Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6   Go Down

Author Topic: Lightroom 7.3  (Read 8007 times)

Mark D Segal

  • Contributor
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11365
    • http://www.markdsegal.com
Re: Lightroom 7.3
« Reply #40 on: April 03, 2018, 03:25:10 PM »

Victoria's article on profiles (a must read from an awesome LR resource):
https://www.lightroomqueen.com/camera-profiles/?utm_source=The+Lightroom+Queen&utm_campaign=0f0de71644-Newsletter_2018_04_03&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_17d5f8afbe-0f0de71644-340903009&mc_cid=0f0de71644&mc_eid=90d02d3347

Yes - it is a very good article; explains it well. I was very pleased to see there is a "neutral" preset - minimizes the need to undo effects one may not want for various photos using some of the others.
Logged
Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....."

digitaldog

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 13598
    • http://www.digitaldog.net/
Re: Lightroom 7.3
« Reply #41 on: April 03, 2018, 03:26:06 PM »

Here are a couple of examples created in 3D LUT Creator, exported as .cube and then packed into a new creative Profile.
Sorry if it's OT but which version (Grading/Standard/Pro) are you using?
Logged
Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers"

kirkt

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 447
Re: Lightroom 7.3
« Reply #42 on: April 03, 2018, 03:45:47 PM »

Sorry if it's OT but which version (Grading/Standard/Pro) are you using?

Pro, v1.46.

kirk
Logged

Chris Kern

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 502
    • Chris Kern's Eponymous Website
Re: Lightroom 7.3
« Reply #43 on: April 03, 2018, 04:27:41 PM »

good text @ https://theblog.adobe.com/april-lightroom-adobe-camera-raw-releases-new-profiles

This may long have been obvious to those who understand the rendering process better than I do, but I found Josh Haftel's description of some of the variables involved in demosaicing a raw file quite interesting:

Quote
Our profiles incorporate deep imaging science and take into consideration the colors of the filters used on top of the sensors (the array of red, green, and blue filters that help an otherwise colorblind sensor “see” the colorful world around us), the specific sensitivity of the sensor used, the sensor’s characteristics in different lighting conditions and with different ISO values to interpret the digital 1s and 0s into images inside Adobe photography products.

Also, this comment about the Adobe profiles provides some practical guidance regarding why using them might be preferable to using the camera-specific ones:

Quote
All of the Adobe Raw profiles, from Adobe Standard to the six new profiles, were created with the intention of providing a unified look and feel, regardless of which camera was used. This can be incredibly helpful when upgrading from one camera to another (you won’t have to spend a ton of time figuring out how make your new photos match your personal style) or if you’re using multiple cameras for the same shoot, you won’t have to worry about some photos looking totally different from the others.

For me, at least, descriptions of how ACR and Lightroom work "under the hood"—i.e., in general non-technical terms; I'm not proposing that Adobe publicly disclose any trade secrets—are a great aid to understanding how to exploit these tools optimally.  I'd definitely like to see more of this type of discussion from the products' developers.

digitaldog

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 13598
    • http://www.digitaldog.net/
Re: Lightroom 7.3
« Reply #44 on: April 03, 2018, 04:57:13 PM »

This may long have been obvious to those who understand the rendering process better than I do, but I found Josh Haftel's description of some of the variables involved in demosaicing a raw file quite interesting:
Sounds like a fair amount of marketing speak to me....
Logged
Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers"

DP

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 267
Re: Lightroom 7.3
« Reply #45 on: April 03, 2018, 06:06:22 PM »

Sounds like a fair amount of marketing speak to me....

but of course ... "deep imaging science" ...
Logged

digitaldog

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 13598
    • http://www.digitaldog.net/
Re: Lightroom 7.3
« Reply #46 on: April 03, 2018, 06:08:56 PM »

but of course ... "deep imaging science" ...
Based on Dark Matter?
Logged
Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers"

Chris Kern

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 502
    • Chris Kern's Eponymous Website
Re: Lightroom 7.3
« Reply #47 on: April 03, 2018, 06:56:57 PM »

but of course ... "deep imaging science" ...

Yes, indeed.  Although, I suppose it's possible that phrase may refer to machine-learning based on a neural-network methodology.  Unfortunately, there's no way for customers like me to know the underlying semantics of fuzzy terms like this.

The specific points that intrigued me were:
  • the references to the characteristics of different color filters on the respective camera sensors, which I assume must be evaluated not only for what frequencies they transmit but also for how much light passes through them;*
  • the way each sensor responds to "different lighting conditions," which I suspect means both different frequencies and intensities of light;
  • and the effect of in-camera amplification ("different ISO values") on the rendering process.
Again, all of this may have been obvious to those who have actually been involved in the development of demosaicing algorithms, or who may have insider knowledge of Adobe's (or other companies') products.  But I am dealing with black boxes—as, I suspect, are the majority of Adobe's customers.  So any information about what goes on between the input and the output is helpful because it provides a conceptual model to help me interpret what I am doing when I fiddle with the end-user controls.

———
*Does Adobe do this through reverse-engineering, or do the camera or sensor manufacturers provide this information?

digitaldog

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 13598
    • http://www.digitaldog.net/
Re: Lightroom 7.3
« Reply #48 on: April 03, 2018, 07:34:21 PM »

  • the references to the characteristics of different color filters on the respective camera sensors, which I assume must be evaluated not only for what frequencies they transmit but also for how much light passes through them;*
  • the way each sensor responds to "different lighting conditions," which I suspect means both different frequencies and intensities of light;
  • and the effect of in-camera amplification ("different ISO values") on the rendering process.
It's massively complex; do they have the actual spectral sensitivities of all the cameras for one? See Doug's reply here; a good start:
http://www.openphotographyforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=11375
Then if you want to go a bit deeper:
http://dougkerr.net/Pumpkin/articles/Metameric_Error.pdf
And no, sensor manufacturer AFAIK, do not provide this kind of information.
Logged
Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers"

digitaldog

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 13598
    • http://www.digitaldog.net/
Re: Lightroom 7.3
« Reply #49 on: April 03, 2018, 07:46:44 PM »

Let's look at just one statement:
Quote
All of the Adobe Raw profiles, from Adobe Standard to the six new profiles, were created with the intention of providing a unified look and feel, regardless of which camera was used.
First, in terms of marketing speak, an intention isn't a result!
Next, the text suggests that if I take a Nikon and a Canon (you pick the model), the results (not intention) would be setting them up to capture the identical scene produce a match (unified look and feel; more marketing space IMHO). OK, so can they do this or can we? What's the deltaE difference in the two captures for each pixel? NOW we have an answer. Not vague marketing speak (intention, look and feel).
This kind of marketing language may work for many (and I'm sure they are eating up on many lesser forums) but doesn't serve Adobe customers well IMHO.
Now IF someone like Thomas Knoll makes such a statement, I'm far more inclined to take that to the bank. Not some marketing manager.
Logged
Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers"

Mark D Segal

  • Contributor
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11365
    • http://www.markdsegal.com
Re: Lightroom 7.3
« Reply #50 on: April 03, 2018, 07:48:17 PM »

My very incomplete knowledge of this subject suggests that the manufacturers provide Adobe et. al. with very little information, especially when they have their own software they prefer to promote. The 3rd-party software developers need to reverse engineer the characteristic behaviour of the sensors in order to build the demosaic algorithms for them.
Logged
Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....."

Rand47

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1261
Re: Lightroom 7.3
« Reply #51 on: April 03, 2018, 07:53:17 PM »

Based on Dark Matter?

Yes!  Same place Apple got the “deep pixels” for the new iPhones!   ;D

Rand
Logged
Rand Scott Adams

digitaldog

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 13598
    • http://www.digitaldog.net/
Re: Lightroom 7.3
« Reply #52 on: April 03, 2018, 08:00:23 PM »

Yes!  Same place Apple got the “deep pixels” for the new iPhones!   ;D
Sure, on the iPhone X, we're told they can 're-light' the photo's taken. And lots of people believe that since the image looks different due to some processing, the phone has lit the scene differently. Here's an example of the new puppy with the iPhone X, Portrait mode. Did the camera relight the second image? Is dodge and burning relighting? Absolutely if you're a marketing person selling Apple cameras to those without critical thinking!  ???
Logged
Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers"

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11129
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: Lightroom 7.3
« Reply #53 on: April 03, 2018, 08:13:32 PM »

Has someone tried the new portrait profiles yet for typical cameras such as the D850, a7rIII or H6D?

Thank you.

cheers,
Bernard

DP

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 267
Re: Lightroom 7.3
« Reply #54 on: April 03, 2018, 10:00:00 PM »

My very incomplete knowledge of this subject suggests that the manufacturers provide Adobe et. al. with very little information

it seems Fuji did provide Adobe with data for their "film" profile, that's why Fuji camera simulation profiles are not external .dcp files (as usual), but hardcoded in ACR/LR instead...
Logged

DP

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 267
Re: Lightroom 7.3
« Reply #55 on: April 03, 2018, 10:03:07 PM »

Has someone tried the new portrait profiles yet for typical cameras such as the D850, a7rIII or H6D?
those are not profiles - those are presets on top of underlying real (dcp) camera profiles... for example I can simply assign the tag "crs:CameraProfile" to "DCamProf SSF M" in "Adobe Portrait.xmp" file and it will be working with my matrix profile for A7R2 instead of Adobe Standard... so I get rid of any references to "Adobe Standard" the first thing after I upgraded in all those presets...
Logged

alleng

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2
Re: Lightroom 7.3
« Reply #56 on: April 03, 2018, 11:11:50 PM »

There is a new sdk document for developing the new profiles. I downloaded it eariler today and it seems like there is alot more than meets the eye going on. The pdf is a good read.
It sounds like each new profile can consist of some of all of the following,
 - Camera Raw Profile (like was being used before, like adobe standard, camera specific) also includes a look table
 - Lightroom slider adjustments (that do not change the accual values of the sliders on the interface)
 - A 3d Lut Table (applied AFTER all the Lightroom sliders)


Here is a http://www.adobe.com/go/profile-sdk
and the https://forums.adobe.com/thread/2473570 where i saw it.
Logged

MBehrens

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 290
Re: Lightroom 7.3
« Reply #57 on: April 03, 2018, 11:51:40 PM »

I'm hoping the new RAW can demosaic Fuji files and render decent sharpness as well as the Fuji film simulations. 

I've done a few compares of the new profiles against Iridient processed DNGs and there doesn't seem to be any improvement in the sharpness of the Adobe processing. Iridient is still better from what I'm seeing.
Logged

[email protected]

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1
    • Lightroom Queen
Re: Lightroom 7.3
« Reply #58 on: April 04, 2018, 02:28:26 AM »

OK, but she raised this today in the context of 7.3, and says they are looking into it urgently. So should one not interpret it mean that if anything systemic were amiss at the 7.2 stage, it hadn't been caught and remedied by the 7.3 release?
As John said, this isn't new to 7.3, so nothing to stop you upgrading. In fact, I think it's been going on intermittently since 7.0, but it's only just been identified in the last few weeks, too late to get a fix into 7.3. It may only affect a very small number of people, but it's a serious issue for those it does affect, and very easily prevented, so just worth erring on the safe side.
Logged

Jack Hogan

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 695
    • Hikes -more than strolls- with my dog
Re: Lightroom 7.3
« Reply #59 on: April 04, 2018, 04:21:30 AM »

Yes, indeed.  Although, I suppose it's possible that phrase may refer to machine-learning based on a neural-network methodology.  Unfortunately, there's no way for customers like me to know the underlying semantics of fuzzy terms like this.

The specific points that intrigued me were:
  • the references to the characteristics of different color filters on the respective camera sensors, which I assume must be evaluated not only for what frequencies they transmit but also for how much light passes through them;*
  • the way each sensor responds to "different lighting conditions," which I suspect means both different frequencies and intensities of light;
  • and the effect of in-camera amplification ("different ISO values") on the rendering process.
Again, all of this may have been obvious to those who have actually been involved in the development of demosaicing algorithms, or who may have insider knowledge of Adobe's (or other companies') products.  But I am dealing with black boxes—as, I suspect, are the majority of Adobe's customers.  So any information about what goes on between the input and the output is helpful because it provides a conceptual model to help me interpret what I am doing when I fiddle with the end-user controls.

———
*Does Adobe do this through reverse-engineering, or do the camera or sensor manufacturers provide this information?

Yes, it's actually pretty easy, all you need are the spectral sensitivity functions of the specific sensor+CFA(+lens? I don't think they bother but maybe...), the rest just follows.    All they need is a well setup monochromator or similar, you can make your own for a couple of hundred bucks or buy it for a few hundred more.  It looks like with this new 'profile' tab Adobe is bringing other standard rendering variables under one roof, which is a good idea.  Nothing deep or rocket science though, just color science with 'Adobe inside'.

If you are interested in a high level overview of how an image is rendered from raw you can find a short article here.

Cheers,
Jack
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6   Go Up