Monday, November 26, 2018
An Essay on Setting
A mini essay on setting in creative writing.
Thanks to the west side half-price bookstore I am now the proud owner of a complete set of the Writer's Digest ' Write Great Fiction' how to do it books. The one on the desk beside me is titled Descriptions & Settings. The how-to page that I am writing about states that everything you include in your description should advance your plot and story. In other words your written description should not just be a collection of what you see around you.
When I look over to the corner of the room where I am writing this I see a poster of Robert Doisneau's Kiss at the Hotel De Ville. Suitable for a story about a street photographer who finds himself in serious trouble after snapping a picture of – fill in the blanks.
Or it could be the grumpy old grandpa stuffed teddy bear complete with a cane. Suitable for a memoir about my very creative granddaughter after she wins her first Tony award. Not impossible fiction. I just contributed a significant amount of money to help pay for the professional crew coming in from New York who will make the high school girl playing Mary Poppins float around the stage in a play where my granddaughter is the stage manager. And if she finishes her own first play and her teachers approve it the school's drama department will stage it next May. Her high school, now that the family moved to Nashville, is very big on the creative arts.
Or the overly expensive digital pen that works with my new Win10 surface book. A pen in the box that is sitting near a stack of large envelopes that might contain a long-lost novel. Only this is the digital age, not the paper age. When I went down into the cellar to find a carrying case for the notebook among the seven several obsolete laptops I had collected over the years I discovered one with an ancient memory stick.
Much to my surprise this contained a folder entitled 1994 novel. This novel was so long-lost I had forgotten that I had written it. After some creative format shifting so I could print it out – this was written pre-Microsoft office in the near-forgotten WordPerfect. I showed an early chapter at a casual critique last spring. And listened as Kristin and Anthony pointed out everything that had left them confused in the chapter.
Big take away – I had written a fantasy novel and had forgotten to include the most important setting when writing in that genre. The part that explains how the magic works. For example, the magic in Harry Potter is quite different than the magic in the Game of Thrones.
I should've started with: The Talisman of the Wildflowers is the first novel of a fantasy series about honorable Men, smelly Dwarfs, ferocious Elves, irresponsible Fairies, and brutal Trolls. Sound familiar? Let's vary the basic plot. In about ten minutes the electricity goes out forever, magic replaces science, and homo-sapiens begin to divide into the five competing Peoples. We pick up the story seventeen years after the Change in a world both magical and ordinary. Zombied dogs and chocolate chip cookies, frenzied demons and bureaucratic politicians, compulsive love spells and zoning regulations-- all become important during the story.
For heroines, heroes and villains:
Maggie Weaver appears to be only a magic-impaired street peddler and boarding house keeper, but with much hard work and some unsuspected magical talents, she amasses a considerable fortune. With the death of her protector, Mage Fatso Freddy, she faces big problems. Chief among them is Dun&Brad, her banker, who wants to steal her money. In this society were magical talents equals status, Maggie gave up dreaming of respect; she will settle for being left alone. Instead two uninvited magicians become unwanted house-guests.
Amy Parker seldom hampers her romantic imagination with mere facts. Forced to assist in her Ma's execution when she was eleven, the teenage street-thief uses her considerable if untrained grasp of high magic to harass anyone with authority. Amy wants to be a magic-warrior, the rock stars of the age, but as she might settle for a dreamy boyfriend. When she get both wishes, she comes to regret it. As Amy gains a matures and begin to understand and use her talents. Her stumbles help drive the main plot.
Archmage Allen Devlin seeks the cause of the Blight, a corruption of magic so subtle he still doesn't know if he battles an Elf warlord, Fairy joker, Dwarf high priestess or an other adept. The somewhat chauvinistic mage (he's the type of hero you want to kick occasionally) has everything he wants: more money than he can spend, the freedom to wander about in disguise, and a convenient network of girlfriends who think he's someone else. What he doesn't want is a permanent address, a more or less permanent girlfriend, or the drudge work of being part of a government. In a humorous sub-plot he ends up with all three.
Mage Eric the Engineer, is considered a joke by some adepts because of his efforts to apply the discredited techniques of science to magic. Then he discovers power-matrixes, a short-cut method of devising new spells. He wants to impose his version of law and order on the world. When he fights Amy in the Battle on the Cliffs at the climax of Zelda's Comb, will experience and power-matrixes overwhelm youth and raw talent?
Evita the Beautiful, the Mistress of Illusions and Eric's cohort, is obsessed by her physical deformities. When she accidentally releases Demon Emil, she is forced to Distances herself and becomes a sea-lion-like serf-breeder in an aquatic alternate universe. She wants to be reincarnated into a better body. In Spice Inc, Evita enchants her and Eric's spirits into Amy's unborn twins. (Amy won her dream boyfriend... for a while.) Can Amy exorcise the evil adepts? Or will she be forced to destroy her own children?
A few of the supporting cast:
Corrine, Maggie's orphan niece, used to be the "nicest kid in the world until she got her hormones." Then she became cursed with Urges, magical compulsions that turn her promiscuous at inopportune moments.
Justin the Magic Thief blames Devlin for the death of his girlfriend, yet reluctantly becomes the Archmage's trouble-shooter-- because that's where the action is.
Someone enchanted Lori to hate all male magicians-- including Micky, her baby boy. And Micky's pa, Bluey the Wizard, AKA the Archmage in disguise, has eleven magical prodigies that prove that the gene of magic doesn't skip generations.
The snobbish Furgerson clan provide comic relief. Blushing Jimmy, the only nice one, maybe loves Amy and maybe doesn't. Rachael, Amy's future tutor, thinks a little hanky-panky with the Archmage can only help her career. April, a world-class shopper and the Archmage's permanent girlfriend, doesn't agree.
Tuesday, March 28, 2017
Tuesday, August 4, 2015
Build 269-A final, for a couple months, wavelet tool
In earlier tutorials I've worked with raw files I've taken. Now, for several reasons including some consistent criticism that I haven't written the book that explains the intricacies of every slider and curve in tools as complicated as RT's wavelets, my tutorials will use raws and jpgs available on the internet. Then anyone can duplicate my setting and if they are interested in the other settings...go for it. Just come back and tell us if you discover something interesting.
My source is http://www.photographyblog.com/reviews/ They have a very large collection of raws, often with matching jpgs, from a multitude of cameras. The images I used for this tutorial shows a family group at the end of a subway corridor that are almost lost in the darkness and ISO128000 noise. A challenging shot that will showcase several RT tools.
The link for the jpg--we will compare the RT results with the straight out of the camera results--is
http://img.photographyblog.com/reviews/panasonic_lumix_dmc_g7/sample_images/panasonic_lumix_dmc_g7_36.jpg The matching raw file is panasonic_lumix_dmc_g7_36.rw2
If you haven't upgraded to the windows build RT 4.2.269 or mac RT 4.2.270 do so immediately. If you are working with wavelets any earlier build will disappoint. Build 269 is stable (no crashes in about a week) and has several new features and bug fixes (a beta release for RT 4.3 maybe) plus some new documentation.
Jacques, the chief developer behind wavelets and CIECAM has posted an updated RawPedia article in french. I'm sure is makes great reading if you are fluent in technical french, but after going through google translates the meaning has been mangled in some sections. Example, when you come to a confusing sentence about a 'beach' the correct translation is 'range' as in range of values. But for the most part it is understandable and in this tutorial I will try to expand on what you will learn there
Wavelets are 3 dimensional. This mathematical third dimension is one of the reasons you see three sliders in many sub tools; two of which will confuse you because they seem to do nothing or make the image worse, Some reasons for this behavior are:
1- they work much better with a different type of image
2-they are in the tool because Jacques and team have future surprises planned
3-they are there because Jacques and team hopes we users will come up with some of the new surprises.
So if you hit a slider or curve that confuses you leave it at the defaults. They have been carefully chosen to work with the majority of images.
Enough talk, the workflow: Lets see what we can do with this image
This is the matching jpg to the raw file we will use, ISO 12800 and SOOTC, The goal is to create as decent an image as possible of the family group that are barely visible at the end of the subway tunnel without completely destroying the detail by the handrail in the foreground
*****
I started with the the residual image tool. It got its name because it was what was left over after the calculations extracted the wavelets. What you do to the wavelets doesn't change it. And vice versa. You must recombine them either on your RT screen in real time in a 100% view or after a trip to the queue. That's one disadvantage when developing wavelet workflows. To chase down all the smal artifacts I develop test jpgs at key steps so I can look at them with other programs. Such as imageJ, a widely used and free NIH scientific image analysis program.
You can modify the residual image with non wavelet tools. The shadow and highlight sliders lighten or darken their areas of the images. Their matching threshold sliders decides how large an area they effect. In past tutorials I recommenced using CIECAM for contrast and chroma because of the tool's curves. Now with the new final tuneup curves ...you pays your penny and takes your pick.
With this image the shadow slider brightens the family group so I can see how bad the noise is.
*****
It is ISO12800 bad, clearly what Jacques calls high noise in his rawPedia article. I'm pleased that the noise reduction workflow I touched on in my Lorde tutorial is now his recommended workflow. In the program flow the preliminary noise reduction in the second tab is now before the color conversion step. The wavelet denoise is now at the end and is intended to clean up any additional noise and artifacts created by sharpening and other adjustments.
*****
For the noise preclean I chose Lum 70 and Detail 30. Depending on the final results I can fine tune these numbers.
*****
To lighten the back area more I tone mapped the image. While wavelet tone mapping is less aggressive and more artifact free than RT's earlier version when it is combined with its gamma slider it can lighten and darken to both extremes.
It's worth mentioning that tone mapping works on the signal side of the all important signal to noise ratio just as noise reduction works on the noise side. RT tone mapping uncovers noise in dark areas. It doesn't create it. We are prone to saying the new full frame camera we bough to collect more light the light in its bigger pixels makes less noisy images, Instead, when the exposure collects four times the light-- four times greater signal-- that is combined with twice the noise to double the signal to noise ratio. This may sound like super geek nit picking but I've seen forum discussions go off the rails into making wrong claims when people didn't understand or take into account the difference. A recent claim I've seen that tone curve also causes noise is one example.
*****
To bring back the sharpness lost with the initial noise reductions I used edge sharpening with edge detection checked. That sub tool tames edge sharpening. The first slider, gradiant sensitivity, determines the amount of taming, The second noise slider checks for nearby noise. With low ISO images it has no effect; with high ISO images it increases the sharpening and can create artifacts. The last slider depends on the image and the other settings and can increase or decrease sharpness.
I followed my own advice and used the default values in the subtool. I set the sharpness, changed first level to unchanged and dragged out another contrast curve before I pulled up a 300 % view for a good look at the increased noise.
If it had been much worst I might have increased the Lum settings. Instead I went to wavelet denoise
*****
A combination of denoise and impulse noise reduction from the second detail tab--combining the two is a class 3 tip --cleaned up real noise exposed by sharpening and a few L shaped artifacts visible in 300% view. Since the goal of this workflow was to fix the darkest area in a ISO12800 image we have to live with some loss of sharpening.
I left the bottom denoise slider at zero. Ever since I began working with wavelet I wondered why anyone would add a slider that increased the noise to a noise reduction algorithm. Jacques latest RawPedia article explained all. Take a 30sec dark night image and the slider brings out the stars in all their glory. Another example of what seems useless or worse with one type of images my be very useful with another quite different type.
The developers didn't include all the sliders in a big joke to confuse us users. They all have a purpose and it's our job to work out the neat little photo tricks they allow.
In his RawPedia article Jacques also cautions about not expecting decent results if you use a saved pp3 on a different image. On this I think he is being over cautious. If you use a saved pp3 that was perfect for a close up of a rose in bright sunlight on one of the ninety concert hall stage shots of your favorite pop-rock band you won't be happy. But if you develop one of the stage shots and use it in the file browser to develop the other 89 stages shots you are well on the way towards fine tuning the three perfect shots you will post and brag about on your Facebook page.
*****
I used a parameter curve in the new Fine Tune tool to even out the lighting in the corridor, Now the histogram is bunched up in the center and needs to be expanded for a better black to white contrast range. So I went to CIECAM.
*****
CIECAM contrast and a touch of colorfullness fixed the problem, So how did we do?
*****
Photographybogs.com's untouched camera jpg vs RT's greatly improved jpg.
*****
A roughly neutral grey S/N improvement from about 10 to almost a 100...
*****
at the cost of a very slight loss of contrast--see the lines on the meter--that no one would notice if the two images weren't shown side by side.
*****
A scaled down version (for the blog) of the original photographyblog jpg and the RT jpg. If you aren't impressed you must be working for an enemy big bucks image editor company. (grin)
My source is http://www.photographyblog.com/reviews/ They have a very large collection of raws, often with matching jpgs, from a multitude of cameras. The images I used for this tutorial shows a family group at the end of a subway corridor that are almost lost in the darkness and ISO128000 noise. A challenging shot that will showcase several RT tools.
The link for the jpg--we will compare the RT results with the straight out of the camera results--is
http://img.photographyblog.com/reviews/panasonic_lumix_dmc_g7/sample_images/panasonic_lumix_dmc_g7_36.jpg The matching raw file is panasonic_lumix_dmc_g7_36.rw2
If you haven't upgraded to the windows build RT 4.2.269 or mac RT 4.2.270 do so immediately. If you are working with wavelets any earlier build will disappoint. Build 269 is stable (no crashes in about a week) and has several new features and bug fixes (a beta release for RT 4.3 maybe) plus some new documentation.
Jacques, the chief developer behind wavelets and CIECAM has posted an updated RawPedia article in french. I'm sure is makes great reading if you are fluent in technical french, but after going through google translates the meaning has been mangled in some sections. Example, when you come to a confusing sentence about a 'beach' the correct translation is 'range' as in range of values. But for the most part it is understandable and in this tutorial I will try to expand on what you will learn there
Wavelets are 3 dimensional. This mathematical third dimension is one of the reasons you see three sliders in many sub tools; two of which will confuse you because they seem to do nothing or make the image worse, Some reasons for this behavior are:
1- they work much better with a different type of image
2-they are in the tool because Jacques and team have future surprises planned
3-they are there because Jacques and team hopes we users will come up with some of the new surprises.
So if you hit a slider or curve that confuses you leave it at the defaults. They have been carefully chosen to work with the majority of images.
Enough talk, the workflow: Lets see what we can do with this image
This is the matching jpg to the raw file we will use, ISO 12800 and SOOTC, The goal is to create as decent an image as possible of the family group that are barely visible at the end of the subway tunnel without completely destroying the detail by the handrail in the foreground
*****
I started with the the residual image tool. It got its name because it was what was left over after the calculations extracted the wavelets. What you do to the wavelets doesn't change it. And vice versa. You must recombine them either on your RT screen in real time in a 100% view or after a trip to the queue. That's one disadvantage when developing wavelet workflows. To chase down all the smal artifacts I develop test jpgs at key steps so I can look at them with other programs. Such as imageJ, a widely used and free NIH scientific image analysis program.
You can modify the residual image with non wavelet tools. The shadow and highlight sliders lighten or darken their areas of the images. Their matching threshold sliders decides how large an area they effect. In past tutorials I recommenced using CIECAM for contrast and chroma because of the tool's curves. Now with the new final tuneup curves ...you pays your penny and takes your pick.
With this image the shadow slider brightens the family group so I can see how bad the noise is.
*****
It is ISO12800 bad, clearly what Jacques calls high noise in his rawPedia article. I'm pleased that the noise reduction workflow I touched on in my Lorde tutorial is now his recommended workflow. In the program flow the preliminary noise reduction in the second tab is now before the color conversion step. The wavelet denoise is now at the end and is intended to clean up any additional noise and artifacts created by sharpening and other adjustments.
*****
For the noise preclean I chose Lum 70 and Detail 30. Depending on the final results I can fine tune these numbers.
*****
To lighten the back area more I tone mapped the image. While wavelet tone mapping is less aggressive and more artifact free than RT's earlier version when it is combined with its gamma slider it can lighten and darken to both extremes.
It's worth mentioning that tone mapping works on the signal side of the all important signal to noise ratio just as noise reduction works on the noise side. RT tone mapping uncovers noise in dark areas. It doesn't create it. We are prone to saying the new full frame camera we bough to collect more light the light in its bigger pixels makes less noisy images, Instead, when the exposure collects four times the light-- four times greater signal-- that is combined with twice the noise to double the signal to noise ratio. This may sound like super geek nit picking but I've seen forum discussions go off the rails into making wrong claims when people didn't understand or take into account the difference. A recent claim I've seen that tone curve also causes noise is one example.
*****
To bring back the sharpness lost with the initial noise reductions I used edge sharpening with edge detection checked. That sub tool tames edge sharpening. The first slider, gradiant sensitivity, determines the amount of taming, The second noise slider checks for nearby noise. With low ISO images it has no effect; with high ISO images it increases the sharpening and can create artifacts. The last slider depends on the image and the other settings and can increase or decrease sharpness.
I followed my own advice and used the default values in the subtool. I set the sharpness, changed first level to unchanged and dragged out another contrast curve before I pulled up a 300 % view for a good look at the increased noise.
If it had been much worst I might have increased the Lum settings. Instead I went to wavelet denoise
*****
A combination of denoise and impulse noise reduction from the second detail tab--combining the two is a class 3 tip --cleaned up real noise exposed by sharpening and a few L shaped artifacts visible in 300% view. Since the goal of this workflow was to fix the darkest area in a ISO12800 image we have to live with some loss of sharpening.
I left the bottom denoise slider at zero. Ever since I began working with wavelet I wondered why anyone would add a slider that increased the noise to a noise reduction algorithm. Jacques latest RawPedia article explained all. Take a 30sec dark night image and the slider brings out the stars in all their glory. Another example of what seems useless or worse with one type of images my be very useful with another quite different type.
The developers didn't include all the sliders in a big joke to confuse us users. They all have a purpose and it's our job to work out the neat little photo tricks they allow.
In his RawPedia article Jacques also cautions about not expecting decent results if you use a saved pp3 on a different image. On this I think he is being over cautious. If you use a saved pp3 that was perfect for a close up of a rose in bright sunlight on one of the ninety concert hall stage shots of your favorite pop-rock band you won't be happy. But if you develop one of the stage shots and use it in the file browser to develop the other 89 stages shots you are well on the way towards fine tuning the three perfect shots you will post and brag about on your Facebook page.
*****
I used a parameter curve in the new Fine Tune tool to even out the lighting in the corridor, Now the histogram is bunched up in the center and needs to be expanded for a better black to white contrast range. So I went to CIECAM.
*****
CIECAM contrast and a touch of colorfullness fixed the problem, So how did we do?
*****
Photographybogs.com's untouched camera jpg vs RT's greatly improved jpg.
*****
A roughly neutral grey S/N improvement from about 10 to almost a 100...
*****
at the cost of a very slight loss of contrast--see the lines on the meter--that no one would notice if the two images weren't shown side by side.
*****
A scaled down version (for the blog) of the original photographyblog jpg and the RT jpg. If you aren't impressed you must be working for an enemy big bucks image editor company. (grin)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)