efftee Posted July 9, 2010 Share #1 Posted July 9, 2010 Advertisement (gone after registration) I needed to make a simple swatch for measuring skin tone in a dermatological study. After taking a photo of the skin on the under part of the upper arm (where the original skin color is most accurate), I saved several variants of different tones from adjusting the levels in PS. These were repeated for different races, ie a set for caucasian, orientals, etc. I then printed these onto good paper, bind them in tabs and punched a hole where the printed areas, which would be placed on a subject's skin for matching and documenting. It wasn't very successful. For one, the printed 'skin' didn't look like real skin at all; when the skin was viewed through the hole, the actual skin was markedly different from printed skin. It was extremely challenging to make accurate and consistent determinations. Not sure if anyone in this forum had done something like this before or that anyone could help -- where is the problem? Is it the capturing device, post-production or printing? Is there a way that a printed skin swatch could be produced? Thanking all in advance for any advice. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted July 9, 2010 Posted July 9, 2010 Hi efftee, Take a look here Advice needed on skin tone. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
andybarton Posted July 9, 2010 Share #2 Posted July 9, 2010 All all your hardware components properly calibrated and colour managed? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wparsonsgisnet Posted July 9, 2010 Share #3 Posted July 9, 2010 F, Are you taking the pix under fluorescent light? This will make your life hellishly difficult. I suggest: 1. Use a diffused flash, such as with a diffusion hood, 2. Place a target like a WhiBal card or some color card next to the area being photographed. In your post processing, w/b to the card. The flash will get rid of most of the green tint from the fluorescents -- all if you turn them off when taking the pic, or if window light is available. The WhiBal card will make it possible to make all the pix comparable. Even if you upgrade your camera, you may wish to continue to use the old one so that all the pix are comparable. I know you are comparing the subject's skin to the patch, under whatever light is available, but the above procedure will give you the correct color on the comparison patch. Then when you compare it to the subject's skin, at least the two patches will be colored by the same light at viewing time. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
psquared Posted July 9, 2010 Share #4 Posted July 9, 2010 Another reason why WhiBal cards are helpful is they have a white card with a black patch. This allows you to standardize the black and white points in different pictures. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
efftee Posted July 10, 2010 Author Share #5 Posted July 10, 2010 All all your hardware components properly calibrated and colour managed? Hi Andy, no, but it's not so much that the color is off but the printed photos on paper do not look like skin. Not sure if this is beyond the topic of photography or print but skin is not only uneven but different from subject to subject; is it even possible to achieve matching skin tone with a printed skin swatch? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
efftee Posted July 10, 2010 Author Share #6 Posted July 10, 2010 F, Are you taking the pix under fluorescent light? This will make your life hellishly difficult. I suggest: 1. Use a diffused flash, such as with a diffusion hood, 2. Place a target like a WhiBal card or some color card next to the area being photographed. In your post processing, w/b to the card. The flash will get rid of most of the green tint from the fluorescents -- all if you turn them off when taking the pic, or if window light is available. The WhiBal card will make it possible to make all the pix comparable. Even if you upgrade your camera, you may wish to continue to use the old one so that all the pix are comparable. I know you are comparing the subject's skin to the patch, under whatever light is available, but the above procedure will give you the correct color on the comparison patch. Then when you compare it to the subject's skin, at least the two patches will be colored by the same light at viewing time. Hi Bill, I will ask a colleague who's better at tech matters to try this. Many thanks. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
efftee Posted July 10, 2010 Author Share #7 Posted July 10, 2010 Advertisement (gone after registration) Another reason why WhiBal cards are helpful is they have a white card with a black patch. This allows you to standardize the black and white points in different pictures. Ok. Thanks for the comment, Peter. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ptarmigan Posted July 13, 2010 Share #8 Posted July 13, 2010 Peter Andy is correct, without a correctly set up calibrated monitor, you've no chance and for best results you want to use proper colour profiles for your printer/paper combo or even have custom ones made if you want to be really anal about it though I don't bother with the latter. Also check out Bruce Beard's skin and hair tone/colour charts. Other comments about using a grey or WB card are sound too but that won't help your current predicament. How do the images look on screen? Can you post one or two here? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.