blend because you have a very well defined transition without things like rocks, mountains, or branches sticking up through the area of transition. Because of this no type of selection is needed. Luminosity masks are overkill for this. You just simply use a large round brush and mask in/out at the area of transition.

The below is from doing just this. It was maybe 30 seconds of PS work. I took the bright foreground exposure and added a Brightness/Contrast adjustment layer with a -105 brightness adjustment. Then I stacked the "sky" image on top of that and masked it out 100% and then with a soft and large brush at 100% I painted in the sky with really no care at all applied to trying to be precise. You could certainly spend more time and get it exactly as needed, bumping up or pulling back the brightness in either of the images to taste, but this was just to illustrate a general concept. But even if you are going to use LM's for this (you certainly could), you really should try and get the tonality between the two images much closer before trying to blend them. Your sky and foreground are so far off in terms of brightness between the two that if you just blend them "as is", they will never look right because the light from the sky compared to the light falling on the land is off by a couple of hours. That will be very jarring to the eye and the brains processes that as "wrong", or as you said, "cartoony".


I use luminosity masks when needed, but I find that maybe 80%+ of the time you just need a large round brush with either no selection or a rough selection with the quick selection tool. For example, for this image I used a luminosity mask https://www.flickr.com …6608852402/in/d​ateposted/ (external link) but for this and similar images I just freehanded or used a quick selection: https://www.flickr.com …6590736647/in/d​ateposted/ (external link)


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


- Dave | flickr (external link)
Nikon D810
14-24mm f/2.8 | 16-35mm F/4 | 24-70mm f/2.8 | 70-200mm f/4 | Sigma 150-600mm

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kirkt
Cream of the Crop
5,719 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 572
Joined Feb 2008
Location: Philadelphia, PA USA
     
Apr 08, 2018 12:10 as a reply to  @ Bcaps's post |  #11

Bcaps’ advice is solid. The one reason I would use a channel-based binary mask rather than a loosely painted blending mask is so that I could reuse the more precise mask for making other tweaks to the two areas of the image (color temp, Dodge/burn, local contrast, etc.) more precisely.

Kirk


Kirk
---
images: http://kirkt.smugmug.c​om (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
dfinn
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
301 posts
Likes: 301
Joined Jan 2012
Location: SLC, UT
     
Apr 09, 2018 22:49 as a reply to  @ kirkt's post |  #12

Thanks again kirkt. I was able to create a binary mask using the blue channel as you suggested. I need to work on refining the edge a little but but here's a quick edit I did using your instructions to create the mask and then lightly processed in color efex.

IMAGE: https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/874/41313774412_36d6c40848_b.jpg

This is definitely getting closer to what I had in mind.



  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kirkt
Cream of the Crop
5,719 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 572
Joined Feb 2008
Location: Philadelphia, PA USA
     
Apr 10, 2018 05:05 |  #13

Terrific! As with most image processing, there are many different techniques to achieve a particular task. Practice, practice, practice!

Glad it is working for you.

Kirk


Kirk
---
images: http://kirkt.smugmug.c​om (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

1,843 views & 2 likes for this thread
Struggling mightily with luminosity masks
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos HDR Creation 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is juansalva
932 guests, 392 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.