"Texture" slider does NOT affect fine details, but accentuates details such as bark or hair?

[Hmmokthen]

Hi, so the texture slider does NOT affect fine details, though according to an adobe agent sliding "texture" to the right "accentuates details such as bark or hair".

Now I dont have any portraits or photos with bark in my catalog so I cant test this myself, but I was always of the belief that bark and especially hair are considered fine detail. 

I guess the question has 2 parts to it: #1 have you ever come across bark and/or hair that you would NOT consider fine detail, #2 have you used the texture slider and it affected hair or bark in your photo?

thanks

[richardplondon]

Absolutely I find Texture addresses larger scaled features within the image than Sharpening does. And Clarity even more so. 

Perhaps it is better to talk of the scale of feature that each of these tools "concentrates on".  There is no adjustment in Lightroom which completely avoids affecting the image in the ways that other adjustments notionally target. Pretty much everything overlaps in function. Editing Shadows tonality does not have zero effect on midtones - but it does concentrate on those shadows far more than it does on midtones, and has no perceptible effect on highlights. Editing Exposure affects general tonality and that means the midtones strongly, but also shadow and highlight areas. And our editing solution is something of an experimental mix, as a result.

[Hmmokthen]

Very good point on the overlapping. I have to admit I'm having trouble with your first paragraph in relation to my questions - Im assuming 'large scaled features" mean low frequency details e.g smooth gradiants etc.?

[richardplondon]

exactly so: I intended "large scale" features to convey essentially the same thing as "low frequency" features - 

which reminds me of this famous artifically created image (not my copyright, linked for study only):

[Hmmokthen]

What is it saying about einsteins hair — that his hair has low, mid- and high frequency areas?

[richardplondon]

The low-frequency detail comes from Marilyn, not from Albert!

[Ian Lyons]

See below linked Adobe article explaining the development history, etc of the  Texture control:.

https://blog.adobe.com/en/publish/2019/05/14/from-the-acr-team-introducing-the-texture-control

[Hmmokthen]

awesome link thanks. I did notice lower down the page "Texture is best for making subtle adjustments to those mid-frequency features." Ive been led to believe texture affects mid-to-high frequencies not just mid-.

"Clarity is best for making stronger adjustments to a broader frequency range, including some lower frequencies."- I thought clarity disregarded the frequecny alltogether and targeted midtone contrast?