Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Lightroom 9.2 New Raw Default presets... old ones ignored- do not update blindly  (Read 1351 times)

kers

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2949
    • Pieter Kers

Just started working in LR 9.2 to find out that my iso dependent RAW defaults are ignored.

Still try to find out how to reinstall them... Not directly clear to me ...NOT VERY NICE ADOBE

I still have not found out how i can make my old ISO raw defaults to work in LR 9.2...
It seems i can only set one default. I miss the choice : make Raw defaults ISO related...
I just went back to 9.1 but now my defaults are broken ... so be warned
here adobes page explaining how to intall the new iso dependent RAWdefaults:
https://helpx.adobe.com/lightroom-classic/help/raw-defaults.html
I don't get it...

here some info how it works from the community
https://feedback.photoshop.com/photoshop_family/topics/lightroom-classic-9-2-default-development-settings-iso-specific
A lot of criticism there too

How can Adobe change this without any warning and without a good way / Info to use the old defaults???
« Last Edit: February 12, 2020, 06:33:50 pm by kers »
Logged

kers

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2949
    • Pieter Kers

Update:
I am back on LR 9.1 thanks to Timemachine ( mac)
i returned the 9.1 application
returned to the old  application support of LR    in user/library/application support/adobe/lightroom
returned the old LR preferences   in    user/library/preferences

reinstalling the old LR from adobe was not enough to get the old defaults back- wasted hours to get where i was in 9.1

I always wait with updates of OSX for a year... now i will also wait with updates of adobe...

for me it is certain that adobe will change the new defaults again because it is a setback, not an improvement.

Logged

kimballistic

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 52

Laura Shoe has some good info on the new default system.  She's one of the only bloggers who has shown how to use a text editor to modify your default preset to include ISO-specific settings.

https://laurashoe.com/2020/02/11/whats-new-in-lightroom-classic-9-2-raw-defaults/

Make sure you click the black '+' button under the video that demonstrates the new defaults.  The '+' button will expand some text that shows in detail how to modify the preset manually with a text editor.

One silver lining to this cloud: ISO-specific settings are now interpolated.  For example, you can have a set of adjustments for ISO 800 and a set of stronger adjustments for ISO 6400.  Then if you import a photo at ISO 3200, Lightroom will apply settings that fall proportionally in between your 800 & 6400 settings.
Logged

kers

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2949
    • Pieter Kers

The interpolation is one thing that is good...   it means you do not have to make a preset for every ASA setting like asa 1000 and every other third stop.
How ever the idea that you have to use a text editor is beyond the scope of a frontend; you might as well introduce some terminal commands.
Logged

kimballistic

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 52

Agreed, it's terribly half-baked.  Clearly they've added new code to improve ISO-specific defaults, and yet they couldn't be bothered to implement any UI to assist with building them.  So odd.
Logged

Rand47

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1625

Agreed, it's terribly half-baked.  Clearly they've added new code to improve ISO-specific defaults, and yet they couldn't be bothered to implement any UI to assist with building them.  So odd.

Kinda makes you think Adobe isn’t very much in touch with how their user base that uses their products, or he problems they create with changes like this.  The whole scheme looks like a solution in search of a problem, a bit.

Rand
Logged
Rand Scott Adams

Denis de Gannes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 302

Here is a snip from The Lightroom Queens book the Adobe Lightroom Classic MissingFAQ book related to the 9.2 update. It may give some insight to Adobe's thinking on the issue.

"If you've used defaults extensively, you may notice that you can no longer set defaults by ISO. Once upon a time, when the defaults feature was first released, the noise
reduction sliders required different settings for different ISO values, so ISO-specific defaults saved a lot of time. Over the years, however, Lightroom’s noise reduction has become a lot smarter. Behind
the scenes, noise profiles have been created for almost all camera models, so the same noise reduction slider value works well for a wide range of ISO’s. You don’t really need to set ISO-specific defaults now,
but if you do want to, there are a couple of options: The easy option is to use Jeffrey’s Bulk Settings plug-in after import. It allows you to apply noise-related
develop settings automatically to the selected photos, based on the camera/ ISO combination. Jeffrey’s plug-in can be downloaded from http://regex.info/blog/
lightroom-goodies/bulk-develop The other option is edit a Develop preset in a text editor to create an ISO-dependent preset, and assign the preset as a default."
« Last Edit: February 12, 2020, 07:33:26 pm by Denis de Gannes »
Logged
Equip: iMac (Ret. 5K,27"Mid 2015),macOS 10.15.3

kimballistic

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 52

Quote
Over the years, however, Lightroom’s noise reduction has become a lot smarter. Behind the scenes, noise profiles have been created for almost all camera models, so the same noise reduction slider value works well for a wide range of ISO’s.

Anyone have a tech note, white paper, press release, or adobe blog post that confirms this?  Victoria said the same in response to my question in her forums.  I've followed Lightroom pretty closely and I've never come across this claim before.

Of course, I'm happy to have just missed it.

But it seems to me, if Adobe is putting a lot of effort into profiling the noise of every camera and building that into ACR/Lightroom's noise reduction, wouldn't their marketing team want to promote it?  Why is this an improvement we aren't hearing about?
Logged

BAB

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 403

Not sure why you would want to use Adobe Noise reduction or sharpening when other cleaner options are readily available unless I'm misunderstanding the issues.
Logged
I fear not the man who has practiced 10,000 kicks once, but I fear the man who has practiced one kic

digitaldog

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16009
    • http://www.digitaldog.net/

Not sure how much I can/should say but yes, Adobe has for years produced (internally) their own noise profiles. They drive the various threshold parameters in the denoise algorithms. And they are ‘camera specific’ (it’s not a one size fits all noise profile). So one setting, say Color Noise Reduction of 25 can greatly differ between what’s going on, under the hood with differing cameras. And for a specific camera, a Color Noise Reduction value of 25 applies more denois‘ing on a ISO 1000 image than for a ISO 100 image.
Logged
Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers"

Denis de Gannes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 302

I have used Lightroom since inception 2007, and have used the feature to include my Default Develop settings ISO specific which I used often with a number of my earlier cameras but less so since I purchased my OLY OM-D E-M1 in 2014. I am satisfied with the results i get from Lightroom defaults with some minor adjustments up to at least ISO 1600 images which would be at least 90% of my image files. Over the past 5 years Lightroom has made siginificant improvements in their default development settings and profiles for my specific camera model including the automatic application of lens correction profiles for my m4/3 lenses which are included in the raw file data captured.
That said this is my personal experience which is specific to my camera model and I am pretty sure will differ from what is experienced by others. This change would have definitely affected many users who have spent a lot of time and effort to created specific Develop Settings for several different camera models. I guess it a signficant challenge for a lot of users al I can say is good luck.     
Logged
Equip: iMac (Ret. 5K,27"Mid 2015),macOS 10.15.3

kimballistic

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 52

Not sure why you would want to use Adobe Noise reduction or sharpening when other cleaner options are readily available unless I'm misunderstanding the issues.

I strongly resist doubling my image assets (i.e. exporting a TIF copy for editing) unless I truly can't achieve my desired results in Lightroom.  I'm not about to introduce a TIF copy of all of my noisier images just because some other plugin offers a slightly fancier interface or a promise of "AI powered" algorithms.

I've also never seen a convincing presentation of any other software's superiority over LR's noise reduction.  It's my impression most of the desire for a different NR solution comes down to people not understanding how to use Lightroom's NR sliders and/or wanting a "1 click" fix.  That's just not my style.

Reminds me of a good friend who got into photography around the same time I did.  The first thing he did after installing Lightroom was install the Nik plugin collection-- not because he actually needed it, but because he didn't know how to use the Develop module and he was enamored with the high-tech marketing of Nik's Point Controls.  Blech!  ;)

Bottom line: with my gear and my style of shooting, I've never been disappointed with Lightroom's noise reduction or sharpening.
Logged

kimballistic

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 52

Not sure how much I can/should say but yes, Adobe has for years produced (internally) their own noise profiles. They drive the various threshold parameters in the denoise algorithms. And they are ‘camera specific’ (it’s not a one size fits all noise profile). So one setting, say Color Noise Reduction of 25 can greatly differ between what’s going on, under the hood with differing cameras. And for a specific camera, a Color Noise Reduction value of 25 applies more denois‘ing on a ISO 1000 image than for a ISO 100 image.

Thanks Andrew.  This is consistent with what I'm hearing elsewhere.
Logged

Denis de Gannes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 302

Thanks Andrew.  This is consistent with what I'm hearing elsewhere.

See this note from Julieanne’s article explaining the new Default Develop Settings in LR 9.2.

Quote “ Note: For customers that have set custom default settings in the past, this new Raw Default option replaces the previous method for creating custom default settings (Develop > Set Default Settings). Existing Default Develop Settings (from previous versions) are not compatible with the new system. That is, any previous default settings will not be carried over to the new system.  At this time, there is no UI in the application for creating ISO dependent presets. If your workflow depends on them, you will need to create them or edit an existing preset externally, using a text editor. Click here for Adobe provided examples and documented syntax. Note: one of the benefits of this updated feature is that it’s no longer necessary to specify default settings for ever ISO setting supported by the camera. Instead, when the preset is applied to an image, the settings will be interpolated automatically based on the actual image’s ISO (a practical improvement over the previous ISO- specific defaults functionality, which required specify values at every ISO).“
Logged
Equip: iMac (Ret. 5K,27"Mid 2015),macOS 10.15.3

kers

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2949
    • Pieter Kers

...
Bottom line: with my gear and my style of shooting, I've never been disappointed with Lightroom's noise reduction or sharpening.

I just started using Topaz denoiseAI version 2 and i works different than LR and does sometimes a remarkable job.
It can work in tandem with LR I think. It even can add more detail ( false detail maybe, but it works)
I am not against some grain, but not in faces... (above 1600 asa)
Problem with Ai however is that you cannot rely on it blindly- ergo more work , but it can pay off.
What i like about LR raw development is that the whole photo is treated very uniformly without strange artefacts, producing a excellent tif for further treatment.
Now i can even use 12800 asa with daylight... 6400 with tungsten on my d850
« Last Edit: February 15, 2020, 03:16:40 pm by kers »
Logged

zobelaudio

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 86
    • zobeleye.com

So if I understand this correctly,

1. for a new import, LR 9.2 applies NR for what it thinks is a good starting point and that varies with the ISO of the file ?
2. all older files in the catalog and their applied settings are not affected in any way ?

please confirm, so I can update😜

cheers
Z


Logged

kers

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2949
    • Pieter Kers

So if I understand this correctly,

1. for a new import, LR 9.2 applies NR for what it thinks is a good starting point and that varies with the ISO of the file ?
2. all older files in the catalog and their applied settings are not affected in any way ?

please confirm, so I can update

cheers
Z
1
No - in 9.2 you can make ISO dependent defaults just how you like it. But they are different from the pre 9.2 ones that are not recognized anymore.
The new thing is that if you make a new RAW preset for say 100 asa and one with noise reduction for 1600 asa it interpolates the 800 asa noise reduction. ( not sure about other parameters )


If you made your own ISO dependent RAW defaults in the past they are ignored and you have to make new ones...
or adjust them by adding some text.
I don't know for certain if it also affects non ISO dependent RAW defaults, i think it does.


2 the older XMP-files are not affected - it is just the new RAW defaults ( starting points for developing) that are affected.
« Last Edit: February 18, 2020, 08:42:31 am by kers »
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up