Lightroom 3.0 Beta Now Available!

[madmanchan]

That really is a dual edged sword though...while you _ARE_ seeing the results at other than 1:1, it's not terribly accurate if you are in a view other than 1:1. So I wouldn't suggest any "fine tuning" of the sharpening at anything other than 1:1. The Fit and Fill screen dither are using downsampling algorithms that will either under or over emphasize the impact of the sharpening.

Yes, and this is why the little warning icon in the Detail panel is still there, when you're zoomed out, and I still highly recommend that you view the image at 1:1 (or occasionally higher) when you're adjusting the controls.

[madmanchan]

Can you enlighten me please?  I have noticed that when high iso, long exposure RAWs are rendered a significant number of coloured spots appear on screen and then vanish when the rendering has finished.  Is this the automatic NR at work or is it something else?  I never normally see any hot/dead pixels.

Hi Peter, yes, what you are seeing is the effect of the hot/dead pixel routine kicking in. When you first bring up the image, we do a fast initial read and render of the image data, just so that you can see something on the window (i.e., good enough for you to recognize the image), but hot/dead pixels aren't treated at that stage. In the meantime, CR/LR is doing the full read and render of the raw file and that's when you see those spots go away (i.e., when the final render is finished and the initial fast preview goes away).

[Schewe]

Am I to assume from this that more numerous controls will appear with increased use?

No, but you SHOULD assume the new local sharpening control is very different (and better) that the 2.x version. Until and unless you have more than a few minutes of use on a variety of images, I wouldn't expect your opinion to be based on real use...

[smahn]

No, but you SHOULD assume the new local sharpening control is very different (and better) that the 2.x version. Until and unless you have more than a few minutes of use on a variety of images, I wouldn't expect your opinion to be based on real use...

Okay, but I wasn't pronouncing it "good" or "bad," just surprisingly limited in control. However good the underlying math might be, one Mystery Meat slider does not constitute a high degree of control. How do I adjust the radius, or limit the functionality by degree to highlights or shadows, etc?

[madmanchan]

smahn, you can adjust the effective radius using the Radius slider, Detail tab. The result now affects both the capture sharpen and the local sharpen.

[smahn]

smahn, you can adjust the effective radius using the Radius slider, Detail tab. The result now affects both the capture sharpen and the local sharpen.

Thanks. Just curious, why not give Creative sharpening the same controls as Capture, since the functionality is already in place?

[Schewe]

Thanks. Just curious, why not give Creative sharpening the same controls as Capture, since the functionality is already in place?

Because it's leveraging (and using) the global controls while offering you a method of moderating the sharpening locally. For example, if you are using the edge mask (and pretty much _EVERY_ image can benefit from edge masking) the local controls gives you local control over the mask. A minus sharpening will actually add density to the edge mask thereby giving you the ability to increase the global while cutting back on areas where the sharpening is too much.

Also note that the global sharpening itself has been improved (in several specific areas I'm not really at liberty to discuss unless Eric wants to) so the net result with the improved global and local controls you'll have substantially increased image quality potential.

Also note that a major factor in all of the IQ is luminance noise reduction which isn't even in there yet (although the noise addition is).

All told, the potential for substantially increased image quality is already there with more to come.

The "elves" have been busy...

[Scott Martin]

Mmmm, I do like the improved localized sharpening behavior - very natural looking and much more useful. Radius, Detail and Masking all effect localized sharpening adjustments - smart.

All told, the potential for substantially increased image quality is already there with more to come.

You can say that again. I'm seeing some impressive results particularly with high ISO images. If anyone cares to take a look I've got a LR2 vs LR3 side-by-side comparison of a 1600 ISO shot from a 5Dmk2 at http://www.on-sight.com/2009/10/22/lightro...y-improvements/

I'm looking forward to the return of Luminance Noise reduction for the sake of some longer exposures (30-130 minutes) that have their own unique luminance signature separate from the color signature.

[BernardLanguillier]

A quick d3s sample focusing on sharpness.



link to full size image: http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlangui...293103/sizes/o/

Cheers,
Bernard

[Andrew Fee]

I'm curious about how people are getting on with the new sharpening in Lightroom 3.
 
There are some aspects where, as expected, it's definitely improved over Lightroom 2. It does a much better job of retaining colour as the amount of sharpening is increased. (at least I am fairly sure this is an effect of the sharpening rather than demosaicing)
 
The downside to this is that it can mean there's less contrast, making it look softer, and then more sharpening is required.
 
I'm finding that I need to use a higher amount and more masking now. The latter may be due to the complete lack of luminance noise reduction though. It's funny, I was always wanting less luminance NR in LR2 and now I actually think I'd use some.
 
 
I need to spend more time with it still, but what I've noticed is that I'm getting more fine textural detail, but I'm seeing more aliasing and while there's more detail, the overall result seems less sharp in places.
 
Using a higher radius in LR3 seems to get more comparable results in places, but then fine lines look thicker. Not sure which I prefer really. It's hard to judge as well with the fact that LR3 has no luminance NR being applied, whereas LR2 has some luminance NR being applied even at 0. If it wasn't for the increased artefacts in places, I'd probably prefer LR3's sharpening.

[smahn]

Because it's leveraging (and using) the global controls while offering you a method of moderating the sharpening locally. For example, if you are using the edge mask (and pretty much _EVERY_ image can benefit from edge masking) the local controls gives you local control over the mask. A minus sharpening will actually add density to the edge mask thereby giving you the ability to increase the global while cutting back on areas where the sharpening is too much.

Also note that the global sharpening itself has been improved (in several specific areas I'm not really at liberty to discuss unless Eric wants to) so the net result with the improved global and local controls you'll have substantially increased image quality potential.

Also note that a major factor in all of the IQ is luminance noise reduction which isn't even in there yet (although the noise addition is).

All told, the potential for substantially increased image quality is already there with more to come.

The "elves" have been busy...

Jeff, I'm going to take your earlier point that I don't have enough experience with this to comment. I do see potential and look forward to further improvements.

However, I would like to suggest/request additional selection/masking tools for local adjustments. Something along the lines of Color Range and the Pen tool would be helpful. If such things already exist please excuse my ignorance.

[Scott Martin]

A quick d3s sample focusing on sharpness.

Nice! It would even more helpful to see a LR2/LR3 comparison. Here's a side-by-side LR2/LR3 comparison from a 1600 ISO file:

[barryfitzgerald]

Sharpening is much improved, also detail at lower ISO levels is notably better.
Still getting better results with Raw Therapee for high ISO work, finer tighter grain, also I like the rendering in RT too. LR3 is better than LR2, have to say that.
Going quickly back to the Linux thing, sure I accept it would drain resources, but one to watch in a few years, the uptake is improving.

[Brammers]

As an a900 shooter, I'm very impressed by the new lease of life given to the noise pattern with this release.  

As an a900 shooter who's also a student (does that mean I've got my priorities very, very right or very, very wrong?) I'm wary about upgrading just for this and a couple of other nicities.  AFAIK you can't upgrade student versions so this means either biting the bullet and going for a full release that can be upgraded in the future, or buying another student version which works out cheaper this time - but by the time LR4 comes along with the all important tea-maker (I'm English - coffee is awful stuff) I'd have been better off just paying up...  2 student versions are cheaper than one full one, but 3 are not cheaper than full versions + upgrades.

So my question is, what chance is there of this new image engine trickling down to ACR and finding its way into LR2.x and PS4?  I'd be over the moon if I got LR3 quality conversion from my current LR 2.5, but I'm slightly hesitant to lay down the cash for this.  Probably will, but if I can get this in LR2.5 I'd happily forgo the other advantages of LR3.

[Andrew Fee]

This will almost certainly be exclusive to Lightroom 3/Photoshop CS 5.

[madmanchan]

I'm finding that I need to use a higher amount and more masking now.

Andrew, note that the "numbers" from the old process version don't carry over directly to the new process version. Therefore, using old numbers that you're used to in LR 2 will generally not give you optimal results with LR 3. Once you adjust the numbers when using LR 3, you should be getting better results.

[Hans Knikman]

Because it's leveraging (and using) the global controls while offering you a method of moderating the sharpening locally. For example, if you are using the edge mask (and pretty much _EVERY_ image can benefit from edge masking) the local controls gives you local control over the mask. A minus sharpening will actually add density to the edge mask thereby giving you the ability to increase the global while cutting back on areas where the sharpening is too much.

Also note that the global sharpening itself has been improved (in several specific areas I'm not really at liberty to discuss unless Eric wants to) so the net result with the improved global and local controls you'll have substantially increased image quality potential.

Also note that a major factor in all of the IQ is luminance noise reduction which isn't even in there yet (although the noise addition is).

All told, the potential for substantially increased image quality is already there with more to come.

The "elves" have been busy...

I am a little confused here. What if I want to have a different radius, amount, detail whatever for local (creative) sharpening, how can I use the global sliders for these local parameters without changing the global sharpening?

[Photo Op]

All told, the potential for substantially increased image quality is already there with more to come.

The "elves" have been busy...

Jeff- Are the techniques you have outlined in your updated version (pub 9/2009) of "Real World Image Sharpening...." for LR, those available in v3 Beta?

[DarkPenguin]

Andrew, note that the "numbers" from the old process version don't carry over directly to the new process version. Therefore, using old numbers that you're used to in LR 2 will generally not give you optimal results with LR 3. Once you adjust the numbers when using LR 3, you should be getting better results.

It doesn't maintain two sets, one for each process version, right?

[Ben Rubinstein]

Can we assume that we won't be getting these new features until ACR 5?

Thanks.