I have a workflow which takes a given image and converts it to sRGB, then scales it, does very minor luminance and exposure adjusting, then exports to a JPEG. Today I noticed that it does not produce as saturated an image as taking the same Photoshop file and just exporting to an sRGB JPEG directly out of Photoshop. The more saturated JPEG is in fact closer to the onscreen appearance in Photoshop itself. See below for the comparison. Any thoughts?
The first question I have - does the preview that Retrobatch is showing match what the output is you’re getting? Or does it look different once the file is written to disk?
The filters in PS are not a one to one match with Retrobatch, so some adjustments will be necessary.
Not sure how to see the preview in Retrobatch. I took the workflow, turned off the “Write Images” node, and ran it on the file in question, but nothing ever shows up in the preview pane I see in the workflow editor. I usually use Retrobatch workflows as applets, so I’m not used to looking for a preview… For now, this is a difference I am seeing once the new file is written to disk.
In other testing, I did disable the Sharpen Luminance and Exposure Adjust nodes to make it a more fair comparison, but that doesn’t seem to affect the overall color saturation difference which I am seeing.
If you’re only ever using it as a droplet, then you won’t see a preview. Otherwise you can drag and drop and image into the canvas and hook it up to your node - then click on the Write node and the preview will appear.
I’d love to see what the original image looks like, along with your workflow. If you can send them to support@flyingmeat.com, I can take a look.