Ah, you need to read Dan's latest book: "Photoshop LAB Color"

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0321356780/ref=sr_11_1/102-4595112-5985720?%5Fe\
ncoding=UTF8

This will expand on his first book a lot. Mike Russell says that CM is
built on a lot of concepts from Dan's first book. He is obviously
customizing CM to easily use many of the concepts in this new book too.

I do challenge you to try these 10 pins in a landscape photo. You
might be surprised. Dan's LAB techniques for separating close colors
is very useful in landscapes. Almost all landscape shots have a lot of
close colors in browns, greens, and/or blues. You can really make a
picture "pop" by using these techniques.

By starting from correct colors around the whole LAB wheel, the
separation and saturation techniques become easier. You get absolutely
no color shifts while you are doing it. You also seem to get better
color separations in all hues. Really!

So, take some shots of a nice landscape. Include a neutral gray in
some shots for a pin from that. Also include the 10 Sears paint chips.
You don't have to have those in the picture; you can just take a
picture in the same light.

Then go back to Photoshop and CM. First adjust the picture in your
normal manual ways. Then adjust the 2nd version with CM's highlight,
shadow, and neutral. (You may need to save the curve from the picture
with the neutral chip in it and apply it to the picture you are
working on.)

For the 3rd version, pin the 10 (or 9) colors and save that curve.
Then apply it to the same picture as before. I think you will be
surprised with the results. You will really see the differences when
you start pushing the saturation up with the techniques in Dan's new book.

I bet your landscapes will pop better and be a better color with
version 2. They will probably be even better with version 3. Try it
and see. The worst that could happen is that your photographs will be
better.

Clyde




--- In curvemeister@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Davis" <mldavis2@...> wrote:
>
> If you read Dan Margulis' book "Professional Photoshop", he explains
a lot
> about reading CMYK/RGB values. Not all foliage, for example, is the
same
> green, but it varies more in luminance than in actual color
variation. If
> you compare known values to a picture that is "off", you can often
see the
> deficient color by examining the plate values.
>
> I use a known flash temperature when shooting indoors. My camera
"knows"
> the color of that light and, coupled with it's AWB, manages to come
> extremely close to "right on". Anything else is easily tweaked in
Photoshop
> if need be.
>
> Wedding shots should be right, especially if the dress isn't pure white.
> But then, only the bride and photographer would know that.
Landscapes are
> quite different because so many of them are "interpreted" rather than
> "reproduced".
>
> Mike Davis
> mldavis2 AT sbcglobal DOT net
> http://www.pbase.com/mldavis2/
>