+ 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

[boscarol]

Please, insert HSL readout near RGB readout.

Thank you.

Mauro

[_Jeff_Schewe_]

Why?

As an aside, if you want to take the time to post a request, you really should spend the time to ask correctly which mean explain why it would be useful to you and what you would use it for.

The odds of _ANY_ feature request getting added goes up about equal to the number of people such request would help.

[boscarol]

Because with HSL readout is simpler to know what happens when sliders are moved.

Many setting modify directly HSL values, and only indirectly RGB values.

For example, hue-twist (L dependent modification of H and S) when exposure is modified become evident with an HSL readout, while with a RGB readout it is impossible to notice.

Thank you.

[habanr]

I agree,
make Color Sampler Tool universally configurable as it is done in the Photoshop application. I use mainly LAB color information as it nicely describes colors in the "human" way and enables me to precisely balance colors even I'm slightly colorblind in red. RGB color information says almost nothing...

[_Jeff_Schewe_]

>RGB color information says almost nothing...

It's giving you an accurate readout of the color in the file based on the RGB working space selected in the workflow...

[habanr]

Yes RGB is precise, but not easily readable by people as in mixes lightness and color information together. Using LAB coordinates one can in very simple way make basic color corrections
Rule 1) Blue sky is (a<0, b<<0)
Rule 2) Plants are mainly (a<0, b>>0)
Rule 3) Skin of "white" people (a>0, b>a)
...
For another explanation see the book http://www.amazon.com/Photoshop-LAB-Color-Adventures-Colorspace/dp/0321356780

[_Jeff_Schewe_]

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. That's easily done in Photoshop, which conveniently occurs when you click the open button in Camera Raw.

[Ramón_G_Castañeda]

>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)

[Chris Cox]

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.

[_Jeff_Schewe_]

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...

[habanr]

"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.

[Joseph_Elfelt]

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.

[_Chrisse_Harwanko_]

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.

[Ramón_G_Castañeda]

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.

[Naughty_Nigel]

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.

[Marco N.]

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

[DaveJDSP]

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.

[_Patrick_de_Souza_]

Would be nice if ACR could display a Before/After Preview side-by-side just like Lightroom :-)

[Marco N.]

>Would be nice if ACR could display a Before/After Preview side-by-side just like Lightroom

I'll be sactisfacted even from a keyboard shortcuts to move between Before and After Preview (like P on all tabs)

Marco

[Dinarius]

The Adjustment Tool is the greatest thing since sliced bread!

Occasionally, I want to isolate a small area in an image and work on the rest. The Adjustment Tool would be perfect for isolating the area I *don't* want to affect.

So, a 'Select Inverse' option, similar to Photoshop, which would allow me to make adjustments to the non-selected areas of the image would be the icing on the cake!

D.

[b2martin_a]

Auto CA correction in ACR would save a lot of time.

[5DM2]

I adjust the exposure on almost every image in ACR and have never found a way to do it conveniently with the keyboard, preferrably with my left hand. Currently, I can use the mouse to drag the adjustment or use the mouse to place the cursor or selection into the exposure value box and then use the up and down arrow with my right/mouse hand. If I forget to give focus to the Exposure control and start pressing the up/down arrow, acr moves to the next or previous image

My preference would be to use the Z key to decrease exposure by one increment and the X key to increase it, without having to give focus to the Exposure control. I know I can create presets to set the exposure to a specific increment like +.3, but that still requires using the mouse.

Am I missing something? Is there an easier way to adjust exposure in ACR?

[5DM2]

I would like the poorly named "Workflow Options" at the bottom of the screen in ACR to be more useful.

Specifically, I would like the ability to choose settings from presets I created. I would also like to have a default setting that is in place when acr opens, instead of the last used.

For example, I normally have Workflow set to create 16 bit Adobe RGB PSD files, but sometimes I would like to create 8 bit sRGB jpg's. That's easy enough to setup, but it's too easy to leave that setting, and then accidentally create a bunch of jpgs the next time I use ACR instead of the 16 bit psd's I prefer.

[hankydysplasia]

My feature request would probably save me about 30 minutes to an hour per shoot I do.

It should be extremely easy to impliment, and I think the secondary market would run with it in the way (albeit smaller) they have for Photoshop actions/ACR xmps.  If it has been requested before, I would like to emphatically second that request.

The request: ability to save Adjustment Brushes presets.

The implimentation: have a window identical to the one seen on the Presets and Snapshots tab below the area for masking.  (If you're worried about screen realestate, I could manage with a dropdown.) A simple Save button at the bottom would store the preset for the current brush.

The usage: Since ACR 5, I have completely switch my vignetting and lighting adjustment to ACR from Photoshop.  I would have 1 preset for eyes with increased contrast, decreased saturation, increased clarity and sharpness, and a small brush size.  Another preset would be my vignetter.  It would have a large brush, dropped exposure and brightness, decreased clarity and decreased contrast.  To switch every one of these every time every picture wastes much time.  Touchup would take seconds rather than minutes.

As me any questions for follow-up on this.

Tyler