Skip to main content
JBedfordPhoto
JBedfordPhoto
Inspiring
February 17, 2019
Answered

Enhance Details = The Emperor's New Clothes

  • February 17, 2019
  • 5 replies
  • 1622 views

So Adobe just proved to me that they are so out-of-touch as to what LR power-users are asking for, they've actually tried to sell me on this new 'Enhance Details' stuff which is little more than the equivalent to the Emperor's New Clothes (if you have no clue about that reference, please Google the story).

Did the engineers actually succeed in adding this feature to Lightroom without anybody calling them out on it? What have they been doing for the past 10 years to improve performance? Zilch. Sorry, LR Team, but someone needs to hold you accountable for this update.

'Photos will look *slightly* sharper when viewed at 1000%, and will take at least 10 seconds to convert each image on a fast graphics card'

I thought April Fool's Day was at least 6 weeks away, and even then, the jokes aren't supposed to be real.

    This topic has been closed for replies.
    Correct answer Ian Lyons

    https://forums.adobe.com/people/bob+frost  wrote

    And the Enhanced dng files are about 5 times larger than my nefs!!!

    The Enhanced DNG is a fully rendered or demoisiced file (i.e. it's no longer raw), hence the significant increase in size. One reason for them being stored as a DNG rather than say TIFF is that the former is larger again.

    If you want to see an example of where 'Enhanced Details' has improved the rendering then check this thread out Enhanced details - bringing life to 20D photos  Whether same was/is an example of the type of artefacts Adobe expects Enhanced Details to reduce isn't clear yet, but I have many similar images where I see the same improvement.

    FWIW, I share John's view regarding how effective it is overall, and whether it will feature in my workflow.

    5 replies

    H
    howintheworld
    Known Participant
    February 18, 2019

    When I open an enhanced DNG file in photoshop, it has the same file size as the non enhanced DNG. How come?

    Jos

    Todd Shaner
    Todd Shaner
    Legend
    February 18, 2019

    The Enhanced Details DNG mystique at work?

    The only difference between the raw and Enhanced DNG files is how fine-detail demosaicing is handled. Other than that they both have the same pixel dimensions (Megapixels). They will also have same file size when exported in LR.  . Please read Ian Lyons reply #3 above.

    Todd Shaner
    Todd Shaner
    Legend
    February 18, 2019

    JBedfordPhoto  wrote

    'Photos will look *slightly* sharper when viewed at 1000%, and will take at least 10 seconds to convert each image on a fast graphics card'

    It's a little better than that with Fuji X-Trans sensor RAF files, which seem to benefit the most. The rest of the Bayer sensor camera world won't see much detail improvement except in areas with color aliasing (zebra stripes). Even then you need to look at Zoom View 2:1 or higher to really see it. Se this post in the Photoshop Family forum where I did some tests:

    Manage Workspace - Get Satisfaction

    JBedfordPhoto
    JBedfordPhotoAuthor
    Inspiring
    February 18, 2019

    Hi Todd, I have an XPro-2 and X-T2 and see little to no difference. I've been testing with landscape shots at F8 and up, with fast shutter speeds and low ISOs, too. I just had my eyes checked (20/20) and use a 4K monitor so I'm being as objective as possible.

    The detail enhancements might be useful to some, but for me, if I'm being this particular about details, I'm hopping over to Photoshop where, in my opinion, this enhancement would be better featured.

    Todd Shaner
    Todd Shaner
    Legend
    February 19, 2019

    The vast majority of subjects and shot types exhibit no benefit from Enhanced Details processing. This is for both X-Trans and Bayer sensor cameras.

    I shoot with Canon L series lenses, which are Canon's best optics and 99% of my CR2 raw files exhibit very few imperfections (i.e. aberrations). How do you make an almost "perfect" image better? I only see detail "improvement" in image files that exhibit Bayer sensor color aliasing zebra stripes. Even then it isn't obvious until viewed at 2:1 Zoom.

    X-Trans sensor don't exhibit this issue, but do see improvement in foliage shots at 2:1 Zoom View as at shown the below link. IMHO this is overkill–Who wants to add 20-30 sec of AI processing to simply make these X-Trans images look "normal?" A better solution is for Adobe to fix the X-Trans demosaicing process. Since the current LR/ACR processing algorithms were designed for Bayer sensor type raw data this apparently isn't a simple task. It probably requires a complete redesign of the processing engine.

    Manage Workspace - Get Satisfaction

    GoldingD
    GoldingD
    Legend
    February 17, 2019

    You might want to read:

    https://elialocardi.com/adobe-lightroom-camera-raw-enhance-details-review/

    and a bit more technical

    Enhance Details | Adobe Blog

    and watch

    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=jWugeczW01o

    B
    bob frost
    Inspiring
    February 17, 2019

    And the Enhanced dng files are about 5 times larger than my nefs!!!

    Bob frost

    Ian Lyons
    Community Expert
    Ian LyonsCommunity ExpertCorrect answer
    Community Expert
    February 17, 2019

    https://forums.adobe.com/people/bob+frost  wrote

    And the Enhanced dng files are about 5 times larger than my nefs!!!

    The Enhanced DNG is a fully rendered or demoisiced file (i.e. it's no longer raw), hence the significant increase in size. One reason for them being stored as a DNG rather than say TIFF is that the former is larger again.

    If you want to see an example of where 'Enhanced Details' has improved the rendering then check this thread out Enhanced details - bringing life to 20D photos  Whether same was/is an example of the type of artefacts Adobe expects Enhanced Details to reduce isn't clear yet, but I have many similar images where I see the same improvement.

    FWIW, I share John's view regarding how effective it is overall, and whether it will feature in my workflow.

    B
    bob frost
    Inspiring
    February 17, 2019

    So it's equivalent to a psd or tiff from Photoshop. Having looked at a few Enhanced dngs, my feeling is that I can achieve far greater improvements to my nefs using Photoshop's tools than I can with these E-dngs.

    My initial impression is that it only enhances parts of the image that are absolutely in focus. Is that correct or haven't I looked at enough yet?

    Bob Frost

    john beardsworth
    Community Expert
    john beardsworthCommunity Expert
    Community Expert
    February 17, 2019

    You really don't have a clue what "power users" told Adobe about it. Look, the Enhance Detail process is slow, it clutters up the catalogue with big duplicate images, and one shouldn't need to adopt methods like Difference mode layers or Apply Image (to save you any Googling) to see if there's any benefit. It is somewhere between subtle and invisible, depending on the image. Will I use the feature - no, or maybe only as a curiosity. Should they not have released it? It's probably a first step for something down the track, and only time will tell. But hey, apart from ongoing performance efforts (see here), what have Adobe ever done for us, eh?

      Terms & ConditionsAccessibility statement
      Using the community Terms of use Privacy Cookie preferences Do not sell or share my personal information ad choicesAdChoices