changing the image/look radically. Adding a ton of technical passes together in a “correct” way – creating the look in compositing and then heavily modifying/manipulating it is a minefield. I would only recommend Nuke for that.
If you just put the layers together – with a few small changes perhaps – than FXtree is just fine. From: Christopher Sent: Monday, June 03, 2013 6:30 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Compositing Levels I have never touched the FXTree, I will start now with this comp :) What do you mean transform the image ? ::Christopher:: [email protected] wrote: better not ask my opinion on any adobe product – at least I can see some use for Photoshop – but compositing it aint. I whish I could recommend FXtree without caveats – as you have it right there in XSI and to a degree it will work - quite well even. But there are some pitfalls. Clipping is one of them – and it doesn’t have display gamma afaik – so you’ll have to resort to adding a 2.2 gamma in the end of the comp (not on the luma but on R G B each!) Last I did a multi-channel-comp in FXtree compared to beauty render – I got it almost perfect. For a simple case that is. If you don’t intend totally transform the image it’s probably fine – and by any means, much less of a headache than Photoshop. From: Christopher Sent: Monday, June 03, 2013 6:07 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Compositing Levels 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.
