Feature Requests

I've always wonder why, a company that has the most well known software for  photo editing, doesn't have a huge choice of film analog emulation presets and color profiles. Surely the freedom for editing raw files by applying color profile and presets is the most easy (compare to others softwares) but why Adobe has never create a good starting base for editing? I personally don't think that old style, analog film, is old enough to get rid of it. The defaults presets that are in, are just fine, but why not implement them, with a rich choice of new/old profiles? Probably I'm asking too much, and is too much work, and probably also there's always the problem about brands rights, but it would be awesome to have a rich choice of analog film profiles and presets inside Camera raw and Lightroom (mobile and classic). 

It would be amazing if Lightroom had a feature that could use subject Detection to apply a radial filter.    Users could select subject Detection, apply the radial settings, and then sync settings across all images.    For portrait or wedding photographers this would have the potential to be game changing and doesn't seem like it would be that hard to implement seeing that Photoshop already has subject Detection technology. 

I'd like all adjustments to be available locally (i.e. maskable, and ability to apply with different settings). (This hasn't been explicitly suggest yet on this "forum", has it?)

Hi everyone, as an interior photographer, I really appreciated it when the automatic tool for correcting perspective lines was introduced a few years ago. In a way, I realized that over time, I could save a lot of time in retouching my interior work and focus on other things. However, even though it's been maybe two or three years now, I don't think the tool is quite mature yet. Let me explain. When I go to retouch the photos taken inside renovated buildings, I almost always have to deal with many lines. Some of these lines are load-bearing and fundamental, while others are less important. It just so happens that Camera Raw almost always fails to identify these important lines. And that's why I think this tool should be further refined, allowing us to choose which lines the automation should work on and which ones it shouldn't. Does anyone else feel the same way when working with Camera Raw? I think it's pretty much the same with Lightroom, given that the tool is identical. Thank you &

I wondered if there's a way of adding an option where you can opt to either always show the masking amount without also using the Option key or to use the Option key? This would make using the sharpening and masking a lot slicker. 

Hello everyone,   I have a question (or a remark) about the "noise profile" tag that is expected to be found on .dng files. For reminding, the noise in a raw picture can be approached by a Gaussian noise, whose variance scales linearly with the brightness. The noise profile tag therefore gives the slope and the intercept of this linear relation, for each color channel.   There are several methods to estimate these parameters, but I doubt that such an estimation is done everytime I take a raw picture with my smartphone. I suspect that the noise profile is estimated one time by the camera manufacter, and scaled according to the picture settings.   It is now fairly known that the slope scales linearly witht the ISO, and the intercept scales quadratically with the ISO, and such relationships can indeed be observed on the metadatas of pictures taken with different ISOs.  Note that there is a first gap in Adobe's documentation, since there is no convention on the ISO for

Hey,    is there any way to blend the amount of the calibration menu at once?  I am using it to grade my images and sometimes I would like to tone it down.   And I dont want to do it for every slider?    It would be great if we could have such a feature if it not exist yet.    thanxs    Peter     

There is a huge amount of wasted space in the current ACR interface-- rating, zoom etc. buttons should be merged with the bottom bar (see pic, red circled areas moved to green circles).  The bottom bar is also about 3x too tall and should be shrunk.         This would give more space to actially look at the photo being edited, instead of having all the wasted blank space that is currently in the interface.  

Enhance Details function is great but it seems unneccisary to have to always create the DNG file (which is 5x larger than my raw files and I will just end up deleting to save space) when it seems that the processing could be done at the same time as I'm saving images.    It would be good to have a checkbox in the Save Image dialog to acheve this, but also keep the current functionality in the filmstrip view to output a DNG.

Sometimes I use this manual correction when the lens profile isn't enough. Please, add the Pin edges option to prevent those gaps. The screenshot below is from the Liquify panel, where it already exists.  

Problem this would solve: Currently there is no option in ACR to apply flat field corrections to RAW files. This forces photographers to use other programs to make the correction and then export a file to edit in ACR.   Here is a list of other well known programs that have this feature:   Lightroom has this feature and calls it Flat Field Correction RawTherapee has this feature and also calls it Flat Field Correction Capture One has this feature, but calls it LCC Correction Hasselblad Phocus has this feature, but calls it Scene Calibration   Thanks! Warren

I am using an HP 840 laptop with 16mg RAM and 256 SSD drive. I am running Photoshop CC and camera raw  as part of the Photography CC package so I am assuming it is the latest versions. Photoshop and Lightroom all work well but when I try to view anything in Camera Raw the Screen is so large it doesn't fit on the screen. Consequently many of the buttons are off screen. I have tried setting then UI to 100% but it doesn't make any difference.     Any ideas?

How can I create a vignette where the centre of the brightest part of the image is not in the centre of the frame?

Microsoft recommend windows UI scaling is 200% on Surface Pro 7, all text on Surface is very very samll, It must be scaling to 250%, but when the Windows UI scaling to 250%, Camera Raw does not display fully and correctly, the problem occurred on all versions of Camera Raw.  

There is currently zero support for .CR3 camera color profiles in Lightroom... especially since the newer Canon cameras use a .CR3 format... making it difficult to get work done. Only slightly surprised that this wasnt planned for beforehand since there still isnt a 64bit version of the adobe programs that i can use on the most current version of MacOS.

Most sliders in ACR/Lr are very intuitive and by playing around and tweaking them you can easily understand what they're doing. BUT it's not obvious at all what's the difference between Balance & Blending. I'm not a beginner, but I was confused and had to ask for clarification on this forum. Fortunately, I got the answer (here's the discussion topic). Now I want to help other users to make the difference clear. Here are my suggestions. 1. Rename Blending to Feathering.Photoshop users know well what Feathering means. It's the smoothing of either a mask or a selection edge.The Blending here does the same thing with the graded areas (highlights or shadows). If it's 0, the transition/edge is harsh.But the naming is confusing. Because in PS we've got Blend modes (they are not smoothing anything), Auto-Blend layers (merging layers for panoramas), Blend if (which is close to this, but only when using the split handles). 2. Add the pop

I cannot believe this is not a feature yet: When in comparison view, it seems impossible to drag the line in the middle, so I can compare specific parts quickly. This feature exists in the shared images/edits for lightroom for example, and is pretty standard on websites showing any type of before/after view of photos.   

This is one of my highest hopes for Lightroom First, to get this out of the way: - U-points are great when they work: but they don't always work, and they have their limitations... - they are not a panacea... It is my hope that Adobe will tackle the same problem that U-points solve, only do a better job than Nik did, and preferably open the technology for use in both Lightroom and Photoshop proper so it can be used with third party plugins too. I have a vision for this that could go on for pages, but I'll refrain, and just iterate the purpose. Often when I look at a photo I think: Gee: If I could just alter the color of ... in this one region, without altering ... it would be perfect. PS - This is just one of many possible examples. Put another way: How to specify the target for various adjustments, without having to explicitly paint the mask. One of the genius features of the U-points is the "anti-point". Its an intelligent, adaptive technology. You say: Get stuff like this (by droppi

I have an OMDS (formally Olympus) camera.  Standard images are 20MP.  The camera provides two levels of high resolution enhancement by sensor shift.  The first is Hand Held High Resolution.  This produces a nominally 50MP composite image using hand movement for sensor shift.  The second it Tripod High Resolution.  Here the camera is fixed and the sensor is moved by algorithm producing a nominal 80MP image.  If processed through the OMDS OM Workspace software, quite pleasing images are produced.  There are two levels of processing, standard and using the AI Noise Reduction plug-in.I've done some experimenting and in terms of rendering detail and sharpening artefacts, I've not been able to get LrC to replicate the quality produced by OM Workspace, close but not as good.  This is quite remarkable give that OM Workspace is free to OMDS owners.  I suspect this may be due proprietary sensor shift algorithms being used but I don't know. 

Just in case we don't get all adjustments local in Lr4, I'd like to toss in the idea of a local tone-curve adjustment. If you've never applied local tone curves, you'll be in for a real treat. If you have, then you know what I'm talking about. Summary: ------------ 1st choice - all adjustments locally apply-able. 2nd choice, top additions to locals, prioritized: 1. Luminance Noise Reduction - preferably with independent detail/contrast controls, but independent controls far less important for NR than for sharpening. 2. HSL 3.a. Tone Curve 3.b. Independent sharpen control settings. Notes: -------- Really hard to decide between independent sharpen controls vs. tone curve. - We already have local sharpening (and de-sharpening/masking, and the sharpen "auto"masking), and together with local NR, would afford a fair amount of flexibility. - And we already have basic local tone controls. But being able to apply a curve allows much better local tone control... I mean fill & highlight recov

I am hoping this would be easy to implement but it would be really helpful if Heal and Clone looked different when using the spot removal tool. Whether it's the colour of the sampler or shape, it doesn't matter. In my use case, I've just gone through 28 photos(thank God I realised before going through the lot) with about 20 spots each and then realised that I was using clone all along. Now having to go back through those 28 photos(X20 plus spots)

only contains a very small preview, which will not allow proper viewing from any app that uses the embedded preview. The size of this preview does not reflect the setting for the size of embedded previews. The preview size of the resulting DNG should at least contain on option to have a fullsize preview embedded and respect the overall setting for embedded previews.   System: Windows 10, Applications: Camera Raw in Photoshop and Lightroom Classic

Please add a color profiling step to the Camera RAW processing panel. This would consist of a step wherein a reference image with a color target (Calibrite, SpyderColor, etc) is selected, and the color swatches designated by the user or automatic detection. The corrected color profile could then be easily applied to the complete set of images being processed.For example: I work in product photography, and we struggle to get colors to stay consistent between cameras, lenses, strobe, and room variation. Currently there is an intensely manual process to color-match images of the same product shot on different sets. The ability to correct these variations with a common color checker target would be extremely helpful.In the video world, these features are becoming commonplace in the color grading process: matching two cameras is becoming as simple as shooting them both at the same target, and making an automated correction, after which the colorist can edit from a common starting point. See

Bring back the “save new camera raw defaults” button. Browsing the menu is tedious and buggy for setting a large quantity of identical camera's often the case in photogrammetry rigs. I'm still on Camera RAW 13, and lowest photoshop and Bridge available.

I absolutely adore the new masking features, especially the ability to use the AI masking in a batch. One issue I have is that when I use a color range selection for multiple images, the mask on the other images selects the color range from the same position as the main photo, not the color that is picked. While there may be a use for that, it seems like it would be more useful, or at least as useful, to be able to sync the selected color range. For example, I often will mask skin tones, but I have re-select the color range on each image because it gets the color range from the position, and it may select a shirt, sky, etc. Is there a way to do this that I am missing? If not, I feel like this would be a useful feature.