Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down

Author Topic: LR add-on tools for better image quality  (Read 8692 times)

john beardsworth

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4607
    • My photography site
Re: LR add-on tools for better image quality
« Reply #20 on: March 26, 2016, 04:15:07 am »

google also abandoned Picasa, so it looks like they don't see a future for themselves in imaging.

Er, have you not noticed all the effort they're putting into Google Photos?

ButchM

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 733
Re: LR add-on tools for better image quality
« Reply #21 on: March 26, 2016, 11:15:15 am »

Er, have you not noticed all the effort they're putting into Google Photos?

Have you not noticed the effort Google puts into using you and your online presence as a source of income for the 'free' tools they offer? Nothing from Goggle is ever really free.

The Google TOU always includes:

"When you upload, submit, store, send or receive content to or through our Services, you give Google (and those we work with) a worldwide license to use, host, store, reproduce, modify, create derivative works (such as those resulting from translations, adaptations or other changes we make so that your content works better with our Services), communicate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute such content. The rights you grant in this license are for the limited purpose of operating, promoting, and improving our Services, and to develop new ones. This license continues even if you stop using our Services."
Logged

Bart_van_der_Wolf

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8224
Re: LR add-on tools for better image quality
« Reply #22 on: March 26, 2016, 12:00:04 pm »

Have you not noticed the effort Google puts into using you and your online presence as a source of income for the 'free' tools they offer? Nothing from Goggle is ever really free.

And not only Google. I can recommend the documentary "Terms and Conditions may apply". It also mentions the silent changes in the terms of e.g. Google after 9-11. Some terms even declare the terms applicable throughout the universe, so emigrating to e.g. Mars won't save you. The 'free' service is currently estimated to be worth some US$ 500 per person per year. Where can we send the bill?

But having said that, the NIK Collection is very useful as long as it is supported for future Operating systems (which is of course uncertain).

Cheers,
Bart
Logged
== If you do what you did, you'll get what you got. ==

bjanes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3354
Re: LR add-on tools for better image quality
« Reply #23 on: March 27, 2016, 11:22:22 am »

And not only Google. I can recommend the documentary "Terms and Conditions may apply". It also mentions the silent changes in the terms of e.g. Google after 9-11. Some terms even declare the terms applicable throughout the universe, so emigrating to e.g. Mars won't save you. The 'free' service is currently estimated to be worth some US$ 500 per person per year. Where can we send the bill?

But having said that, the NIK Collection is very useful as long as it is supported for future Operating systems (which is of course uncertain).

Cheers,
Bart

That said, merely using Nik tools to develop one's image does not give Google any rights over the image. True?

Bill
Logged

Bart_van_der_Wolf

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8224
Re: LR add-on tools for better image quality
« Reply #24 on: March 27, 2016, 11:40:45 am »

That said, merely using Nik tools to develop one's image does not give Google any rights over the image. True?

Correct, unless they somehow get away with revised terms and conditions, but that seems unlikely for images not stored on their servers. I think other data than our images is worth much more to them, although other parties might want to get to our images for free (facebook/Twitter come to mind but there are many more).

Cheers,
Bart
Logged
== If you do what you did, you'll get what you got. ==

dwswager

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1375
Re: LR add-on tools for better image quality
« Reply #25 on: April 13, 2016, 09:16:32 pm »



Bob, thanks for the links to the tutorials. They are helpful for getting optimal sharpening, and they did improve some of my images.

The color editing tools in Capture One are what I am finding most helpful.


This picture was processed in Lightroom:

https://flic.kr/p/zQpNna

This version of the picture was processed in Capture One. I used the color editor to select the red, green, and yellow in the leaves, and increased the saturation for each. This was done in a layer so I could avoid applying the adjustment to the rocks and earth.

https://flic.kr/p/EyXWn5

I printed both versions and everyone I show them to likes the Capture One version better.

Is there any way to do this type of adjustment in Lightroom or in a post Lightroom tool?

I'm just leaning LR but have use ACR for years.  I personally like parts of both the images.  Two things:

1. I suspect your major problem is the camera calibration used by Lightroom versus that used in Capture One.  Capture One's starting point is much better.  Never, Ever use Adobe Standard.  I use ColorChecker Passport to make custom calibrations it is makes all the difference in the world.

2. There are tools in ACR and LR to do the things you want, but it it might take a global adjustment for saturation and then an adjustment brush to desaturate the rocks.


Logged

JoachimStrobel

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 30
Re: LR add-on tools for better image quality
« Reply #26 on: April 14, 2016, 12:50:35 am »

I feel that DXO is not mentioned often enough here. DXO works very nicely together with LR and it works on raws. It seems to have the best noise reduction system when working with raws. It does a lot of good automatic improvement that of course always need some extra editing before finalizing. Final Color adjustments are better made back in LR as DXO seems not to be able to pass all color changes back to LR in a perfect way (at least not when passed back in a DNG which is a good choice if the starting format is a RAW, if JPEGs were passed to DXO, then tif will be good as format to return into LR.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up