That wasn't the question.

I assume the adjustment is a multiplier, and that is why it is in the range of 0 to 3.999. Moving the elements radially within a sector would be an additive adjustment.

But why does the selection and vector scope use different ranges. And what is a 0 to 162 range anyway?

Don't know if I can answer all of this but,
vectorscopes existed well before anything digital and video, so they were scaled 0 to 100% to show the level releative to the analogue range of the video signal. The histogram display is scaled 0 to 255 to match the range of 8 bit digital video.

That's pretty much the take I got too. The histogram if it could be blown up a lot larger would actually be a bar chart. If you have it running while a video is playing each "bar" represents the relative strength of the combined RGB signal, 0-255. The left (low range) is the shadows, the right end represents highlights, the middle the midtones. If you adjust something like color curves you'll see real time effect.We're just talking the relative intensity. You can also see the impact adjusting gamma and gain, levels.

The saturation, which is the radial dimension on the vector scope, is in units of 0% to 100%. But the saturation selection on the secondary color corrector is in units of 0 to 162.

0 to 255 would be a raw 8-bit display. But o to 162? I end up doing the math in my head to enter values. What is 0 to 162????

Thanks,

David

You know... sometimes I feel like that duck in those funny AFLAC insurance commerials.

http://www.ajc.com/business/content/business/best2003/aflac.html

Sometimes the person you're trying to help simply doesn't seem to be paying attention.

The control you're referring to adjusts the STRENGTH of the mask. You use it FIRST if necessary to control what is masked. For more information bring up the secondary color filter, click on the little question mark and read the EXTENSIVE help that tells you what each control does and how to use it which is what I did. I also wrote a tutorial on how to use it.

So you can see when I sometimes go quack, quack, quack, like that AFLAC duck. Its because I too sometimes get frustratedl

Hint: The control you're asking about has NO effect on saturation at all which you would have seen if you simply slid the control back and forth. It DOES have a profound effect on the mask. Click Mask, THEN slide the control back and forth.

Try this:

Take a image where there is a lot of trees, shrubs in the background. Drop the secondary color corrector filter on the event. Drag the select effects eyedropper over an area of the greenery in the preview area. The idea is to draw a little box with the eyedropper tool. Check show mask. Adjust BOTH low and high and perhaps smooth to get the best mask. Turn off show mask. Slowly advance 'rotate hue 'to get greener and also move the color wheel for a pleasing shade. Note ONLY the green areas are effected. Adjust gain and saturation on top half of filter. That's a quick lesson on what's possible with this filter.

Billy, you do seem to have a problem reading. But you do like listening to yourself.

Now, for someone who may know the answer, the scale for limiting the saturation is in the range of 0 to 162. The documentation doesn't cover setting the saturation limits manually. I don't know what the range is supposed to signify.

On an HSL scale, S and L are from 0 to 100 percent, and H is 0 to 360 degrees.

When identifying a range to adjust on the video scope, the saturation is given as a percentage, 0 to 100. What does 0 to 162 signify? Multiplying the desired percent by 162 does appear to create the desired saturation levels.

I think the problem is someone being pigheaded and not listening to what he's being told. You keep confusing what the controls you're jabbering about do.

The scale for limiting saturation is 0 to 3,000. NOT 0 to 162 that you keep saying because you think you know what you're talking about and you really don't have a clue. My guess is your anger is trying to do something you could in another application a certain way and you can't do in Vegas. Being too pigheaded to learn how to do it in Vegas you let your anger get the best of you.

You've made several WRONG assumptions.

You said the HSL scale is 0-100 percent. Well you don't adjust on a percentage basis in Vegas. Again, you apparenlty don't want to learn how its done in Vegas.

You then go on to say "When identifying a range to adjust on the video scope..." something you CAN'T do in Vegas either. The scopes only report values. There's nothing to adjust on any of the scopes. You're wrong again David.

I don't have any problem reading. It does get annoying when someone asks for help gets it, then not liking the answer disrespects the person trying to help him. The documentation covers the topic very well. Just because YOU aren't intelligent enough to understand it every when sombody holds your hand expaining it to you is YOUR problem, not mine.

Billy,

You not only feel like the duck, but act like it also. You still don't understand the question, but that doesn't stop you.

Stop answering...

I know a jackass when I see one posting. What I understand all too well is some people no matter how we as a group try to help them simply refuse to listen.

Gee,
if only we could video a few of you guys in a boxing match, it'd make the best VV training DVD ever :)

No I'm serious, this is great, while everyones blowing off steam the rest of us are learning heaps. Just wish I could think of something provocative to say so you'll keep it up.

Where do you get 3,000? I see that the Saturation range is 0.000 to 3.000 (not 3,000). However, the question is about the Limit saturation Low: and High:, which do indeed range from 0.0 to 162.0. Where the heck does 162.0 come from? What does it mean? It seems to be a totally arbitrary value. Is there some significance to 162?

[Where do you get 3,000?]
I think BillyBoy is using a locale where the comma character is the decimal point (as in France?) instead of a full stop.

I used 3000 because that's the upper limit of the range on the control I was talking about. When I write numbers to make them easier to read I almost always insert a comma. Should have been a decimal pont. Right now I can't see the differnce that well. For somebody to nitpick over it being 3.000 or 3,000 when they know that I can hadly see right now due to my Bell's Palsy is a pretty cheap shot.

As I said when I first got this Bell's Palsy I probably at times would be more grumpy. OK, maybe I am a LOT more grumpy. I still try to help, because it helps me get through another day passing the time where other things are even more difficult. Develop a case of Bell's Palsy and see how grumpy you get. My left eye is tearing nearly constantly.

As far as the question the issue is what the $%$# does it matter what the scale is? Answer: no difference at all. My point is the guy asking apparently doesn't understand HOW to use the filter. I tried to explain and for trying to help he tries to paint me as the dummy.

Do I need this kind of aggravation?

What do you think?

Apparently my posting is bothing some so I guess I'll stop and just sit in the dark and count the days till I can see better if I ever can again.

You don't need Bells Palsy to get annoyed with someone who responds to attemted help with "That wasn't the question". That should bring tears to anyone's eye.
Tor

The mask function in the secondary color corrector actually frustruates me a little but not because the scale goes 1 to 162 (which really requires asking, what unit is being measured that stops at 162). What I truly wish for is a cumulative mask function, as can be found in certain photo-correction software, in which you can add and subtract portions of masks, or identify areas not to be masked after creating the initial mask. It drove me nuts when I was trying to make a mask of leaves on the ground which I could turn white and make to look like fresh-fallen snow. Problem is, the same-colored overcoat being worn by one of the actors in the shot, also looked like fresh-fallen snow. But I can't "subtract" that selection from the mask.

As to the Great 162 Debate, I can only say that many of the controls in Vegas are real-time hand-eye feedback controls, such that I didn't have to study and learn all the theory about them in order to use them effectively. I have assumed that the masking "scale" goes to 162 because that's the highest qualitative (not quantitative) value in which an effect can be seen on screen. In any event, I never crank it up to 162 because by then the mask has become much too all-encompassing. (And why are there still speedometers that go to 120 mph? Or 180 kph? If I hit that speed on the Interstate they'll be making a mask of ME.)

Hey SoFo guys, food fight over here! Anybody wanna weigh in?

P.S. To BillyBoy who only knows me as an occasional poster (and lawyer in disguise): Have you looked into Neurontin? Supposed to be very good for chronic nerve irritations. Hope you're on the road back, though I know these things seem to take forever.

Interesting, I'll look into it thanks. Taking some B-12 complex thing which is supposed to help nerve regeneration, hasn't, at least not much, at least not yet.

Sorry, I kind of lost it in the last post. Kind of like an old dog who's tail you pull once too often, then he snaps. On top of everything else WideOpenWest (my ISP) is reporting system wide network problems today, so, I can't browse the web and its taking 20-30 tries to post, usually times out. So if I don't post much today or the next couple that's the reason, not my temper tantrum. Sorry again for being so grumpy.

editor3333:

On target for the issue. The mask you are talking about would be based on areas in the frame or on HSL levels? There are times a geographic mask would be nice. For non-contiguious ranges of HSL values in the mask I find using multiple secondary color correction filters a usable workaround.

On the second point, the speedometer analogy works for the vector scope. The digital readout that tracks the cursor position will go past 100%, even though the maximum level is 100%.

The 162 level is more analogous to a phone number "Call ATT" and having to translate it to the corresponding numbers on a phone without letter displays.

Using a scale of 255 instead of 100 makes some sense to access the underlying resolution for 8-bit values. But 162 seems odd. I like to read a range from the vector scope and apply that to the mask. I end up translating 0-100 to 0 to 162.

I find that the sliders don't give me the precision or repeatability I need to to select ranges and and make adjustments. An example would be Gaussian Blur, where all of the settings I need are between .003 (Light Blur) and .010.

On the secondary color corrector, I make manual adjustments to the values, watching the results in the preview screen mask. Frequently the final adjustments are in the range of less than 5 degrees of hue or 5 points on the 162 scale; smaller than I can do with the sliders.

David

These forums are a place for people to share ideas about the software, not insult other participants. Refrain from distasteful or offensive language, please. Also, If you do not appreciate the comments of another forum participant, you can choose to "Ignore This User".

From the Forums FAQs:

Are there any censorship features on your forums?
No. However, please be respectful to all forum users. If you find another forum user's posts to be offensive, you can choose not to view the individual's posts by clicking Ignore This User next to their User Name. This will filter all of the user's posts so you no longer have to see them.


What are Moderators?
A moderator is an individual who visits the forums regularly and has the ability to edit posts that are distasteful or offensive. All of our current moderators are Sonic Foundry employees.

Thanks to SoFo but I actually wasn't asking for someone to weigh in on the conduct of the users posting. We spat now and then but are basically a community and see ourselves as such. I only say this because I don't want BillyBoy to stop posting, having contributed invaluable amounts of knowledge here and on his own site.

I was asking for SoFo to address the interest we have in certain aspects of the masking function. However, DavidNJ gave me some useful ideas to try out, and I thank him for that too.

Thank you editor3333,

The comments and links I made were not specifically directed to BillyBoy, rather towards the tone of the thread and posts made by more than one user. BillyBoy has helped many users figure out the intricacies of our products over the years and we appreciate his insight and patronage. The thread was getting a bit "heated" and becoming inappropriate. If everyone can remain professional and keep the offensive comments off the board, we'd appreciate it.

As for understanding the Color Corrector levels, I'll ask around and get some details for everyone.

Thanks,
Josh Dodge
Manager, Customer Relations

We'll admit right off we could have used scales that were more user-friendly, and we'll consider modifying future versions if this is really confusing/annoying.

The odd looking numbers you see (like 162) are based on some fairly complex math that for a number of reasons I can't share (sorry). We believe the internal math is all correct but if you think we are doing something wrong in a technical sense feel free to email me offline, drdropout@sonicfoundry.com.