If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Adobe Photoshop Lightroom
LIGHTROOM-
It's shipped, released, and for the last few weeks I have been testing and using Lightroom. It's good, eventually could be superb. Not ready for network or multi-user use yet, it's on for a free 30 day trial. It's pretty much a streamlined RAW processor with a database structure, and there are also a lot of tutorials out there to give a boost up the learning curve, which isn't huge. Lots of depth for a product only a few years old, still some bugs to work out. I like it a lot, and wonder how many here have taken a real look at it? -- John McWilliams |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Adobe Photoshop Lightroom
"John McWilliams" wrote: LIGHTROOM- It's shipped, released, and for the last few weeks I have been testing and using Lightroom. It's good, eventually could be superb. Not ready for network or multi-user use yet, it's on for a free 30 day trial. It's pretty much a streamlined RAW processor with a database structure, and there are also a lot of tutorials out there to give a boost up the learning curve, which isn't huge. Lots of depth for a product only a few years old, still some bugs to work out. Uh, that's "for a product only a few _DAYS_ old"... I like it a lot, and wonder how many here have taken a real look at it? I like it a lot, too. It's got everything one needs in a raw converter, even dust removal, rotation and cropping (for dizzy photographers such as myself), and vignetting correction (for FF users and folks with cheap consumer DX lenses). It would be nice if the sharpening happened _after_ noise reduction, but the sharpening is remarkably free of halos (halleluiah!). Fill light, highlight rescuing, and vibrance work _better_ than in RSP (antoher loud halleluiah!). It's a tad sluggish though. But nothing a 4GHz quad CPU PC with 16 GB of RAM and four large, fast, internal disk drives wouldn't fix, though. Pity no such PC exists... David J. Littleboy Tokyo, Japan |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Adobe Photoshop Lightroom
David J. Littleboy wrote:
It would be nice if the sharpening happened _after_ noise reduction, but the sharpening is remarkably free of halos (halleluiah!). Hmmmm... I'm just thinking about Capture NX and wondering whether when converting a raw file it makes any difference whether the NR is done after or before sharpening - either in which order the software deals with a conversion, whether it's kind of "absorbed" in to the whole demosaicing raw conversion process, and whether the order in the user selects workflow matters. My gut feeling is that it makes no difference. Like Lightroom, Capture NX sharpening is superb. But it's still a clunky ******* of a program to navigate compared to the version of Lightroom I trialed. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Adobe Photoshop Lightroom
"frederick" wrote: David J. Littleboy wrote: It would be nice if the sharpening happened _after_ noise reduction, but the sharpening is remarkably free of halos (halleluiah!). Hmmmm... I'm just thinking about Capture NX and wondering whether when converting a raw file it makes any difference whether the NR is done after or before sharpening - either in which order the software deals with a conversion, whether it's kind of "absorbed" in to the whole demosaicing raw conversion process, and whether the order in the user selects workflow matters. My gut feeling is that it makes no difference. Sharpening aggravates noise. Unless it has a threshold setting, and even then that only helps for relatively low-noise images. So you want to apply sharpening to the noise reduced image when any noise is present; trying to noise reduce sharpening-aggravated noise is going to just lose more detail. For ISO 100 dSLR images this isn't an issue. But it becomes an issue at some ISO for any camera. David J. Littleboy Tokyo, Japan |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Adobe Photoshop Lightroom
"Lionel" wrote: "David J. Littleboy" wrote: I like it a lot, too. It's got everything one needs in a raw converter, even dust removal, rotation and cropping (for dizzy photographers such as myself), and vignetting correction (for FF users and folks with cheap consumer DX lenses). It would be nice if the sharpening happened _after_ noise reduction, but the sharpening is remarkably free of halos (halleluiah!). Fill light, highlight rescuing, and vibrance work _better_ than in RSP (antoher loud halleluiah!). Yeah? Other than the highlight recovery, they seem about the same as RSP to me. Fill light in RSP reduces highlight contrast as well, so having those separate is a big improvement, I think. Vibrance in LR seems more subtle than in RSP; in RSP anything over about 10 was off the wall, but the whole range of the control seems useful in LR. Also, I think the histogram is more accurate in LR than in RSP, i.e. when you export a file and look at it in Photoshop, RSP often needs more levels adjustment that I thought reasonable. But the halleluiah and it's loudness were largely for not losing anything; a slight improvement on something good is superb news when one was worrying that one might be moving backwards. It's a tad sluggish though. But nothing a 4GHz quad CPU PC with 16 GB of RAM and four large, fast, internal disk drives wouldn't fix, though. Pity no such PC exists... It's performing reasonably well for me on a Dual 3.4GHz Xeon (2MB cache version) with 4GB of fast RAM. That's good to hear. My PC is a single CPU 3GHz/2GB system, and LR takes painfully long to load an image. This is worse in Develop than in Library, so the trick is to (do what you are supposed to and) use Library mode for looking through things. In particular, Library mode gets to 1:1 view much faster than Develop mode when you first switch to a different image. David J. Littleboy Tokyo, Japan |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Adobe Photoshop Lightroom
Lionel wrote:
On Fri, 9 Mar 2007 14:53:16 +0900, "David J. Littleboy" wrote: "John McWilliams" wrote: LIGHTROOM- It's pretty much a streamlined RAW processor with a database structure, and there are also a lot of tutorials out there to give a boost up the learning curve, which isn't huge. Lots of depth for a product only a few years old, still some bugs to work out. Uh, that's "for a product only a few _DAYS_ old"... Eh? It's been under development for about a year, & the 1.0 release was weeks ago. And I was counting the time to include the pre-public beta; it was the public beta on Mac which went on for about a year, and about 7 months on PCs. I like it a lot, and wonder how many here have taken a real look at it? I like it a lot, too. It's got everything one needs in a raw converter, even dust removal, rotation and cropping (for dizzy photographers such as myself), and vignetting correction (for FF users and folks with cheap consumer DX lenses). It would be nice if the sharpening happened _after_ noise reduction, but the sharpening is remarkably free of halos (halleluiah!). Fill light, highlight rescuing, and vibrance work _better_ than in RSP (antoher loud halleluiah!). Yeah? Other than the highlight recovery, they seem about the same as RSP to me. It's a tad sluggish though. But nothing a 4GHz quad CPU PC with 16 GB of RAM and four large, fast, internal disk drives wouldn't fix, though. Pity no such PC exists... It's performing reasonably well for me on a Dual 3.4GHz Xeon (2MB cache version) with 4GB of fast RAM. It's quite decent on a MacBookPro, 2 Gigs RAM. There are things that can be done to avoid "congestion" if the app is processing bunches of files. One interesting aspect between the betas and release v1 is that sidecars are done away with for all but RAW files. So even JPEGs can be edited non-destructively and the edit data and metadata written into the headers. Same for TIFFs, which is not surprising, and DNGs. -- John McWilliams |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Adobe Photoshop Lightroom
I see Lightroom as Adobe crippleware.
A limited raw converter. A display/organization program with features available elsewhere, for free in many instances. I cannot understand the price tag Adobe has placed on it. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Adobe Photoshop Lightroom
"nsag" a écrit dans le message de news: ... I see Lightroom as Adobe crippleware. A limited raw converter. A display/organization program with features available elsewhere, for free in many instances. We are waiting for this looooong list. Better each one has at least the same features than Lightroom, or we will laugh. Don't forget, they must work with both: RAW **and** JPG. I cannot understand the price tag Adobe has placed on it. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Adobe Photoshop Lightroom
On Mar 9, 6:11 pm, "Saguenay" wrote:
[snip] Don't forget, they must work with both: RAW **and** JPG. And TIFF. -- Barry Pearson http://www.barrypearson.co.uk/photography/ |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Adobe Photoshop Lightroom
David J. Littleboy wrote:
"frederick" wrote: David J. Littleboy wrote: It would be nice if the sharpening happened _after_ noise reduction, but the sharpening is remarkably free of halos (halleluiah!). Hmmmm... I'm just thinking about Capture NX and wondering whether when converting a raw file it makes any difference whether the NR is done after or before sharpening - either in which order the software deals with a conversion, whether it's kind of "absorbed" in to the whole demosaicing raw conversion process, and whether the order in the user selects workflow matters. My gut feeling is that it makes no difference. Sharpening aggravates noise. Unless it has a threshold setting, and even then that only helps for relatively low-noise images. So you want to apply sharpening to the noise reduced image when any noise is present; trying to noise reduce sharpening-aggravated noise is going to just lose more detail. For ISO 100 dSLR images this isn't an issue. But it becomes an issue at some ISO for any camera. Yes, but I suspect raw converter may not do sharpening then nr as separate operations - for example to produce a bitmap internally from the raw image, use something like USM on that bitmap, then NR before saving as a tff or jpg. From what I see of Capture NX, the order doesn't matter. The old rawshooter NR was pretty good, but I never liked the sharpening. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Adobe Lightroom | Richard Smith | Digital Photography | 15 | February 5th 07 06:08 PM |
Adobe Photoshop Lightroom | [email protected] | Digital Photography | 3 | November 17th 06 06:24 PM |
Press Release: Adobe Brings Lightroom into Photoshop Family with Introduction of Beta 4 | Frank ess | Digital Photography | 0 | September 25th 06 07:24 PM |
Adobe Lightroom, where does it fit in? | Bill Crocker | Digital Photography | 9 | September 17th 06 07:52 AM |
Adobe Lightroom | G.T. | Digital SLR Cameras | 1 | January 10th 06 09:40 AM |