Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Adobe Lightroom Q&A => Topic started by: Frodo on October 06, 2018, 04:44:02 pm
-
There's usually time pressure to get photos from an event back to a client. And usually events involve many photos, often over a hundred.
It would be great if autotone (auto-exposure) could get the exposure in the right ballpark. Sadly, Lightroom's autotone button is almost useless.
In LR 6, autotone would almost invariably produce over-exposure, often with excessive contrast.
I thought that had been improved in LR Classic CC, but autotone has flipped the otherway, with photos typically given 1.5 to 2 stops underexposure and contrast at -20, when 0 is about right.
This is off RAW files with my 5DsR, 6D and M3.
Are there any work-arounds for this? Ideally that I could calibrate the autotone function.
Otherwise its: set exposure for faces, fill shadows, adjust highlights, then set white and black clipping points.
Surely there must be an algorithm that can get this right.
Even auto-exposure in Lightroom Elements is close.
-
You must be using a different Lightroom than the rest of us ;)
-
Hi Slobodan
Perhaps you are right. I was expecting a substantial improvement in autotone. I'm using Lightroom Classic CC release 7.5.
Thanks, Bob
-
Hi Slobodan
Perhaps you are right. I was expecting a substantial improvement in autotone. I'm using Lightroom Classic CC release 7.5.
Thanks, Bob
Is the problem that LR is not telepathic? I don't bother using it. I just adjust my images the way I want them. It only takes a few seconds.
-
Here are three photos (test shot for getting exposure right).
First: Original photo (just cropped)
Second: Autotone (ctrl-U)
Third: my preferred exposure
-
Hi, I'm new here. Lurked a lot and decided to participate.
What I have noticed. If I use Canon camera profiles Auto Tone can underexpose them a lot. If I use the same file with an Adobe profile this does not happen. I guess the engineers built Sensei using Adobe information. That is all I can think of.
This may be what you are looking for. The last tool - Personalized Auto Tone. You can apply it to one image at a time, a group or all while in the Develop module.
http://regex.info/blog/lightroom-goodies/bag-o-goodies
I also use this which you may be interested in. Before this plug-in I set my Develop Default Settings by ISO so NR applied by a specific ISO. I kept a master set of files per camera to make any changes to the Develop Settings. I had to use 1/1 ISO values - 100, 200, 400, 800 and so on. This created about 10 master files per camera. To use 1 /3 or intermediate ISO values would have made it impossible to manage.
You enter a range of ISO and NR range and it applies NR using a logarithmic formula. I now can shoot using all ISO values and use Auto ISO as well. Auto ISO does not work in 1/1. With the Bulk Developer I now only need 1 master file per Camera. Now the only things I apply at import is a colour profile and lens corrections. I created keyboard shortcuts for both plug-ins.
http://regex.info/blog/lightroom-goodies/bulk-develop
I used to apply Auto Tone at import but when Adobe changed the presets to XMP (7.3 I think) they messed something up. Applying Auto Tone at import overrides all your Default Develop Settings. I had to apply it after import in the Library module. Both these plug-ins have changed my workflow. Much closer starting base.
-
Am I going to have to solve math problems every time I post? I didn't spend this much time at it in school. :) I did notice the questions are the same for my second post - hopefully.
-
Am I going to have to solve math problems every time I post? I didn't spend this much time at it in school. :) I did notice the questions are the same for my second post - hopefully.
No, just for a couple of first posts. Intended to prevent spam.
-
Thanks
-
At first I didn't like the Contrast adjustments either. When you look at the images it adds more detail to shadow areas. With Personalized Auto Tone I allow 50% of what Sensei thinks. With Bulk Developer I didn't activate Colour Noise, Contrast and Clarity.
Auto Tone does not adjust Clarity but that is something that also auto applies with Default Develop Settings. Set to +12.
-
No, just for a couple of first posts. Intended to prevent spam.
Seems not to be working by example. :o
For the OP; auto anything in any product is usually hit or miss. Might be a good starting point. No insurance it’s the final point and software can only “Analyze” individual pixels and not color and tone in context. We see an image in context and edit based on this and a goal.
-
Well you must be referring to me. The OP asked for help and I offered a suggestion. I have no affiliation with the developer.
-
We had a short conversation earlier today at the Adobe forums regarding why some people see $9.99 for the photography plan and others see $19.99.
-
For the OP; auto anything in any product is usually hit or miss. Might be a good starting point. No insurance it’s the final point and software can only “Analyze” individual pixels and not color and tone in context. We see an image in context and edit based on this and a goal.
Hi Andrew
I agree that auto anything is a bit hit and miss. My car has manual transmission partly for this reason.
I'm not seeking perfect exposure per button click, hence using "adequate" in the title.
I thought autotone was improved significantly with Sensei AI, but my experience with three different cameras has not been positive. The example I posted has caucasian skin in front of z lot of dark foliage (even more in the uncropped image). If autotone is based on average pixels, I would have expected washed out skin, but instead I get underexposure. Its hardly a "starting point".
The workflow I use (and described above) is okay, But I'll start the software Zen8 suggested .
Thanks
-
What I have noticed. If I use Canon camera profiles Auto Tone can underexpose them a lot. If I use the same file with an Adobe profile this does not happen. I guess the engineers built Sensei using Adobe information. That is all I can think of.
Correct...while not stated anywhere, I happen to know that the Auto settings are based upon using Adobe Standard as the profile (or Adobe Color for new defaults which uses Adobe Standard underneath).
Not for nothing, this is what I got using ACR Auto on your JPEG...
-
How would you know that? Just kidding. :) Thanks for making PK Sharpener free. A nice addition to PS. I didn't really need it because by the time I learned about it almost all my exports were via LR.
-
Correct...while not stated anywhere, I happen to know that the Auto settings are based upon using Adobe Standard as the profile (or Adobe Color for new defaults which uses Adobe Standard underneath).
Not for nothing, this is what I got using ACR Auto on your JPEG...
Problem solved! I knew it had to be simple.
First photo is autotone with Camera Standard profile.
Second is autotone with Adobe Standard.
The difference is huge and the second image is pretty close.
I tend to prefer the colours with Camera Standard, but not enough to make a difference when I have a lot of images to process and autotone works so much better.
Thanks Jeff and Zen8!
-
Those are the exact results I got. Even that bit of highlights around the hair is enough for Sensei to over-protect a Canon profile. You will notice files that do have bright highlights are fine. I also have thing for Canon files. When shoot people I use Canon Portrait and do not apply Auto Tone. Most of my shooting is wildlife and scenic so Auto Tone works fine. If Sensei lowers the exposure too much I just bring it back up again.
I did experiment a little. If you want to use Adobe profiles I find Adobe Colour lacks a little punch compared to Canon Standard. To match it I found it easier to use Adobe Vivid and tone down saturation (and a few other tweaks) than use Adobe Colour and try and punch it up. I use the adjustments in Personalized Auto Tone to do this and I got pretty close to Canon Standard.
There are several work arounds but easiest option is to just use an Adobe profile.
-
The only problem I see now, is that auto tone works and your stuck so to speak, with only that Adobe Profile for all the other rendering it affected. Not certain it’s a good deal. ???
-
This is true. I'm not sure how a ColourChecker profile would work. I'll give it a try.
It does make sense Adobe would use their own formulas with Sensei. C1's claim is how great their images look out of the box using their colour rendition. Adobe Standard is flat. For years we got Adobe Standard and either you tweaked, used a camera, created a custom profile using ColorChecker, etc.
I came across a C1 video saying how much better it was out of the box compared to LR. You don't know if C1 was showing the final image or not. My guess it was. They were comparing the image in LR before export and my guess it was an un-edited Adobe Standard file. A big difference between the two.
Several months later Adobe introduced new profiles (Adobe Colour is now the default), improved Sensei and increased the sharping default to 40. I have a feeling this was a response to competitors as first impressions do make a difference, especially for people just starting out. I'm surprised it took that long.
So there are the 2 sides I guess. People who are going to use Adobe or Camera profiles and ones who prefer or need to use colour charts for industry standards and Auto Tone won't matter.
-
So there are the 2 sides I guess. People who are going to use Adobe or Camera profiles and ones who prefer or need to use colour charts for industry standards and Auto Tone won't matter.
That sums it up quite well. It begs the question (request) that Auto Tone not be so crippled as to rely on one generic profile for one illuminant. But I think your idea of just not futzing with it based on this limitation alone is reason not to futz with it. ;)
-
Well hopefully Adobe keeps improving it. For my wildlife work it gets me there faster and looks great. I still review it and tweak as needed. I did an engagement shoot a few weeks ago (which I said I'd never do again). I did not use it and took the time to process everything carefully. It's just another tool that has it's place.
-
Hi Andrew and Zen8
This has been a most helpful discussion. I find it rather bizarre that Adobe has, in effect, just designed autotone to work just with Adobe profiles and I support Andrew's request to "uncripple" this "feature".
I stress that if I'm taking a limited number of photos that need to be as good as I can produce, I use an appropriate camera profile. This often involves local adjustments. But often I have jobs that requires a quick turnaround of a large number of "good-enough" photos (e.g. tomorrow I have a corporate event). LR autotone working off an Adobe profile is "good-enough" for that purpose. So I am happy.
I do feel that Adobe should make the limitations of autotone clearer. if it wasn't for Zen8 and Jeff, I would never have thought of that.
Thanks
-
To be honest, I had NO idea Autotone was based on this one profile. That's why I need Jeff to post more often! But then I don't use Autotone (that's my excuse, I'm sticking to it). :D
-
I only discovered that my mistake. I just assumed Auto Tone was over protective of highlights in general. Surprised me when I did a test between both one day. I'd like to see LR take the brakes off too but I doubt they will. It think it would require them to collect DATA from not only Canon but all manufacturers. I don't know about such things.
I'm pretty fond of Canon colour. I have said on other sites - if I could get Canon's engine with all the bells and whistles in a developer like LR I'd pay big money for it. Adobe does a pretty good job emulating Canon colours.
-
I find it rather bizarre that Adobe has, in effect, just designed autotone to work just with Adobe profiles and I support Andrew's request to "uncripple" this "feature".
Actually, if you understood what went into training the AI you would understand that the ONLY profile it makes sense to use for Auto is Adobe Standard (or Adobe Color which is Adobe Standard under the hood). If you think about it, Adobe would need to train the AI on each profile included with Lightroom which just ain't gonna happen. The profile is the basis of the tone curve that the AI uses to evaluate and tone map the image. Change the profile you are forced to change the tone mapping.
I do think Adobe should pop a warning when applying Auto to new images whose profiles are NOT at Adobe Standard and offer to change the profile to Adobe Standard but I suspect that won't happen either...
The reason I know so much is I've been working with Adobe since last year trying to train the AI on what images should look like. I've adjusted 1K of my own images and 1,500 images from other photographers from all sorts of cameras and scenes. The AI still messes up from time to time but the vast majority of the time the AI moves in the right direction even if it does a bit too much (or not enough) of certain adjustments. I'm due to adjust another 500 images by the end of the month. These are weird edge case images to train the AI on unusual images.
Personally, I now auto tone all my new images at import because it makes selection editing so much easier...and since the AI is already trained on my style and taste, the AI is usually pretty accurate.
The only limitation is, of course, the AI can ONLY do global adjustments, no local adjustments (although that might show up in the future).
So, if you like the way Auto works, you can credit me...if you don't like the way it works, blame Adobe :~)
-
That all makes perfect sense to me. I agree about a warning.
-
Just thought of something else. Does the training apply for Adobe Color only or all the Adobe colors like landscape, portrait, etc?
-
So, Jeff, who’s to blame for almost every image jumping to -20 Contrast? Which then I not only have to reset to zero, but often go for +20.
-
I'm not defending what it was designed to do but it does bring out shadow detail. I stated before I didn't like it at first but warmed up to it. With that plugin I split the difference.
-
So, Jeff, who’s to blame for almost every image jumping to -20 Contrast?
Bug...
(not my fault)
-
Really. I guess they will correct that one day.
-
I think I recall that Adobe will continue to improve it and if I'm not mistaken at one time asked the general public to participate. Thanks for the info about contrast. I made some changes to my workflow. Good thread. I'm glad I found it.
-
To be honest, I had NO idea Autotone was based on this one profile. That's why I need Jeff to post more often! But then I don't use Autotone (that's my excuse, I'm sticking to it). :D
I'm reading through this thread again. Is Auto Tone based on the Adobe Colour profile only or does it include the other 6 new Adobe profiles as well?
Sorry for bumping. An intriguing thread.
Update. A simple test I should have thought of. I tried both Colour and Vivid. Both adjusted exposure equally. The Canon profile unexposed a full stop lower.
-
Speaking of bugs... all of a sudden "undo" doesn't work any more. Neither as a keyboard shortcut (Command-Z on Mac), nor as a menu item (grayed out). The only way is to click on history!?
-
Double click on Tone.
-
I meant anything in LR, not just Auto Tone.
-
Sorry about that. Edit - Undo works for me. I can't test Command Z as I over-road that to apply Auto Tone. Restarting might fix that. If not usually a re-install of LR does it.
-
Speaking of bugs... all of a sudden "undo" doesn't work any more. Neither as a keyboard shortcut (Command-Z on Mac), nor as a menu item (grayed out). The only way is to click on history!?
Unable to confirm or replicate your bug on two different machines ... one under High Sierra and one under Mojave. the undo/redo function works as intended either directly or using keyboard shortcuts.
-
... Restarting might fix that...
Thanks, Zen8 (and ButchM). Restarting the computer worked.
-
Glad that worked. Something gets stuck once in a while.
-
So, Jeff, who’s to blame for almost every image jumping to -20 Contrast? Which then I not only have to reset to zero, but often go for +20.
Just thinking about this post. If there is a bug what is it doing? If Slobodan is going +20 from Sensei's -20 is the bug doing the opposite of what it is supposed to? I made a change to my workflow and I'm wondering if I should do more.
Sensei was a pretty big roll out. Blogs, etc all over the place. It doesn't seem like Adobe is in a big hurry to correct it.
-
Problem solved! I knew it had to be simple.
First photo is autotone with Camera Standard profile.
Second is autotone with Adobe Standard.
The difference is huge and the second image is pretty close.
I tend to prefer the colours with Camera Standard, but not enough to make a difference when I have a lot of images to process and autotone works so much better.
Thanks Jeff and Zen8!
I've not done a quantative test but if you prefer Camera Standard colours but need/want autotone then you can apply the Camera Standard profile after an autotone in Adobe Standard. Not sure if this will give exactly what you want as I don't have an image that reacts the same as the example you posted.
-
I never thought of that. Thanks, I'll try it out. A while ago I played around with Adobe Vivid and set parameters in the Personalized Auto Tone plug-in to desaturate because Vivid has too much. I found it easier to tone down with Vivid than to tone up with Adobe Colour.
That is what I'm doing now. For my wildlife work, etc it works fine. I was going to test one my ColourChecker profiles but forgot to. I'll do that.
-
Well that didn't take long. First off the reason I use Vivid (beside the saturation) it has this slight punch that Adobe Colour lacks compared to Camera Standard. I have tried to get Adobe Colour to match and no matter what I did, blacks, contrast, etc I couldn't reproduce it.
Very interesting. That worked quite well. After applying Auto Tone and switching to Canon Standard that punch came back. The Auto Tone button deactivated but there were no changes to adjustments.
Thanks very much :) I was wondering if that $12 was a good investment here. That is 1 ½ beers at the next hockey game ;)
-
Just thinking about this post. If there is a bug what is it doing?
The AI has been trained by evaluating thousands of images...several thousand I've been paid to do. However, many of the other images have been poorly adjusted in an inconsistent manner–which is why I'm going back over previous image settings to images used to train and correcting them. The minus contrast has been a problem that we're trying to smooth out. I'm currently working on 200 images of just faces–to help train the AI on skin tone.
It doesn't seem like Adobe is in a big hurry to correct it.
It takes time...the first rollout was a big improvement, it's been updated 2 times (as far as I know) and it's due to another update soonish. Hopefully (and based on testing I've done on recent test builds) some of the wrinkles are getting smoothed out :~)
-
It takes time...the first rollout was a big improvement, it's been updated 2 times (as far as I know) and it's due to another update soonish. Hopefully (and based on testing I've done on recent test builds) some of the wrinkles are getting smoothed out :~)
Thanks for the update Jeff.
-
Yes I have been in roll outs. First one is always big and there are always some speed bumps. Lot's of work and it is appreciated. Auto is part of my workflow now and contrast is an easy fix. Looking forward to the update. In Blog's, etc Adobe said they would keep improving it. Thanks for the update.
-
Glad that this is being worked on. Adobe has access to a large image library and ought to be able to train Lightroom straightforwardly. The tech is no longer in the real of rocket science.
-
Glad that this is being worked on. Adobe has access to a large image library and ought to be able to train Lightroom straightforwardly. The tech is no longer in the real of rocket science.
the issue is we are getting Schewe's ideas how to "adjust" images... to get it to work adequately, ACR/LR shall learn from customer's own adjustments (and not Schewe's) and keep that "database" probably in local cloud account (for each customer) ;D
-
and since the AI is already trained on my style and taste
now I understand what it is so <self-censored>, thank you for shedding the light
-
the issue is we are getting Schewe's ideas how to "adjust" images... to get it to work adequately, ACR/LR shall learn from customer's own adjustments (and not Schewe's) and keep that "database" probably in local cloud account (for each customer) ;D
I have no problem with whoever is inputting to improve the AI response.
However, it would be nice if Adobe incorporated the capabilities of Jeffrey Friedl’s ‘Personalized Auto Tone’, so each of us could easily fine tune....within the built in auto tone function
-
That would be a nice addition. One thing I like about that plug-in is you can apply it for a group or all images while in the Develop module.
-
That would be a nice addition. One thing I like about that plug-in is you can apply it for a group or all images while in the Develop module.
I would just rather it not be a “plugin”. It would be great if Adobe implemented it so each of us could adjust our own starting point, but using their AI as the base.
This way, if the AI generally was to bright or dark, too saturated or flat, we could tune to our personal likes.
-
I'll back you on that one.
-
I have always used Auto-Tone as a starting point and then tweaked its settings. When AI was initially added, I thought it was a big improvement. Somewhere along the way it got very broken, especially exposure and negative contrast.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
-
Not sure if you read the whole thread but I also found that it underexposed. I noticed this was happening mostly with Canon profiles, not Adobe profiles. We learned that Adobe built Sensei using Adobe Profiles, which makes sense. Maybe one day they will include other manufacturers. My new workflow is applying AT to Adobe Colour then changing the to a Canon profile. Really works well. I have a preset to switch all the files back to Canon so it takes seconds.
As for contrast Jeff said Adobe is aware and there will be a fix. For now a preset will get all your files back to zero or your preferred value.
-
Version 8 is out. I wonder if they corrected contrast?
-
Version 8 is out. I wonder if they corrected contrast?
Nope. No apparent change.
-
I really liked the AI driven auto tone when it was introduced. It’s useless to me now. Too bad. I’m sure they are working on it.
-
They are working on it. Just a contrast glitch and a preset fixes that in seconds. I find it very useful. You can bypass with Jeffrey Friedl's Personalized Auto Tone plug-in.
-
I noticed this was happening mostly with Canon profiles, not Adobe profiles.
You do realize that the brand named profiles are actually profiles created by Adobe, not the various camera makers. Adobe has tried to build those 'brand' profiles to closely replicate what the camera maker applies using the camera maker's proprietary software and/or processing applied to in-camera jpegs. Try as they might, they will never exactly be identical to the camera maker's look.
In essence ... all the veracious profiles included with ACR and/or Lightroom are Adobe profiles.
-
You do realize that the brand named profiles are actually profiles created by Adobe, not the various camera makers. Adobe has tried to build those 'brand' profiles to closely replicate what the camera maker applies using the camera maker's proprietary software and/or processing applied to in-camera jpegs. Try as they might, they will never exactly be identical to the camera maker's look.
In essence ... all the veracious profiles included with ACR and/or Lightroom are Adobe profiles.
Does it matter?
If the profiles available you can choose any one or multiple, dependent on image type, and use that as a starting point.
Having a consistent starting point, that you are used to, is more important than the exact match to any in-camera profile.
-
Does it matter?
If the profiles available you can choose any one or multiple, dependent on image type, and use that as a starting point.
Having a consistent starting point, that you are used to, is more important than the exact match to any in-camera profile.
That wasn't my point ... my point was that Lightroom does not ship with camera profiles created by the camera makers
-
You do realize that the brand named profiles are actually profiles created by Adobe, not the various camera makers. Adobe has tried to build those 'brand' profiles to closely replicate what the camera maker applies using the camera maker's proprietary software and/or processing applied to in-camera jpegs. Try as they might, they will never exactly be identical to the camera maker's look.
In essence ... all the veracious profiles included with ACR and/or Lightroom are Adobe profiles.
Yes I do. I realized quite a while ago Auto Tone didn't play nicely with Canon files so I used tweaked Adobe profiles. Jeff Schewe confirmed Sensei was built using Adobe profiles that in this thread - which makes sense. I even stated in one post that maybe Adobe might add other manufacturer profiles but I won't hold my breath. Another member suggested an awesome workaround. Apply Auto Tone to an Adobe file and then switch to the camera's profile. Works great.
-
Does it matter?
If the profiles available you can choose any one or multiple, dependent on image type, and use that as a starting point.
Having a consistent starting point, that you are used to, is more important than the exact match to any in-camera profile.
How do you post images here? I see this come up [img] [img]. Just insert the Jpeg?
-
That wasn't my point ... my point was that Lightroom does not ship with camera profiles created by the camera makers
Yes they are emulations and darned good ones.
-
How do you post images here? I see this come up [img] [img]. Just insert the Jpeg?
https://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=108865.0
-
Contrast set to zero for all.
1. Image imported as Canon Standard
2. Auto Tone applied
3. Back to square one and Auto Tone applied to Adobe Colour
4. Switched profile to Canon Standard