methods of global adjustment

[bwana]

one can use the exposure panel
highlights, shadows, whites, blacks, contrast, exposure

or one can use the tone curve
highlights, shadows, lights, darks

adjusting either panel changes the histogram but the controls are not affected.

When does one decide to use one or the other?
Is there a clear discussion of the independent uses of these two tools and which circumstances are better for one over the other?

Or is this just a matter of featuritis-with software companies adding more knobs to do the same thing?

[john beardsworth]

Or is this just a matter of featuritis-with software companies adding more knobs to do the same thing?

Before you make such statements, try bringing out detail in almost-blown highlight areas in Lightroom 3 and then try 4.

[Schewe]

Or is this just a matter of featuritis-with software companies adding more knobs to do the same thing?

Yeah, that's it...the engineers have nothing to do with their time so they sit around coming up with ways of adding knobs.

Really doode...with that sort of attitude it doesn't surprise me that you don't understand the differences in all the knobs.

Each adjustment is there because of extensive development and hard work. To think otherwise really disrespects the talent and efforts of the engineers. Kinda makes it hard for me to seriously give you any answers.

The overall strategy in LR/ACR is to work top down. Each additional adjustment can modify the previous adjustments and act as a fine tuning adjustment. The Basic panel is designed to make all the basic adjustments. The Curves panel is designed to fine tune the results of the Basic panel. When you understand how the settings work then you can start to grasp when to use each control to get the best out of your image. Till them it's hit or miss and a lot of flailing around. Plenty of places to learn how to use the Develop module, that's what you need to do.

BTW, if you hadn't through in that zinger at the end, I would be offended...I've worked with the engineers on LR/ACR and know that what you suggested is pure crap and is simply disrespectful of the hard work they do. I suggest you alter your perspectives...it may actually help you understand that everything is there for a purpose and you should learn what that purpose is instead of presuming they just decided to add fluff.

[bwana]

sry if you fellows were offended. It's just the same words are used in two different sections. Confused me. "Highlights and shadows" in the basic panel as well the tone curve would suggest a redundancy but of course I should read the manual, use the help facility, etc.. asking in public i suppose is a show of ignorance. i did try and manage highlights using both techniques- I thought the tone curve reduction of highlights was accompanied by decreasing contrast whereas the global highlight reduction seemed to preserve it. This is reflected by a compression of the highlights using the tone curve control where the basic slider seems to manipulate a greater section of the histogram.

One can imagine a whole range in the complexity of controls regarding image management that can be overwhelming and distract from a primary goal-enhancing the emotional direction of the image.  Imagine the ability to draw a 'bell' curve over the histogram. The height of the curve, center of the curve, breadth of the curve, skew of the curve could be molded in edit mode and then the curve could be dragged left or right. Higher parts of the drawn curve would apply greater 'drag' or 'friction' on the histogram. But this metaphor has no real equivalent to classical darkroom work. It would be yet another complexifying twist.

I should just get one of the new LR4 books after it's been out a while to real world examples of the proper use of these sliders. I would learn fastest from from seeing how these tools can 'ruin' an image but it would take real confidence for an author to write such a book. In my hands, a tool is best defined by knowing its limitations. tnx for at least explaining a little of the two subpanel differences.

[Schewe]

sry if you fellows were offended.

If you had simply asked the questions without the snarky comment, it would have played better to the people who could help you the most.

The main reason that some adjustments share similar or the same names is that LR has evolved over the versions...in LR 3, it was Exposure, Recovery, Fill Light, Blacks, Brightness & Contrast. The Parametric Tone Curves had Highlights, Lights, Darks & Shadows.

In LR4 and PV 2012, they (meaning the engineers/product management) changes the functions dramatically. Yes, they chose to rename Highlight Recover simply to Highlights. Yes, it has the same name as Highlights in curves, but the function is really different. Fill Light got changed to Shadows which is the same name but completely different than Shadows in curves. Personally,

Should they have renamed the regions in the Parametric Curves panel? I think a case can be made for doing that, but those controls have not changed between LR3 and LR4. Could they have come up with different names in the Basic panel? Perhaps...but in reality, once you get used to the adjustments, the names don't really mean all that much, right? Somebody ran out of names to call things...but they all have their discreet function that are used to adjust your image. I wouldn't want to lose any of them (I still sometimes miss Brightness, but I've learned how to overcome that :~).

[John R Smith]

I still sometimes miss Brightness, but I've learned how to overcome that :~).

I must say that I am more confused than enlightened by the changes in the Basic Edit panel. If you have used LR since version 1 or 2 or 3 LR4 is a major shift of paradigm. LR4 Exposure now seems to be doing most of what Brightness used to do (which I have always thought of as a gamma shift, affecting the mid-tones principally). But the old Exposure I always used as an EV shift - hence +1 Exposure equalled +1 EV. That seemed to work OK. But is this still true with LR4? I ask because I used to do this a lot with my DB - shoot at ISO 100 and "push" it one or two stops in LR, rather than setting the back itself to high ISOs. I felt that LR did a better job (after suitable NR) than the firmware in the back.

John

[Tony Jay]

No doubt LR4 is different.
It is taking some getting used to however I have to confess to getting pretty excited by abilities of some of the sliders.
No doubt practice will be required to fully master the possibilities.

I am using the advice to go top to bottom  in the basic panel.
Sometimes small second adjustments to shadow sliders are required after adjusting the blacks and similar with highlights and whites.
Overall from some of the results I am getting I do think that the process 2012 is superior to process 2010.

Regards

Tony Jay

[Eric Myrvaagnes]

I took heed of all the early mentions by knowledgeable people that LR4 was "different" and that one should again try working from top down.

By playing around with a variety of test images in the Beta, I was able to wean myself of the habits I had from LR1, LR2, and LR3, even before the new videos came out.

Yes, it's different, and the names of the sliders are different. But time spent exploring what each slider actually does, from the top down, makes learning the new approach pretty easy, IMHO. I find the results much more satisfying and predictable now than what I got from LR3, so I'm very satisfied with LR4. YMMV.

Eric

[NikoJorj]

LR4 Exposure now seems to be doing most of what Brightness used to do (which I have always thought of as a gamma shift, affecting the mid-tones principally). But the old Exposure I always used as an EV shift - hence +1 Exposure equalled +1 EV. That seemed to work OK. But is this still true with LR4?

That's a very interesting question - I often use LR3's "Match total exposures" function to get photos of a panorama at the same value, with good results.
Is this possible in LR4, or does Exposure use an an image-adaptative algorithm?