Question about Tonedexter

[Photojeep]

Originally Posted by Doug Young

...But say you're a photographer and you set the white balance of your camera in one lighting situation (for non-camera operators, the white balance basically corrects colors to adjust for lighting differences). Can you use that stored white balance setting in a completely different envrionment? Sure. It will definitely change the way colors look. It might even look very cool. But it won't be white-balanced for the new environment, and it won't make one lighting setup look like another. However, "training" the camera by re-adjusting the white balance for each location can make colors look correct in each location...

Doug,
As a photography professor I have to give you credit for a a very good explanation!

Well done!
PJ

[phcorrigan]

Originally Posted by Photojeep

Doug,
As a photography professor I have to give you credit for a a very good explanation!

Well done!
PJ

As a photographer I would agree!

[Marshall]

I just did an experimental session yesterday. I have 3 guitars with the same Fishman Sonicore pickup; a 2015 Nick Lucas (local luthier), a 1957 Gibson J50, and an Eastman E1 SS Ltd. I've made wavemaps for each with 2 mics; a Neuman K184, and a Shure KSM32. I mostly play out with the NL. It's a little thinner acoustically than the 2 sloped dreads. I ran the NL through all 6 of the wavemaps I've made. And I like the amplified sound of the NL through the 1957 J50 program with the KSM32 mic the best. The KSM 32 mic is a big round warm sound. Whereas the K184 is more articulate but slightly harsher. And of the 3 guitar's wavemaps, the NL is the harshest, the Eastman the warmest (but not articulate), and the J50 is in the middle (big and warm, but also articulate).

I just like the sound I get from the NL guitar in the J50/Shure mic program the best. The best of 6 different worlds. - None of the programs are bad. I've been playing out with the NL guitar through it's own program for months. They're all (the 6 programs) head-and-shoulders above anything else I've ever had for an amplified sound. But I think I'm going with the J50/Shure program for the Nick Lucas next time I get to play out somewhere.

In the mean time I'm going to start making some home videos with the guitar amped too. It's a big cool sound.

[ljguitar]

Originally Posted by Doug Young

…There are lots of analogies to this, tho with the danger of just muddying things up :-). But say you're a photographer and you set the white balance of your camera in one lighting situation (for non-camera operators, the white balance basically corrects colors to adjust for lighting differences). Can you use that stored white balance setting in a completely different envrionment? Sure. It will definitely change the way colors look.

Hi Doug

Great analogy.

I own multiple DSLR and Mirrorless cameras, shoot RAW always, and use an 18% gray card during every shoot so the white balance it spot on in post. I'm not using the profiles of one camera (or even lens) with other cameras and images, because each of my cameras/lenses were purchased to do specific jobs.

I realize I'm a picky shooter.

I think of the ToneDexter the same way. I'm pulling a RAW sound image, and then the ToneDexter processes it and I tweak it with controls.

I'm not looking for mixed results or experiments. Each of my guitars has unique qualities which I WANT to feature, not borrowed waves forms from other guitars.

I'm OK is someone does want to swap wave-maps, but won't be doing it. I'm ok with people using LightRoom to process hundreds/thousands of images with the exact same settings, but I prefer PhotoShop because I have more than 20 times the tools to process my images. I'm friends with all of my photographer friends who use LightRoom, and we don't argue about techniques, but enjoy each other's work.

[phcorrigan]

Originally Posted by ljguitar

I own multiple DSLR and Mirrorless cameras, shoot RAW always, and use an 18% gray card during every shoot so the white balance it spot on in post.

I think this might be even a better analogy:



When I want to get all the colors in a photo to appear as close as possible to "real life" I'll use the color checker, because when used with the accompanying software it will give you the correct colors. I create profiles for each camera/lens/lighting combination, effectively giving me a "wavemap" for each combination.

[Doug Young]

Originally Posted by ljguitar

I'm not looking for mixed results or experiments. Each of my guitars has unique qualities which I WANT to feature, not borrowed waves forms from other guitars.

I think there are cases for the other, tho not what the OP is asking. James' demo of using a cross-trained wavemap on a silent practice guitar is one. I also was happier applying my wavemap trained on a real wood guitar to my rainsong with the same pickup than when I tried to train with the rainsong - just because the rainsong doesn't sound all that good acoustically. But it wasn't ideal, and doesn't make the rainsong sound like the guitar I trained with, it just overall seemed to be better, tho still a compromise. But basically these cases are applying a wavemap to a guitar that doesn't have that much of a sound of their own.

I didn't know about the colorchecker thing. Looks interesting. Could it be used with video?

[ljguitar]

Originally Posted by Doug Young

I think there are cases for the other, tho not what the OP is asking. James' demo of using a cross-trained wavemap on a silent practice guitar is one. I also was happier applying my wavemap trained on a real wood guitar to my rainsong with the same pickup than when I tried to train with the rainsong - just because the rainsong doesn't sound all that good acoustically. But it wasn't ideal, and doesn't make the rainsong sound like the guitar I trained with, it just overall seemed to be better, tho still a compromise. But basically these cases are applying a wavemap to a guitar that doesn't have that much of a sound of their own.

I didn't know about the colorchecker thing. Looks interesting. Could it be used with video?

Hi Doug

I use a small (12"X12" collapsible) carry around 18% gray checker for my photo work. They are gray on one side and White on the other for setting white balance on cameras and referencing for flesh tone in post. It collapses to about a 4" circle (one of the pictures in the link shows it zipped into it's carry bag) and goes in each camera bag, and I keep one in the studio for portrait sessions. I just hand it to the subject and have them hold it up next to their face and shoot a frame or two.

Several companies build small fairly accurate color chart checkers for video which has a lot of colors on it. You shoot a bit of footage with the checker in the image near the subject, and match it in post. I don't need the $hundreds-of-dollar$ versions. I'm not doing broadcast capable video work. Someone makes a small one in a fold up plastic case for about $80 (more durable). Video color matching benefits from having more colors than neutral gray to reference in post.

18% gray - CliCk

Color Checker - CliCk

Using an 18% gray 'card' (you can buy them as cards) saves tons of time in post, and is accurate in post. On stages where there is mixed light (our church use a lot of colored light washing on backgrounds, and the spots are balanced to a totally different color temp), it is invaluable for setting the flesh tones accurately.

Both are pretty indispensable to me for doing quick color match editing. [EDIT]I'm using PhotoShop & Final Cut Pro most of the time[EDIT]

Hope this helps.

TONE-DEX stuff…
I don't have issues with people using the ToneDexter in creative ways. For my purposes it has to do with a 71 yr old guy who is enjoying the fact my guitars sound like my guitars through PA systems.

I can certainly see where experimenting might produce acceptable results, and if I were 40 instead of 71 I'd likely be one of those doing experiments.

The gray cards are likely made in Asia since they are back ordered everywhere right now (3-25-20). The links are so you can see them.

[phcorrigan]

Originally Posted by Doug Young

I didn't know about the colorchecker thing. Looks interesting. Could it be used with video?

There's a video version:
https://www.xrite.com/categories/cal...passport-video

This short video explains how to use it:
https://youtu.be/2Bz3YMd4uNs

I don't use this a lot, but when lighting and color balance are critical it's an invaluable tool.

[BluesKing777]

I think this video from the Tonedexter site shows everything you need to know!

Plug it in, train it, play it. Simple.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DBbO...ature=emb_logo



BluesKing777.

[ljguitar]

Originally Posted by phcorrigan

There's a video version:
https://www.xrite.com/categories/cal...passport-video

This short video explains how to use it:
https://youtu.be/2Bz3YMd4uNs

I don't use this a lot, but when lighting and color balance are critical it's an invaluable tool.

Hi Patrick

I hadn't even thought of the point about color matching multiple cameras (from the article). I do it all the time with pictures. We have a team of people who shoot at our church and use the gray 'card' method, and I do the editing, and it's always great to have the same editing start point.

I'll think about that if we start shooting multiple video cameras.

[phcorrigan]

Originally Posted by ljguitar

We have a team of people who shoot at our church and use the gray 'card' method...

The grey card method is great for white balance, but the Color Checker helps you make sure all colors are consistent, accounting for variation in camera sensors, lenses, lighting, etc.

In most of what I do this isn't critical, but for my last book I wanted to make sure that the images were not only consistent, but the colors were true to the products I was photographing. The Color Checker made this easy.