Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Adobe Lightroom Q&A => Topic started by: john beardsworth on May 14, 2019, 10:03:49 am
-
Big new feature is a new slider - Texture. For me it's a subtler form of Clarity, like a blend of Clarity and Sharpening, and it's a global or local adjustment. I like to use it at negative values too.
https://theblog.adobe.com/from-the-acr-team-introducing-the-texture-control may interest people.
Nothing else of significance, other than changing all the LR app names, again - just to make sure everyone is equally confused.
-
Nothing else of significance ...
Not sure about that , John.
Of interest to those using hybrid lens/camera combinations (aka adapted lenses) Adobe has now incorporated their "Flat Field Plugin" within Lr 8.3. Sean Reid explains all in a comprehensive guide: https://www.reidreviews.com/examples/flatfieldnew.html
-
It leaves me yawning, that one!
-
It leaves me yawning, that one!
:)
-
Texture seems like it might be quite useful to me.
https://theblog.adobe.com/from-the-acr-team-introducing-the-texture-control/
-
This changes a lot of things. I run Detail in the Detail panel quite high however you lose halo suppression. Just experimenting with setting that back to the factory default of 25. Looks real good so far.
-
For me the biggest benefit is at negative values as it has a smoothing or blurring effect (as mentioned in the linked article), and also as a local adjustment, for example to blur elements of a background. Give it a try.
-
Not sure about that , John.
Indeed, there's Flat Field Correction; absolutely doesn't suck:
https://helpx.adobe.com/lightroom-classic/help/whats-new/2019-3.html#flatfieldcorrection
Auto is supposed to be improved but I don't use it.
-
Big new feature is a new slider - Texture. For me it's a subtler form of Clarity, like a blend of Clarity and Sharpening, and it's a global or local adjustment. I like to use it at negative values too.
https://theblog.adobe.com/from-the-acr-team-introducing-the-texture-control may interest people.
Nothing else of significance, other than changing all the LR app names, again - just to make sure everyone is equally confused.
Is this similar to C1’s “Structure?”
-
Is this similar to C1’s “Structure?”
Don't know.
-
Is this similar to C1’s “Structure?”
It appears to be somewhat depending on 'direction' applied. As we see here and here:
https://theblog.adobe.com/from-the-acr-team-introducing-the-texture-control/ (https://theblog.adobe.com/from-the-acr-team-introducing-the-texture-control/)
https://blog.captureone.com/how-to-enhance-details-with-structure/ (https://blog.captureone.com/how-to-enhance-details-with-structure/)
And you can do localized adjustments with it in LR.
-
Indeed, there's Flat Field Correction; absolutely doesn't suck:
https://helpx.adobe.com/lightroom-classic/help/whats-new/2019-3.html#flatfieldcorrection
Brilliant; it's great that FFC has been integrated!
Maybe we'll get colour readouts and 1:1 cropping before 2025 ..giddyup!
-
Hopefully Adobe will steer well clear of such rabbit holes.
-
https://theblog.adobe.com/from-the-acr-team-introducing-the-texture-control/
-
Yeah, that's been posted at least twice already in this thread ;)
-
Hopefully Adobe will steer well clear of such rabbit holes.
True, it may well be better to keeping it lite.
-
And you can do localized adjustments with it in LR.
Thant's great but you can do localized adjustments of any tool in C1 (unlike LR)
-
Thant's great but you can do localized adjustments of any tool in C1 (unlike LR)
That’s great now if they could only work out the DNG issues I keep asking about that seriously kept me from using it in the past after looking it over.
-
Thant's great but you can do localized adjustments of any tool in C1 (unlike LR)
My photo editor is better than your photo editor?
-
My photo editor is better than you photo editor?
Mine’s bigger than yours ;D
-
Sure seems like owners of other developers like C1 aren't too happy with todays new and significant addition. Maybe when they pays their $150 this Nov 1 they will get something.
-
My photo editor is better than your photo editor?
No, they're different. Just clarifying on a comment that I interpreted as "here is something that C1 cannot do", but I may be wrong (and I use both BTW, each has its own advantages and disadvantages)
-
No, they're different. Just clarifying on a comment that I interpreted as "here is something that C1 cannot do", but I may be wrong (and I use both BTW, each has its own advantages and disadvantages)
NO one said that (Here’s something C1 cannot do) with respect to Texture. Seems what it can’t (couldn’t) do was deal with my DNG’s. Your interpretation is off.
-
I don't use DNG. What is the issue with C1? Just curious.
-
I don't use DNG. What is the issue with C1? Just curious.
C1 does not guarantee full support for DNG (except those created directly in supported cameras). This might affect color rendition
-
C1 does not guarantee full support for DNG (except those created directly in supported cameras). This might affect color rendition
Thanks
-
It seems some are not that happy that Adobe, often accused of riding the gravy train, added a significant feature today. I can list all of the features that Adobe added since Oct of 2017 but I'd rather avoid a mine is better than yours sub thread. Maybe I'll look at C1 a 3rd time and spend $300 with $150 annual upgrade fees every Nov 1 if they add lens corrections for all my telephoto lenses ;)
-
Not sure texture is exactly the same as structure in C1 but it’s similar enough that I will use it in the same way. I use LR and C1. Lr to get through masses of commercial work and C1 for my personal work. C1 for all tethered shooting of course. I like them both.
-
Indeed, there's Flat Field Correction; absolutely doesn't suck:
https://helpx.adobe.com/lightroom-classic/help/whats-new/2019-3.html#flatfieldcorrection
Auto is supposed to be improved but I don't use it.
Adobe released a flat field correction back in 2013. See here (https://labs.adobe.com/technologies/lightroomplugins/). That version required a DNG file and was very useful in photomicroscopy where less than perfect Köhler illumination resulted in uneven illumination. About the same time Martin Evening published a short paper on how to obtain flat field correction in Photoshop using the divide blending mode. Martin's method not only corrected for uneven illumination, but also removed dust marks on the sensor in his fashion photography but also dust marks on the microscope condenser, something not possible with the LR version. It will be interesting to see what the new version can dol
Bill
-
Big new feature is a new slider - Texture. For me it's a subtler form of Clarity, like a blend of Clarity and Sharpening, and it's a global or local adjustment. I like to use it at negative values too.
https://theblog.adobe.com/from-the-acr-team-introducing-the-texture-control may interest people.
Nothing else of significance, other than changing all the LR app names, again - just to make sure everyone is equally confused.
The new texture slider in ACR is useful as a local adjustment to reduce or eliminate pesky unwanted texture on out of focus balls.
Thank you Adobe.
-
I downloaded today. "Auto" does seem to get me much closer to finished. I shoot a Nikon D810 and find myself decreasing Highlights and increasing Shadows on most images. Auto does this very well. Seems to increase exposure a little too much.
I will still manually adjust "keepers" but "auto" is great for a quick run-through.
"Texture" seems to be closer in use to older "clarity", current clarity bumps up contrast AND saturation too much for most of my images. I can see a mild use of "texture", + & -, for many uses.
Jim
-
I downloaded today. "Auto" does seem to get me much closer to finished. I shoot a Nikon D810 and find myself decreasing Highlights and increasing Shadows on most images. Auto does this very well. Seems to increase exposure a little too much.
I will still manually adjust "keepers" but "auto" is great for a quick run-through.
"Texture" seems to be closer in use to older "clarity", current clarity bumps up contrast AND saturation too much for most of my images. I can see a mild use of "texture", + & -, for many uses.
Jim
I noticed that auto now moves the contrast slider to a more contrasty look. Not always as good as the previous one, which in some cases was too much on the negative side with contrast. That's the main difference I have seen so far for auto.
-
I thought about this, once I receive the update. Us C1PRO users have "Texture" as the original or legacy "Clarity" in C1PRO years ago. I think all these sharpening tools or local enhancements are never one-tool slider task and they have to be used in conjunction and image-subject-matter dependent.
Big new feature is a new slider - Texture. For me it's a subtler form of Clarity, like a blend of Clarity and Sharpening, and it's a global or local adjustment. I like to use it at negative values too.
-
I downloaded today. "Auto" does seem to get me much closer to finished. I shoot a Nikon D810 and find myself decreasing Highlights and increasing Shadows on most images. Auto does this very well. Seems to increase exposure a little too much.
I will still manually adjust "keepers" but "auto" is great for a quick run-through.
"Texture" seems to be closer in use to older "clarity", current clarity bumps up contrast AND saturation too much for most of my images. I can see a mild use of "texture", + & -, for many uses.
Jim
Note sure if this effects Nikon but Auto, which is very usable now, does not play nicely with Canon profiles. It tends to over-protect highlights and underexposes quite a bit. I import with Adobe Color, apply Auto and then change to a Canon profile. I noticed ColorChecker Passport files don't suffer this.
Clarity adds to mid tone contrast
Vibrance adds to only the least saturated colors
-
I noticed that auto now moves the contrast slider to a more contrasty look. Not always as good as the previous one, which in some cases was too much on the negative side with contrast. That's the main difference I have seen so far for auto.
I have not tried that yet. Adobe did say that it was going to correct that. Thanks for the heads up.
-
Fairly shortly after the new Auto was introduced I noticed that Auto underexposed Canon profiles badly. Based on Hans's post I gave it a try. It always exposed this file to around -70. Looks like they fixed that too. Awesome
-
I also read that using Auto as an import preset didn't match when Auto was applied after import. Apparently that has been corrected as well.
-
I forgot to mention that import from cards should be much quicker. Instead of copying via the "device" method, it's now copying files as if they are on a drive - so it should now be a quick as using Explorer/Finder to copy from the card to the hard drive.
-
I forgot to mention that import from cards should be much quicker. Instead of copying via the "device" method, it's now copying files as if they are on a drive - so it should now be a quick as using Explorer/Finder to copy from the card to the hard drive.
That will be a big improvement! Hope to check that out soon.
-
In import's left hand side, you'll see that it now defaults to the drive letter or external drive.
-
The use of the term flat field to refer to phenomena relating to electronic image sensors is a bit confusing, since the term also applies to a strictly optical characteristic: a lens's plane of focus.
-
Not sure about that , John.
Of interest to those using hybrid lens/camera combinations (aka adapted lenses) Adobe has now incorporated their "Flat Field Plugin" within Lr 8.3. Sean Reid explains all in a comprehensive guide: https://www.reidreviews.com/examples/flatfieldnew.html
It would be very nice if Adobe would incorporate these corrections into their lens correction profiles. It would also be very nice if Adobe would offer a feature to move lens corrections off axis, to account for the movements of perspective control lenses. Capture One at least offers this for lens distortion.
-
It would be very nice if Adobe would incorporate these corrections into their lens correction profiles.
Hi David,
While I'd agree that that would be nice, I doubt that it would produce optimal results (and I would readily agree that my preferred standands exceed those of normal/average people). The reason is that each, and I mean EACH, lens is a bit unique.
So while adding another step(-up) to 'average' image quality control, I (don't/)wouldn't object if offered as an option.
It would also be very nice if Adobe would offer a feature to move lens corrections off axis, to account for the movements of perspective control lenses. Capture One at least offers this for lens distortion.
I'm just being realistic about this, while I agree (which is easy as a licensed Capture One Pro user looking for ultimate quality and already having those options), it probably/apparently doesn't serve a concern of most LR subscribers. I'm okay with that, that's one of the reasons I abandoned LR, and several other Adobe offerings. While it serves a lot of people, it simply doesn't serve those seeking the best.
As an anecdote, I vividly remember a 'discussion' with a prominent and widely respected National Adobe representative for my country (The Netherlands), when asked when Adobe intended to improve the resampling quality of Photoshop, he said there was nothing wrong with it, period. At roughly the same time, I was investigating opportunities for improvement with people who would later be contracted by Phase One, who did value progress more than short term subscription earnings.
Cheers,
Bart
-
... that's one of the reasons I abandoned LR, and several other Adobe offerings. While it serves a lot of people, it simply doesn't serve those seeking the best....
Cheers,
Bart
Adobe just introduced enhanced detail, texture and flat field; These are all options a lot of photographers do not care about but the ones looking for the best possible quality...
I will have a look at C1 again soon, but some things I did not like about it in the past:
1 too vivid colors.
2 uneven sharpness across the image. (for instance hair being cluttered (as Trumps) at some points)
What i do not like about Adobe Photoshop ( since decades) is that it makes very bad use of the computing power of the hardware, especially in repetitive batch tasks.
(making a bunch of photo's smaller it does one at the time- only one core is used- and i have 10, making the process about 8 times slower than possible)
-
Adobe just introduced enhanced detail, texture and flat field; These are all options a lot of photographers do not care about but the ones looking for the best possible quality...
Gotta love when one person speaks for an entire industry and group of users. :o
-
Gotta love when one person speaks for an entire industry and group of users. :o
+1
-
Adobe just introduced enhanced detail, texture and flat field; These are all options a lot of photographers do not care about but the ones looking for the best possible quality...
You're probably right about flat field, a bit less so about enhanced detail, and I can only assume you haven't even tried texture before making that comment.
-
You're probably right about flat field, a bit less so about enhanced detail, and I can only assume you haven't even tried texture before making that comment.
Not right about flat field if the goal is the best quality image data:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat-field_correction (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat-field_correction)
Flat-field correction is a technique used to improve quality in digital imaging. The goal is to remove artifacts from 2-D images that are caused by variations in the pixel-to-pixel sensitivity of the detector and/or by distortions in the optical path. It is a standard calibration procedure in everything from pocket digital cameras to giant telescopes.
I utterly accept there are lots of photographers who's goals are not ideal image quality. It's why so many can't even figure out how to expose for raw; exposure photography 101!
-
You're probably right about flat field, a bit less so about enhanced detail, and I can only assume you haven't even tried texture before making that comment.
you are right; texture is a big plus for everyone...
It is going to replace the use of clarity in many situations.
-
you are right; texture is a big plus for everyone...
It is going to replace the use of clarity in many situations.
Not replace. They work hand-in-hand. Fibroids doesn’t replace saturation. Different tools for different needs. The Adobe blog has some good examples where both texture and clarity work in tandem.
-
Fibroids doesn’t replace saturation.
I suspect you mean "don't", not "doesn't", but I'm unsure of the relevance of uterine leiomyomata.
Jeremy
-
I suspect you mean "don't", not "doesn't", but I'm unsure of the relevance of uterine leiomyomata.
Jeremy
Ouch: vibrance. Auto spell strikes again. ???
-
..and replace in the sense there was no texture before and looking back it was often the better choice over clarity.
i understand they can work together....
-
I downloaded 8.3 a couple of days ago and I am having a problem making the round trip to Photoshop and back to Lightroom. I use Control-E to move the image to Photoshop and do whatever I need to do and in the past I could simply close the image in Photoshop and it would automatically be saved as a tiff.
Now, if I do that Photoshop freezes and must be killed in the task manager, then reopened to continue. I can avoid this by saving the images in Photoshop using Control S before returning to Lightroom.
Did the upgrade to Lightroom 8.3 somehow alter the relationship between Lightroom and Photoshop?
Has anyone else experienced this?
-
My workflow is round tripping just as you have described and it has been unaffected by the upgrade on my system.
-
Thanks Martin. The only change I've noticed is that, after working the image in Photoshop I must first click Save or use Control-S and then click to close the image. Before, just closing the image would automatically save it. Not a big deal but my system is freezing Photoshop completely when I do it the"old" way.
-
Oh the magic of rebooting the system. Problem solved. Lightroom and Photoshop are behaving as before.
-
Correct me if I’m wrong, but flat field correction is an old hat in Lightroom. I remember that Michael showed this feature many years ago. I think it was in the video to version 4 of Lightroom.
-
It was a separate utility.
-
It was a separate utility.
Not reales, as far as I remember we had to download it from Adobe separately, but it was to be integrated into Lr as a plugin.
So, the tool is pretty old and the integration has been improved...
-
Any separate program can be set up as an external editor and called a plugin, and that's what happened before. Adobe have simply brought it into LR and listed it as a new feature.
I'm not sure the integration is that great. When I looked, it seemed to remove the raw original from the catalogue, replacing it with the DNG.