+ Camera Raw Feature Requests +

Interface consistency:

First of all, THANK YOU for adding Ctrl+0 (fit in view) and Ctrl+Alt+0 (100% view) keyboard shortcuts so that ACR is consistent with Photoshop in that regard.

Now I am asking for consistency across the board, specifically so that the mouse scroll wheel can adjust the numbers in the adjustment boxes that are attached to the adjustment sliders.

Handling tiff and jpeg files the calibration tab could show the real ICC profile name attached to image and not a generic embedded label.

Marco

Chrisse Harwanko - You are in the wrong forum. I suggest you try a general photography forum such as www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/forums

Briefly though, when you process your G9 raw files, make sure you select 12 MP output at 8 bits per channel colour depth, and save as a PSD file rather than TIFF.

Chrisse,

You have the wrong forum AND the wrong thread. This thread is for requesting features to be incorporated in future versions of the Camera Raw plug-in, and this forum is exclusively for Camera Raw issues.

Please post in the Photoshop forum for your platform, Macintosh or Windows.

http://www.adobeforums.com/webx/.3bbf2764/

Your questions are Photoshop questions.

I am hoping that I have the correct forum I am using PS CS3 the appropriate RAW Plug-In. I shoot in Raw with my Canon G9 camera. I come out with about 12 MB pix. When I open them and do my editing in the RAW plug in they are saved as a Tiff and become these mega files of 68 MB. When I do any more editing it increases it. When I opened one up today and looked at the resolution it said 72... this is too low for printing correct? I upped the resolution to 240 and it made it a 553MB pix! I am still new to PS and using Raw camera data and would like to learn what is the best way to print quality photos (normally 8x10) from these raw images without having such huge files. Any help would be appreciated.

This suggestion has great bang-for-buck since it will (1) take minimal engineering time by the ACR team to implement and (2) help many of us learn more about ACR capture sharpening via experimentation as recommended by Jeff Schewe.

I am requesting the ACR team try to convince the Bridge team to remove the unwanted transition that appears in a slideshow running at 100% view. This has been around awhile since I see it in CS3 and CS4.

How can I better learn ACR sharpening unless I can flip back and forth between copies of the same image that I have converted with different sharpening settings? Seems to me that a Bridge slideshow running at 100% view ought to be a dandy tool for this self-help learning.

Alas, even when I set transition to none I get a ~1/2 second transition between images in the form of a fuzzy version of the next image. This transition makes it impossible to compared edge nuances with a Bridge slideshow.

BTW, I am running PS CS4 on a PC with XP SP3 and 4GB with the 3/GB switch. My video card (MATROX P650 PCIe 128MB) does not support OpenGL 2.0 so I am not using GPU acceleration. Full screen preview and slideshow in Bridge seem to work about the same with CS4 as with CS3 on my 450XSi raws and tiffs.

Yes, I made a similar post in the Bridge forum this morning. But now Im looking for some insider help. I mean, hey - since Jeff says experiment, then how come Adobes best tool for such experimenting thwarts the effort with an unwanted transition? Hopefully you ACR folks can have a word with the Bridge crowd on this point.

Thanks.

"Uh huh...that book doesn't get a whole lot of traction around here :~)"
"And since Camera Raw doesn't output to Lab, I personally don't see the usefulness of an Lab readout."

Yes I agree, the book is about color manipulations in the LAB space, but one part of it concerns of identification of "strange" unreal colors and this can be simply done in the LAB space not in the RGB.

"That's easily done in Photoshop, which conveniently occurs when you click the open button in Camera Raw."
Of course, but it's very slow workflow. One must first open raw image as an object in the Photoshop, then measure colors in LAB, reopen the raw image object, change color balance and tint sliders in ACR, then switch to Photoshop to check lab colors and again and again, until the colors are correct...
Even in this approach you can't use multiple image editing capabilities of ACR, which further slows down overall workflow.

The number of people I personally know that can look at an Lab or HSL number and register it as some sort of real color (including being able to tell you the hue and saturation) could prolly be counted on 3 hands (or about 15 people and Chris, Thomas and Eric are 3 of the 15 people).

I don't doubt that some people, somewhere might (read "might") find some use...but in the grand scheme of things, which would provide better utility, HSL or Lab readouts or, say perspective crop?

Unless you one can make a real compelling case for the effort it would take, the odds of it ever happening falls way, way down.

Just saying...merely asking for something because it sounds "useful" vs asking for something EVERYBODY could make use of is pretty easy feature triage...

:~)

Now, ask me about arbitrary output profiles (including being able to output to LAB), would I think that useful? Uh, yes...

I don't know - the idea of offering other color readouts sounds like a useful idea to me.
Thomas and Eric will have to chime in on how doable it might be.

>that book doesn't get a whole lot of traction around here

nor does its author.

>And since Camera Raw doesn't output to Lab, I personally don't see the usefulness of an Lab readout. That's easily done in Photoshop, which conveniently occurs when you click the open button in Camera Raw.

B)