Jump to content
Philsan

Images generated by RastaConverter

Recommended Posts

Northern Lights with buck

27 colors

 

ivop_northern-lights.png.c2c07f70f1e4cd3e014308a756f678dc.png

 

I'm not a big fan of dither, but I just had to use knoll dither with ciede predistance once :) On an eight core 3.5GHz AMD64 it took thirteen(!) minutes just to dither and render the destination picture. And all cores were in use! I suppose it could take hours on lesser CPUs.

 

Tip: if you ever use knoll dither, immediately save the output.png-dst.png file somewhere else. If you use it later as input, be sure to disable dither in your new run and set both /predistance and /distance to yuv.

 

The line artifacts in the deer luckily resolved. Sadly, there are still some in the darker areas. What dither did BTW is introduce some blues! Without dither, it was all green bands.

 

Edit: white speck is not en error BTW. It's a celestial body :)

 

ivop_northern-lights.xex

Edited by ivop
  • Like 10

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Today I'd like to present you a photo which for me became the most challenging so far.

I cannot tell you exactly how many attempts I have made. Everytime the result was far from my expectations.

Despite everything, I decided to publish the final conversion. There are 59 individual colors.

I hope you like it.

 

output.png.2847e523c6f7b193c215452f8bd7b4a0.png

 

amarok_girl.xex

  • Like 14
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, amarok said:

I hope you like it.

Yeah, I like it! A lot :)  I assume you also still see some, what I call, annoying artifacts ;) Especially in the left eye (right for the viewer). The blue overflows into the white. I recognize this problem. What turns up blue, is RastaConverter attempting to be close to something greyish most of the time. The luminance of the blue is closer. When I see that happen, I edit the source image so it's all (extremely) white :D

 

But with such a good conversion, you can also take either output.png or output.png-dst.png as an input for a new conversion. Be sure you then set /predistance to the same as your previous conversion's /distance. And use the exact same palette! That way you can edit out the problematic parts in the eyes. All white, and perhaps even two or three blues for the irisses. Just guessing. But could be tried. During editting (with The Gimp, Photoshop, ...) you have to be very careful to not introduce any new colors. Select by color, use the pipette to get the exact same color when you go fill parts with other colors, and so on ;)

 

I have used this method for some of my best conversions. Once you're close, you have to accommodate RastaConverter a little ;) Most of the time I used the output.png-dst.png image to "adjust" some errors, like the shadow of Michael Jackson's Jacket on his pristine white shirt :)

 

Edited by ivop
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, amarok said:

Today I'd like to present you a photo which for me became the most challenging so far.

I cannot tell you exactly how many attempts I have made. Everytime the result was far from my expectations.

Despite everything, I decided to publish the final conversion. There are 59 individual colors.

I hope you like it.

 

output.png.2847e523c6f7b193c215452f8bd7b4a0.png

 

amarok_girl.xex 22.04 kB · 10 downloads

Her eyes are pretty. It is all good except for the shameful face covering.

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@ivop, thank you for your advices, it is very helpful. In fact, in couple of my converions I used corrected output-dst.png as an input for RastaConverter, but not in this time. Many often I use Gimp for preprocessing, especially correction of colors like desaturation as you suggested.

 

For me the worst thing is the long time for getting the results in RastaConverter. I hope that in a near future someone will prepare a GPU based RastaConverter 🙂.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello guys

On 6/26/2020 at 7:04 PM, amarok said:

output.png.2847e523c6f7b193c215452f8bd7b4a0.png

 

20 hours ago, Kyle22 said:

Her eyes are pretty. It is all good except for the shameful face covering.

 

If I remember correctly, this is a famous picture of a woman living in a tribe of nomads.  Covering your face is often a necessity in places where the combination of wind and sand will otherwise sandblast your face.  Men can grow beards to prevent that, women usually can't (and most women and men wouldn't like that).

 

Sincerely

 

Mathy

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tie Fighter Squadron. 49 colors. This one I redid many times, attempting to get the explosions better defined. This isn't the best for explosion definition, just the best over all.

TieSquadron1.gif

TieSquadron1.xex

  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/27/2020 at 6:52 PM, Mathy said:

Hello guys

If I remember correctly, this is a famous picture of a woman living in a tribe of nomads.  Covering your face is often a necessity in places where the combination of wind and sand will otherwise sandblast your face.  Men can grow beards to prevent that, women usually can't (and most women and men wouldn't like that).

 

Sincerely

 

Mathy

Well, in reality, there is no such thing as covering your face for "wind-and-sand" for the "Afghan-girl", which was captured by one of my all-time-fav. photographers Steve McCurry, neither of which relate to the above random face-cover. picture (if that is what you were referring to, of course...)

 

The Afghan girl covers her face because of her religion, and because she lives in a place that is quite inhospitable for women, and especially young boys... That is the truth. 

 

Here she is, as Steve saw it... and later in life, deprived from any real chance of growth and progress:

 

C1139440-5AE3-4E4A-8FF8-896C44A6C31D.thumb.jpeg.6269d349da48e20f1cbab5b338e05308.jpeg

 

4D7BC934-79B4-418B-B3C7-9CB25F379014.thumb.jpeg.afe6dbdf7464b692cec57d37c84ddd30.jpeg

Edited by Faicuai

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

About the "ninja" photo:

 

A piercing gaze

They say beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Sometimes, that beauty is just in their eyes. This magnificent shot shows that iPhone photographs have been incredible for years. This image by Kim Hanskamp was taken way back in 2013 and selected as the winner in the people category. 

 

https://kimhanskamp.com/a-wards/

 

It was part of the iPhone Photography Awards. I think it is Hanskamp herself:

 

https://kimhanskamp.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/kim2-1810x1280.jpg

 

The freckles are somewhat less on this photo, but that changes per season. I know personal experience. The "ninja" also wears mascara ;) 

Edited by ivop

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Faicuai said:

 

 

The Afghan girl covers her face because of her religion, and because she lives in a place that is quite inhospitable for women, and especially young boys... That is the truth. 

 

 

It's not something for a thread like this, but your sentence is partly wrong and right. 

 

There is NO text in the Q'RAN where female people have to hide their face. Vice Versa. It is written that , if some "higher person in law" gets close, they AREN'T allowed to hide their face. It is only allowed to protect people when they see danger.

That whole "Burka" and "NIQAP" or "hidshab" is Moslem religion based thing is a western plucked out of the air invention, and a basis to have meaning collision on both sides. 

And, as you wrote, there are a lot dangerous possibilities particular for young women , so they are allowed to wear those "protection suits". 

 

 

Edited by emkay

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, emkay said:

It's not something for a thread like this, but your sentence is partly wrong and right. 

 

There is NO text in the Q'RAN where female people have to hide their face. Vice Versa. It is written that , if some "higher person in law" gets close, they AREN'T allowed to hide their face. It is only allowed to protect people when they see danger.

That whole "Burka" and "NIQAP" or "hidshab" is Moslem religion based thing is a western plucked out of the air invention, and a basis to have meaning collision on both sides. 

And, as you wrote, there are a lot dangerous possibilities particular for young women , so they are allowed to wear those "protection suits".

Our posts will probably be moderated into oblivion, but read An-Noer:31 and Al-Ahzab:59. Perfectly clear.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello faicual

 

1 hour ago, Faicuai said:

... if that is what you were referring to ...

 

It was.  Thanks for correcting me.

 

Sincerely

 

Mathy

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well if anyone here feels brave enough to take a rasta-conversion shot at the Afhgan girl, here it is, in full glory:

 

9A2F4BDF-63B8-4860-8743-2DE463A1E363.thumb.jpeg.57fc9bcec6e89cda81d097cec4173401.jpeg

 

And for those that do like PJ - photography, this book is a must have, by many reasons:

 

17B6ADB4-DFE2-46FC-AB8C-490A70F1AA89.thumb.jpeg.c8b2636be12951e3ea9547290716824d.jpeg

 

Let's see what comes out of it...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   1 member

×
×
  • Create New...