LR4 auto tone continues to be a disaster?

[Dirgle]

How is it that Photoshop's auto tone can produce such pleasing results, yet Lightroom's auto tone can be so wildly off the mark?  This is not a recent LR4 thing, it's been a problem ever since Lightroom was released 6 years ago and Photoshop's auto tone has worked well as far back as I can remember.  It just baffles me that this feature of LR still hasn't been fixed in this latest release.  Lightroom's auto tone feature, as it stands, is essentially useless and I see many people posting similar experiences.  It's erratic too... sometimes setting exposure wildly too high, other times wildly too low.  It seems it's biggest problem is in setting exposure.  All I ask for is an auto tone that behaves like Photoshop because I don't have time to manually tweak all of my photos. 

Any insights on why this behaviour might be?

Does anyone have any suggestions?  I saw a few people suggesting manually tweaking the text of the preset (e.g. turn off auto exposure).

I trust I'm not alone in this frustration?

Does anyone have experience with Aperture?

I realize there can never be a magic "fix any photo" button, but it would be so helpful if Lightroom could at least give me a good starting point.  As it stands, I have to manually adjust every photo, which is fine for my favourite shots, but way too time consuming to perform on the rest (either I do that or I edit in Photoshop, which kind of defeats the purpose of having Lightroom in the first place).

cheers

[Steven Bodnar]

Hmmm, looks good with full 4.1 release

[areohbee]

After initial check (brief) - it seems Adobe opted for a more predictablle set of adjustments for auto-toning:

exposure, contrast, whites, & blacks.

Is it just me, or are highlights & shadows always 0 after auto-toning for you too?

Rob

[Jim Wilde]

Often, but not always, i.e. a few that I tried it did adjust them both.

[bob frost]

A tip from Jeff Schewe (in his LR4 Tutorials with Michael Reichman) is to manually set the Exposure so that it is roughly correct, and then to auto set the other sliders by holding down the shift key while double clicking on each slider name.

Bob Frost

[areohbee]

bob frost wrote:

A tip from Jeff Schewe (in his LR4 Tutorials with Michael Reichman) is to manually set the Exposure so that it is roughly correct, and then to auto set the other sliders by holding down the shift key while double clicking on each slider name.

Bob Frost

I wonder if there is any advantage in that over just clicking auto-tone and then adjusting exposure(?)

(this is all academic to me, since I don't use auto-tone - just a curiousity...)

R

[CSS_Simon]

On those pictures I've tried. Auto results in Highlights and Shadows that are either 0 or altered inwards (+shadows -highlights) as Rob says. 

I often try Auto Tone to see what it does.  I rarely leave at that (and most often undo it) but it can be a starting point, or give me an idea for adjustment. 

[areohbee]

So, auto-tone improved in Lr4.1 final, in your estimation?

[CSS_Simon]

I think it might have improved, but I haven't got any before/after tests. 

Usually it produces a plausible result (if not optimum) but I've found one or two tonight way off.  An example: an under-exposed shot where the tonal range didn't go all the way to the top: nothing above about 91%.  Auto-tone gave a massive +1.85 on exposure, producing a very washed-out skin tones.  More realistic was +0.6 exposure, and a boost to contrast, highlights and shadows. 

[areohbee]

I'm just wingin' it here too .

But, what's your take on:

Auto-tone followed be exposure adjustment, vs.

Exposure adjustment followed by individual auto-toning of the others.

?

[Guest]

I pretty sure it doesn't makes a difference.

Moving the "Exposure" slider does not effect the values when you "Shift/Dbl Click" other sliders.  For that matter you can move any slider and the "Shift/Dbl Click" will always bring it back to the "Auto-Tone" value for that slider.

I think moving the "Exposure" slider after "Auto-Tone" makes more sense because your are adjusting "Exposure" while viewing Adobe's "Auto-Tone" [Shadow/Blacks] and [Highlight/Whites] pairings. 

[areohbee]

Thanks Bob - that makes sense.

[bob frost]

Rob Cole wrote:

I wonder if there is any advantage in that over just clicking auto-tone and then adjusting exposure(?)

(this is all academic to me, since I don't use auto-tone - just a curiousity...)

R

From what I have read, exposure should be adjusted before any of the other sliders, and they are supposed to be adaptive, so that their settings will depend on what exposure is set at. But from the results of a couple of quick expts, whatever exposure setting I make, the other sliders autoset to the same values!

In which case, using autotone and then adjusting the exposure is OK!

Bob Frost

[areohbee]

I think it's confirmed then, according to BobDiN too.

To summarize:

------------------

When manual toning, set exposure first (since it effects other sliders behaviors / adjustment ranges), but when auto-toning - order doesn't matter (whether auto-toning individual sliders one-at-a-time, or doing the whole lot in one auto-tone click).

[areohbee]

After further consideration, I have found plenty more cases where highlights and shadows are also adjusted, but still so far always -highlights = +shadows.

Is that always the case for you too?

[Todd Shaner]

Yes LR4.1 final Auto Tone Shadows = Highlights always.

With my Canon 5D MKII CR2 images I get fairly consistent Highlights (H) = 0 and Shadows (S) = 0 with normal to moderate contrast images that have no highlight clipping. I'm getting ±50 with very high contrast images that have near clipped highlight areas, and lower settings for images with lower contrast.

It's not perfect and still seems to underexpose pictures with fully clipped highlight areas, but not as often as 4.1 RC2.

I still find doing full manual "top-down adjustment" starting with Exposure is the fastest method. My manual settings are typically about +.5 to 1.0 EV higher than LR4.1 final Auto Tone's, with the objective of maximizing highlights. Using a higher starting Exposure also helps in setting the other controls correctly, even when you have to go back and lower Exposure.

[areohbee]

Thanks for the tip trshaner.

[Guest]

Wes Craft wrote:

...but it's a three step process per file. In LR3 I used to drag my exposure slider down untill all my critical highlights were on the histogram then boost brightness, fill, contrast, and add a custom tonecurve to get dimension back in it. 

Wes, this seems like a this seems like a "5 steps" to me:

"In LR3 I used to (1) drag my exposure slider down until all my critical highlights were on the histogram then (2) boost brightness, (3) fill, (4) contrast, and (5) add a custom tone curve to get dimension back in it."

... with the last step "add a custom tone curve to get dimension" being more time consuming and always needing to be revisited.

This "dimension" (tonal shaping) is more robust in LR 4. The Auto-Toning in LR4 "shapes" the tone curve in taking advantage of its expanded processing. Notice the "Highlight/Whites" and the "Shadows/Blacks" relationship in Auto Tone.  Now this is a general observation but... notice how these "pairs" [Highlight/Whites] and [Shadows/Blacks] work: ["Highlights" has "-" value and "Whites" has "+" values] ; [Shadows has "+" values / Blacks has "-" values] these are shaping the contrast in the "toe/shadows" and "shoulder/highlights" of the tone curve! ... a.k.a. "dimension".

Have you seen George Jardine's new Lightroom 4 Develop Tutorials" ? "click here'  18 Videos - the entire set is enlightening and well explained... the 18th "Bonus" video "Understanding The New Tone Controls" may answer all we need to know about this discussion.

As for the difference in "Auto-Tone" of the 2 similar bride shots... I just don't know.  As for "ssprengel's" explanation, I am just not sure here also.  Do you think Adobe takes into account "where in the scene" the tones are that influence the final Auto-tone calculation? I don't think so... I think the variance of tones and the frequency of these tones have more if an effect.  Just my guess.

[areohbee]

l gt l wrote:

Lightroom 4 is otherwise a great product, but without a fix, probably wouldn't recommend anyone purchasing/upgrading.

You sound like me during the beta test period .

How about: "I wouldn't recommend Lr4 to anyone who depends on auto-tone" instead?

I've heard that it's the exposure that tends to be the most off. I don't use auto-tone, but what if you do auto-tone followed by a quick exposure correction - are the other things decently set?

If you can identify the critical factors, you could use Cookmarks to do the auto-tone followed by relative adjustment tweaks, in one click. Maybe have a couple different cookmark presets to handle different cases (sometimes auto-tone over-exposes too...).

R

[ChrisJoyce]

I've been watching this to see what develops.

My experience, mostly events, is the auto tone is now a do not touch button. It was a huge time saver.

I loved the high 'hit rate' of auto before. Now, every stinking image needs to be put through a deep dive.

Frustrating... not advancement in my opinion.

Chris

[areohbee]

Chris,

I never used Auto-tone in the earliest days of Lr4, but recently I've been using it a lot in Lr4.1.

Although the initial result may make you want to hurl, after a (potentially large) adjustment of exposure, and a proper setting for blacks, the result is often quite good. Maybe a tweak to contrast for taste, and good to go. Granted, some photos will also need fine tuning of highlights/shadows.

Auto-tone'd value for whites seems pretty darn good most of the time, although I would not consider it off-limits for a tweak, if ultimate optimization is your aim, and you know what to do with it, e.g. sometimes a little attenuation suits my taste (gentle nudge leftward) when it has a relatively large positive value.

Rob

[ChrisJoyce]

Thanks for the reply.

You have confirmed my finding...... They took the AUTO out of Auto Tone.

You are basically HAND toning each photo. I am looking for time savings. ($$$)

LR3 is the Gold Standard for this Feature. Maybe it will be given a complete rework but they will have to change the development team since this group had their chance and well..... it needs a team that was familiar with LR3.

Chris

[Lee_Jay]

vidlife wrote:

it needs a team that was familiar with LR3.

It's the same team for both versions.

[areohbee]

vidlife wrote:

LR3 is the Gold Standard for this Feature.

In my experience, Lr3 auto-toning often required some follow-up adjustments too. I would say the biggest difference is just being proficient at making those follow-up adjustments, which only comes with practice using PV2012.

I'm not saying there's no room for improvement, just that even in it's current state, it can be a viable shortcut, once you know what to do after clicking "Auto".

[Todd Shaner]

vidlife wrote:

Thanks for the reply.

You have confirmed my finding...... They took the AUTO out of Auto Tone.

You are basically HAND toning each photo. I am looking for time savings. ($$$)

LR3 is the Gold Standard for this Feature.

Chris

If the vast majority of your images respond better to LR3's Auto Tone why not just use it!

Set or import the images to PV2010 with Auto Tone, and then convert them to PV2012 (click '!' 'Update All filmstrip pictures) in the Develop module. The PV2012 conversion does a pretty good job of retaining the tonality of the PV2010 settings. Then you can benefit from all of the other PV2012 features using your "preferred" LR3 Auto Tone adjustment point.

If you intend on doing complete top-down settings adjustment in the Basic panel this won't save you much time. IMHO, manual PV2012 adjustments take no longer than PV2010 and the results are superior. As Rob Cole mentioned, speed in PV2012 comes with practice. You will start to see a pattern to the settings adjustments dependent on image type (normal exposure and contrast, under-exposed, heavily clipped highlights).

General PV2012 Basic Panel Adjustment Tips:

1) Set Exposure to adjust the midtones. This means bright highlight areas will be noticeably clipped when all other settings are at a '0 starting point. I typically use +.5 to +1.0 EV for images with normal exposure. When adjusted properly the overall image should appear slightly over-exposed.

2) Set -Highlights to bring out detail in the overexposed highlight areas, but no more.

3) Set +Shadows to the same value as Highlights (i.e. -40 and +40).

4) Adjust Whites holding the ALT/Option key to just show white clipping.

5) Adjust Blacks holding the ALT/Option key to just show black clipping.

With practice these five steps will only take a few seconds and the image should be useable. Making a second pass in the same order will help to "refine" the midtone balance and bring out more highlight and shadow detail. With experience the second pass should also take no more than a few seconds. If you have a "series of images" with the same subject and camera/lens settings, then go ahead and 'Sync' these Develop settings. That's the best way to speed up your image processing.

[areohbee]

trshaner wrote:

...manual PV2012 adjustments take no longer than PV2010 and the results are superior. As Rob Cole mentioned, speed in PV2012 comes with practice. You will start to see a pattern to the settings adjustments dependent on image type (normal exposure and contrast, under-exposed, heavily clipped highlights).

Agreed. While learning, it can take *forever* to adjust even a single photo. Iterating, painting oneself into a corner, starting over... But after a while, it's actually quicker to edit with PV2012 than with PV2010 (whether using auto-tone or not). - less tone curve needed, and highlight/shadow locals can be applied without precision yet with great results.

trshaner wrote:

If the vast majority of your images respond better to LR3's Auto Tone why not just use it!

Set or import the images to PV2010 with Auto Tone, and then convert them to PV2012 (click '!' 'Update All filmstrip pictures) in the Develop module. The PV2012 conversion does a pretty good job of retaining the tonality of the PV2010 settings.

Clever idea - wish I had thought of it . Just beware of PV2012 blacks, when PV2010 has blacks > 5 (raws). You will almost certainly need to adjust leftward.

trshaner wrote:

General PV2012 Basic Panel Adjustment Tips:

...

3) Set +Shadows to the same value as Highlights (i.e. -40 and +40). ...

Number 3 is a great technique for finding proper exposure and a generally nice complement of settings. It doesn't have to stay that way once the image adjustment is down to the short strokes, but until then, why not make it easy on yourself?

I noticed contrast was omitted from this procedure. I'm assuming this was on purpose. There is something to be said for leaving contrast at a midland value (0) if it's not clear whether to increase or decrease it. Some photos will begin to cry out for a contrast increase at some point (e.g. they seem to look flat, or lack pizazz, richness, or a sense of fullness..., no matter what you do with the others). Or you may find you just can't get enough highlight detail without lowering contrast, or -contrast helps take some of the load off of the shadows slider, or keeps photo from looking too heavy and/or oversaturated... But agree: when in doubt, just leave it at zero...

Thanks for the great tips, trshaner.

Rob