You should add the option to change the bg color in the Program window (like in Photoshop).
It's very handy while working with too dark or bright footage, to make shure it's not clipping or having a wrong tint. Often the canvas color matters 🙂
If you are checking the image for clipping to white or crushing blacks, it doesn't really matter what the image background or the program surround is set to. Your eyes work in a 'relative' mode, and bluntly lie to you.
Use only the scopes for such quantitative information. They tell you accurately, immediately, if you are out of bounds.
I work for/with/teach pro colorists, who are vastly more trained in this than the rest of us. And they never trust their eyes for that sort of thing. Ever.
@Ann Bens, Photoshop has 6 options for the BG color (see the screenshot).
In Premiere the area around the footage is not black, it's gray.
@R Neil Haugen, those who don't believe their eyes can't become true artists.
As you said, they are just technical specialists who work with eyedroppers, numbers and histograms. Efficient, but boring.
All in all, if the feature exists in PS for ages, why can't we have it in Premiere? I'm not a video editor, I'm more into Photography & Retouching and I use the feature in PS very often. Not for the clipping (which I reduce in LR or ACR if needed), but more for slight color correction, adding a vignette, darkening or lightening some particular areas at the edges. Let's say, I'm editing images for a website with a white BG, so they should be bright as well; and vice versa, if I know that they will be viewed on a black BG, I can make them a bit darker. Checking the files on a corresponding BG helps to adjust the overall exposure (but not only that).
Your comments are rather derogatory to virtually all professional colorists. Who know both a lot more than most people about both actual artistry and technical tools.
Both are required in high end artworks. And knowing the proper use of definitive tools like scopes, and relative tools like the human viewing system, is a must to really be able to push the art to your limits.
Being a professional colorist requires a massive amount of technical knowledge in order to properly integrate images from various cameras and applications without damaging the pixels. And then being able to apply an interpretation of those pixels that gives full range for the director's intent.
I've worked with international rep painters. You better believe they knew every possible implication of any paint, canvas or substrate and archival properties. Heavily technical stuff.
And if you don't know it, no gallery wants your painting.
According to you, there isn't a single colorist doing any major long-form or streaming work that is "an artist".
And of course that would include all the Ae, Nuke, and Fusion folks doing the cgvand compositing work.
Sorry, but asca many year professional artist here, your assumptions aren't matching any experience or artists I've ever known of or worked with.
I've known a number of college people with that belief. No actual professionals
Which simple question? You've asked or discussed several things.
Understand, I normally support user requests for options even when I wouldn't personally need or use them. I've both posted a ton of UserVoice now "Ideas" things myself, and upvoted other ideas by the bucket full.
But some things are not really that needed across the user base than others. While allowing more user options for UI especially brightness and text color would be helpful, some ideas are a bit of a waste.
@R Neil Haugen, according to you, all PS users (including pro retouchers) are amateurs, because they have this feature... LOL 🙂 But that's not true, it's just another tool which expands the horizons and makes editing more comfortable.
If you don’t like the idea, just don’t embarrass yourself with these comments. And don't pretend you're not seeing the text in italics, otherwise I'm getting worried about your eyesight.
12
Replies
AdChoices