AdamStanislav

Unavailable?

Thanks. I made this silly android head with it.

Oh, jeez. Round-a-clock.

True, though of course they also don’t want to put people to nursing homes if those people can still live independently with just some help. I mean, nobody wants to go to a nursing home unless they really need round-a-click care.

Yeah, right! Disabled, so the social services assigned me a housekeeper and other services because it is cheaper for them than paying for a nursing home.

Just showed the latest one to my housekeeper. She said, Oh wow! 😁

Here is one I made a few weeks ago, when I named it ChromaFun.cube. I actually do not remember doing it, but the time stamp on the original file says 22-Jul-21. I must have been having fun, though, judging by the name I gave it. Or maybe I just gave it that name because of all it does in just a simple LUT. First, it converts the RGB color to YCC (a.k.a. luma and chroma) using the Rec. 2020 standard for HDTV. Then it rotates the chroma by 17 degrees to make the reds look somewhat bluer. But then it only keeps 11% of the effect the rotation produced and sets the remaining 89% to just an unrotated chroma. That makes the skin colors just a wee bit colder to compensate for how cell phones try to make all pictures kitchier. It does not stop there, though. It then lowers the saturation to 72.31% of the original (again to compensate for what cell phones do). Then it increases the overall contrast somewhat by setting the black level from 0 to -0.05 and the white level from 1 to 1.1. Last but not least, it converts the result back from YCC to RGB. And all of this is so subtle that most people could not tell the difference! But I bet you can.

And yes, I would crop it just as @Smee Again suggests. Mostly because the buildings are as much in sharp focus (looks like it was taken by a cell phone, not a real camera) as the cars. They detract from the cars. Try reshooting it with a much narrower depth of focus.

Good point. Thunder3.cubeshould fix that.

Well, here are two quick LUTs I tried to unmute it. The first, Thunder1.cube, is way overboard, but it could be tamed by lowering its efficacy: The second, Thunder2.cube, is the same but much less strong. More realistic, IMHO, but there still is a little haze left.

Here are two more LUTs. The first makes the colors look softer (soften.cube). It does so by making primary colors brighter and secondary colors darker, which lowers the contrast of the colors, but not of black and white (which your typical lowering of contrast does). The second makes the colors look harder (harden.cube). And yes, you guessed it, it does so by making the primary colors darker and the secondary colors brighter, which increases the contrast of the colors, but not of black and white. The sample image I have been using is not the best to show this because it already has a lot of soft colors. But you can still see the difference by comparing the red neck of the wine bottle in the two images below (softer first, harder second):

Thanks for confirming that it works.

Well, that explains the difference in the architecture we see in the photo.

Here is a LUT I made way back in 2017 and have just remembered it,grk17.cube. I started a separate thread because this one does not fit the simple LUT motif of my other LUT thread. Anyway, it essentially turns a green background black and everything else white. Then you use it as a mask, like this (the model came on the disc with a book on green screen, but the LUT is mine),

In my never-ending quest for the filter that makes the colors of the human skin look their best, last night I made another 48 color filter LUTs by interpolating the colors with the above almost-gray filter. Then I tested a bunch of images of people with almost-amber. I liked the result. But this morning I was wondering if I could do something radical to improve it. Those sets of 48 bring out a color by suppressing its opposite. What if I took the opposite and gave it a negative efficacy? So I took almost-cobalt (with cobalt being exactly 180 degrees from amber on the color wheel) and gave it the efficacy of -1. That certainly made all colors quite brilliant and those in the neighborhood of amber more than others, but it was too much. So I remixed it with the efficacy of -0.5, and cutis-humana.cubewas born. I gave it that name because way back when I studied the pipe organ I was always puzzled by a register called vox humana, which is Latin for human voice. So I thought a filter that emulates human skin should be called cutis humana, Latin for human skin. Anyway, here is the picture, albeit not with any human face as posting other people’s pictures on the web is something I prefer not to do. But this filter makes color portraits look good. At least I think it does.

For what it’s worth, I really like the original colors.

Pure magic here. I love the work of Ansel Adams, even visited his house in Yosemite (the park turned to into a camera store 😊). I despise the official standards for turned color images into grayscale. The problem with them is that in 8-bits per color channel they only allow for 256 levels of gray (because they make a pixel gray by setting all three color channels to the same number, and 8 bits can only have one of 256 values). So, I made my own LUT, almost-gray.cube, which makes pixels almost gray, so their values are close but not necessarily the same. Our brains still perceive them as gray. Like this,

And here is a losat_amber-TF.cube. As its name implies, it lowers the saturation of the image (down to about 29% of the original saturation of each pixel), and then if applies an amber color filter. Amber is the color close to the color of human skin (in every race, as far as I can tell), so this LUT is nice to emulate an old picture with a color image of a person (or a bunch of them).

Very nice.

I have been playing with it this morning, and came up with 48 new filters (yes, I think of them as the various color filters you place on your camera lens to change the overall mood of an image, except done in software). They are kind of soft, so I just packed them in soft.zip. Here are just three examples: Soft Cerulean: Soft Fuchsia: Soft Mint:

That is awesome.

I meant to give it some texture, not structure, but with English being my 5th language, sometimes I cannot remember the right word.

Quite impressive!

And just to test the new Affinity Designer 1.10, I used its shape tool to make this silly lantern (though I added an SVG filter in the final SVG code to give it some structure). ScaryLantern.svg

Thanks, I try. 😁