[Theo Van laar]

This is the result with Vegas:

https://www.yousendit.com/transfer.php?action=check_download&ufid=B82585B35EDC86D1&key=333a7b7278efe66e3ec297957e73e0dc634af1fe

Theo

[Theo Van laar]

To set the region of high, low or mid, you use the SELECT EFFECT RANGE pipet. You have to select the ranges by hand, but you can identify the high and low area’s in the ‘photoshop way’ by using the BLACK RESTORE effect. Move the slider from left to right to identify the darkest regions and move the slider from right to left to identify the whitest-regions.

However, I don’t think a lot of people want to set the luminance independently for the low, mid and high range. A much better way to achieve the same results is simply use CURVES. Did you not consider the adjustment of CURVES instead of LUMINANCE?

[Theo Van laar]

The best way I can think of: Make your scene in greyscale. Then use 3 times the secondary color corrector effect. For every secondary color corrector effect, you select a region (low, mids or high) and set the luminance as you wish.
At the end, you remove the greyscale again.
That should work.

[Theo Van laar]

Thanks everybody for all the replies.
I know there are ways to stretch the photographs. But I’m still trying to understand the logic behind the different sizes given in literature.
787 x 576 is very logic because 720 x 1.0926 (the PAR value) is 786.672
However the value of 768 x 576 is also often found. Has this something to do with “full raster” and “ust the 4:3 image”? If yes, what does it mean?

[Theo Van laar]

Thanks!!