Lowering exposure of MASK

I have a mask and have set the perimeters with the mask points. Now i want to lower the exposure of the masked region. When I go to correction for exposure the mask is disengaged and I cannot lower levels.
Mavericks FCP 10.1.4

Are you talking about a mask in color correction or a mask effect? The mask effect requires two layers, one for the mask, one of the rest of the image. The color correction has a separate control.

Similar Messages

Any ideas on how to do this effect?

I've got my talent chroma keyed.
How may I put him in shadow/silohuette? (Not a complete "reverse" key, but do darken him)
Any ideas?

aside the very polite offer of fox_m …
The built-in Color Correction tools would allow a 'basic' adjustment:
What I've done here:
• applied a 'mask' in the Color Board
• rotated it, stretched it, adjusted blur zone
• in the Color Board itself, I lowered Exposure OUTside mask… - done
just a few remarks from the German-Jury… :
• if optional,I would adjust the green screen perspective to that of the background: The Library is 'plain frontal', whereas Sherlock is 'top down'. It's always good to know on recording, what the applied bg does look like.
• the chair shows tons of spill… perhaps you could 'shadow' that on recording? or, I'm actually participating on some school project as 'no budget v/fx-consultant' (hey, hey, heyyy! ) and we're using the worst green-screen in history of movie-making (crinkled fabrics, puzzled from diff. cloths, no extra lights,do we have light at all??? etc) - and we get suprising good results with the 'sample color' adjustments in FCPX:
… ok, not Hollywood, but for the kids needs good enough = they wanted to fly like Superman over the school building; then they wanted some tiny dwarfs on their hands; lately: "Mr Schlüter, can we do dinosaurs too?!" ... wot the… who's 'we' in that question?!?

How to mask out specific area in a specific time?

Hi,
I want to make a mask on a specific area of the footage in a specific time. I drew the mask and all the frame went black,so I clicked on Mask-> invert and only the specific area I masked went black,which is exactly what I wanted.
Now I want to make it happen in a specific time, not on all timeline, but I can't find a way to do it. I thought about lowering down the mask opacity to 0% and a frame later bringing it to 100%, but if I lower down the opacity of the mask, it lowers down the opacity of the whole frame, same as
lowering down the opacity of the frame by intention, which seems weird, cause I did inverted the mask, and as I understand it, it should affect the opacity of the mask and not the whole frame...
any ideas...?
I'm using CS4.

Put a copy of the footage on the timelime below the one you masked. Use opacity like you doing and it will reveal the track below.

My Masks are not working in PS CC

Is there a way for me to reset my preferences to the orginal. I was not having a problem applying a exposure compensation mask a few days ago and now when I do it does nothing. When I use the brush tool in masking nothing happens.

Did you check the brush's blend mode. It may be set to something other than "Normal."

Exposure/colour balance change on loading - what have I got switched on?

Hi all
One more question from me as a fairly new user of Lightroom.
My camera is a Nikon D700 and I'm shooting RAW.
When I import images, there's an exposure change once they've loaded. I suspect something automatic is happening but I can't tell what. Possibly an auto-exposure setting somewhere but I can't find it.
I have to admit this happened a few months back when using the Beta release, but I can't remember for the life of me what I changed to put things right.
Both of the 'apply during import' (filter and metadata) settings are at 'none', but I think there's something deeper somewhere making these changes.
Any help, as ever, would be much appreciated.
p.s - I'm certain it's nothing on the camera (such as active D-lighting) as I haven't changed my camera setup and things have been fine before.

You might have changed the camera develop defaults. To reset, go to Develop. In the menus, select Develop -> Set Default Settings.
Another possible cause is something that confuses most new users. Right after import, Lightroom briefly shows a camera-embedded preview of the file. After that it renders it's own images. Lightroom's interpretation might not match Nikon's built-in. You can choose a different profile in the calibration panel to match Nikon's built-in colors. Also, try lowering exposure by some 1/2 stop.

N95 camera is poor quality

Hi all
I've just recently downloaded new software onto my N95 and have discovered that the camera quality is no where near as good as the previous software.
Has anyone else noticed this.
My pictures before i did the download were superb quality, but now i get a fuzzy or blurred pictures and they are really poor.
Thank you
Daz

24-Apr-2008 03:12 PM
deadman2444 wrote:
Ok grschinon if i want to take a good picture,what things to keep in mind
Errm.. OK. Thing is, I'm not a photographer either but I do know more or less how to use a digital camera. I also worked for 5 years in a professional photographic lab so I guess that helps a little.
The biggest problem with photos is the lighting and sometimes misuse of the flash.
If you're photographing someone's portrait but there's a window behind them, then all you're going to see is a lovely photo of the window with a person-shaped black splodge in the middle of it. Why? Because the camera accounts for the bright light of the window, considers that the global scene is bright and consequently lowers exposure, thus blacking out the actual subject of the photo. Solution? Photograph the person elsewhere or, if that's not possible, force the flash to go off. This will have the effect of lighting the subject and balancing out the brightness level in the composition.
Conversely, if you're outside, for example, and the lighting isn't too good, only use the flash as a last resort. Why? Because it isn't powerful enough to illuminate your whole back yard, the camera knows it let off the flash and compensates for it, and you end up with a black photo with a few red eyes dotted around it. Solution? Turn the flash off altogether, set the camera to night mode and, optionally, adjust the exposure manually up an f-stop or two (yes, you can do this on the N95's camera).
Avoid using the flash on close-ups and prefer natural light. Why? Because the flash light is too intense and it'll drown out any detail of the subject of the photo, particularly if its surface is reflective.
Also bear in mind that you can adjust the sensitivity of the camera, just like you'd put 50 or 100 ISO or 1600 ISO film in a traditional camera. Lower sensitivity means it can deal with much more light coming in, so it's great for sunny scenes out side, while higher sensitivity means that it knows it has to work with less light so it's suited ideally to evenings and indoor shots in poor lighting conditions. High sensitivity is also good for taking blur-free shots of objects in motion in good lighting conditions because the camera, which is extremely sensitive on this setting, compensates for the large amounts of light by shortening the exposure time.
Colour balance is another problem. You may not know it because your brain compensates for it automatically, but neon lighting is green and regular incandescent light is yellow. This affects the colour of objects photographed quite dramatically to the point where you can even buy special reversal film from professionnal labs that has a blue mask on it to compensate for the yellowness of a tungsten flash. One of the functions of a digital camera is the "white balance" function whereby you point the camera at an object which is white even if the lighting makes it look different, and the camera then adjusts the photos taken according to what the white object actually looked like.
Those are the main points I can think of right now. Others should feel free to add to this thread if they have more suggestions.
Message Edited by grschinon on 24-Apr-2008 03:44 PM
Was this post helpful? If so, please click on the white "Kudos!" star below. Thank you!

Lightroom to Photoshop & Back :: Two Requests

b Two Related Requests:
1) Easier and more natural integration between Lightroom and Photoshop. Maybe a button at the bottom of the Develop Module. It could fit right next to Previous.
2) The option of saving an image as a PSD rather than have LR automatically save it as a copy. Everytime you start from a raw file and open in Photoshop it creates a new PSD saved to the hard drive, whether you want it or not. Then if you do it again it adds another file with the next number in the name. My preference is to simply have LR open the file in PS and then let the user decide what to do with it from there.
By the way, I do enjoy using Lightroom.
Thank you for your consideration on these requests.
Linda

> My wish would be that LR opens in PS/ACR without saving a file in any
> format. That way, we could choose what to do and how to save in PS.
Me too, please!
For the moment, I take care to save metadata to XMP in LR, then open the raw file directly in photoshop (ACR4.1 develop the files as in LR), and finally save a jpg (or whatever) image that I import and stack with the raw file - there should be a way to automate this workflow, shouldn't be?
Btw, I use Photoshop besides LR for 3 main reasons :
1 masked adjusment layers,
2 merge to HDR, either with the built-in HDR, or simply by blending two exposures with masks,
3 photomerge to make panoramas.
I understand there is a market to share between CS3 and LR ;o) but I'd like to see these functionalities implemented non-destructively in LR!
1 shouldn't be very different from the PS way of doing it, and for 2 and 3 a comfortable way to do that could be to use some sort of "ueber-stack" : select all images to join in a (kind of) stack, and then have the result image at the top of that stack?
Of course, I speak in a user point of view, not a programmer's one ;o)! But I'd really like to make all my PP work in 1 soft only, and LR seems very promising to me.

Muddy photos--what am I doing wrong?

Hello all,
I'm a newish Lightroom user. I feel that my photos usually look very muddy around the edges/details when zoomed in in Lightroom.
I am attaching an example that I shot RAW using Canon 5D Mark II with the 24-70mm lens. Is it something I'm doing wrong either when shooting or with post processing?
Thanks so much for any answer.

Basics are not adjusted optimally, consider:
Exposure: Left (you got the whole thing, including midtones shifted too far rightward - highlights are getting jammed and blacks are unhinged).
Contrast: Left (it's a high contrast photo, with little need for midtone contrast, so it seems contrast reduction is called for - will help lift shadows and control highlights without excessive use of highlights & shadows sliders).
Highlights: Left (to preserve highlight detail).
Shadows: Right (to bring light into the woman's darkness).
Whites: Right (to keep dress bright and maintain sense of "contrast", and expand highlights for dress detail).
Blacks: Left (to get rid of that muddiness , and maintain sense of "contrast"). Note: with -contrast & +shadows, -blacks should not make the bottom end too dark.
Clarity to taste...
PS - As you know, you can also use tone curve for fine-tuning tonal distribution, but consider doing most of the heavy lifting with the basics.
PPS - Consider a touch of paint too, to perfect - e.g. +exposure -contrast in darker regions around face/hair - as long as -blacks is strong enough, this should not result in muddiness (or you could "cheat" and use a radial gradient instead of paint ).
Also, consider clicking auto-tone to see what Lr would do with it - can often be highly educational .
Summary: this is a photo that warrants full dynamic range, in my opinion - ideally there should be some black clipping and some white clipping. Within that dynamic range, basics, tone curve and local supplementation for most pleasing tonal distribution...
eh?
UPDATE:
I processed the jpeg screenshot and found a pleasing result by:
* dropping exposure a little bit (not as much as I expected would be needed).
* decreasing contrast a lot.
* increasing whites a lot.
* decreasing blacks a lot.
* minimal -highlights
* minimal +shadows
* one big radial gradient over shadow side (her right) of face (+exposure).
* one small radial gradient over other (her left) eye (+exposure).
* No clarity required.
* Bumped saturation (often helps restore "presence" when reducing contrast to satisfy tonal goals).
Points:
* Minimal use of shadows slider eliminated the harsh look and obviated need for -clarity.
* lowered exposure, coupled with -blacks assured -contrast did not result in loss of "clarity".
* strong -highlights not necessary once exposure dropped, and minimizing it kept photo looking "bright", despite reduced exposure (along with +whites).
* Indeed, all of this left the bride's face too dark, but that's what locals are for - a couple radial gradients and photo looks bright enough all around, with no muddiness.
About me: I'm not a super photographer, so I have to make up for it using Lightroom .
UPDATE #2:
You also asked about shooting - a little fill light (e.g. via flash or whatever else may have been handy, in this case on-axis (e.g. pop-up) would probably have been fine) would have helped and probably eliminated the need to use locals.
Just remember to remove the lens hood before shooting (wider angles) with on-camera flash, or else it casts a nasty shadow (I forget that regularly, so - note to self if not to you...).
Rob
Message was UPDATED (twice) by: Rob Cole

Photoshop CS4 gamma is wrong

I've been using Lightroom and PS CS3 for a couple of years with no problems.
I've just updated to CS4 and now when I send a photo from LR to PS it always looks too light. I find to get LR and PS looking similar I have to apply an exposure adjustment mask with a gamma correct of 0.86 in PS??
I'm using;
Vista Ultimate 32bit
Photoshop CS4 v11.0.1
Lightroom v2.3
Camera Raw 5.3
Nvidia 9600GT (1GB memory)
My monitors are calibrated and profiled using GretagMacBeth Profile maker 5.05 and an Eye One Pro, the profiles have been applied as system profiles so Vista loads them correctly.
This issue has only come into being since installing CS4. Has anyone else seen this and if so do you have a fix?
Regards
James

Thanks for the reply. I'd love to post a screen grab but I can't work out how to post an image?? I'm sure it's something that's really easy but I can't see how to! :( Am I missing an obvious "insert image" button somewhere?
A text overview of my settings from Photoshop;
WORKING SPACES
RGB - ProPhoto RGB
CMYK - Coated FOGRA27 (ISO 12647-2:2004)
Gray - Dot Gain 15%
Spot - Dot Gain 15%
COLOR MANAGEMENT POLICIES
RGB/CMYK/Gray - Preserve Embedded Profiles
Ask when opening, pasting or when missing
CONVERSION OPTIONS
Engine - Adobe (ACE)
Intent - Perceptual
Yes to 'Use Blackpoint Compensation', 'Use Dither (8-bit/channel images)' and 'Compensate for Scene-referred Profiles'
ADVANCED CONTROLS
No to 'Desaturate Monitor Colours' and 'Blend RGB Colours Using Gamma'
Thanks again for any help you can offer.
James

Aperture and PS

Users of Aperture: "What is the big advantage of Aperture over PS CS 2 combined with Adobe's bridge" .
Imac G5 Mac OS X (10.4.3)

Lemke,
while Aperture isn't meant to replace Photoshop, it does for me 95% of the time now.
Basically, Aperture organizational abilities, smart albums, the amazing stacking and compare functions make organizing shoots, and picking the best images from a day of shooting far easier than Bridge can. Plus the whole versions leaving the masters untouched and letting you have multiple version each adjusted differently (B&W, super saturated, cropped) without using extra disk space is great.
I guess one of the big questions is: what type of photography do you do? What type of post processing do you do? What do you do with the images?
For me, I shoot mostly fashion/commercial. I shoot RAW, I shoot a lot of images. The end goal is to have a very small number of the best images from a shoot for print or online use.
So for my uses, here is where Aperture shines above Bridge+PS from the start of my workflow to the end:
Aperture can automatically unload from your cards or camera into a new project, and erase your card for you.
My RAWs are never touched. They can be viewed at 100% zoom without converting them.
I can auto-stack and/or manually stack different shots of the same pose. I can then use the excellent stack comparison view, full screen mode, promote, demote, reject, and pick images, using 2-up, 3-up, or more-up views. I can use the loupe tool to check details and sharpness instantly. My rejects are hidden from the default view, but never deleted. This lets me find the best image from a stack very quickly compared to Bridge, where you can only see things at a small size with anti-aliasing, and has no simple 2-up comparison view, and no concept of stacks and picks. All this lets me go from 500 images to about 30 very very quickly.
I can create a dark moody version (with lowered exposure adjustment) and a light almost-blown glowing version (with raised exposure adjustment) and a black and white version without using 4X the disk space.
I can do all of my most common types of edits/adjustments: saturation, sharpness, levels, white balance, straightening, cropping, and more quickly, with no conversion from RAW, and no damage to the master file, and no disk space use to speak of.
I can use export presets and smart albums to dump all non-rejected images at 1000px wide jpegs with my copyright and name watermarked on them onto a CD to send the model, and all 5-star selects as 16-bit TIFFs with embedded color profile for the printer or for the client, and all stack picks and solo images to 2000 px wide srgb color-spaced jpegs for my website. And it's all faster than doing batch action processing in CS2.
I can backup everything to my external drive Vault with the click of a button.
I can do all of this in a single application.
So, for me, that's the high level advantages.
Devon

Lost 'mask' (using alt key) in exposure and sharpening?

The black or white 'mask' by using the alt key in exposure adjustments AND the 'mask' while adjusting amount, detail and unsharp mask in sharpening is missing for me. The only difference I can think of is that LR is now on a new notebook (ASUS) and am now working with Windows 7 64-bit. Is there something I can do to re-gain those helpful masks? Any idea what happened? I'm in the middle of nowhere and don't have a lot of wireless time to research . . . Any help or suggestion will be appreciated. Joia

Well guys, everything checks out good - specs are fine and both alt keys work. The touchpad is, however, a big problem and seems to be the culprit. It switches between being hypersensitive (giving me only a quick flash of the mask) or unresponsive (the sliders do not move at all).
We plugged in a mouse and I now have control of both the masks and sliders.
Thanks again for responding - otherwise I probably would have given up for now while we're on the road - got a lot of work to do. Cheers! Joia

Lowering brush transparency in Quick Mask Mode

Using Quick Mask mode to add to a selection and to remove parts, how is lowering the transparency of the paint brush useful? I tried it and it seemed to make less of a selection, though I'm not quite sure why you would do this?

For example for the edges if you want to make a very soft/blurry selection.
By the way: With »transparency« do you actually mean »opacity« or »flow«?

Video exposure not working in all 3 video modes new iphone 6 Plus ios 8.1

Bug 1. In video mode, exposure does not automatically brighten in darkly lit areas - then when you touch the screen to focus and try and use the sun slider for upping or lowering the exposure, you have to swipe it many, many times to go a short distance, then IT ONLY WORKS TO DARKEN THE EXPOSURE, IT DOES NOT LIGHTEN IT IN ALL 3 VIDEO MODES. It works fine in Photo mode. Go to this video at :54 to see it working properly: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tehcNa3ecs4#t=75
Bug 2: Slo-Motion videos will play back on computers in slow motion ONLY if the base frame rate is set to 60 fps and the Slo-mo speed is set to 240fps. With any other settings the computer (both win and mac) play the video back at full speed.
Especially with bug 1, can any of you check your phone to see if sliding your finger up will brighten the image while in any of the 3 video modes?

Hi,
I'm having also having game sound issues the game music and sounds just go completely quiet in iOS 8.1. Sometimes it'll just be completely quiet and others I'll have game music and sounds and partway through the game I'll lose audio. It's not the side lock/mute button either which I checked.
It's happening in two different games: Shadowgun:Deadzone and Modern Combat 5.
I have that side button above the volume set to toggle mute and I tried changing it to lock rotation instead to see if that made a difference which it did not. I have to kill the game and relaunch it to get the game audio working again.

Can you make a "filter mask" in FCP ?

Like in photoshop you can add an "adjustment layer" , for example Hue/Saturation and then add a mask so the Hue/Saturation will only apply to a certain part of the image... Can you do the same thing in FCP, ie: apply a filter mask ?

Thats a good tip thanks. I've used the 3-way's visual interface before so didn't notice the -limit on luma- option.
The bottom half of my picture was underexposed,-- but it seems like this limit on luma would allow me to lighten the bottom half without increasing further the over-exposure in the top half.

Is there a fix for the slow processing yet? Clipping mask slows down Illustrator CS4 to the point it can't be used

I've seen a few older posts regarding CS4's bug with applying a clipping mask to any image that is somewhat complex, but have yet to find an answer.
The problem is, any time a clipping mask is applied to a semi-complex shape, Illustrator CS4 slows almost to a halt. We're talking 10 minutes of the beach ball to apply the mask and then another few minutes to do anything else with the document. This is unacceptable. My system is loaded (Dual 1.8 GHz G5, 1.25 GB of memory). The exact same files process fine in CS3. Many of our other designers are running iMacs and cannot work on the files at all using CS4. There has to be an answer to this problem.
Prefs have been deleted, Document Raster Effects has been lowered. Any other suggestions?
Your help is greatly appreciated.

My system is loaded (Dual 1.8 GHz G5, 1.25 GB of memory).
Uhm.. that's "loaded"? That's like the slowest G5 made with almost the minimum amount of RAM.
But.. I agree with you. Clipping masks seems to drastically slow CS4 down. Even if an object isn't really complex, but included many objects. I'm running a much faster system than you are and I have to wait around 3 to 10 seconds after any operation for some files. It's annoying. So far, I've not found any solution other than to expand and clip the masks.

Lowering exposure of MASK

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for