We’re rewarding the question askers & reputations are being recalculated! Read more.

New answers tagged

5

If you run the file through ExifTool, you'll see that it contains a huge number of Document Ancestors elements: Document Ancestors : 0, 0000A6C7815905497C2762FB3073AC1B, ... ... Warning : [Minor] Extracted only 1000 photoshop: DocumentAncestors items. Ignore minor errors to extract all If you remove all EXIF data (...


2

As indicated by its "magic number" bytes (FF D8 FF E1), it is a JPEG file in EXIF fomat. You are probably more accustomed to the JFIF format. Note that in the EXIF format (which is a "container" format) there are several possible encodings for the image itself, including the TIFF format.


0

For me it seems like the image (JPEG you provide via URL) is ordinary JPEG file with some hidden information inside (Steganography). You can check this Q/A for more information. It incorporate binary codes C3 BF (can be decoded as ÿ). The total size of included information is 2.7MB. You can test it here. P.S. You can save it (after open in PS) via usual way:...


0

Consider this answer as an addendum, not as a direct answer for the color checker usage. And I am writing it because your posted images are showing some important deficiencies. To get the right colors you need a bit more than just the color checker. In fact, it is probably the last step, not the only or primary one. Illumination Not only they need to be ...


0

Here are my conclusions for now after further research: Using Xrite's "Colorchecker Camera Calibration" software in TIFF mode produces .icm files. It probably cannot be used easily in Photoshop (?), or at least not in the normal CameraRaw workflow. Using Xrite's "Colorchecker Camera Calibration" software in DNG mode produces .dcp profiles that can be ...


0

Here is a useful tutorial, and a documentation in PDF: White Balance and Colour Calibration Workflow in Photoshop with the X -Rite ColorChecker Passport (Adobe Camera Raw 10.3 and Later). The workflow is: Shoot in RAW or DNG an image with the Colorchecker visible with good lighting If needed, convert the RAW to DNG (either using Lightroom > Export > ...


2

Usually, in the Adobe Camera Raw or Lightroom, the way that camera characterisation is done is via custom .dcp profiles, those are created with the Adobe DNG Profile Editor. The documentation explains how to create them:


1

Your colour checker is incorrectly lit and placed here. The lighting should be as uniform as possible and representative of the illumination conditions of your subject. Generally speaking, however, you should only really use the colour checker for white balancing and exposure correction. It is very tempting to use is systematically for colour correction but ...


1

In addition to reducing the JPEG export quality, if you have a lot of detail in the image, and you are willing to sacrifice a little bit of sharpness for file size, you can add a little Gaussian Blur (less than 1px) for a dramatic effect on the final file size. In this video for Affinity Photo, they explore both options and see what effect it has on the ...


-3

Don’t be so crazy to upload a losslessly compressed TIFF to Flickr, use rather a lossy compressed JPEG. An JPEG image that occupies 13 MB with an 84% quality should be way more than enough to be seen on a screen, and in most case printed, at its original resolution. What software is used to convert from RAW, TIFF or PSD to JPEG, Google it because there’s at ...


0

Update in 2019: Tilt adapters for crop DSLM cameras are available for around 25 to 50 quid, and a good M42 prime to put on it can be had used for around the same amount. While that is still special equipment, it is rather inexpensive special equipment.


2

As far as I know, C1 does not support alpha channels. That might be because photos typically offer no alpha channel. You say that you want consistent color correction, crop and positioning of your photos - I would suggest that you get those things done first in C1, then export the pictures for use in Photoshop.


1

Most likely, you saved it in Photoshop with menu File - Save for Web. Which is fine, it is still the same image, but that "Save for Web" purpose is to remove all of the Exif data, which is where the JPG dpi number is, so it disappears. That saves a few bytes, and video monitors have no use for the dpi number anyway. Menu File, Save As (JPG) will Not ...


4

PPI is unimportant and meaningless in a camera picture (inches of what?). The only thing that matters is the actual size in pixels. The only kind of capture where the PPI matters is a scan, because it lets you print the image at its initial size. Otherwise the PPI it is just an indication of the intended size, and can be changed at will...


-3

It depends on the software you use for it, and especially the settings you have in them. If you check in the save-as dialog under JPG, there are normally 'additional' or 'advanced' settings, and in there, you can set the quality target for the JPG. The default is often 80%, but you can set it to anything between 1% and 100%. You should always set it to 100%,...


3

Generally, when you do this with an image editor like Photoshop, yes, this is destructive. That's because the software doesn't keep a JPEG-encoded version of the image in memory to write back unchanged. It decodes it to its own internal working format, and then re-encodes to whatever output format you want when you save. (It may be smart enough to use ...


Top 50 recent answers are included