# Photoshopping in YouTube videos



## greencare (Sep 14, 2019)

I was watching a YouTube video (not going to mention names but you can probably find it) that was posted today (6/21) about summer heat/stress, and I noticed drone photoshopping going on to make the lawn appear darker green from above than it actually was. I mean, it was terrible; the photoshop, and the deception. The photoshop was so terrible that even the mower stripes were blurred out in the front lawn. My god. At least get pro to do the photoshop for you. :roll:

No more YouTube videos from this guy for me.


----------



## cbagz (May 12, 2020)

Real estate listings are notorious for photoshopping lawns to appear better than they actually are.








All photos were taken during a 45 minute timeframe. The first two photos you can see what the actual backyard looked like and the bottom two are what it was photoshopped to look like.


----------



## greencare (Sep 14, 2019)

@cbagz

Can't see the photos, but a good, green lawn certainly raises the appeal of any house. But one shouldn't deceive. I immediately walk away from any deception, no matter how good the deal might be. I won't complain or even ask for explanation as further time spent would be time wasted.


----------



## Green (Dec 24, 2017)

Back in the 80s and 90s, everyone used reversal (slide) film, and underexposed by 1/3 to 1/2 stop to saturate and deepen the color. They also tended to shoot with polarizing filters. All the garden books, Scotts lawn brochures, etc. Nothing renders green lawns quite like that, even now. But it's a natural look, still.


----------



## cbagz (May 12, 2020)

@greencare

Corrected the photos.

Had I been looking at that house and seen how it was misrepresented I would have been very mad.


----------



## Killsocket (Mar 16, 2018)

greencare said:


> I was watching a YouTube video (not going to mention names but you can probably find it) that was posted today (6/21) about summer heat/stress, and I noticed drone photoshopping going on to make the lawn appear darker green from above than it actually was. I mean, it was terrible; the photoshop, and the deception. The photoshop was so terrible that even the mower stripes were blurred out in the front lawn. My god. At least get pro to do the photoshop for you. :roll:
> 
> No more YouTube videos from this guy for me.


Went back and watched and now see exactly what you see. So disappointed. Has a killer yard and still alters the image. :roll:


----------



## dfw_pilot (Jan 28, 2017)

Green said:


> Back in the 80s and 90s, everyone used reversal (slide) film, and underexposed by 1/3 to 1/2 stop to saturate and deepen the color.


I miss the way Velvia pushed the green so well (your favorite color, of course!). I miss Velvia 50!


----------



## Green (Dec 24, 2017)

dfw_pilot said:


> I miss the way Velvia pushed the green so well (your favorite color, of course!). I miss Velvia 50!


Green definitely. But also red, purple/blue, and neutrals.

I still have a couple hundred feet of the original Velvia 50. You know how they used to pack it in 100' spools. One of these days.

If you want to do it, just order a couple of rolls of the current version ($$) from B&H or whoever, a couple of Fuji E6 mailers (which go to Dwayne's...the famous last Kodachrome lab a while back), and load up an old 35mm camera. I guarantee it'll be a great experience.

And yes, I'm into lawns because green is my favorite color...no joke. I don't think I could do it if grass were some other color. Also, very happy the @mentions are green now.


----------



## ryanknorr (Jun 2, 2017)

greencare said:


> I was watching a YouTube video (not going to mention names but you can probably find it) that was posted today (6/21) about summer heat/stress, and I noticed drone photoshopping going on to make the lawn appear darker green from above than it actually was. I mean, it was terrible; the photoshop, and the deception. The photoshop was so terrible that even the mower stripes were blurred out in the front lawn. My god. At least get pro to do the photoshop for you. :roll:
> 
> No more YouTube videos from this guy for me.


I'm assuming you don't understand you can't photoshop moving video and an angle of the sun changes the way stripes appear or do not appear. Any raw files you want to see I can gladly upload for you straight from the camera.


----------



## ryanknorr (Jun 2, 2017)

Killsocket said:


> greencare said:
> 
> 
> > I was watching a YouTube video (not going to mention names but you can probably find it) that was posted today (6/21) about summer heat/stress, and I noticed drone photoshopping going on to make the lawn appear darker green from above than it actually was. I mean, it was terrible; the photoshop, and the deception. The photoshop was so terrible that even the mower stripes were blurred out in the front lawn. My god. At least get pro to do the photoshop for you. :roll:
> ...


Nothing altered about it. Stripes don't appear when you haven't mowed them in yet


----------



## greencare (Sep 14, 2019)

Well, Ryan, since you came out as the producer, I will just let the people decide from this screencap:


----------



## Green (Dec 24, 2017)

I don't see anything altered there. What I do see, is youtube compression reducing the bit depth of the video (all video except raw capture does this), so the colors for screen capture don't reflect the colors of nature, but the colors that the video encodes, and your screen displays.

Plus, as far as color psychology goes, we are looking at green grass surrounded by partly brown grass. The difference in color saturation is exaggerated in the visual cortex. due to this.

You can't entirely separate the two effects, either. The interplay is highly synergistic. Therefore, you cannot divorce yourself from either effect, or from both effects combined together.

And all video is processed, whether in camera or in post. So are all photos. It's just how it works. Everything gets encoded, and the artist or documentation needs to use their discretion if they capture a photo in raw. This is why commercial photogs shoot color checker grids and have calibrated monitors generally.


----------



## greencare (Sep 14, 2019)

Green said:


> I don't see anything altered there. What I do see, is youtube compression reducing the bit depth of the video (all video except raw capture does this), so the colors for screen capture don't reflect the colors of nature, but the colors that the video encodes, and your screen displays.
> 
> Plus, as far as color psychology goes, we are looking at green grass surrounded by partly brown grass. The difference in color saturation is exaggerated in the visual cortex. due to this.
> 
> You can't entirely separate the two effects, either. The interplay is highly synergistic. Yo cannot divorce yourself from either or both effects together.


That's farfetched blaming YouTube. Since this only seems to be applying to his front lawn and not the back lawn, or other lawns around him. Not to mention at very precise locations in his front lawn. Pay attention to the border edge at the top.

I had my suspicion of him buffing it dark green early on in the video, but when I reached that exactly spot, with the clear difference between back and front, it was confirmed.

View the screen capture in full size to see the difference at the edges.


----------



## Green (Dec 24, 2017)

greencare said:


> That's farfetched blaming YouTube. Since this only seems to be applying to his front lawn and not the back lawn, or other lawns around him. Not to mention at very precise locations in his front lawn.


Not really. Once you look into what colors are actually available in the color space for the video format and how the codec compresses it (I'm guessing Mpeg is used, but I'm a stills guy and not a video guy) you will see that the color values assigned are just an approximation. It's never going to look as it would in person, on-screen.

But I think that's the lesser of the two effects, the main one in this case being the color contrast formed by the brown and other roughly neutral tones surrounding it and taking up a larger percentage of the frame. Your brain is going to lock onto that green in this case...and amplify it comparatively.

The other thing is, everyone has slightly different color vision due to differences in cone pigments, and their spectral response. It's never going to look exactly the same to me as it does to you.


----------



## greencare (Sep 14, 2019)

Green said:


> greencare said:
> 
> 
> > That's farfetched blaming YouTube. Since this only seems to be applying to his front lawn and not the back lawn, or other lawns around him. Not to mention at very precise locations in his front lawn.
> ...


You are engaging in repetition.


----------



## Green (Dec 24, 2017)

The other thing is...Perennial Ryegrass is truly a dark green. The color in the video is not actually that far off from reality, even though it's not exact due to the reasons I mentioned. And you have a whole front lawn composed of it. And it's highly reflective as well when light hits the backside, which has that plastic-like texture. I also think short-cut grass just reflects light better in general, too, because it's not laying over as much as longer grass. So, the "white" stripes (where the grass is laying over rather than coming toward you) aren't going to reflect quite as much white light on short-cut turf as on longer turf (with more blade surface area bent over). So, you get more green (since it's all due to reflection angles and the angles are smaller in a shorter blade), and a slightly darker striping pattern to the camera, with a bit less variation in color between stripes, but more saturation in general. At least that's how I see it.


----------



## g-man (Jun 15, 2017)

@greencarethats not photoshop (Final Cut). That area you highlight is the area he is testing different KBG seeds, so it will have a different color plus it is in a slope (see his washout videos). Also, on a reel mow lawn, the stripes/sun makes a huge difference in how it looks. I can see the stripes on my lawn for 3 mows back sometimes.

Lastly, look at the area behind the shed. Yes the area that looks bad with dog pee everywhere. Why will he photoshop the narrow strip from the back and not the obvious dog pee spots?

Now there is another YT person that does photoshop their still images. The roof shingles and street asphalt turn way darker.


----------



## greencare (Sep 14, 2019)

Green said:


> The other thing is...Perennial Ryegrass is truly a dark green. The color in the video is not actually that far off from reality, even though it's not exact due to the reasons I mentioned. And you have a whole front lawn composed of it. And it's highly reflective as well when light hits the backside, which has that plastic-like texture. I also think short-cut grass just reflects light better in general, too, because it's not laying over as much as longer grass. So, the "white" stripes (where the grass is laying over rather than coming toward you) aren't going to reflect quite as much white light on short-cut turf as on longer turf (with more blade surface area bent over). So, you get more green (since it's all due to reflection angles and the angles are smaller in a shorter blade), and a slightly darker striping pattern to the camera, with a bit less variation in color between stripes, but more saturation in general. At least that's how I see it.


It not only attempts to look more green, dark green to be precise, but buffed. But only buffed at exactly around his properly line. I believe the sides were KBG, right?

@g-man Almost all shots in the video show both front and back having similar, buffed, dark-green look, except for the first one I posted. I am not sure what happened. I can theorize, but that is not important. For example, here is that stripped back lawn smoothed out dark green to match the front lawn in color and texture:


----------



## Green (Dec 24, 2017)

Two more comments and then I'm done here.

I'm trying to help everyone understand how light and image capture alters color, and interacts with our vision.

1. All the youtubers who are using drones have very saturated greens when viewed from straight down or close to straight down. Ever see Pete's 4th of July video? We don't usually view out lawns from straight down (unless we either have a drone, or we are standing in the middle of it, looking straight down). Angles matter with light reflection. It's the same thing as how the striping works. Time of day, too. A good photographer or cinematographer learns to use the lighting conditions to create the effect they want.

2. I would say part of the reason for the exaggerated color begins in the camera itself. Most CMOS sensors use a Bayer pattern or some variant of it. And the layout of the sensor is G-R-G-B. So, there's twice the number of green pixels as either red or blue in a typical sensor. That makes the camera more sensitive to green from the get-go, even before any processing of the image or video. And all images and videos are processed (usually in camera, but i think you can also pick effects to emphasize certain colors in video in post as well). There is no such thing as natural color in a photo or video.


----------



## greencare (Sep 14, 2019)

Green said:


> Two more comments and then I'm done here.
> 
> I'm trying to help everyone understand how light and image capture alters color, and interacts with our vision.
> 
> ...


I completely understand what you are saying, Green, but it just doesn't apply in this situation. I posted two images which counter your theory.

Also, the two screen caps I posted were taken on the same day (judging from where neighbors' cars are parked), and around the same time (judging from shadows of trees).


----------



## Green (Dec 24, 2017)

greencare said:


> I completely understand what you are saying, Green, but it just doesn't apply in this situation. I posted two images which counter your theory.


Ok, cool. Then my job is done. Btw, right when you were posting, I added to my last sentence by editing. I think you can also pick certain "looks" in post production for video, but I'm not totally sure as I don't do video. But generally you'd pick one style and use it consistently in all of your work, or a whole series.

As for your image comparisons, I'm looking at things like the lengths of shadows, angle of light source with respect to camera position, etc. I see the shadows are longer in one, and the vantage point has shifted 90 degrees. Food for thought...you can analyze it and draw your own conclusions. Actually, I drew my own, and the time of day does look like it changed a bit. Whether that's relevant or not, I'm not sure.

It feels like we're discussing whether or not UFOs have an explanation, and what that is.


----------



## ryanknorr (Jun 2, 2017)

greencare said:


> Green said:
> 
> 
> > I don't see anything altered there. What I do see, is youtube compression reducing the bit depth of the video (all video except raw capture does this), so the colors for screen capture don't reflect the colors of nature, but the colors that the video encodes, and your screen displays.
> ...


Dude I'm not going to argue with you about anything. I have all the files on my sd card still raw and untouched for anyone to see. NO need for me to do anything with them or prove anything to anyone. I've got 135k people I am trying to help and people like you just want to talk all day and accuse people of things that aren't true. Later!


----------



## ryanknorr (Jun 2, 2017)

greencare said:


> Green said:
> 
> 
> > I don't see anything altered there. What I do see, is youtube compression reducing the bit depth of the video (all video except raw capture does this), so the colors for screen capture don't reflect the colors of nature, but the colors that the video encodes, and your screen displays.
> ...


The front lawn is reel mowed at the spots you are pointing out with different grass type and I mow 3 swipes over into my neighbors yard at a higher height in the back. If I would have fixed anything I sure as hell would have made the backyard outside the fence look way better than it does! It is stressed and doesn't look great.


----------



## greencare (Sep 14, 2019)

Green said:


> greencare said:
> 
> 
> > I completely understand what you are saying, Green, but it just doesn't apply in this situation. I posted two images which counter your theory.
> ...


There is no need for precise timing. One can also make the argument that that's how the neighbors always park their cars, every single day after 5pm, right? But what is the probability of that happening?

Getting back to the time of day. Compare the shadow of the tree on the white object and also on the pavement into grass. They look the same to me. Maybe you can sleep on this, Green:


----------



## greencare (Sep 14, 2019)

ryanknorr said:


> greencare said:
> 
> 
> > Green said:
> ...


Oh Ryan, but in the second picture I posted, your back lawn looks the same as your front lawn, in terms of color and texture.


----------



## ryanknorr (Jun 2, 2017)

greencare said:


> ryanknorr said:
> 
> 
> > greencare said:
> ...


Like I said...all original files wherever people want to see them, I can upload.


----------



## The Anti-Rebel (Feb 16, 2019)

that's it. its that simple. RYAN KNORR IS PART OF THE DEEP STATE AND PAID BY GEORGE SOROS!1!!!!!!!!!!!!11111!


----------



## osuturfman (Aug 12, 2017)

Never did I ever think a Lawn YouTube video would turn into the Zapruder film. "_Back and to the left. Back and to the left._"

I can't say what it's like to be anything but a turf pro because that's been my identity for almost 25 years now. So when I say what I am about to, please understand I'm trying to put myself in your shoes @greencare.

At the pro level (think golf courses, sports fields, high-end turf areas) virtually no one criticizes other turf managers. That's not because we are soft but rather, we know the struggle, limitations, and advantages each of us is afforded to produce great turf. For the guys who have stuff on TV for games, tournaments, commercial shoots, etc. they will do whatever needed to make it look good for that. Do you really think CBS doesn't jack up the green hues for golf tournaments? ESPN/Fox for baseball? Hell yes, they do and the turf pros know it. All that said, the camera tricks don't include CGI or Photoshop. Good, sound agronomics go a long way to "making" the shot.

Suffice to say, pros don't call other pros out for "bad looks" or poor conditions, in fact they almost always try to help and support one another through tough times, bad weather, and crappy looking turf. It's only when a pro doesn't put forth a good effort, isn't willing to help others, or is overly critical of others with nothing to back it up that they become ostracized.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion but, I steadfastly disagree that a person like @ryanknorr is trying to pull a fast one on us. From my outside point of view, he's the YTer with the biggest reach that is actually trying to convey how difficult maintaining grass at high-level is on a day-in-day-out basis. As a pro, I cannot, in good faith, criticize someone who is doing things the right way and giving his best effort.

I'll leave the conspiracy theory stuff to y'all. Just remember: If the second gunman was on the grassy knoll, the grass, not the gunman, was probably Photoshopped.


----------



## Ware (Jan 28, 2017)

osuturfman said:


> ...At the pro level (think golf courses, sports fields, high-end turf areas) virtually no one criticizes other turf managers. That's not because we are soft but rather, we know the struggle, limitations, and advantages each of us is afforded to produce great turf...


Great analysis. We should be building each other up.

In the DIY world I have noticed some of the loudest talkers are those who rarely/never share photos or videos of their own work - maybe that's how they have enough time to be so critical. Hell, I rarely have enough free time to even watch YouTube videos. When I do it's usually at an accelerated speed to get to the meat of the topic. If I don't like watching someone, I don't. I don't come here and conduct a frame by frame analysis of their work. Who has time for that.

At any rate, this is a non-actionable (trolling) topic. If readers can't do anything with the content of a topic other than argue about it, it really does not belong here - especially when it is targeting another member, active or not.

_Discussions should be conducted without fondness for dispute or desire for victory._ - Benjamin Franklin


----------



## Ware (Jan 28, 2017)

The OP has requested that their account be deactivated.


----------

