4 ms·

The article isn't very concise and is actually quite repetitive, it uses a bunch of jargon (without any description), and shifts blame around. The topics are i

The article isn't very concise and is actually quite repetitive, it uses a bunch of jargon (without any description), and shifts blame around. The topics are interesting and the opinions are there, but it certainly could be written better. As a programmer who has done a small amount of work in graphics but hasn't worked in HDR rendering I have no idea what any of these are.... film LUT color grading post process LUT color grade ...but I could write the linked-to shader. So who is he helping? > It alters between putting the blame on technical limitations and ignorance, so I would have liked to see a suggestion on how to address either of these. I second this.

mattnewport 9y ago
I think the audience is other games graphics programmers and technical artists who can be expected to understand all this terminology. As a game graphics programmer the article was written appropriately assuming I'm representative of his intended audience (which is implied by his use of 'we').
jacobolus 9y ago
CLUT = color look-up table color grading = adjusting the color in an image, as you might do in Photoshop or whatever post process = any image adjustment that happens after the image is originally captured This author is assuming a basic background in lighting / human vision / film technology.
- xigency 9y ago
  Yes, I understand the acronyms, but they are being used as jargon, not in a instructive way. If I were to talk about a web framework and say, "we've got our JSON files wrong and our package configs are cluttered, and don't get me started on the XML files," it's clear that it is metonymy [1]. Knowing that JSON is JavaScript Object Notation, the package.json is used for Node Package Manager, and that XML is a file format doesn't capture the feeling that a developer might have reading that sentence, and it doesn't instruct. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metonymy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metonymy From the article: >>> It was Reinhard in years past, then it was Hable, now it’s ACES RRT. And it’s stop #1 on the train of Why does every game this year look exactly the goddamn same? If the problem the author is facing is a gap between art skills and technical skills, then the post could be less angry and more informative about color theory or rendering technology, maybe bridging the needed skills.
  - jacobolus 9y ago
    If you were writing for an audience of people who work with web frameworks all the time, writing JSON and XML and whatever would be entirely reasonable. Though if you look to the sidebar, you can see the author’s recent tweets: > Tonight in "alarming discoveries" is that I went into my WP stats to find heavy traffic from Reddit. From r/pcgaming no less - blech. > Practical consequence is that I'm going to have to write future entries from more basic principles, because this is getting out of hand. So maybe you’ll get your wish.
  - blattimwind 9y ago
    The title of the blog is literally "vent[ing] space".
    - xigency 9y ago
      Sure. I feel like this discussion has drifted away from the original comment and reply. Great vent, mediocre article.
- blattimwind 9y ago
  > adjusting the color in an image, as you might do in Photoshop or whatever Photoshop is a very basic tool for this. Color grading tools used in the industry are far more advanced than the options offered in PS, take a peek at Resolve (free).
  - jacobolus 9y ago
    I’m just defining a term, hence the “or whatever”. But personally I find Photoshop to be more flexible and more capable than any of these film tools I’ve looked at, none of which seem to be capable of the kind of (very non-standard) workflow I use in Photoshop. Photoshop tools (layers, masks, adjustment layers [especially curves, and more recently full color lookup tables], blend modes) can be combined in very sophisticated ways which can be set up via a macro action, whereas most of these other tools are a bit more prescriptive. For example I can build my own “hue vs. hue” tool (from the Resolve marketing video) out of more basic Photoshop building blocks, and set up an action to pop one up with a keystroke. To be fair Photoshop also has piles of highly constrained single-purpose tools, most of which are outdated and relatively useless. But none of these tools was ever designed with a user in mind who would think abstractly about building blocks and means of combination. More abstract and generic functional-boxes + arrows kind of interface could probably do better from a flexibility perspective, but can be a pain in the butt to use. Someone with a color science, user interface design, and art background and a lot of time to experiment who was trying to make a tool for professionals could also certainly do a heck of a lot better. Most of the individual user interface components in these tools [including photoshop] are pretty uncreative and inflexible. Maybe this will be me in a few years when I have some more time, we’ll see. Admittedly I deal with still images, not video.
    - lozenge 9y ago
      Resolve exactly lets you put your layers in graphs instead of have them linear. It also lets a later layer bring back detail that was removed in a previous layer, while Photoshop doesn't. Here's an example: https://youtu.be/YxUoW5_gMjQ https://youtu.be/YxUoW5_gMjQ
      - 9y ago
banachtarski 9y ago
The article is intended for graphics engineers. All those terms are pretty fundamental and something I expect a graphics engineer working even ~6 months professionally to fully grasp.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
moogleii 9y ago
Have you considered that you're not the target audience?

mattnewport 9y ago

I think the audience is other games graphics programmers and technical artists who can be expected to understand all this terminology. As a game graphics programmer the article was written appropriately assuming I'm representative of his intended audience (which is implied by his use of 'we').

jacobolus 9y ago

CLUT = color look-up table color grading = adjusting the color in an image, as you might do in Photoshop or whatever post process = any image adjustment that happens after the image is originally captured This author is assuming a basic background in lighting / human vision / film technology.

xigency 9y ago
Yes, I understand the acronyms, but they are being used as jargon, not in a instructive way. If I were to talk about a web framework and say, "we've got our JSON files wrong and our package configs are cluttered, and don't get me started on the XML files," it's clear that it is metonymy [1]. Knowing that JSON is JavaScript Object Notation, the package.json is used for Node Package Manager, and that XML is a file format doesn't capture the feeling that a developer might have reading that sentence, and it doesn't instruct. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metonymy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metonymy From the article: >>> It was Reinhard in years past, then it was Hable, now it’s ACES RRT. And it’s stop #1 on the train of Why does every game this year look exactly the goddamn same? If the problem the author is facing is a gap between art skills and technical skills, then the post could be less angry and more informative about color theory or rendering technology, maybe bridging the needed skills.
- jacobolus 9y ago
  If you were writing for an audience of people who work with web frameworks all the time, writing JSON and XML and whatever would be entirely reasonable. Though if you look to the sidebar, you can see the author’s recent tweets: > Tonight in "alarming discoveries" is that I went into my WP stats to find heavy traffic from Reddit. From r/pcgaming no less - blech. > Practical consequence is that I'm going to have to write future entries from more basic principles, because this is getting out of hand. So maybe you’ll get your wish.
- blattimwind 9y ago
  The title of the blog is literally "vent[ing] space".
  - xigency 9y ago
    Sure. I feel like this discussion has drifted away from the original comment and reply. Great vent, mediocre article.
blattimwind 9y ago
> adjusting the color in an image, as you might do in Photoshop or whatever Photoshop is a very basic tool for this. Color grading tools used in the industry are far more advanced than the options offered in PS, take a peek at Resolve (free).
- jacobolus 9y ago
  I’m just defining a term, hence the “or whatever”. But personally I find Photoshop to be more flexible and more capable than any of these film tools I’ve looked at, none of which seem to be capable of the kind of (very non-standard) workflow I use in Photoshop. Photoshop tools (layers, masks, adjustment layers [especially curves, and more recently full color lookup tables], blend modes) can be combined in very sophisticated ways which can be set up via a macro action, whereas most of these other tools are a bit more prescriptive. For example I can build my own “hue vs. hue” tool (from the Resolve marketing video) out of more basic Photoshop building blocks, and set up an action to pop one up with a keystroke. To be fair Photoshop also has piles of highly constrained single-purpose tools, most of which are outdated and relatively useless. But none of these tools was ever designed with a user in mind who would think abstractly about building blocks and means of combination. More abstract and generic functional-boxes + arrows kind of interface could probably do better from a flexibility perspective, but can be a pain in the butt to use. Someone with a color science, user interface design, and art background and a lot of time to experiment who was trying to make a tool for professionals could also certainly do a heck of a lot better. Most of the individual user interface components in these tools [including photoshop] are pretty uncreative and inflexible. Maybe this will be me in a few years when I have some more time, we’ll see. Admittedly I deal with still images, not video.
  - lozenge 9y ago
    Resolve exactly lets you put your layers in graphs instead of have them linear. It also lets a later layer bring back detail that was removed in a previous layer, while Photoshop doesn't. Here's an example: https://youtu.be/YxUoW5_gMjQ https://youtu.be/YxUoW5_gMjQ
    - 9y ago

banachtarski 9y ago

The article is intended for graphics engineers. All those terms are pretty fundamental and something I expect a graphics engineer working even ~6 months professionally to fully grasp.

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]

moogleii 9y ago

Have you considered that you're not the target audience?