+ Camera Raw Feature Requests +

[Ian Lyons]

UPDATE:

We're interested in what changes you would like see in our products. Do you have an idea for a feature that would help your workflow? Is there a small change that could be made to make your life a little easier? Let us know!  Share an Idea, Ask a Question or Report a Problem and get feedback from the Product Development Team and other passionate users on the Photoshop Family product Feedback Site on Photoshop.com.

In future it would helpful if you could use this thread as a means to add

"Features" that you would like to see in future releases of Adobe Camera Raw.

Please do NOT create additional new Topics and try not to duplicate requests by other users. Also, be thorough in your description of the feature and why you think Adobe should consider it.

Oh, and if you find it necessary to comment on someone's feature request/suggestion, try not to get into a shouting match. The penalty for doing so is...

b If you're asking that a particular camera is supported in a future release or just taking the opportunity to carp that yours isn't then please do so in another thread!

IanLyons

Forum Host

[deejjjaaaa]

>  using a negative value for Sharpness

why there is a big jump in how that works as soon as we step below -50, as if it suddenly shifts to a different algorithm ?

[Hudechrome]

I definitely need a history Palette for ACR, as I am opening tiffs of difficult corrections to be able to use the Adjustable Brush. Or the Adjustable Brush available in Photoshop itself, not just in ACR. There are things I can do with that brush that cannot be done otherwise, but for successive applications (like the gradual changing of the color of a shadow on a white door in a facade which has shadows on it, the shadows taking on the colors of the fill light ). I can go back only so far  and then I have to start over. That sucks, especially if using the add button wasn't right earlier in the workflow. Then, either I or my client loses money and time.

[Guest]

Thanks Eric. I was using proces 2003 so far, because results are more to my liking than fom 2010

I see now that sharpness slider in brush/gradient tool works quite diferently in process 2010, and, as deejjjaaaa noted in the previous post, it actually starts applying a kind of blur when you pass -50 position. This is more than enough blur for me (even without stacking)

[deejjjaaaa]

> t actually starts applying a kind of blur when you pass -50 position.

the issue is that it is rather abrupt/steep change, it will be nice to have it more gradual - may be like a mix of different algorithms.... like "detail" slider in sharpening palette is mixing USM w/ deconvolution when you are moving it from 0 to 100

[Guest]

I tend to agree with you

Maybe it would be better idea to enlarge the slider range to -200, so that from 0 to -100 the slider would work like (or at least similar) in process 2003, and when you pass -100, it would start applying blur. This way, if you have some old photos that were developped with older ACR versions and want to develop them again, converting to 2010 could make brushed parts blured too much - unless, of course, converting to 2010 takes this into account (have no time to try it right now, as I'm in a hurry)

[MadManChan2000]

The reason is that there are two parts to the minus range.

The first part of the minus range (thru -50) is backing off on any capture sharpening you may have applied. In other words, if you paint over an area with Sharpness = -50, you will effectively tell ACR/LR not to apply capture sharpening to that area.

Once you go below -50, you are getting into blur territory.

[deejjjaaaa]

but I think the issue is how suddenly strong that blur is once we move below -50, can't it be made more gentle and not so steep (like I'd split -50 to -51 in at least 10 steps)

[Hudechrome]

So what if no capture sharpening has been applied? Or capture sharpening applied with another app, like DXO and ACR sees the resulting .dng? What about tiff or jpeg uses? In camera sharpening?

[deejjjaaaa]

> Or capture sharpening applied with another app, like DXO and ACR sees the resulting .dng?

< that is as if no sharpening was applied - ACR does not know what specific operations (except general understanding that there was some form of demosaicing for example)  were done to generate the linear DNG (that is what DxO will output).

[Hudechrome]

Yes, I understand that, but there are differences between no sharpening, ACR sharpening and third party sharpening. What actions are taken in that first -50? It does something because I use it on tiffs when I get digital images from clients to edit.

[deejjjaaaa]

> Yes, I understand that, but there are differences between no sharpening...[skipped]... and third party sharpening.

< how ACR is supposed to know whether there was any 3rd party sharpening ?

[Hudechrome]

Then what happens in the first -50 for those files? Maybe that's more to the point. If ACR sees no sharpening applied in ACR, what does it do then?

[Jeff Schewe]

Hudechrome wrote:

Then what happens in the first -50 for those files?

ACR/LR's local sharpening brush will apply a mask to the image between -1 and -50 that reduces the image sharpening set in the Detail panel. This allows increasing the overall sharpening in the Detail sliders and then reducing the sharpening in areas where the global sharpening is too strong.

If you have the Amount in the Detail panel set to zero, the local -1 through -50 will have no effect. The blurring kicks in at -50. You can reduce the strength of the blur by using a lower opacity in the brush and slowly increase the blur. If you are working on a tiff file with zero Detail panel sharpening, -1 through -50 will do nothing.

[Hudechrome]

Thanks, Jeff. Nice to come back and have an answer. I was going to go in and experiment (which I probably will do...you know me! ) but at least I have a reference now.

ACR is becoming a "go to" app.

Lawrence

[_Udo_]

ACR is now extremely powerful. I find some of the editing functions to be actually faster in ACR then they are in Photoshop. I now edit about 9 out of every 10 images only in ACR.

In most image I can do any required sky enhancement, usually a reduction in sky exposure, in ACR using the Adjustment Brush and the Graduated Filter buttons. However, some images require a sky layer mask, which I create in Photoshop. I then use the layer mask to combine two ACR conversions of the same image. The workflow would be much faster, if I could access the Photoshop mask creation tool directly from within ACR.

Specific ACR feature request.

Next to the Adjustment Brush and the Graduated Filter buttons, add another button, which could be called Layer Mask. Clicking this button would provide access to the Photoshop mask creation tools. Once the mask would have been created, it would allow access to the existing controls now provided for the Adjustment Brush and the Graduated Filter buttons.

I am not asking to duplicate the layer mask creation tools in ACR, but use the ones, which exist in Photoshop. This would require to have Photoshop installed. This feature would therefore not work in Elements.

If implementing this would be to complex, I would settle for a feature to easily import gray-scale layer masks to a newly created layer Mask button.This still would be more convenient because the layer mask would be stored with the ACR data.

Udo

[imontv08]

Since you can create Snapshots in ACR now, it would be great if they could be displayed as miniatures/virtual copies in the Bridge.

[jawspinkid]

It would be helpful if camera RAW was going to be updated for Photoshop CS4. I just bought a Nikon D3100. I noticed that Camera RAW was updated for CS5 to include the Nikon D3100. Can anyone tell me if it will be updated? As a temporary workaround, I installed the DNG converter, and it works great, but it doubles the amount of space needed to store my files, and I don't want to throw away the original RAW files.

[Tai_Lao]

jawspinkid wrote:

It would be helpful if camera RAW was going to be updated for Photoshop CS4…

Unfortunately, that is not going to happen.

Adobe has made it abundantly clear that there will never be ACR updates for anything other than the currently shipping version of Photoshop.

You are left with the DNG Converter or the Nikon software.

[dan3430]

If history has shown us anything - Adobe will not be updating CS4. Make the leap to CS5, the improvements in ACR are great, and photoshop has a lot of great new features. The only drawback that I know of is a loss of features in the photo-merge tool.

Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2010 08:22:12 -0700

From: forums@adobe.com

To: ithedanman@hotmail.com

Subject: + Camera Raw Feature Requests +

It would be helpful if camera RAW was going to be updated for Photoshop CS4. I just bought a Nikon D3100. I noticed that Camera RAW was updated for CS5 to include the Nikon D3100. Can anyone tell me if it will be updated? As a temporary workaround, I installed the DNG converter, and it works great, but it doubles the amount of space needed to store my files, and I don't want to throw away the original RAW files.

>

[bkovacs7]

Complete full version of Adobe Camera Raw installed with Photoshop Elements. Not stripped down version!. Meaning all the tabs you get when you install Camera Raw on Lightroom 3 and Photoshop CS5. Because I see no real reason to use a stripped down version of Adobe Camera Raw, seeing how you can get a complete Raw editor for free, like Raw Therapee, DPP (included with all Canon DSLR's), etc... Including the "full" Camera Raw will not hurt Lightroom or full Photoshop sales, if that is what Adobe is worried about.

[Guest]

Glad that A580 appeared in ACR 6.3 and sad that there is no one profile for Sony lenses. No one Why?

[deejjjaaaa]

> Why?

because Sony did not create them - unlike Sigma for example

[borbeni_25_25]

again, nothing for FUJIFILM FINEPIX S200 EXR

[Noel Carboni]

Please add the ability to at least review, if not manipulate, the document profile in the Save dialog.

It would be great to be able to see the profile while saving so as to be able to double-check that the appropriate profile is being embedded (e.g., so that an image destined for the web doesn't end up with ProPhoto RGB).  I know that you can see it on the ACR main dialog, but showing it again in the dialog would be especially good because it wouldn't be a UI element that's normally ignored.

It would even better to be able to choose not to embed the profile (both Save As and Save for Web offer these things in Photoshop proper).

Ability to override the default document profile for conversion output during the Save would be extraordinary.  One could imagine leaving ACR set to convert to ProPhoto by default but override that setting occasionally when saving images that need sRGB, for example.

Finally, it would be icing on the cake, which we would already have and be able to eat too, if the conversion could be accomplished in a way (e.g., perceptual) that didn't result in channel clipping.

Thanks.

-Noel

[klsteven-zl2JzT]

I have a "problem" when using a Wacom with ACR or Lightroom: When I move a slider, every millimeter that I move my pen translates in too much of a change of the correspondent value. For example I want to change "exposure" just a tiny bit. Then I have to move my pen just a mm. That`s very uncomfortable!  I want to be able to move it let`s say a centimeter. In Photoshop one has the ability to click Shift/Alt to make the values change faster or slower. Of course I could set my pen to "mouse-mode", but I don`t want that.