PainShop Pro Scripting - Kris Zaleka / JASC's OneStepPhotoFix.PspScript

Author

Kris Zaleka / JASC's OneStepPhotoFix.PspScript

2006-04-24, 7:02 pm

underprocessable

Trev

2006-04-24, 7:02 pm

RoseW

2006-04-24, 7:02 pm

In news:444cc9ed$1_1@cnews,
Trev <trevbowden@dsl.pipex.cominvalid> typed:
| <Tadjio> wrote in message news:444cc316_1@cnews...
|| I thought it might be helpful to provide a copy of Kris Zaleka /
|| JASC's OneStepPhotoFix.PspScript written for PSP8.
||
|| This can be obtained from:-
|| http://www0.jasc.com/pub/en/OneStepPhotoFix.PspScript
||
|| As it says in the script:-
|| # This script provides "one-step" photo enhancement by running the
|| # following commands in order: Automatic Color Balance, Automatic
|| # Contrast Enhancement, Clarify, Automatic Saturation Enhancement,
|| # Edge Preserving Smooth and Sharpen.
||
|| This is the script that I based mine on, called Tadjio's Photo
|| Script for PSPX, but with certain changes and omissions.
|| As already stated, I have left out Automatic Color Balance and
|| Automatic Saturation Enhancement and substituted High Pass Sharpen
|| instead of Sharpen (note no USM in either script).
||
|| Kris uses Edge Preserving Smooth factor 2 whereas I prefer 1.
|| I also see that Kris' script uses Clarify 2 whereas I prefer 1.
|| Perhaps with a higher Clarify there is more need for Automatic
|| Saturation Enhancement?
||
|| Any comments?
||
|| Tadjio
||
| It might be the difference if the clarify that caused you to change.
| Kris also introduced the clarify at this time which He often promoted
| It can do some marvellous things just on its own

Clarify in PSPx at 2 or 1 in some images does not do a marvellous thing
and then in another image will add a marvellous touch. For me, using it
tends to be an adventure under the heading 'What will it produce this
time?' Perhaps having a copy of a converted Raw to .tif has an
influence because previously in PSP9 my format was jpg out of the
camera. Using a USM with no clipping in the range of 50/20 can produce
practically the desired result and this suggestion originated From Ms
Spandex R. I have been inclined to go that USM route in the recent past.
Rose

2006-04-24, 7:02 pm

"RoseW" <wdmn@NShurontel.on.ca> wrote in message news:444cd564_2@cnews...
> In news:444cc9ed$1_1@cnews,
> Trev <trevbowden@dsl.pipex.cominvalid> typed:
> | <Tadjio> wrote in message news:444cc316_1@cnews...
> || I thought it might be helpful to provide a copy of Kris Zaleka /
> || JASC's OneStepPhotoFix.PspScript written for PSP8.
> ||
> || This can be obtained from:-
> || http://www0.jasc.com/pub/en/OneStepPhotoFix.PspScript
> ||
> || As it says in the script:-
> || # This script provides "one-step" photo enhancement by running the
> || # following commands in order: Automatic Color Balance, Automatic
> || # Contrast Enhancement, Clarify, Automatic Saturation Enhancement,
> || # Edge Preserving Smooth and Sharpen.
> ||
> || This is the script that I based mine on, called Tadjio's Photo
> || Script for PSPX, but with certain changes and omissions.
> || As already stated, I have left out Automatic Color Balance and
> || Automatic Saturation Enhancement and substituted High Pass Sharpen
> || instead of Sharpen (note no USM in either script).
> ||
> || Kris uses Edge Preserving Smooth factor 2 whereas I prefer 1.
> || I also see that Kris' script uses Clarify 2 whereas I prefer 1.
> || Perhaps with a higher Clarify there is more need for Automatic
> || Saturation Enhancement?
> ||
> || Any comments?
> ||
> || Tadjio
> ||
> | It might be the difference if the clarify that caused you to change.
> | Kris also introduced the clarify at this time which He often promoted
> | It can do some marvellous things just on its own
>
> Clarify in PSPx at 2 or 1 in some images does not do a marvellous thing
> and then in another image will add a marvellous touch. For me, using it
> tends to be an adventure under the heading 'What will it produce this
> time?' Perhaps having a copy of a converted Raw to .tif has an
> influence because previously in PSP9 my format was jpg out of the
> camera. Using a USM with no clipping in the range of 50/20 can produce
> practically the desired result and this suggestion originated From Ms
> Spandex R. I have been inclined to go that USM route in the recent past.
> Rose

I understood that USM was an alternative to Sharpen in Kris' script, not an
alternative to Clarify.

Likewise, isn't High Pass Sharpen on PSPX an alternative to both USM and
Sharpen?

Tadjio

RoseW

2006-04-24, 7:02 pm

In news:444ce503_2@cnews,
Tadjio <Tadjio> typed:
| "RoseW" <wdmn@NShurontel.on.ca> wrote in message
| news:444cd564_2@cnews...
|| In news:444cc9ed$1_1@cnews,
|| Trev <trevbowden@dsl.pipex.cominvalid> typed:
||| <Tadjio> wrote in message news:444cc316_1@cnews...
|||| I thought it might be helpful to provide a copy of Kris Zaleka /
|||| JASC's OneStepPhotoFix.PspScript written for PSP8.
||||
|||| This can be obtained from:-
|||| http://www0.jasc.com/pub/en/OneStepPhotoFix.PspScript
||||
|||| As it says in the script:-
|||| # This script provides "one-step" photo enhancement by running the
|||| # following commands in order: Automatic Color Balance, Automatic
|||| # Contrast Enhancement, Clarify, Automatic Saturation Enhancement,
|||| # Edge Preserving Smooth and Sharpen.
||||
|||| This is the script that I based mine on, called Tadjio's Photo
|||| Script for PSPX, but with certain changes and omissions.
|||| As already stated, I have left out Automatic Color Balance and
|||| Automatic Saturation Enhancement and substituted High Pass Sharpen
|||| instead of Sharpen (note no USM in either script).
||||
|||| Kris uses Edge Preserving Smooth factor 2 whereas I prefer 1.
|||| I also see that Kris' script uses Clarify 2 whereas I prefer 1.
|||| Perhaps with a higher Clarify there is more need for Automatic
|||| Saturation Enhancement?
||||
|||| Any comments?
||||
|||| Tadjio
||||
||| It might be the difference if the clarify that caused you to change.
||| Kris also introduced the clarify at this time which He often
||| promoted It can do some marvellous things just on its own
||
|| Clarify in PSPx at 2 or 1 in some images does not do a marvellous
|| thing and then in another image will add a marvellous touch. For me,
|| using it tends to be an adventure under the heading 'What will it
|| produce this time?' Perhaps having a copy of a converted Raw to
|| .tif has an influence because previously in PSP9 my format was jpg
|| out of the camera. Using a USM with no clipping in the range of
|| 50/20 can produce practically the desired result and this suggestion
|| originated From Ms Spandex R. I have been inclined to go that USM
|| route in the recent past. Rose
|
|
| I understood that USM was an alternative to Sharpen in Kris' script,
| not an alternative to Clarify.
|
| Likewise, isn't High Pass Sharpen on PSPX an alternative to both USM
| and Sharpen?
|
| Tadjio
In posts sometime back when the content included that Clarify was heavy
handed this USM 50/20 was suggested as an alternate and it can give the
effect desired. I don't know for sure if HPS is an alternative
.....basically, it doesn't do clipping is my translation. The overlay
tends to give quiet results generally.
Rose

Jerry Rivers

2006-04-24, 7:02 pm

> I understood that USM was an alternative to Sharpen in
> Kris' script, not an alternative to Clarify.
>
> Likewise, isn't High Pass Sharpen on PSPX an alternative
> to both USM and Sharpen?

That is my understanding, too. But, I modified OSPF to take
out both the Sharpen and EPS that I believe was also in the
original PSP 8 script. I prefer to use USM after everything
else is done as I can visually see its effect and alter the
parameters. And, since I sometimes run OSPF more than once
on the same image, I didn't want it either over-sharpened
nor softened.

-- Jerry

Trev

2006-04-24, 7:02 pm

<Tadjio> wrote in message news:444ce503_2@cnews...
>
> "RoseW" <wdmn@NShurontel.on.ca> wrote in message news:444cd564_2@cnews...
>
>
> I understood that USM was an alternative to Sharpen in Kris' script, not
> an alternative to Clarify.
>
> Likewise, isn't High Pass Sharpen on PSPX an alternative to both USM and
> Sharpen?
>
> Tadjio
>
High Pass Is an Alternative to USM but Sharpen being none adjustable was
used in the script like the other tools in there to work at a default
setting to simplify a process to suit average users

Spandex Rutabaga

2006-04-24, 7:02 pm

Tadjio wrote:

> Kris uses Edge Preserving Smooth factor 2 whereas I prefer 1.

It's no good saying "Kris does this, I do that". The script may be
called One Step Photo Fix but in reality there is no such thing.
EPS is a filter that suppresses noise without blurring object
edges. However, the amount of noise varies from image to image.
There won't be much at an ISO setting of 100 but at at an ISO
setting of 1600 there is likely to be a lot. In fact the difference
will be very large and some compromise EPS setting will be too
little for some images and too much for others. Added to that, you
may tend to take more pictures at low ISO than someone else or
you may have a more expensive camera with lower noise levels than
others. This would bias you to lower noise reduction settings than
someone else might be using. You could say that if the filter
did it's work based on the EXIF data it could do a better job.
However, this would mean that its authors would have to analyze the
noise in every reasonably popular camera, which would lead to the
same unsatisfactory situation that exists with RAW support. It
would be useless anyway for scans, faded photos, web downloads,
newspaper clippings, and all the other imagery people accumulate
on their computers.

> I also see that Kris' script uses Clarify 2 whereas I prefer 1.

Apart from the fact that Clarify may be doing something completely
different in PSP X as compared to PSP 9, the proper value of
Clarify depends on the *subject*. If your scene is foggy or has
lots of texture (distant leaves, grass, fur, pebbles, etc.) you
can beneficially apply a lot of Clarify. If your image is a
close-up of a face or a vivid sky with dramatic clouds you would
probably want to apply less since the face can start looking
"dirty" or "greyish" while the sky might develop unnatural halos.
If your image is greyscale and not color you might be able to
apply very large amounts of Clarify. Whether you'd want to could
depend on whether you were after a "film noire" look or not. (In
the sky situation you might try USM with a large Radius (50 to
100 depending on image size) with a relatively low Strength (e.g.
something around 10 to 30).

> Any comments?

No two images are alike. You have to use your experience and
knowledge of image editing to decide what to do with them. What
you do will also depend on your artistic intent. Stop and think
about this for a moment. The people who make software are not
intrinsically any smarter than the people who design and make
digital cameras. (Since the coming of Corel the first group may
well be ... but I digress :) The camera people have made very
great efforts to make the shots come out of the camera just right.
However, you have an image editor to fiddle with these shots
because you think they can be improved. Now, why should some
software author with a one-step-smart-super-duper-fixer-upper
be any better than a camera maker, especially since the camera
maker has access to more information about the image than does
the software author?

Bottom line: if you are clueless about photography (and nobody
was born knowing about it) or you have a cheap and nasty camera
(and few of us were born rich), then a one-step-smart-super-duper-
fixer-upper will quickly get you into the right ball park for an
improved picture. If you are a dedicated and experienced
photographer you will want to make your own decisions about each
image so you can get the effect you want. This can be very little
because you have the talent to make it all happen in the camera
or it can be rather more because on top of a good image you want
to emphasize a look or mood.

I don't intend to be critical by use of the word "clueless". For
example, there are people who are immensely talented in creating
scrapbook layouts but let themselves down with sub-par photos
included in these layouts. This is because their knowledge lies in
the area of design and creation of layouts, rather than in the area
of photo enhancement. This doesn't make these people any worse or
better than anyone else. They may in addition be much better
gardeners or doctors or parents than you or I :)

Spandex Rutabaga

2006-04-24, 7:02 pm

Tadjio wrote:

> I understood that USM was an alternative to Sharpen in Kris' script, not an
> alternative to Clarify.

Read the summary below and the links to see what happens in USM.
By using a very large Radius the filter works on very large regions
and not simply on very narrow edges. When messing with very large
regions it can affect the local contrast of the image, which is
what I have read that Clarify does (http://tinyurl.com/f3hxf).
Incidentally, sharpening a narrow edge is messing with local
contrast too. It's just very, very local :)

> Likewise, isn't High Pass Sharpen on PSPX an alternative to both USM and
> Sharpen?

This link might be interesting http://tinyurl.com/emvey. Both USM
and High Pass filtering depend on comparing an image with a
blurred version of itself. The difference between these two
versions is the fine detail in the image. When you know what the
fine detail is then you can manipulate it (e.g. to make it more
apparent).

To make your life more complex let me mention that you can use the
sharpening in DCNR (which can be applied with noise removal off).
It is not the same as regular sharpening http://tinyurl.com/grgl2.
You can also sharpen using edge masks http://tinyurl.com/jccu9 :)

Peter Corser

2006-04-24, 7:02 pm

<Tadjio> wrote in message news:444cc316_1@cnews...
>I thought it might be helpful to provide a copy of Kris Zaleka / JASC's
>OneStepPhotoFix.PspScript written for PSP8.
>
> This can be obtained from:-
> http://www0.jasc.com/pub/en/OneStepPhotoFix.PspScript
>
> As it says in the script:-
> # This script provides "one-step" photo enhancement by running the
> # following commands in order: Automatic Color Balance, Automatic
> # Contrast Enhancement, Clarify, Automatic Saturation Enhancement,
> # Edge Preserving Smooth and Sharpen.
>
> This is the script that I based mine on, called Tadjio's Photo Script for
> PSPX, but with certain changes and omissions.
> As already stated, I have left out Automatic Color Balance and Automatic
> Saturation Enhancement and substituted High Pass Sharpen instead of
> Sharpen (note no USM in either script).
>
> Kris uses Edge Preserving Smooth factor 2 whereas I prefer 1.
> I also see that Kris' script uses Clarify 2 whereas I prefer 1.
> Perhaps with a higher Clarify there is more need for Automatic Saturation
> Enhancement?
>
> Any comments?
>
> Tadjio
>

Hi Tadjio

I think that Kris Zaklika wrote the OneStepPhotoFix - perhaps others more
knowledgeable could confirm or refute? BTW and OT, anyone know where Kris
is now and if he's ok?

Before the introduction of the OSPFix in PSP8 Kris used to recommend all the
actions but always quoted USM as the sharpening - there used to be a JASC
tutorial including this on their website. I think that the conversion to
Edge Preserving Smooth and Sharpen was to simplify the operation for new
users (and make writing it easier!) and not neccessarily to improve the
quality of the output.

Kris used to stress that Clarify tends to desaturate an image when it is
applied - the higher the setting the more the desaturation. I have not used
any of the high settings made available in PSPX but would not be surprised
to find that these almost convert the image to monochrome at maximum
settings.

Peter
--
Peter & Elizabeth Corser,
Linslade, Beds, UK

Spandex Rutabaga

2006-04-24, 7:02 pm

Peter Corser wrote:

> I have not used
> any of the high settings made available in PSPX but would not be surprised
> to find that these almost convert the image to monochrome at maximum
> settings.

That's a bug or a design flaw, not a Clarify thing, I think. The
problem with PSP X is most evident with yellow. In PSP 9 I can take
an image with vivid yellow (and also browns, greens, pinks, reds,
whites, pastel blues and greys) at run Clarify at the maximum
setting of 5 a total of 20 (yes 20 :) times in succession and the
image does not desaturate to monochrome. In fact, the "desaturation"
seems to be more related to the fact that some dark regions (which
could not have been highly saturated in absolute terms) are
brightened and look less saturated than you'd expect for a bright
color in the original scene. These colors don't look much different
than when you brighten them instead by applying Gamma Correction
of, say, 3 or so. (Various other things happen of, course, like
JPEG blocks becoming pronounced and halos appearing thus causing
ugliness in the image, but that's not the point here.)

Incidentally, if you attempt the Bart Hickman technique I mentioned
elsewhere in these threads, namely applying Clarify to individual
channels and then reconstructing the RGB image, the results for the
brutal treatment of 20 repeats at maximum settings are not good. In
addition to the problems noted above there are strong hue shifts
which are very undesirable. (This does not mean Bart's technique
cannot be of value when Clarify is used in moderation.) The point
of the experiment with Bart's technique is to show that, whatever
Clarify does, you can do Clarify right (minimal problems at extreme
settings) or you can do it wrong (severe problems at extreme
settings). As far as I can tell PSP X does it wrong at least
sometimes.

Peter Corser

2006-04-24, 7:02 pm

"Spandex Rutabaga" <SpRu@agabatur.xednaps> wrote in message
news:444D4C5C.5BA082F4@agabatur.xednaps...
> Peter Corser wrote:
>
>
> That's a bug or a design flaw, not a Clarify thing, I think. The
> problem with PSP X is most evident with yellow. In PSP 9 I can take
> an image with vivid yellow (and also browns, greens, pinks, reds,
> whites, pastel blues and greys) at run Clarify at the maximum
> setting of 5 a total of 20 (yes 20 :) times in succession and the
> image does not desaturate to monochrome. In fact, the "desaturation"
> seems to be more related to the fact that some dark regions (which
> could not have been highly saturated in absolute terms) are
> brightened and look less saturated than you'd expect for a bright
> color in the original scene. These colors don't look much different
> than when you brighten them instead by applying Gamma Correction
> of, say, 3 or so. (Various other things happen of, course, like
> JPEG blocks becoming pronounced and halos appearing thus causing
> ugliness in the image, but that's not the point here.)
>
> Incidentally, if you attempt the Bart Hickman technique I mentioned
> elsewhere in these threads, namely applying Clarify to individual
> channels and then reconstructing the RGB image, the results for the
> brutal treatment of 20 repeats at maximum settings are not good. In
> addition to the problems noted above there are strong hue shifts
> which are very undesirable. (This does not mean Bart's technique
> cannot be of value when Clarify is used in moderation.) The point
> of the experiment with Bart's technique is to show that, whatever
> Clarify does, you can do Clarify right (minimal problems at extreme
> settings) or you can do it wrong (severe problems at extreme
> settings). As far as I can tell PSP X does it wrong at least
> sometimes.

Spandex

Thoroughly agree about clarify - when it works it is superb. When it
doesn't either decrease the value until it improves things or has no effect
or ditch it altogether for that image.

I think that Tadjio's script could be a very good way of applying the basic
corrections in the right order (as long as we have usm as the last), but
they must all be interactive to ensure best end product. This may not
produce an absolutely technically perfect image (does that ever really
happen?) but could be very useful!

Peter
PS I can't see my previous reply post, but assume you can - the joys of
newsgroups!
--
Peter & Elizabeth Corser,
Linslade, Beds, UK