It is currently Thu Apr 25, 2024 1:02 pm


All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 16 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Interesting but not what i expected.
PostPosted: Fri Jul 01, 2016 12:53 am  (#1) 
Offline
Script Coder
User avatar

Joined: May 07, 2014
Posts: 3975
Location: Canada
I took a black and white photo,
and replaced every pixel with a random color that has the same luminosity (with an extremely slow script that took like 4 hrs to run).
and this is the result.
Image
It's not what expected, I expected it to look more random with all sorts of colors.
So I zoomed in on a little section.
Image
Image
Zoomed in. It does have sorts of colors but when zoom out, they tend to look like
Purple for dark tones and Yellowish Green for highlights.
So I thought well since it's not what expected, and since it has tendency to be purple-ish for dark tones and yellowish green for highlights anyways why not try to do a split tone with similar colors that show that tendency.
Image
And that ends my findings on random colors, just thought i'd share that.
Thoughts?

_________________
TinT


Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Orkut Share on Digg Share on MySpace Share on Delicious Share on Technorati
Top
 Post subject: Re: Interesting but not what i expected.
PostPosted: Fri Jul 01, 2016 2:03 am  (#2) 
Offline
GimpChat Member
User avatar

Joined: Jan 20, 2013
Posts: 14816
Location: roma, italy
Tin, about performances, did you try to use tiles or was it impossible?

_________________
"Where am I ?"


Top
 Post subject: Re: Interesting but not what i expected.
PostPosted: Fri Jul 01, 2016 2:13 am  (#3) 
Offline
Script Coder
User avatar

Joined: May 07, 2014
Posts: 3975
Location: Canada
nope didn't use tiles ...
just ran it and see what shows up as an experiment now that i know what it does with its random colors tendency i don't think i'll ever run it again.

_________________
TinT


Top
 Post subject: Re: Interesting but not what i expected.
PostPosted: Fri Jul 01, 2016 3:29 am  (#4) 
Offline
Administrator
User avatar

Joined: Aug 10, 2012
Posts: 13016
Location: Native to NYC living in Arizona, Gimp 2.8 & 2.10, Win 11 PC.
trandoductin wrote:
nope didn't use tiles ...
just ran it and see what shows up as an experiment
now that i know what it does with its random colors tendency
i don't think i'll ever run it again.

That's interesting.
How about inverting the colors, how would that work?

_________________
Image
"A wise man learns more from a foolish question than a fool can learn from a wise answer"
Image


Top
 Post subject: Re: Interesting but not what i expected.
PostPosted: Fri Jul 01, 2016 4:05 am  (#5) 
Offline
GimpChat Member
User avatar

Joined: Jan 20, 2013
Posts: 14816
Location: roma, italy
Tin, another small (maybe also stupid) question: is your filter in .scm or .py?
Someone told me that the "random" function in .scm does not work as good as in .py

_________________
"Where am I ?"


Top
 Post subject: Re: Interesting but not what i expected.
PostPosted: Fri Jul 01, 2016 9:32 am  (#6) 
Offline
Script Coder
User avatar

Joined: May 07, 2014
Posts: 3975
Location: Canada
Dinasset,
I used .py.

Wallace,
Here's the image inverted... also something i didn't expect... interesting isn't it?
Darktones are now yellowish green, and highlights are now dark purple-ish.
Image
Image

_________________
TinT


Top
 Post subject: Re: Interesting but not what i expected.
PostPosted: Fri Jul 01, 2016 10:01 am  (#7) 
Offline
GimpChat Member
User avatar

Joined: Jul 04, 2010
Posts: 2253
Location: Retired Moderator Slowly Returning to the Living.
I'd be interested in checking out the script if you have it available to share :)

_________________
Artists aren't crazy! We're eccentric! ~G.M. Ross

Image

My Sigs = My Photos
Check out my work at http://www.flickr.com/photos/photomastergreg.


Top
 Post subject: Re: Interesting but not what i expected.
PostPosted: Fri Jul 01, 2016 10:06 am  (#8) 
Offline
Script Coder
User avatar

Joined: May 07, 2014
Posts: 3975
Location: Canada
PhotoMaster wrote:
I'd be interested in checking out the script if you have it available to share :)

Warning. you're entering a super slow zone. Use at your own risk :D
Attachment:
auto_colorize_pixels.zip [2.05 KiB]
Downloaded 158 times

_________________
TinT


Top
 Post subject: Re: Interesting but not what i expected.
PostPosted: Fri Jul 01, 2016 12:26 pm  (#9) 
Offline
Script Coder
User avatar

Joined: May 07, 2014
Posts: 3975
Location: Canada
What best 2 colors to use to split tone an image?
I do not know but because of this experiment, I am biased towards purple and yellowish green now.
@Wallace, another reason to love purple (It represents the average of all dark random colors).

_________________
TinT


Top
 Post subject: Re: Interesting but not what i expected.
PostPosted: Fri Jul 01, 2016 1:06 pm  (#10) 
Offline
Administrator
User avatar

Joined: Aug 10, 2012
Posts: 13016
Location: Native to NYC living in Arizona, Gimp 2.8 & 2.10, Win 11 PC.
trandoductin wrote:
@Wallace, another reason to love purple (It represents the average of all dark random colors).

Purple is that way...
:jumpclap

_________________
Image
"A wise man learns more from a foolish question than a fool can learn from a wise answer"
Image


Top
 Post subject: Re: Interesting but not what i expected.
PostPosted: Fri Jul 01, 2016 5:47 pm  (#11) 
Offline
Script Coder
User avatar

Joined: Oct 25, 2010
Posts: 4739
Not too surprised since our eyes are more sensitive to green. Notice that the dark tones are the complementary color...

IMHO that just means that your luminosity formula has some kind of bias... does it take in account the gamma?

_________________
Image


Top
 Post subject: Re: Interesting but not what i expected.
PostPosted: Fri Jul 01, 2016 5:50 pm  (#12) 
Offline
GimpChat Member
User avatar

Joined: Sep 24, 2010
Posts: 12518
You have way too much time on our hands, Tran. lololol

Who am I to judge though. ;)

:)

_________________
Lyle

Psalm 109:8

Image


Top
 Post subject: Re: Interesting but not what i expected.
PostPosted: Fri Jul 01, 2016 9:40 pm  (#13) 
Offline
Script Coder
User avatar

Joined: May 07, 2014
Posts: 3975
Location: Canada
ofnuts wrote:
Not too surprised since our eyes are more sensitive to green. Notice that the dark tones are the complementary color...

IMHO that just means that your luminosity formula has some kind of bias... does it take in account the gamma?


i don't think it does anything with gamma as i just calculate luminosity based on
(0.2126*R + 0.7152*G + 0.0722*B)

_________________
TinT


Top
 Post subject: Re: Interesting but not what i expected.
PostPosted: Wed Sep 28, 2016 10:34 pm  (#14) 
Offline
Script Coder
User avatar

Joined: May 07, 2014
Posts: 3975
Location: Canada
I revisited split-toning in GIMP. I was bored.
And found a tutorial and thought i do a simply .py script for it (There probably exists multitude of scripts already) but this one followed the tutorial i found that was like first hit on Google search.
More details about script here --> Split-toning in GIMP python script

_________________
TinT


Last edited by trandoductin on Tue Mar 13, 2018 6:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Post subject: Re: Interesting but not what i expected.
PostPosted: Thu Sep 29, 2016 1:06 am  (#15) 
Offline
GimpChat Member

Joined: May 12, 2015
Posts: 4694
I read through the tutorial and your examples on your script. Looks nice, will play with it tomorrow. Does it matter where we post our attempts?


Top
 Post subject: Re: Interesting but not what i expected.
PostPosted: Thu Sep 29, 2016 1:21 am  (#16) 
Offline
Script Coder
User avatar

Joined: May 07, 2014
Posts: 3975
Location: Canada
Of course not...you post where you like. :hehe

_________________
TinT


Top
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 16 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


   Similar Topics   Replies 
No new posts Interesting problem

5

No new posts Krita development sprint report (interesting read)

5



* Login  



Powered by phpBB3 © phpBB Group