For a program that cost $1K such as Ps it's quite restricted for this type of work, I still wonder why I have a zillion color profiles in Photoshop. I imported the levels as linear gamma, but upon import in photoshop I let photoshop apply sRGB (2.2 gamma), I suppose I shouldn't. You make it sound as though I will fight will Ps to get things right, although you probably are right :) I'm going to do the comp all in linear, see what results I get. I need to find an alternative to Photoshop, Nuke I don't use here. Is AE more better then Ps, or more of the same ?
::Christopher:: [email protected] wrote: > > If the above is correct, what is ticking me off is it is so dark, > when I render in the renderer, it's nice,... > > are you looking at it with proper gamma correction? > oh right it's photoshop... > > well, in XSI you are probably seeing the linear image with a gamma > correction added (which is the desired way to work) -- but most other > software will show it without gamma - So if you add a gamma of 2.2, > chances are it will look like what you expected. > But here's the twist: you should not be using that gamma -- first do > the comp and add it in the end. Or actually -- better not add the > gamma at all and rather export the image to the correct target color > space. > > > Photoshop 'add' blend mode doesn't work in 32-bit color space, what > is the correct alternative ? > > Nuke. > > Really -- you can't expect to use Photoshop for a comp like that and > have the same result as in the renderer -- it has the maths all wrong > and doesn't even know how to handle an alpha. > What you're trying to do will work correctly the first time around you > try it in nuke (ok -- perhaps that's wishful thinking) > > Add (or Plus in Nuke terms) is the one and only proper blend mode to > use - it's called linear dodge or something senseless like that in > Photoshop I think. > > Screen is not correct - though handy at times, it will never give you > the same result as in the renderer. (except for the speculars in the > mr skin shader -- but that's another story) > > Seriously -- photoshop isn't worth all the pain for this kind of > thing. I know it might sound harsh but that's just how it is -- > photoshop will not work the same way as the renderer. > If you just want to mess around with some layers and make something > whatever -- I guess you can use photoshop -- but if you want to get > the same, correct result, as in the renderer -- don't use photoshop. > If your client wants to receive a layered photoshop comp... then > though luck.
