Damien Symonds

Yep. Now do you understand the problem?

Right. So for banding to have occurred where you showed me, it must have been caused by your masking. So, Alt-click on the mask of the levels layer you used to darken the background, and show me a screenshot of it.

Well, it's "smooth" because there is literally no detail, right? It's completely blown out?

Ok, so if you add that same test Levels layer to the SOOR, and pull the black slider in aggressively, was there ANY detail in that area? When I try it, I can't see any.

Ok ... so this is a question I should have asked earlier. Exactly how many of your adjustment layers are affecting that background area?

Yep, for sure. The problem is that the banding is occurring right where the edge of your mask is, yes? Your mask fell off just before the hair started.

Great. So basically, your levels method should have worked just fine. The trouble was, you didn't allow it to go safely into their hair.

If you add a Levels layer to the print file, and pull the black slider across REALLY aggressively, do you see the banding appear?

Oh, right. Yes, significant editing. When I compare your SOOR to your final edit, I can see the slight light halo around their heads. Can you see it too? That's where the banding happened.

Thanks. I need to see if there was any degree of Photoshop editing to that area.

May I see the SOOR?

Great!

https://www.damiensymonds.net/what2buy_tab.html

That is the hardest part of the question. Of course, if they suddenly stop working because of a fault, you'll immediately know. And if you upgrade your computer, and the device simply doesn't work for you any more, you'll know (although of course you'd go to the calibrator's website to see if there was an upgrade or patch.) And if you upgrade your screen to something fancy and new, and suddenly the calibrator gives you outrageous results, you'll know (although of course if that happens you'd post here for me so we could troubleshoot.) BUT ... What if it begins to die very slowly or subtly? Just a small shift in the results it produces, over time? That's the worst, because the first time you're aware of the problem might be when you open an expensive delivery of prints from your lab, which are all slightly too pink, or something. So keep your original test prints safe in a dark place, and compare them to the screen after each calibration, or at least every second calibration, once the calibrator is a few years old.

Hi Ashley, yes, that is always an interesting conversation. They're like computers, in a way. You certainly expect that they'll last three or four years, and you'd be disappointed if they don't make it that long. But you also expect that they will need to be replaced eventually. Some of them literally stop working, because of some kind of fault. Others become obsolete, because of technology or software changes. In my time, I have had to replace several devices for both of those reasons.

Yes, I think that would be possible. But you'd need to make sure you placed the new main picture at EXACTLY the correct size.

Download PSD

How did you go with the real one?

Couldn't resist a play with fake beams.

Can't wait to see!

Well ... I assume you'd have to double-process the raw file. Once as normal Once for the sky only, with REALLY aggressive contrast, so the beam stands out. Then combine them as layers in PS. But the trouble is, such aggressive contrast would almost certainly bring out some pretty nasty noise. A dark blue sky will usually harbour noise, and the risk of exaggerating it would be great. So try it, but you might find that the "faking it" route is better.

Yes, use these modes. And then yes, change the colour of your text layers until it looks like a match.

Yep, exactly this. Another difficulty will be finding a suitable font.

Yay!

I'm not aware of one, no