Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Adobe Lightroom Q&A => Topic started by: Jimbo57 on October 08, 2015, 05:42:55 am
-
Just by accident found an unexpected plus in the latest Lightroom CC upgrade.
For removing lighting highlights on, for example, the nose or forehead of a portrait, the dehaze tool used from within a radial gradient does an absolutely amazing job.
I didn't expect it to be so much better than any other method (in LR) and, for me, it almost compensates for the screwing-up of the import function.
-
Well done for finding a non intuitive use for the dehaze tool. Beats the heck out of all the complaining. Thank you for that.
-
Great find. I have not had the proper time to try any local adjustments with dehaze yet.
-
Thanks, Jimbo!!! Finally a person who's not crying about someone moving their cheese with the latest Lightroom. ;D
Great find!!!
-
Thanks, Jimbo!!! Finally a person who's not crying about someone moving their cheese with the latest Lightroom. ;D
More like 'stolen cheese' if you want to use that sort of metaphor.
Particularly as LR can't move our cheese anymore, it can only copy it. :P
-
Thanks, Jimbo!!! Finally a person who's not crying about someone moving their cheese with the latest Lightroom. ;D
Great find!!!
Talking about cheese... why isn't the DeHaze control in the Basic Panel? After all it is a control in the same class/type as Clarity... That is my cheese.
-
Talking about cheese... why isn't the DeHaze control in the Basic Panel? After all it is a control in the same class/type as Clarity... That is my cheese.
Because it isn't applicable to every type of image.
-
Because it isn't applicable to every type of image.
But it lives side-by-side with Clarity and other controls in the various local adjustments... It just makes no sense. It is a Clarity type control.
lt makes no sense. Other photo editors allow configuring control panels and that makes a lot of sense.
-
But it lives side-by-side with Clarity and other controls in the various local adjustments... It just makes no sense. It is a Clarity type control.
lt makes no sense. Other photo editors allow configuring control panels and that makes a lot of sense.
It's an on-balance thing. There is an argument for having it in Basic, but similarity to Clarity isn't it - it's really that you often have to make compensating adjustments after Dehaze cranks up contrast, saturation, WB etc. But you just can't clutter up Basic with sliders that aren't useful for all image types, and the global Dehaze will get less use now Dehaze is available as a local adjustment.
Other photo editors are other photo editors.
-
Well done for finding a non intuitive use for the dehaze tool. Beats the heck out of all the complaining. Thank you for that.
Yes indeed...cup half empty versus half full. Refreshing.
-
It's an on-balance thing. There is an argument for having it in Basic, but similarity to Clarity isn't it - it's really that you often have to make compensating adjustments after Dehaze cranks up contrast, saturation, WB etc.
After using the dehaze tool regularly since it appeared, it seems to me an "on-balance thing" in which the scale tilts heavily in the direction Adobe didn't choose. The current position of the tool, hanging out at the bottom of the unalterable develop mode, is a chronic PITA, because (as you say) it almost always needs to be used in conjunction with other tools which are in the basic panel. And I find it difficult to imagine that anyone would ever have complained if it had been placed there. Hopefully at some time it will be quietly moved up.
-
. And I find it difficult to imagine that anyone would ever have complained if it had been placed there. Hopefully at some time it will be quietly moved up.
WHat and admit they made a mistake.
Calibration has been in the wrong place ever since it appeared. It should be at top to match the LR paradigm of top down working and I think grain should be in with sharpen for the same reasons you want Dehaze in Basic panel.
-
There is a wedding photographer who adds De-Haze to almost all images. The amount is rather small from 2 to 4 on the scale, using presets rather than opening the tool. I might give this a try just to see what it adds or takes away from the images.
-
WHat and admit they made a mistake.
Calibration has been in the wrong place ever since it appeared. It should be at top to match the LR paradigm of top down working and I think grain should be in with sharpen for the same reasons you want Dehaze in Basic panel.
Best place for the Calibration to be applied is in the import panel (no option there now, but I would use it if it were) or default develop settings (a user option) which can be camera model and/or ISO specific.
My default develop settings include Calibration settings, Clarity, Vibrance and Sharpening (Lightroom General Preset-Scenic).
-
Best place for the Calibration to be applied is in the import panel or default develop settings (a user option) which can be camera model and/or ISO specific.
My default develop settings include Calibration settings, Clarity, Vibrance and Sharpening (Lightroom General Preset-Scenic)
That's a completely separate thing from Panel layout.
-
After using the dehaze tool regularly since it appeared, it seems to me an "on-balance thing" in which the scale tilts heavily in the direction Adobe didn't choose. The current position of the tool, hanging out at the bottom of the unalterable develop mode, is a chronic PITA, because (as you say) it almost always needs to be used in conjunction with other tools which are in the basic panel. And I find it difficult to imagine that anyone would ever have complained if it had been placed there. Hopefully at some time it will be quietly moved up.
Well, you have to balance it with not cluttering up the Basic panel with tools like Dehaze that aren't applicable to every type of photo. Yes, I have seen good non-landscape uses, but people are even less likely to use that global Dehaze slider on every type of photo now Dehaze is a local adjustment, which is exactly how some people here wanted it in the first place. And yes, I'm already complaining that the local adjustment panels are too-densely packed.
-
Well, you have to balance it with not cluttering up the Basic panel with tools like Dehaze that aren't applicable to every type of photo. Yes, I have seen good non-landscape uses, but people are even less likely to use that global Dehaze slider on every type of photo now Dehaze is a local adjustment, which is exactly how some people here wanted it in the first place. And yes, I'm already complaining that the local adjustment panels are too-densely packed.
I would also prefer dehaze to be in the basic panel.
I'd like Adobe to revisit the whole localized editing paradigm. I would much prefer a layer/mask approach with only one set of develop controls.
-
I'd like Adobe to revisit the whole localized editing paradigm. I would much prefer a layer/mask approach with only one set of develop controls.
Adjustment brushes/gradient tool etc are just like layers in that they sit on top of the image and the area they cover is the mask.
What do you mean by 'one set of development controls'?
-
Adjustment brushes/gradient tool etc are just like layers in that they sit on top of the image and the area they cover is the mask.
Yes ... and if you could create a local selection (or layer) and apply adjustments using the normal Develop settings to that selection, rather than a duplication of sliders and settings in the Brush or Gradient dialog ... might be a simpler, more efficient method ... for the end user at least. I have no idea of the hurdles it would place in front of the engineers to establish such a method in a parametric solution ... but to me, that would be the desirable end goal.
-
Yes ... and if you could create a local selection (or layer) and apply adjustments using the normal Develop settings to that selection, rather than a duplication of sliders and settings in the Brush or Gradient dialog ... might be a simpler, more efficient method ... for the end user at least. I have no idea of the hurdles it would place in front of the engineers to establish such a method in a parametric solution ... but to me, that would be the desirable end goal.
Layers being parametric are not an issue, they already can be in PS.
But if you want layers use PS. Why make adjustment brushes etc into layers?
As for selections, part of the beauty of LR is I don't have to bother with selections for adjustments. It can do a better/faster job of selecting than I could do in PS most of the time.
An image that took ages of faffing in PS with various selections was done in a fraction of the time in LR and with far better results too.
-
But if you want layers use PS. Why make adjustment brushes etc into layers?
That is not what I was suggesting.
-
CaptureOne has layers. Although I'm a bit surprised to say so, I think I prefer Lr's approach. It's less fiddly. The only advantage that C1 has is that turning layers off and on is but 1 click away. However, I preferred Aperture's approach to both (more or less any "brick", including Curves, could be duplicated and masked as a local adjustment). But the Aperture approach needed, and never got, a bit of polish, and the underlying imaging engine fell way behind in most respects.
-
Layers being parametric are not an issue, they already can be in PS.
But if you want layers use PS. Why make adjustment brushes etc into layers?
As for selections, part of the beauty of LR is I don't have to bother with selections for adjustments. It can do a better/faster job of selecting than I could do in PS most of the time.
An image that took ages of faffing in PS with various selections was done in a fraction of the time in LR and with far better results too.
I'm not talking about changing the way you paint the mask in LR. I just want to be able to apply any develop setting to any mask. There are many ways this could be implemented. One possibility would be to have a dropdown number appear beside the local tools: 0 for the base layer and so on. When you click on one of the local tools, such as the adjustment brush, the number representing the active layer would be incremented and you know which layer is active. Then any changes to the mask you paint with the adjustment brush would be controlled by the same develop controls you always use - no need for another set of duplicated local controls, where adobe dribbles out additions over time. I'm sure there is a better implementation, but this is the idea.
I understand this would require a re-architecture of the lightroom rendering engine and the UI, but I believe this would be a better fundamental design.