Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Digital Image Processing => Topic started by: Frans Waterlander on April 07, 2020, 10:57:34 pm
-
When you increase exposure in the Photoshop Elements ACR converter, the highlight clipping point shows up when you start to blow out the highlights, as you would expect. However, when you continue to increase exposure (yes I know, it's not really exposure you increase that way) the clipping line grows, as you would expect, but the line moves to the right. I estimate the line first shows up at around a value of 250 and then moves gradually to the maximum value of 255. Why is that?
My best guess (but it's not more than a guess) is that clipping is set to begin at around 250 to allow for some headroom after RAW conversion for things like sharpening. But why the move to a higher value when more pixels get clipped? Any ideas?
-
My best guess (but it's not more than a guess) is that clipping is set to begin at around 250 to allow for some headroom after RAW conversion for things like sharpening.
Since you are guessing and sure the guess is correct, do you really want to hear what's happening or what you're guessing?
Consider (try):
The Histogram and the clipping isn't solely Luminance based.
The Histogram and numbers isn't representing the underlying image data depending on if it is raw or not nor the underlying color space if raw or not.
Just that indicates a guess that clipping is set to begin at around 250 is indeed a guess. ;)
-
Since you are guessing and sure the guess is correct, do you really want to hear what's happening or what you're guessing?
Consider (try):
The Histogram and the clipping isn't solely Luminance based.
The Histogram and numbers isn't representing the underlying image data depending on if it is raw or not nor the underlying color space if raw or not.
Just that indicates a guess that clipping is set to begin at around 250 is indeed a guess. ;)
I have no idea what's happening and would like to hear from someone who does. My best guess (yes, pun intended) is that what you are saying is "I have no idea either".
What I do know is that the highlight clipping line of the ACR histogram moves to the right when increasing Exposure and that move is confirmed when playing with Levels after RAW conversion.
-
Yes, you are still guessing. No. I don't guess/assume. Both your guesses are incorrect.
I asked you to considerseveral facts and as is expected you didn’t.
-
Yes, you are still guessing. No. I don't guess/assume. Both your guesses are incorrect.
I asked you to considerseveral facts and as is expected you didn’t.
Would really appreciate if you would be so kind as to explain to this dummy what is going on.
-
The truth? (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=MMzd40i8TfA)
Maybe someone else wants to play your games again.
-
Would really appreciate if you would be so kind as to explain to this dummy what is going on.
I don't think you'll get much help from Andrew Rodney. He specializes in flaming, not explaining.
-
I don't think you'll get much help from Andrew Rodney. He specializes in flaming, not explaining.
So do explain it. The floor is yours.
Let the game show begin. 🤮
-
I don't think you'll get much help from Andrew Rodney. He specializes in flaming, not explaining.
;D ;D ;D
-
Good to see Slobodan leaving the political forum to explain ACR for Franz. You were going to say Sloboda? 😛
-
Good to see Slobodan leaving the political forum to explain ACR for Franz. You were going to say Slobodan? 😛
I was going to say that the moment I saw Frans' question, I knew there would be a snarky response from you. You seem unable to respond in a professional, let alone friendly fashion, to people you otherwise dislike politically.
-
You seem unable to respond in a professional, let alone friendly fashion, to people you otherwise dislike politically.
+1
-
I was going to say that the moment I saw Frans' question, I knew there would be a snarky response from you.
And you were correct sir. Because we have years of history here and on PhotoNet where Franz asks a technical question with (usually) the incorrect answer predetermined in his head, then pushes back when the technically correct answer is provided. Do you require a paper trail of such proof? I have it all archived for copy and paste.
Now what I did do is partially answer his question which thus far, no one else has attempted. You are all free to answer it in a technically correct fashion or by just guessing like Franz.
Franz is guessing indeed. But he's sure his guess is correct. And when someone here actually attempts to answer the technical question that doesn't fit the his predetermined answer, they too will get push back.
Do examine my admittedly partial answers in post #2 where thus far, the discussion is actually on topic with "Consider".
The Histogram in ACR and LR isn't providing anything about the underlying data and depending on if ACR is editing a raw or a rendered image, the differences can be profound.
The Histogram in ACR and LR isn't just showing the clipping of Luminance! Or what some could call brightness of the image being previewed.
The Histogram in ACR and LR and numbers is showing us workflow options/Melissa RGB in most cases (there are ways of alter this in LR and I'm sure you and Peano are well aware of this of course ;D )
The assumption clipping therefore "shows up at around a value of 250 and then moves gradually to the maximum value of 255" is a big fat guess. That answer was provided before two others came here to dismiss the technicality of the questions or answers.
So Slobodan, you've ventured into the topic, do tell us your understanding of the Histogram, RGB values and clipping in ACR and LR. The actual topic at hand. The floor is also yours.
-
... So Slobodan, you've ventured into the topic, do tell us your understanding of the Histogram, RGB values and clipping in ACR and LR. The actual topic at hand. The floor is also yours.
I never questioned your technical expertise, nor professed that mine is anywhere near. I, like the other member, am simply commenting on the manner your response is delivered.
-
I never questioned your technical expertise, nor professed that mine is anywhere near. I, like the other member, am simply commenting on the manner your response is delivered.
Thank you for venturing here to learn of Franz's posting history and agenda so you can understand the response I delivered to him while I actually stayed on topic.
Thank you for admitting you don't know the answer to his question.
Thank you for now either leaving or lurking to learn more about ACR so this topic can go forward on the factual behavior of ACR. Or waiting on Peano to explain this to us. ;)
-
Andrew, your behaviour is not acceptable. Either contribute something useful (and I know that you're capable of that) or don't post at all. Your history of rows with Frans, for which I do not seek to apportion blame, is neither here nor there.
Jeremy
-
Andrew, your behaviour is not acceptable. Either contribute something useful (and I know that you're capable of that) or don't post at all. Your history of rows with Frans, for which I do not seek to apportion blame, is neither here nor there.
Jeremy
I'm done and IMHO have contributed something useful about the ACR Histogram, clipping and numbers in two posts after two members went utterly off topic.
Further I'll contribute:
Everything you thought you wanted to know about Histograms:
Another exhaustive 40 minute video examining:
What are histograms. In Photoshop, ACR, Lightroom.
Histograms: clipping color and tones, color spaces and color gamut.
Histogram and Photoshop’s Level’s command.
Histograms don’t tell us our images are good (examples).
Misconceptions about histograms. How they lie.
Histograms and Expose To The Right (ETTR).
Are histograms useful and if so, how?
Low rez (YouTube): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EjPsP4HhHhE
High rez: http://digitaldog.net/files/Histogram_Video.mov
-
I'm done and IMHO have contributed something useful about the ACR Histogram, clipping and numbers in two posts after two members went utterly off topic.
Further I'll contribute:
I don't mean blow your usual trumpet. I mean answer the damn question without being abusive or stay silent.
Jeremy
-
I mean answer the damn question...
Jeremy
Right on! This is not an issue of whether or not the histogram in the Adobe Camera RAW (ACR) converter faithfully represents the underlying data, but why the highlight clipping level is shifted to the right when the Exposure slider is moved to the right (as confirmed by using Levels after conversion).
-
... the clipping line grows, as you would expect, but the line moves to the right.
I'm not sure I understand what the "Clipping line" is. Could you post a screenshot indicating what you call the Clipping line?
-
Here’s an image construct with four white patches:
http://digitaldog.net/files/AlmostWhiteGrad.tif
1st is RGB250 (because that value was mentioned), then 252, 253 and 254. NOT 255.
Open in ACR (you have to set preferences OR select “Format to Camera Raw”) so TIFF actually opens in ACR.
Turn ON the clipping indicator for highlights in Histogram. NO Red overlay. Because nothing is clipping to 255. That’s how the clipping indicator should and does work. Forget trying to assume what's the last so called 'clipping line' use a better tool to SEE if all three channels clip: the clipping overlay and/or the numbers!
Move Exposure slider to the right to read +0.5 or +0.10 or +0.15 or +0.20 or even +0.25. NO clipping from the RGB 254 square let alone 250!
Only until you move Exposure to +0.30 does that last value which was R254 move into clipping for all three channels which are now RGB 255 and the red overlay now comes onto the one,LAST square. And the RGB values are 255.
Nothing seen here is unexpected.
The guess (“but it's not more than a guess“) that clipping is set to begin at around 250 is simply incorrect. Clipping is a well understood condition. For some. And RGB 250 isn't clipping. It certainly can after altering the RGB values as can many RGB values if pushed too far so it clips to RGB 255. RGB 255 clipping line is as far right of the Histogram as can be.
Side note: Raw CAN undergo highlight reconstruction (recovery) and how well is dependent on Process Version used. IF one channel of raw isn't clipped, but the other two are, ACR/LR can provide highlight recovery from the one channel. But NOT from anything done with Exposure slider being pushed to the right...
Enough said.
-
I'm not sure I understand what the "Clipping line" is. Could you post a screenshot indicating what you call the Clipping line?
Here are the screenshots.
(http://)
-
Here are the screenshots.
Of a single channel clipping in ACR.....
-
Of a single channel clipping in ACR.....
And what, may I asked, is the significance of that remark?
-
And what, may I asked, is the significance of that remark?
That two are not and this is an attribute of saturation clipping of one channel.
And yet, you started this 'discussion' writing:
"When you increase exposure in the Photoshop Elements ACR converter, the highlight clipping point shows up when you start to blow out the highlights, as you would expect".
Do you understand the differences between clipping highlights and clipping a single channel?
Really, the way ACR treats highlight clipping was shown with a test image and it works as expected.
And the push back begins Jeremy.
I give up. Proof of concept was provided. I can do no more (nor should I have to).
-
Do you understand the differences between clipping highlights and clipping a single channel?
Do you? Take a look at the ACR histogram when the Exposure slider is increased by one step, to -1.05. Still only one channel is clipping, but now the clipping warning is turned on. Hmmmm... Comments?
(http://)
-
Do you? Take a look at the ACR histogram when the Exposure slider is increased by one step, to -1.05. Still only one channel is clipping, but now the clipping warning is turned on. Hmmmm... Comments?
(http://)
Yes, you've confirmed you don't understand what the red ("Clipping line" your invented term) indicates and that the Exposure slider in this setting isn't (yet) clipping the highlights (all channels) and that you don't know what that warning is telling you and that you didn't watch a video that would have taught you how this all works, that you didn't download a test image that shows how ACR works as those of us who know, works as expected, and that your guess about clipping at 250 is just that, a guess and and wrong, that you are again wasting my time with your push back. Man, you've told us a lot about where you're heading in this thread. As I predicted in the 2nd post here.
Hmmmm indeed. ;)
“There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn't true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true.” -Søren Kierkegaard
-
Take a look at the ACR histogram when the Exposure slider is increased by one step, to -1.05. Still only one channel is clipping, but now the clipping warning is turned on. Hmmmm...
Take a look at the ACR histogram when YOUR Exposure slider is DECREASED by one STOP, to -1.05. ;D
Enough said. Again. For Jeremy's sake and so you are not further embarrassed by facts, and because again you are asking questions where the predetermined answers have to fit your acceptance instead of the facts, I bow out and will turn off notifications of this thread. Maybe someone will join in, (those two other members?) or otherwise and attempt to explain how this works, either factually and with your pushbacks, as I have, or as a fabrication to fit your desires.
“Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored.”
― Aldous Huxley
-
Yes, I may have invented the term "clipping line", so sue me. Fact is, at the Exposure slider value of -1.75, there is no such line, no pixels stacking up. But increase Exposure beyond -1.75 and the line appears at a guesstimated value of 250 and grows in the same position until you reach Exposure value -1.30 and then the line starts to move until it reaches the maximum value at which point the clipping warning turns on. Nothing of what you have said sofar explains this weird behavior.
-
Hi Frans,
Thanks for posting the screenshots. What is happening here is a different issue. Your raw image has a channel severely clipped and what you see in the histogram is not a "clipping line" but a bunch of pixels at the same value.
A clipped channel is bad because there is no way to know how clipped it is, so any highlight reconstruction algorithm has to "guess" what to do with those clipped values, and the LR/ACR algorithm does what you are seeing in the histogram. For instance, the software RawTherapee has different highlight reconstruction algorithms to choose from, with different outcomes depending on the case.
As you continue to move the exposure slider to the left, the quantity of pixels at the same level with decrease, due to the math involved, including, but not limited to rounding issues. This is what you are referring as if the line disappear when you have exposure of -1.75
You could check the raw file in a serious histogram tool like RawDigger to see the clipped channel.
-
Hi Franciso,
I understand all that and yes, I know that the red channel gets severely clipped when I increase the Exposure slider setting beyond the point where it start to clip. My point is that the line showing the clipped red channel is not stationary but moves to the right as the Exposure increases and that doesn't make any sense to me.
-
Hi Franciso,
I understand all that. My point is that the line showing the clipped red channel is not stationary but moves to the right as the Exposure increases and that doesn't make any sense to me.
That's the way the highlight reconstruction algorithm works. In ACR it gives priority to keeping the tone & neutrals. It is not a clipping line, it is just a large amount of pixels with the same value or inside a very narrow range of values. In this case you are not increasing exposure, but reducing negative exposure (it seems a small difference but it is not!), so all that bunch of pixels in a narrow range will move to the right until they reach 255
Use a raw image that does not have clipped values and you will see that you cannot replicate this behaviour.
-
That's the way the highlight reconstruction algorithm works. In ACR it gives priority to keeping the tone & neutrals. It is not a clipping line, it is just a large amount of pixels with the same value or inside a very narrow range of values. In this case you are not increasing exposure, but reducing negative exposure (it seems a small difference but it is not!), so all that bunch of pixels in a narrow range will move to the right until they reach 255
Use a raw image that does not have clipped values and you will see that you cannot replicate this behaviour.
That makes a lot of sense, Francisco. Thanks a bunch! And yes, I don't see this behavior with "normal" images.
-
Right on! This is not an issue of whether or not the histogram in the Adobe Camera RAW (ACR) converter faithfully represents the underlying data, but why the highlight clipping level is shifted to the right when the Exposure slider is moved to the right (as confirmed by using Levels after conversion).
The current Process Version 5 in ACR and Lightroom is a poor tool for evaluating highlight clipping in the raw file as it invokes automatic highlight recovery. To get a better indication of the highlights you can use Rawdigger, which gives an accurate raw histogram. In ACR and LR you should repeat your experiment using Process Ver 2 with the sliders on the main panel set to zero and the point curve set to linear. Adobe applies a baseline exposure offset for exposure (see here (https://www.rawdigger.com/howtouse/deriving-hidden-ble-compensation)) for details. For the Nikon D850 the offset is +0.35 EV, so you should set the exposure to -0.35 EV to compensate for the offset. With these settings ACR/LR gives a more accurate indication of the raw file values.
As you increase the exposure in PV 5 automatic highlight recovery corrects for highlight clipping up to a certain extent until it can no longer do so and the histogram shows clipping. Compare this clipping point with that shown by PV 2 which shows clipping considerably earlier and the behavior of the histogram may be more like what you expected. In any case, I do not see why you should make such a fuss over this issue. I don't see any significant anomaly. You should post images showing the behavior you allege.
Bill
-
Hi Bill,
Thanks for your inputs. I'll play around with different process versions. I raised the issue because the ACR histogram at various Exposure values didn't make sense to me. Thanks to you and Francisco it now does.
My previous posts have screenshot that show the behavior I described.
-
Do you? Take a look at the ACR histogram when the Exposure slider is increased by one step, to -1.05. Still only one channel is clipping, but now the clipping warning is turned on. Hmmmm... Comments?
(http://)
Frans, you seem to be concerned about highlight clipping, but I think the problem here is not clipping because of exposure but because out of gamut colour conversion. Look at your shadows: blue channel clipped, and highlights: red chanel clipped. Your image has some saturation that your current output colour profile chosen (was it sRGB? try to switch to ProPhoto RGB and look at the histogram) cannot handle.
Regarding real highlight clipping, it's very rare to have the red channel clipped and the green channel intact. Almost always on any camera and scene, the green channel is the first to clip on the RAW file.
If you can upload that RAW file we can find out. I'd bet ACR is just showing you an out of gamut issue, and what he (or it? or she?) is telling you is correct.
Regards
-
I'd bet ACR is just showing you an out of gamut issue, and what he (or it? or she?) is telling you is correct
Indeed, he was told this (« Reply #25) and promptly ignored it. As will our posts. :-[
-
Frans, you seem to be concerned about highlight clipping, but I think the problem here is not clipping because of exposure but because out of gamut colour conversion. Look at your shadows: blue channel clipped, and highlights: red chanel clipped. Your image has some saturation that your current output colour profile chosen (was it sRGB? try to switch to ProPhoto RGB and look at the histogram) cannot handle.
Regarding real highlight clipping, it's very rare to have the red channel clipped and the green channel intact. Almost always on any camera and scene, the green channel is the first to clip on the RAW file.
If you can upload that RAW file we can find out. I'd bet ACR is just showing you an out of gamut issue, and what he (or it? or she?) is telling you is correct.
Regards
Hi Guillermo,
I wasn't concerned about highlight clipping by or in itself, but rather about the looks of the ACR histogram. As others have explained, what you see in this particular case is not a varying clipping value, but highlight recovery at work. Once you know that, all makes sense.
The histogram looks non-traditional because the image is non-traditional: it's an infrared image, so oodles of values in the red channel, less so in the green and way, way less in the blue.
-
Indeed, he was told this (« Reply #25) and promptly ignored it. As will our posts. :-[
Reply #25 on my screen is one of my own replies. I seem to remember we went through this before where your reply numbers didn't match with mine. Could you say what day and time for the reply you are referring to?
-
Frans, you seem to be concerned about highlight clipping, but I think the problem here is not clipping because of exposure but because out of gamut colour conversion. Look at your shadows: blue channel clipped, and highlights: red chanel clipped. Your image has some saturation that your current output colour profile chosen (was it sRGB? try to switch to ProPhoto RGB and look at the histogram) cannot handle.
Regarding real highlight clipping, it's very rare to have the red channel clipped and the green channel intact. Almost always on any camera and scene, the green channel is the first to clip on the RAW file.
If you can upload that RAW file we can find out. I'd bet ACR is just showing you an out of gamut issue, and what he (or it? or she?) is telling you is correct.
Regards
+1
Without the proper context, histograms can be quite misleading. Here is an example. A red flower was photographed with the Nikon D850 with the camera set to AdobeRGB and the Picture Control to flat.
The camera histogram shows a nearly ideal ETTR exposure. Looking at the histogram in ACR Process Version 5 with the Adobe Color profile and rendering into AdobeRGB, the histogram is slightly to the left of the camera histogram. However, looking at the raw histogram in Rawdigger demonstrates that the red channel is more than 2 EV short of clipping. The white balance coefficients are added to the Rawdigger histogram. Note that the red channel is multiplied by 1.90 for white balance.
Finally, rendering into sRGB with the same settings in ACR shows prominent clipping in the red channel.
Bill
-
+1
Without the proper context, histograms can be quite misleading. Here is an example. A red flower was photographed with the Nikon D850 with the camera set to AdobeRGB and the Picture Control to flat.
The camera histogram shows a nearly ideal ETTR exposure. Looking at the histogram in ACR Process Version 5 with the Adobe Color profile and rendering into AdobeRGB, the histogram is slightly to the left of the camera histogram. However, looking at the raw histogram in Rawdigger demonstrates that the red channel is more than 2 EV short of clipping. The white balance coefficients are added to the Rawdigger histogram. Note that the red channel is multiplied by 1.90 for white balance.
Finally, rendering into sRGB with the same settings in ACR shows prominent clipping in the red channel.
Bill
+1; Histograms can lie, a lot as outlined. Especially with raw data and a Histogram of rendered data that isn't reporting the actual data. A Histogram of a current rendering that only tells us about that current rendering (in this case, Saturation clipping as explained of a single channel) which has nothing to do with the raw let alone highlight clipping.
-
+1; Histograms can lie, a lot as outlined. Especially with raw data and a Histogram of rendered data that isn't reporting the actual data. A Histogram of a current rendering that only tells us about that current rendering (in this case, Saturation clipping as explained of a single channel) which has nothing to do with the raw let alone highlight clipping.
You still don't get it, do you? As I stated early on, the issue that I brought up has nothing to do with how well the histogram represents the original image data. It had everything to do with what looked like a weird shift in the clipping level, explained by some helpful people to be highlight recovery algorithms in action.
-
You still don't get it, do you? As I stated early on, the issue that I brought up has nothing to do with how well the histogram represents the original image data. It had everything to do with what looked like a weird shift in the clipping level, explained by some helpful people to be highlight recovery algorithms in action.
You still don't get it. What was told to you by three people have nothing to do with Highlight clipping. Further still, you don't get what three four people have told you; Histograms lie (like the leader of the free world ;) ).
TOPIC: PSE ACR histogram highlight clipping point moves right with increased exposure
When you increase exposure in the Photoshop Elements ACR converter, the highlight clipping point shows up when you start to blow out the highlights, as you would expect.
What I do know is that the highlight clipping line of the ACR histogram moves to the right when increasing Exposure and that move is confirmed when playing with Levels after RAW conversion.
This is not an issue of whether or not the histogram in the Adobe Camera RAW (ACR) converter faithfully represents the underlying data, but why the highlight clipping level is shifted to the right when the Exposure slider is moved to the right (as confirmed by using Levels after conversion).
Reply #26 on: April 08, 2020, 05:40:45 pm
Do you understand the differences between clipping highlights and clipping a single channel?
Answer as seen above: No.
-
No, Andrew, you still don't get it. Highlight recovery algorithms and how they can be seen at work in the histogram and how I misinterpreted it as moving clipping levels is the issue.
-
Yes you misinterpreted! And by your own admission, guessed. Despite this being explained to you. As we’ve seen in the past and predicted you would in post #2. And #4!
-
Yes you misinterpreted! And by your own admission, guessed. Despite this being explained to you. As we’ve seen in the past and predicted you would in post #2. And #4!
And you, sir, never understood what was really happening, but ranted on and on about basic histogram stuff, not at all applicable to this corner case of highlight recovery algorithms. Maybe you should work on some infrared shots and observe what happens to the ACR histogram under different process versions.
-
And you, sir, never understood what was really happening, but ranted on and on about basic histogram stuff, not at all applicable to this corner case of highlight recovery algorithms.
As is so often the case, you've shown your readers you can't read what has been written correctly and described to you nor do you even understand the so called "basic histogram stuff" but you can only guess (stating it's an educated guess; hilarious and not so):
« Reply #21 on: April 08, 2020, 02:18:04 pm »
Side note: Raw CAN undergo highlight reconstruction (recovery) and how well is dependent on Process Version used. IF one channel of raw isn't clipped, but the other two are, ACR/LR can provide highlight recovery from the one channel. But NOT from anything done with Exposure slider being pushed to the right...
“Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.” Martin Luther King
-
As is so often the case, you've shown your readers you can't read what has been written correctly and described to you nor do you even understand the so called "basic histogram stuff" but you can only guess (stating it's an educated guess; hilarious and not so):
« Reply #21 on: April 08, 2020, 02:18:04 pm »
Side note: Raw CAN undergo highlight reconstruction (recovery) and how well is dependent on Process Version used. IF one channel of raw isn't clipped, but the other two are, ACR/LR can provide highlight recovery from the one channel. But NOT from anything done with Exposure slider being pushed to the right...
“Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.” Martin Luther King
Well, that's reply #20 on my screen, but who's counting. And that side note is a good example of touching upon an subject, but not really explaining it. Yes, you touched upon the issue of highlight recovery, but claimed that had nothing to do with the Exposure slider. Francisco and Bill understood and explained it. Let me repeat that maybe you should work on some IR images and see what happens.
-
Well, that's reply #20 on my screen, but who's counting.
And who’s not reading, understanding or accepting? You sir. That should be abundantly clear to those here that DO read and understand the predicted agenda outlined in post 2 and 4 and further.
Again, enough said to readers. As for non readers, you will continue.
Here it comes..... ;D
-
And who’s not reading, understanding or accepting? You sir. That should be abundantly clear to those here that DO read and understand the predicted agenda outlined in post 2 and 4 and further.
Again, enough said to readers. As for non readers, you will continue.
Here it comes..... ;D
DO let us know what you find out if and when you work with some IR images.
-
DO let us know what you find out if and when you work with some IR images.
More proof you're not reading:
-
This is not an out of gamut issue, it is a case of really overblown raw channel. It it were a case of out of gamut for sRGB, the spike will disappear when reducing exposure. The more experienced photographers who never miss the correct exposure may have not experienced it, but lousy photographers as myself have experienced it plenty of times, so even if the LR histogram does not tell you the right picture about the raw data (use rawdigger for that). The "Moving spike" is a clear indication of overexposure beyond the capabilities of the highlight reconstruction.
As for the current Process version of LR compared to the old, yes, the highlight reconstruction is invoked automatically, but if you search in the history of LuLa posts by Madmadchan (Erik Chan), who knows a thing or two about LR, explains that the priority of the new process is to maintain the tone of the image, while the previous processes tend to introduce colour shifts.
-
...if you search in the history of LuLa posts by Madmadchan (Erik Chan), who knows a thing or two about LR, explains that the priority of the new process is to maintain the tone of the image, while the previous processes tend to introduce colour shifts.
How do I do that, Francisco? When I search for either Madmadchan or Erik Chan in the top level of this forum, the only hit I get is your post.
-
This Adobe engineer is named Eric Chan.
-
This Adobe engineer is named Eric Chan.
Oops! thanks for the correction, Apologies to Eric Chan.
-
How do I do that, Francisco? When I search for either Madmadchan or Erik Chan in the top level of this forum, the only hit I get is your post.
Hi, you could go to Members -> Search for Members and look for this specific member and then search posts (I believe this only works for subscribers)
Otherwise look for PV2012 posts in the LR Subforum.
Here an example of a post by Madmanchan (Eric Chan) about this:
https://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=70852.msg561230#msg561230 (https://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=70852.msg561230#msg561230)