And then here’s a pic I took of blaze and uploaded via Imgur which Id say is pretty spot on for blaze. I think the ACF is “new” blaze though and the old school Reno T5 likely isn’t the same shade.
Truth in Filtering (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter Taghkanic
- Start date
And then here’s a pic I took of blaze and uploaded via Imgur which Id say is pretty spot on for blaze. I think the ACF is “new” blaze though and the old school Reno T5 likely isn’t the same shade.
Mine’s blazier (no filters, just an iPhone flash)And then here’s a pic I took of blaze and uploaded via Imgur which Id say is pretty spot on for blaze. I think the ACF is “new” blaze though and the old school Reno T5 likely isn’t the same shade.
Last edited:
Meh, I was gone most of the weekend if something happened, and as I mentioned my post was in general since it happens a lot from various users. People know what they are doing with their own images; I don't think an observation/opinion is off-limits if it's not directed anywhere specific or thread crapping.
I actually got a new phone this last week and am not really liking how the images are coming out. Not going to edit but definitely going to look into the default settings to see what's happening. I'm sure issues can pop up for people that are as technologically challenged as myself.
OP
OP
Casual use of smartphone camera flashes almost always produces weird/bad results, IMHO. (Not talking about professional flashes, lightbooths, etc.).
It’s better to wait for daylight unless you have some kind of controlled, balanced lighting and understand how that specific lighting affects color.
My preference is for indirect daylight—where the sun is well up in the sky, and the chips can be shot in a room where daylight is illuminating the room but not shining directly on the chips. Daylight does tend to be bluer than incandescent light, but it’s easy enough to tweak the warmth without blowing out saturation.
But even if one is not a professional, there is always the simple eye test. Does my picture look like the chips? No? Then either try to gently adjust it to a reasonable match, or take more pics until you get a decent representation.
It’s better to wait for daylight unless you have some kind of controlled, balanced lighting and understand how that specific lighting affects color.
My preference is for indirect daylight—where the sun is well up in the sky, and the chips can be shot in a room where daylight is illuminating the room but not shining directly on the chips. Daylight does tend to be bluer than incandescent light, but it’s easy enough to tweak the warmth without blowing out saturation.
But even if one is not a professional, there is always the simple eye test. Does my picture look like the chips? No? Then either try to gently adjust it to a reasonable match, or take more pics until you get a decent representation.
jpietrella
4 of a Kind
And then here’s a pic I took of blaze and uploaded via Imgur which Id say is pretty spot on for blaze. I think the ACF is “new” blaze though and the old school Reno T5 likely isn’t the same shade.
LeLe
4 of a Kind
Really don’t mind people doing the “touch-up” for their own porn showcase, in fact I think i prefer them to be done this way
But for classified, that’s kinda like angle-shooting in poker. They are technically not wrong in doing that but we all think it’s not right.
Also, most of those “touch-up” pic are pretty obvious so maybe only the newer chipper will get “Angle-shoot” by those “touch-up” pic
But for classified, that’s kinda like angle-shooting in poker. They are technically not wrong in doing that but we all think it’s not right.
Also, most of those “touch-up” pic are pretty obvious so maybe only the newer chipper will get “Angle-shoot” by those “touch-up” pic
There is zero over saturation in the pic. Only whites have been upped and blacks have been reduced.
Here is the actual color chip against the chips. I’d wager, in the example you provided, the chip you say is more realistic is actually not the color of the chip. It doesn’t look like Blaze at all!
jpietrella
4 of a Kind
Wow - is that NCV 100 actually dark brown? That's insane.There is zero over saturation in the pic. Only whites have been upped and blacks have been reduced.
View attachment 963610
View attachment 963611
Here is the actual color chip against the chips. I’d wager, in the example you provided, the chip you say is more realistic is actually not the color of the chip. It doesn’t look like Blaze at all!
OP
OP
This does not look natural. Not sure what is going on, but I own blaze chips and samples, and they don’t blow out the lens like that unless I force it. What do you think accounts for it?
OP
OP
Here are my Black and Dark Brown samples side by side on a PCF mat in indirect midday daylight, no color/contrast adjustments. The difference in the base colors is much more pronounced than in some other pics posted, which appear to be more contrasty or otherwise have the black point bumped up. (Camera is an iPhone 12 Pro.)
OP
OP
I would love for the next PCF chip mat to have some sort of color and grayscale blocks built into it! Then everyone could take pics on these mats however they pleased, and if there are variations due to camera/editing issues, it would be relatively simple to color-correct for them. No more debates!
OP
OP
@Windwalker, the Fitzgerald 5 does appear to be a hair darker/redder than the Blaze sample in the pic. Would you say that’s the case to the naked eye? (I’ve certainly found that there are often batch differences with any chip, and also different ages of samples.)
gopherblue
Straight Flush
Welcome to the list! It's mostly just us long-standing, easy-going members with senses of humor and low BS quotients.
It’s the case to the naked eye. I’ll check with some of the other color sample sets I have.
OP
OP
Here’s also a pic with the same light and camera adding my Blaze sample. It does pop a fair amount though somewhat less than some others I’ve seen. Might have to try the IMGUR option too.
Here is the picture exactly as shot in indirect daylight, and then with my black point and whites adjustments, for reference.
As shot.
With whites upped and blackpoint adjusted.
As shot.
With whites upped and blackpoint adjusted.
OP
OP
^^^ Here the brown seems darker and almost greener than my sample chip, while the Blaze looks more orange or pumpkin-y.
Anyway until color sample mats are printed, now is the moment to try to revive my Froot Loop Solution idea, which totally flopped the first time:
https://www.pokerchipforum.com/threads/the-froot-loop-solootion.33519/
OP
OP
Marius L
4 of a Kind
Gotta say I think the picture without contrast edited looks more realistic. The edited picture pops a bit too much. As shot looks like very close to the real deal in on my screen at least.Here is the picture exactly as shot in indirect daylight, and then with my black point and whites adjustments, for reference.
As shot.
With whites upped and blackpoint adjusted.
If uploading pics to the site, reduce the file size to under 1MB before uploading to prevent the colors from getting crushed
1.1MB pic uploaded
same pic, just reduced size before uploading (edited from 1280 width to 1024) 827KB
Both pics from a phone camera, unedited aside from reducing the image size.
1.1MB pic uploaded
same pic, just reduced size before uploading (edited from 1280 width to 1024) 827KB
Both pics from a phone camera, unedited aside from reducing the image size.
Okay but what about this guy??? No filtering, just great lighting. Look at this brown spots shine!!!!!!!!!!!!!¡!!
Sorry to crap in your thread, @Taghkanic, I actually think this is a quite interesting. It really touches on some great topics: setting community standards, the struggles of digital dis-standardizations, the idea of a “correct visual representation” of something, etc
With the prices of complete Paulson sample sets and some of the chip colors that attract attention (blaze and blurple) being hard to get into, it can be hard as a new member to do this work yourself, to gauge what photos are accurate and inaccurate portrayals.
Interesting stuff. Though maybe not worth being too angry about
OP
OP
Not “angry” about anything, I just think if we could establish some goals for more accurate chip pics, that would be a benefit to everyone in the community.
Create an account or login to comment
You must be a member in order to leave a comment
Create account
Create an account and join our community. It's easy!
Log in
Already have an account? Log in here.
