Photoshop Tone Separation Ques

[bob carnie]

Hi Photoshop Geekheads

I am trying to figure out methods for creating a highlight region, and a shadow region, negative, for multiple printing, using photoshop. **Black and White images for now.**

Is anyone here doing this on a regular basis and or have methods that they would like to share. I have looked around quite a bit have not seen much info.

I am not talking about channel splitting or creating L or K masks , but being able to create continuous tone negs of highlight region only, or shadow region only regions.
These negatives would be used in conjunction with regular negatives I am producing but used as accent extra exposure only... much like split printing in silver as a basic idea

thanks

Bob

[Lenny Eiger]

Bob,

The image is its own mask for a highlight or shadow. You can make it darker or lighter... increase the contrast of the application or apply the layer a small percentage. You can also invert it for the shadows vs highlights...

Dup it as an alpha channel and use it as a mask...

Lenny

[bob carnie]

Hi Lenny

I do not want to use the whole negative , I guess I could make a selection and create a ruby style mask that covers everything but the Highlights or reverse blocks everything but the shadows.

But .... I want to do special little things to the highlight or shadow , ie extra sharpening or such so I would love to be able to make a highlight or shadow region only negative.
I use to do this manually but I would like to do it easily in PS. I am sending an inverted file to my lambda and making direct silver negs . I am mounting the recieving paper to thin aluminum for multiple printing with separate distinct negatives.
I want to send over a full bodied file to lay down the initial exposure and body of the printand then either a highlight or shadow only file to add oommpphhh.
so my question is how do I see only the H/S regions that I want to accent or how do I separate them out in PS??

Bob,

The image is its own mask for a highlight or shadow. You can make it darker or lighter... increase the contrast of the application or apply the layer a small percentage. You can also invert it for the shadows vs highlights...

Dup it as an alpha channel and use it as a mask...

Lenny

[bob carnie]

Kind of like in the days of Ciba masking we would make a highlight protecting mask that was used on the trans to produce a contrast reducing mask.
Only the reverse.

[Mark Stahlke]

I'm not sure I understand exactly what you're trying to accomplish but I wonder if Tony Kuyper's luminosity masks might be useful.

[bob carnie]

Hi Mark

I do not think this is what I am looking for, I will investigate further .
I looked at this awhile back but did not feel it was right, I may be wrong

thanks
Bob

I'm not sure I understand exactly what you're trying to accomplish but I wonder if Tony Kuyper's luminosity masks might be useful.

[Bruce Watson]

I do not want to use the whole negative , I guess I could make a selection and create a ruby style mask that covers everything but the Highlights or reverse blocks everything but the shadows.

But .... I want to do special little things to the highlight or shadow , ie extra sharpening or such so I would love to be able to make a highlight or shadow region only negative.

Bob, this is going to sound strange to you I think. But I'll try anyway.

What you're asking for is basically what Photoshop was designed to avoid. Photoshop's use of layers (in particular layer masks) lets you do exactly what you are talking about, *without* having to create a separate physical mask.

From my view the whole point of making a digital negative is to avoid just what you are asking to do. That is, to avoid making any physical masks. To avoid, indeed, any manipulation of any kind during exposure of the print. It should all be in the negative before you make that exposure. And that's just what Photoshop excels at.

If I'm completely missing the point you're trying to make, I apologize in advance.

[Greg Miller]

This is a simple, if gross, method.

Use Select | Color Range, and change the selection in the "select:" drop down list from "sampled colors" to either "highlight" or "shadow". This will select all pixels that are either highlights or shadows. You can then inverse that selection to mask out everything else.

[bob carnie]

Hi Greg

Actually the method I am using in a round about way, I have recieved some pretty good tips over on hybrid that I am investigating.
The blendif tool looks most promising at this point.

This is a simple, if gross, method.

Use Select | Color Range, and change the selection in the "select:" drop down list from "sampled colors" to either "highlight" or "shadow". This will select all pixels that are either highlights or shadows. You can then inverse that selection to mask out everything else.

[bob carnie]

Hi Bruce

You are not missing the point. Photoshop should be able to put tone, pixels density on any area of the film I am making, in fact it does very well.

What I am trying to do is overcome the deficiencies or attributes of different print processes.

To me I like platinum prints , but the dmax is not where I personally like it in single hit prints. Therefore a dedicated negative to bring extra punch oomph pizzazzzs to the the shadows is what I want to do with an complete different hit.

Carbon prints are killer in the shadow and mid tone areas but for some workers find the highlights tough to control, basically very hard to keep within one hit. I would like to make a second highlight negative to lay down tone into the hightlights.

Basically I want to lay down tone where the process may be weakest.. hope this makes sense.
In the digital to inkjet world I believe you are correct , but with some of the alt processes some extra hits help.
I am kind of using my years of split printing in silver as a basis for this.


Bob

Bob, this is going to sound strange to you I think. But I'll try anyway.

What you're asking for is basically what Photoshop was designed to avoid. Photoshop's use of layers (in particular layer masks) lets you do exactly what you are talking about, *without* having to create a separate physical mask.

From my view the whole point of making a digital negative is to avoid just what you are asking to do. That is, to avoid making any physical masks. To avoid, indeed, any manipulation of any kind during exposure of the print. It should all be in the negative before you make that exposure. And that's just what Photoshop excels at.

If I'm completely missing the point you're trying to make, I apologize in advance.