Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Adobe Lightroom Q&A => Topic started by: ErikKaffehr on October 20, 2017, 12:46:32 am
-
Hi,
Lightroom Classic now has two great features, called range mask.
It is described here:
Range Mask
Range Mask works within the structure of the existing local adjustment tools to give you more precision with your local adjustments. One way to think of it is that Range Mask is a modifier that can be applied to a local adjustment, allowing you to create more precise selections with less hassle. Range Mask is designed to be easy to use, and the resulting mask can be further refined by nudging the sliders.
Range Mask has two different modes to address two different types of color/tone-based masks: Color Range Mask and Luminance Range Mask.
Usage Instructions:
Open an image into the Camera Raw plugin
Select one of the local adjustment tools (Local Adjustment Brush, Graduated Filter, Radial Filter) and make an initial mask of your intended selection area.
From the Range Mask option, select either Color or Luminance.
Color: Use the Eyedropper to select the colors you’d like to include in your selection. You can select up to 5 different colors using the Shift + click method with the eyedropper. Alternatively, you can sample a range of colors, even completely different colors, by dragging out an area with the eyedropper. Once selected, you can further refine your selection using the Amount slider.
Luminance: Use the Range and Smoothness sliders to adjust your mask and fine tune.
Use the local adjustment sliders to make the desired edits to your images.
It is described here, for ACR engine, but we have the same tool in Lightroom.
Best regards
Erik
-
Try using Option/Alt when using the sliders to adjust parameters...
-
Try using Option/Alt when using the sliders to adjust parameters...
I'm really impressed with this new feature. It's a pity it has got so buried under the rest of the carnage. I'm sure the engineers who created this must be a bit depressed that it is getting so little notice.
-
(http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/Themes/lula/images/english/new.gif) (http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=121116.msg1006376#new)
I'm really impressed with this new feature. It's a pity it has got so buried under the rest of the carnage. I'm sure the engineers who created this must be a bit depressed that it is getting so little notice.
Probably also because C1 has had such a feature, and much more, available for local adjustments for at least a good while. Though I'm not exactly sure how long because I currently 'use' LR (with some AMD issues aside, lately). LR is finally beginning to catch up in some small way with the local adjustments aspect.
-
I'm really impressed with this new feature. It's a pity it has got so buried under the rest of the carnage. I'm sure the engineers who created this must be a bit depressed that it is getting so little notice.
Count me in as one who noticed. The first thing I did was to look for what are the new photo editing features and this one struck me as particularly valuable. I look forward to working with it once I download Classic 7, which I won't be doing just yet, but have no doubt that I shall enjoy this new version a lot. I think some people are making a big mistake conflating the engineering side with the marketing side of this application. Each needs to be viewed on its own merits, and notwithstanding several glitches a long the way, the overall story of Lightroom has been one of continued growth and improvement on the engineering side with every new release.
-
I noticed one thing about auto masking last night and am not sure if it is new or if I had not noticed it....maybe you guys can help.
I was going to play with the ‘range’ function. In the image, I had a logo which had a solid color, separated by a band of white, which had narrow black strikes on each side, then had the solid color on the other side.
I selected a wide brunch with -exposure, and auto mask on. I brush to solid color, being careful to keep the ‘+’ in the color. The brush did extend across the white/black boarder into the solid color on the other side.
I had thought that the auto mask would repeat the white/black edge. What I found was that it did not.
Is this new, or is it just my error in past observation?
-
Range mask is the first feature that finally tempts me to give up on LR6 "perpetual" and consider joining the "Ransomware" parade.
-
Range mask is the first feature that finally tempts me to give up on LR6 "perpetual" and consider joining the "Ransomware" parade.
Yes, well I've been a hostage of the "ransomware" option since the Photography bundle subscription started and I haven't regretted it. Each new release brings new and very useful goodies, as if the captors really did want to keep their hostages from rebelling and bolting! :-)
I think it may be worthwhile mentioning that there over 170 people (engineering and various other professions) engaged with supporting this application world-wide, a great many of whom would be obviously well paid people plus the cost of the overheads and other employer contributions that support them. This has to run into many millions of dollars per year. This is largely what our ransom payments are recovering, plus of course a rate of return to the shareholders who need some interest to keep the company capitalized, and I won't get into debates about how much is enough because that's only revealed in the capital markets. So yes, the model does make some sense. Recurrent revenues are being earned to support recurrent costs. One joins the "ransomware parade" if one wants the new features and has confidence that there will be more in the future. Adobe's own interest in this, combined with competitive forces I think provide a better than even chance that it's worthwhile in this context.
-
I think it may be worthwhile mentioning that there over 170 people (engineering and various other professions) engaged with supporting this application world-wide, a great many of whom would be obviously well paid people plus the cost of the overheads and other employer contributions that support them. This has to run into many millions of dollars per year. This is largely what our ransom payments are recovering, plus of course a rate of return to the shareholders who need some interest to keep the company capitalized, and I won't get into debates about how much is enough because that's only revealed in the capital markets. So yes, the model does make some sense. Recurrent revenues are being earned to support recurrent costs. One joins the "ransomware parade" if one wants the new features and has confidence that there will be more in the future. Adobe's own interest in this, combined with competitive forces I think provide a better than even chance that it's worthwhile in this context.
That is not a lot of individuals working on a software program. My daughter's boyfriend is an algorithm developer for Pandora, an Internet radio application, and they have way more software engineers working there than the 170 at Adobe who focus on LR. Remember that LR is right now a mature application and things can be added without the extra developmental cost that was present at the start up. LR is not keeping Adobe afloat in terms of market capitalization, it is the use of all the CS programs of which LR is a niche player (though not for members of LuLa).
-
That is not a lot of individuals working on a software program. My daughter's boyfriend is an algorithm developer for Pandora, an Internet radio application, and they have way more software engineers working there than the 170 at Adobe who focus on LR. Remember that LR is right now a mature application and things can be added without the extra developmental cost that was present at the start up. LR is not keeping Adobe afloat in terms of market capitalization, it is the use of all the CS programs of which LR is a niche player (though not for members of LuLa).
From my experience in the software field...since the early 80's...it actually costs more to maintain a software product than to originally create the product. Once a product is in the field...hardware / software compatibility in the ever changing world chews up an awful lot of resources without adding any new functionality. New processors, new graphics cards, new printers etc....
-
It is a good addition to ACR/LR. However, it is nowhere as powerful as the V5/V6 panel developed by Tony Kuyper for Photoshop.
-
From my experience in the software field...since the early 80's...it actually costs more to maintain a software product than to originally create the product. Once a product is in the field...hardware / software compatibility in the ever changing world chews up an awful lot of resources without adding any new functionality. New processors, new graphics cards, new printers etc....
Some of what you mention are functions of the OS and of course we know of the problems that have occurred when MacOS is updated. Those are all ongoing costs which are incurred irrespective of the addition of new features which I was focusing on. We also know that LR still cannot take advantage of the dramatic advances in GPU power (perhaps these new releases will finally harness that power) or for that matter CPU. Intel now has released Coffee Lake which might offer terrific potential but who knows when Adobe will get around to that.
-
Some of what you mention are functions of the OS and of course we know of the problems that have occurred when MacOS is updated. Those are all ongoing costs which are incurred irrespective of the addition of new features which I was focusing on. We also know that LR still cannot take advantage of the dramatic advances in GPU power (perhaps these new releases will finally harness that power) or for that matter CPU. Intel now has released Coffee Lake which might offer terrific potential but who knows when Adobe will get around to that.
I was just pointing out that many of those 170 resources ( I'm sure there are a lot more than that ) are not adding any new features...just keeping the existing software afloat in the constant changing hardware / software world. Typically a very small set of resources are devoted to new features.
-
I was just pointing out that many of those 170 resources ( I'm sure there are a lot more than that ) are not adding any new features...just keeping the existing software afloat in the constant changing hardware / software world. Typically a very small set of resources are devoted to new features.
Yes, that's right. I agree!
-
Yes, well I've been a hostage of the "ransomware" option since the Photography bundle subscription started and I haven't regretted it. Each new release brings new and very useful goodies, as if the captors really did want to keep their hostages from rebelling and bolting! :-)
Although to be fair here, it didn't become true ransomware until just now when all options to retain a recent/current fully-functional program 'snapshot' have currently been taken off the table. Even after say, x amount of years of subscribing. LR 6 would be a relatively recent snapshot, but that will get outdated quickly, if not already considered such. But at least that has been the best option to get out for the short term - which is why it was comforting to have available. It may still not be regretted - at least not until you come across an unfortunate situation where you may not be able to afford it any longer.. AKA: sh*t happens - often when least expected. But I digress... :)
-
Although to be fair here, it didn't become true ransomware until just now when all options to retain a recent/current fully-functional program 'snapshot' have currently been taken off the table. Even after say, x amount of years of subscribing. LR 6 would be a relatively recent snapshot, but that will get outdated quickly, if not already considered such. But at least that has been the best option to get out for the short term - which is why it was comforting to have available. It may still not be regretted - at least not until you come across an unfortunate situation where you may not be able to afford it any longer.. AKA: sh*t happens - often when least expected. But I digress... :)
Unless I misunderstood something, I don't think that's true. I believe users of perpetually licensed LR6.x continue to have full functionality of the current version for as long as they want, but yes, it will become dated.
-
Unless I misunderstood something, I don't think that's true. I believe users of perpetually licensed LR6.x continue to have full functionality of the current version for as long as they want, but yes, it will become dated.
Yep, that's what I was kind of trying to say, but I've been up since yesterday so it may not have come out right - I'm losing coherence at this point. :) I kind of think it already is dated - especially with the range mask and guided upright (and kind of dehaze, but that's possible via presets or plugin). But, that is the last we'll be able to go back to for the indefinite future - and only as long as one doesn't convert their catalog to PV4, so it actually stops being an option right before the Classic version.
-
Unless I misunderstood something, I don't think that's true. I believe users of perpetually licensed LR6.x continue to have full functionality of the current version for as long as they want, but yes, it will become dated.
Not exactly... it will take many years, but at some point, a Windows or Mac OS update will make LR6 not to work... and you will have to balance between keeping an not updated unsecure OS or migrate your Lightroom catalogue to other app
http://dgpfotografia.com
-
Not exactly... it will take many years, but at some point, a Windows or Mac OS update will make LR6 not to work... and you will have to balance between keeping an not updated unsecure OS or migrate your Lightroom catalogue to other app
More likely under MacOS. Win 10 still runs 32bit XP apps without issue (stubborn ones can be run in compatibility mode).
-
Hi,
If you need upgrades, that comes with an attached cost.
In the computing business we used to have maintenance contracts that mostly included both major and minor upgrades. So you pay a fee and get upgrades free. You opt out and you have a fully functional product, but no support and no upgrades.
It could be argued that is the way Lightroom should work. But very clearly, there are no licences that are perpetual in the real world. Microsoft works a bit in that way, programs written ten years ago may still work on that system. With MacOS that is not the case.
In a way, maintenance contracts were pretty sane. It yields income for the vendor to spend on development and relaxes the pressure to rush out new releases, just to sell. So, it will lead to a more mature product. It may also slow down on innovation.
Best regards
Erik
Not exactly... it will take many years, but at some point, a Windows or Mac OS update will make LR6 not to work... and you will have to balance between keeping an not updated unsecure OS or migrate your Lightroom catalogue to other app
http://dgpfotografia.com
-
Unless I misunderstood something, I don't think that's true. I believe users of perpetually licensed LR6.x continue to have full functionality of the current version for as long as they want, but yes, it will become dated.
There is one glitch to this that I thought about last evening. Yes, you do have a perpetual license to LR6 but say your computer crashes and you did not have a system image (bad practice of course). You need to do a fresh install of LR6. You download the new installation file (or if you are lucky you maybe had it on a backup drive as I do. You do the installation but now it does not update to the most recent ACR that is needed to support all the cameras added since LR6 was introduced. You are now officially screwed if you have a newer camera. By the end of the year Adobe is not required to support LR6 any longer and newer versions of ACR are incompatible with LR6. Of course this is conjecture but the chances of it happening are not zero and could be high as Adobe wants people onto the subscription mode.
I would urge anyone who plans on using LR6 after support ends to make sure you have a system image of your OS!!!
-
Hi,
If you have an old license, with no support, you are stuck. That is the problem with perpetual licenses. That don't live forever.
If LR dies, it may be possible that someone will replace it's functionality.
Adobe has built a path for raw image compatiblity, with DNG and DCP profiles. It may be it is not the optimal way, but it is probably the best way we have, as it is almost fully documented.
Best regards
Erik
-
You are now officially screwed if you have a newer camera.
I would urge anyone who plans on using LR6 after support ends to make sure you have a system image of your OS!!!
You can download older versions of apps from Adobe's CC App.
For newer cameras, use the DNG Converter to edit the photos in LR1-6. Can you name any other raw conversion software that allows you to import newer raw formats into old versions of the program?
-
You can download older versions of apps from Adobe's CC App.
For newer cameras, use the DNG Converter to edit the photos in LR1-6. Can you name any other raw conversion software that allows you to import newer raw formats into old versions of the program?
John, you are missing the point. Of course you can download the software and I've done this for new workstation builds on two occasions. What is unclear is whether any of the Version updates will still be available and automatically download. Adobe is in no way required to provide those once support for LR6 is ended.
Yes, one can convert to DNG but I, as with many others, want to keep my Nikon NEF files and rely on LR to be able to read those. Also, I'm not talking about using newer raw formats; Adobe has been very clear on that one. My point is that "if" I had a Nikon D850 and had the latest update from Adobe that supports it I am OK but if my SSD with the OS and programs fails sometime next year after support for LR6 has ended I "might" be out of luck if the fresh install of LR6 does not properly update to include that camera. I hope this is clear.
-
With every software vendor, it is equally "unclear" if you would always be able to download the software you bought. Adobe's no better or worse. The evidence is all we can go on, and you can download earlier versions of LR back to version 1. I just checked.
With any other software, Alan, you are completely "screwed" (your word) if your camera is newer. You might not want to convert to DNG, but it means you're only half-screwed with Adobe.
-
What is unclear is whether any of the Version updates will still be available and automatically download.
If you're worried just download the update patch file now and keep it safe.
I really don't see any need for concern.
-
There is one glitch to this that I thought about last evening. Yes, you do have a perpetual license to LR6 but say your computer crashes and you did not have a system image (bad practice of course). You need to do a fresh install of LR6. You download the new installation file (or if you are lucky you maybe had it on a backup drive as I do. You do the installation but now it does not update to the most recent ACR that is needed to support all the cameras added since LR6 was introduced. You are now officially screwed if you have a newer camera. By the end of the year Adobe is not required to support LR6 any longer and newer versions of ACR are incompatible with LR6. Of course this is conjecture but the chances of it happening are not zero and could be high as Adobe wants people onto the subscription mode.
I would urge anyone who plans on using LR6 after support ends to make sure you have a system image of your OS!!!
The download for the initial LR CC 2015/ 6.0 is still available online and the Latest update patch 2015.12 /6.12 is also available. Version 2015.13 / 6.13 patch should be available soon. However I believe you will need to have an internet connection to access your Adobe account to activate the installation and your license key/ keys of course. Remember only 2 active installations are permitted at any point in time. Deactivate from one to Activate on another.
-
Not exactly... it will take many years, but at some point, a Windows or Mac OS update will make LR6 not to work... and you will have to balance between keeping an not updated unsecure OS or migrate your Lightroom catalogue to other app
http://dgpfotografia.com
Yes, I agree - it's the risk of using legacy software. I have had it happen to me, thanks to X-Rite. Lesson learned: one can keep it till it no longer serves a need or no longer works, but at some point up-dating becomes unavoidable.
-
There is one glitch to this that I thought about last evening. Yes, you do have a perpetual license to LR6 but say your computer crashes and you did not have a system image (bad practice of course). You need to do a fresh install of LR6. You download the new installation file (or if you are lucky you maybe had it on a backup drive as I do. You do the installation but now it does not update to the most recent ACR that is needed to support all the cameras added since LR6 was introduced. You are now officially screwed if you have a newer camera. By the end of the year Adobe is not required to support LR6 any longer and newer versions of ACR are incompatible with LR6. Of course this is conjecture but the chances of it happening are not zero and could be high as Adobe wants people onto the subscription mode.
I would urge anyone who plans on using LR6 after support ends to make sure you have a system image of your OS!!!
Sure - Adobe has no obligation to provide ACR updates to discontinued software and I think the chances of some critical element of this scenario happening are MUCH greater than zero.
-
With every software vendor, it is equally "unclear" if you would always be able to download the software you bought. Adobe's no better or worse. The evidence is all we can go on, and you can download earlier versions of LR back to version 1. I just checked.
With any other software, Alan, you are completely "screwed" (your word) if your camera is newer. You might not want to convert to DNG, but it means you're only half-screwed with Adobe.
Yup, the DNG option is always there, a nuisance, but a way out of an otherwise sticky-wicket - unless of course one up-graded and paid.
-
Remember only 2 active installations are permitted at any point in time. Deactivate from one to Activate on another.
Denis - is it not the case that one can install on more than two computers, but one is only allowed to use 2 at the same time?
-
I wonder if we could get this forum split into „arguing about Adobe commercial policies“ and „discussion on actually using Lightroom“ ? Or are we all ok that every single topic is now destined to end up here?
-
Denis - is it not the case that one can install on more than two computers, but one is only allowed to use 2 at the same time?
That's why I said active installations. LR 6 requires activation for it to function not closed. Yes you have ten or more installations but only two activated.
-
I wonder if we could get this forum split into „arguing about Adobe commercial policies“ and „discussion on actually using Lightroom“ ? Or are we all ok that every single topic is now destined to end up here?
That's why Kevin started a topic trying to gather discussion of functional issues all in one place. http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=121124.0
-
That's why I said active installations. LR 6 requires activation for it to function not closed. Yes you have ten or more installations but only two activated.
Thanks for confirming, that's what I thought. For example, I have two installed and activated - one desk top, one laptop. If I wanted to use it on a third computer, is it the case that I would have to actually de-activate one of the others, or is it sufficient that it just remain closed while I am using the third one? I think I know the answer and I'm not going to like it, but just want to double check, if you know.
-
If you're worried just download the update patch file now and keep it safe.
I really don't see any need for concern.
I'm not worried as I always have an up to date system image. It was more to alert other uses of LR6 that they need to make such provisions.
-
I'm not worried as I always have an up to date system image.
Not much use if you need to install it on a new system.
-
Not much use if you need to install it on a new system.
I you are talking about a new OS that is true but if you are talking about a new computer, the answer is false. I have a bootable USB stick that allows me to transfer everything to a new machine if that were necessary.
-
...arguing about Adobe commercial policies...
Careful, you'll end up getting debate of Adobe's policies banned from LuLa...the LuLa snowflakes don't like controversies.
-
Careful, you'll end up getting debate of Adobe's policies banned from LuLa...the LuLa snowflakes don't like controversies.
I don't know who these snowflakes are (one can guess - ha ha Jeff) and I'm assuming this is humour, but just in case, I'd jsimply point out that this website has seen several rather warm discussions in the past of Adobe commercial policies every time the issue of renting software has come up and I kind of think there is nothing new to say about this. We've heard all the arguments, said what we can and the policy is the policy - Adobe's to determine and the market to judge. My understanding of LuLa policy is that no such discussion would be locked as long as it remains civil. I think David's intention is that there is value to the idea of keeping commercial policies and technical issues in separate threads so people more interested in the one or other can conveniently participate in one place of their choosing. I think this is the way to go, and it is why Kevin started the thread I referenced above.
-
I don't know who these snowflakes are (one can guess - ha ha Jeff)
It was the Trump discussions on the Coffee Corner Section of LuLa. Jeff was an important contributor to those discussions.
I'm assuming this is humour,
Unfortunately not for some of us who were active on some of the aforementioned threads
My understanding of LuLa policy is that no such discussion would be locked as long as it remains civil.
There was a very good Climate Change thread that ended up in the waste can as well and I think the discussion on that thread was pretty civil (I was very active along with Ray and some others). It's all water under the bridge right now and I'm sure LuLa released a large amount of disk space when all those threads were removed.
-
OK, I'll just mention one last time that I think it makes sense to carry separate threads for commercial policies versus technical matters on the subject of the Adobe applications.
-
Agreed. This thread started out about the new Range Mask feature. I'm still interested in hearing from early adopters what they think about it.
-
I don't know who these snowflakes are (one can guess - ha ha Jeff) and I'm assuming this is humour, but just in case, I'd jsimply point out that this website has seen several rather warm discussions in the past of Adobe commercial policies every time the issue of renting software has come up and I kind of think there is nothing new to say about this.
I wasn't making a joke...