[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vr / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Search] [Home]
Board
Settings Home
/p/ - Photography



Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.




File: 0269.jpg (271 KB, 2499x1663)
271 KB
271 KB JPG
are they a meme? Why not just change color in photo editing software??

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution300 dpi
Vertical Resolution300 dpi
>>
>>3418857
>Why not just change color in photo editing software??
How are you going to change the colours correctly if you don't have a colour checker...
>>
>>3418860
methinks he thinks he can just eyeball whites
>>
>>3418862
Your eyes deceive you. Correctly estimating a colour value is incredibly hard, maybe impossible. Surrounding colours, environment lighting, individual differences and biases... Heck, white looks slightly different even between my 2 eyes. If you get your camera and screen properly calibrated then you've got a proper baseline from which to edit.
>>
>>3418857
Different companies have their own "colour science", colour checkers remove the differencences and give a much more accurate, consistent photo. This allows you to use presets that you've made across different brands with them all working as expected.

If a "professional" turned up to a shoot i booked without one, I'd send him home.

And $70 once a decade is cheap af.
>>
Do teh cheap ones work? Or is this something where you absolutely HAVE to buy the expensive ones.

I'm talking at amateur level, not looking to sell pictures or anything
>>
>>3418965
The $10 ones off ebay were worse than using none at all for me.

The xrite passport isn't even expensive.
>>
>>3418857
MILKIES!
>>
>>3418857
Name of this actress? Google reverse search yields no result.
>>
>>3418857
what if you want to print?
>>
File: 0207.jpg (297 KB, 1663x2499)
297 KB
297 KB JPG
>>3418974
Eva Karera, but she's my waifu.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CC 2019 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width1663
Image Height2499
Number of Bits Per Component8, 8, 8
Pixel CompositionRGB
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution300 dpi
Vertical Resolution300 dpi
Image Created2019:01:11 18:31:28
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width1663
Image Height2499
>>
>>3418988
It's most important for print
>>
>>3418937
It's for porno shoot. I don't know why they bother with it when everyone watching is too brain-mushed to even think about it.
>>
>>3418959
What difference does it make when it'll never be the same across different monitors and tv screens?
>>
File: 1546724641915.jpg (10 KB, 325x325)
10 KB
10 KB JPG
>>3419119
just buy a monitor color calibrator tool for 500 bucks goyim
>>
All you need is a pure white color, why do these things have all this other shit and cost so much?
>>
>>3419416
Cameras all have slightly different color profiles, which means colors will look slightly different from camera to camera, or even when changing lenses. The color checker just makes sure you get consistent results from capture to print. It’s not needed if it’s only digital, and sounds overkill for brazzers, but hey, looks fancy. It costs a lot because getting those little squares of the same exact color is quite tricky, the different paints must reflect different lights in the same way etc.
>>
Lol
>>
>>3419118
manipulation. never underestimate those conniving jews
>>
>>3419466
Get out.
>>
>>3419474
oy vey!
>>
>>3418857

Fucking hulk smash
>>
>>3418959
It's almost distressingly pathetic to think about how much value people place in this shit.
>>
>>3418857
Those breasts are a fucking horror show. I'll never understand how normies can enjoy studio porn.
>>
>>3418857
MOMMY
>>
>>3419864
It's almost distressingly pathetic to think about how little value people place in their shit.
>>
>>3418857
>are they a meme?
no but spending more than $30 on one is pretty retarded
>>
>>3419119
That's the dumbest argument ever presented.

Why master music to have bass below 70hz, when 99% of people don't listen on equipment that can play that low?

>>3419416
Lol, no.

All cameras present colour differently, a color card removes the inconsistency https://www.pdnonline.com/gear/cameras/the-best-cameras-for-color-reproduction-ranked/

>>3419864
If a chippy turned up without a spirit level, you'd tell him to go home, right? Or do you encourage incompetence?

>>3420112
I tried that one, it's whack, super low contrast compared to the xrite. Passports easily last a decade+ as long as you keep the lid closed and away from moisture, you'd be lucky to get a year out of one of the kodak sheets before it's way off. Colour cards have to use matte swatches, which absorbs moisture and is easier to sun bleach.



Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.