Wishlist and speculating on Lightroom 5

[hamish niven]

Any news, ideas thoughts of the next iteration of Lightroom?

Message title was edited by: Brett N

[Pbeck1]

Rob, thanks for your detailed reply, very informative.

I'd be interested in your thoughts on the following:

I won't pretend to be an expert LR user (by any stretch of the imagination), and don't/can't manipulate my images via the basics panel in an advanced way. My procedure really only consists of this:

1) Use the tone curve as a levels tool, if that is all the image requires.

If not enough then:

2) Scrap 1)

3) Increase exposure (almost all my images require more rather than less, as i tend to shoot with a slightly faster shutter speed to reduce the movement blur of my never still child, lol)

4) Adjust contrast until any fogginess introduced by the exposure slider has been neutralised

5) Reduce highlights if any clipping has been introduced by 3) & 4) (seldom happens)

6) Add some shadows if required

7) & finally, possibly adjust black slider if a little more blacks is required.

[areohbee]

Not a bad regimen. I do something similar, except:

(all of this depends on the photo and artistic vision of course - speaking in general and more for when fairly normal photos with fairly normal results are desired)

* I usually have +whites (to the extent the photo will "permit").

* and I almost always start out with +shadows value to match -highlights, at least at first.

Why?

In a nutshell, if one cranks the whites up a little, and blacks down, then one can have contrasty clear and bright pictures without cranking contrast and exposure as high, and also have detailed highlights and shadows without cranking highlights down nor shadows up too much (which tends to look less natural, IMO, albeit punchy).

Then at the end, if highlights still too strong decrement them a smidge and/or go over with a -highlights brush, etc... - maybe touch up the shadows with a brush..

Add clarity of 5, 10, or 15 like a bow on a christmas present, and voila! (depending on photo of course). Maybe bump vib/sat some if contrast kept lowish, to further help with that fogginess you were talking about.

More notes regarding shadow/highlight symmetry: due to the image adaptive nature of PV2012 (and other things), I find that fairly closely matching values are a sweet spot, and best to start out (and stay in) the sweet spot for a while at first until exposure settles and I know what I want, and have had a chance to see which range of tones are affected by the highlights & shadows sliders (it can vary a great deal from shot to shot).

Something like that..

One thing I recommend is to learn from auto-toning, it'll often goof up exposure, and it has a hard time knowing how much black-clipping you're gonna want on any given photo, but it's actually pretty good at coming up with pleasing results once you tweak exposure, at a minimum, then maybe blacks, and highlights/shadows... Perhaps the most important thing to learn is what it does with whites, and how it balances highlights & shadows values. Beware: it auto-tones based on whole picture, *not* cropped region, so extra dark or bright regions that are cropped out can really foil it.

Sorry for getting off-topic. Regarding Lr5 - I'd love to see a larger number of sliders that affect smaller ranges of tones, like ACDSee and the graphics equalizer on an audio amplifier. Pop the levels control up front and ditch the image adaptiveness, which is really just a trick to pack more capability into a smaller number of sliders, but in my opinion makes it trickier and demands more iterations... - trying to have Lightroom's sliders sorta-match Revel's may have been good for users who use both, but for those of us who only use Lightroom - no value added...

Cheers,

Rob

[Lee Jay]

If you slide the top-right point left along the top and the bottom-left point right along the bottom, that's a levels tool.  It's very crude but then so is Levels.

[hamish niven]

The levels tool is most definitely not a crude tool. It is a very powerful way of manipulating an image that does not conform to an easy exposure. However, it is not a simple tool to use, so it is one that I will tweak when I am unhappy with what I can achieve with the standard tone curves, like all things, it is al learning curve.

Sent from my iPhone

[Pbeck1]

I wouldn't call the levels tool crude. I think 50% of images only need the image enhanced as a whole rather than just 1 part of the image needing the most attention, and in this 50% the results from using a levels tool are great and actually look as real as the orginal. In the other 50% of images that have problems in parts of the images that need specialist tools and algorithms, the basics panel comes into it's own. However, the results never do look quite real to me (if you're looking for it).

I would argue, why not let the user of LR decide if he wants to use a levels function or not?

[areohbee]

I recommend auto-toning, instead of tone/point-curve for quick-n-dirty initial edits. - you may need a big or small tweak to exposure afterward, but often times the results with just those 2 things are fairly near what I would do if I spent a few minutes making manual adjustments - I hate to admit that .

Again, don't get me wrong: I like the idea of a levels tool for getting in the ball park fast before fine-tuning, but it may never happen (or it may: I really don't know), so in the mean time...

With this approach, you don't need to go back and undo the tone curve when you want to refine using the basics (or not undo, and have disappointing experience with basics - as discussed previously).

Regarding reality: it's true that Lr's image enhancment processing does "distort reality" in the interest of making pleasing pictures, which is most often a really great thing, in my opinion (especially once you learn to temper, and counter...) - but once you are fluent with PV2012, you can still create very natural looking photographs, without too much time-consuming fuss... - hint: keep -highlights/+shadows slider values fairly close to equal, and keep their values low-ish. Also, go easy on the clarity. Also: mastery of blacks, and (arguably even more so) whites, is critical to making optimally natural (or any other kind of) photos.

Cheers,

Rob

[Pbeck1]

I think Rob that LR for a lot of people is a bit of a mystery. It doesn't really comes with beginners tutorials that the beginner (like myself) can easily understand. I get the impression it's for the 'already' Pros, rather than those that want go in that direction. I always always get the feeling that i'm not quite doing things as good as can or need to be on each image, not because of laziness but because i dont really quite understand what all those sliders really do and how they effect one another. I feel Adobe just want the beginner to get on with it, and slowly work out through trial and error what looks good (& real) or what doesnt.

For example, I've developed almost all my 600  home photo's just using the exposure slider, and then clarifying the image using the contrast slider. I rarely use the whites slider, as i never know what is too much and what isn't (if any), or how it effects the other slider like contrast (that has already been set ect). Yet in reading this thread, i realise that my method has been lacking because it sounds like i should be giving the images some adjustment with the white slider too. Then it just goes on, because if i'm adjusting the whites should i then be..... etc etc.

So really for the beginner (like myself) the appeal of using a levels tool is strong (like how we're used too in other image enhacing programs), simply because of it's simplicity and ease of understanding. I would even go as far as saying i'd be happy only ever using a levels tool, and with 3 additional sliders to control the low, mid, and high tones (& of course contrast).

I am however quite prepard to learn Lightroom, but just feel is not beginner friendly at all. So why not just use Photoshop some might ask? Well i just love the non-destructive aspect of LR.

[areohbee]

Pbeck1,

Pbeck1 wrote:

I think Rob that LR for a lot of people is a bit of a mystery...

You're preaching to the choir !

But I did all my kicking and screaming during the beta, which was too late anyway.

It took me a *long* time to master PV2012. The results I get now are awesome, but that came only *after* spending dozens (actually: hundreds) of hours on the learning curve.

Pbeck1 wrote:

I've developed almost all my 600  home photo's just using the exposure slider, and then clarifying the image using the contrast slider.

PS - try auto-toning before that exposure adjustment .

Pbeck1 wrote:

I rarely use the whites slider...

Auto-toner tends to be pretty liberal with the whites (somewhat surprisingly, given it's initial billing as a "toward-the-end fine-tuning" adjustment), but it's values are generally well-chosen, in my opinion . If it makes the top-end a little too intense for you, it can be attenuated, or if you want to lighten up the mids & shadows more without resorting to shadows slider, it can be traded for a little more exposure). Reminder: shift-double-clicking whites will give you the auto-toned whites value, without affecting any other sliders.

Cheers,

Rob

[Pbeck1]

Rob

Can I ask you a couple of questions?

I’ve noticed in Lightroom that I can send my images to Photoshop Elements too. I’m thinking that if I really want a proper levels tool, that I can do just that, adjust the black and whites points in the Photoshop Elements Levels tool, save, and then maybe afterwards back in Lightroom use the Tone Curve sliders to adjust, highlights, lights, darks and shadows in the image to taste.

My questions are:

1)    Is this a viable method than can be used to enhance an image?

2)    Can I send the image to Photoshop Elements at any time, i.e. does it have to be sent to Photoshop Elements 1st before anything is done to it in Lightroom, or can things like the non-destructive cropping and healing be done 1st in Lightroom and then the image still be sent to Photoshop Elements at any time for the levels to be corrected?

[dj_paige]

1) Is this a viable method than can be used to enhance an image?

Depends on what you mean by "viable". Yes, you CAN do this, but should you do this is another question entirely. It sure is a lot of extra steps and waiting time for each photo just to get a "proper levels tool". And while I can't speak for Rob, he did produce a very detailed an excellent summary of how he edits photos in Lightroom, which does not include this exiting out of LR4 to use a "proper levels tool". Plus, most Lightroom users gets extremely good results without this "proper levels tool".

A major drawback is that you now are creating a 16bit TIF for every photo you want to edit.

Can I send the image to Photoshop Elements at any time, i.e. does it have to be sent to Photoshop Elements 1st before anything is done to it in Lightroom, or can things like the non-destructive cropping and healing be done 1st in Lightroom and then the image still be sent to Photoshop Elements at any time for the levels to be corrected?

Yes. However, at the point in time that you choose to send the photo to PSE, your non-destructive editing ends. Anything you do after that has a "destructive" step in Elements

[Pbeck1]

Hi DJ Paige

Bit confused. All my photo's are Jpegs (yes i had 1 or 2 raws, but i corrected any major over exposure problems and kept only finished Jpeg versions. Normally i discard any Raws straight away and keep just the Jpegs, as i feel they are good enough already to work with). When i right click on a Jpeg in the Library in LR one of the options is "edit in photoshopshop elements". When i choose that i get options come up asking me if i want to edit a copy or edit the original. If i choose edit the original for example, the original is opened up in PSE but it's opened up as a Jpeg, not a Tiff. It's saved as the Jpeg too.

[dj_paige]

Pbeck1 wrote:

Bit confused. All my photo's are Jpegs (yes i had 1 or 2 raws, but i corrected any major over exposure problems and kept only finished Jpeg versions. Normally i discard any Raws straight away and keep just the Jpegs, as i feel they are good enough already to work with). When i right click on a Jpeg in the Library in LR one of the options is "edit in photoshopshop elements". When i choose that i get options come up asking me if i want to edit a copy or edit the original. If i choose edit the original for example, the original is opened up in PSE but it's opened up as a Jpeg, not a Tiff. It's saved as the Jpeg too.

Okay, I assumed that your originals were raw. I was incorrect!

Thus, you are correct, no TIFFs are involved, just JPGs. Everything I said about the other drawbacks above still is true. Plus, you are introducing a JPG save in the process now, which of course results in a small decrease in quality, and a 2nd JPG for every photo you edit using this procedure.

One other point ... JPGs are 8 bit, but when you edit them in Lightroom, 16-bit arithmetic is used, and I have seen examples of how 16-bit arithmetic on 8 bit JPGs produces better results than doing the equivalent operations with 8-bit arithmetic (which is what levels in PSE would be using).

[Pbeck1]

Yes, all Jpegs

I'm not a pro photographer at all. Just love takin photos of my family. I have over 600 keeps now (all jpegs). I do shoot in RAW too, just in case i get an over exposed picture that can only be saved by working on it as a raw 1st & then saved as a Jpeg (& the RAW thrown away). So yes all my collection are Jpegs.

I've been attracted to Lightroom because of it non-destructive elements (mainly for cropping etc), and it cataloging features. My issue though is feeling very uneasy using the basics panel, because i always feel like i'm not quite doing things right (adjust this slider, then that one then needs adjusting & so on and so on (so confusing, and hit and miss)). I've always been happy using photoshop elements before, but felt sad that it's not non-destructive. Really, my ideal photo editing program would be a mix of PSE and LR, i.e a non-destructive PSE. I feel very comfortable using the levels tool in PSE for the black and white points, and maybe then adding some low and mid tone enhacements.

So that's how i've got to where i am now, asking is it possible to do all the cropping, cataloging etc in LR and then sending all the tonal work to PSE (all working on Jpegs of course).

I think that's why i asked in the 1st place if Lightroom 5 could have a proper levels tool.

[dj_paige]

I've been attracted to Lightroom because of it non-destructive elements (mainly for cropping etc), and it cataloging features. My issue though is feeling very uneasy using the basics panel, because i always feel like i'm not quite doing things right (adjust this slider, then that one then needs adjusting & so on and so on (so confusing, and hit and miss)).

There's nothing wrong with this (either the feeling uneasy part, or the going back and adjusting other sliders). Eventually, I suspect you will get to the point where you no longer feel uneasy, and your need to go back and adjust sliders that you previously adjusted will decrease. Please note that in the link to Rob Cole's develop instructions that I posted earlier, he clearly indicates that sometimes you will need to go back and re-adjust certain sliders, and that is my experience as well.

You are faced with a tradeoff ... additional work and additional time to use the levels tool in PSE, or additional work on each photo in LR (which should be reduced over time as you get more comfortable with LR). I can't make that tradeoff for you, but it seems to me you are headed down a path where EVERY photo will have to be sent to PSE, instead of heading down a path where this step will not be necessary, and I would hope you give up this insistence on using the levels tool in PSE (because LR can indeed accomplish the equivalent). But its your choice.

[Pbeck1]

Ok, i think i'll have to admit when i'm probably wrong. I had a little experiment with the "sending to PSE levels tool" method, and it seems that afterwards back in LR when i apply further modifcations to the new image using the tone curve sliders,  i still then need to muck around with things like contrast etc too from the basics panel. So i'm not really solving anything, and in fact have just thrown away the non destructive element of things in the process.

So, instead i think i'll have a good look at Robs tutorial and see what i can learn to help me understand things a bit more.

Thanks for all the advice people.

[Pbeck1]

I feel uneasy when it comes to understanding what the basic panel sliders actually do, because of not knowing what goes on under the hood. It's easy to see what the tone curve sliders do because you can see it on the tone curve. I think it would really really help the understanding of Lightroom if something similar could be displayed for the basics panel too (maybe on a top layer on the histogram)?  Maybe there are even diagrams out there or something that could help to explain this?

[Lee Jay]

Pbeck1 wrote:

I feel uneasy when it comes to understanding what the basic panel sliders actually do, because of not knowing what goes on under the hood. It's easy to see what the tone curve sliders do because you can see it on the tone curve. I think it would really really help the understanding of Lightroom if something similar could be displayed for the basics panel too (maybe on a top layer on the histogram)?  Maybe there are even diagrams out there or something that could help to explain this?

What it does is so complex that it can't come close to being shown on a histogram or tone curve.  All the Basic controls are now "localized" and "adaptive" such that what they do depends on the image and the location within that image.

[Pbeck1]

Can i ask one final question please people.

I'm still practicing, and this is my method so far (remember most of my photos are underexposed):

1) Use exposure slider to increase brightness of the image (mainly in the midtones)

2) Use contrast slider to reduce the fogginess introduced by increasing the exposure

The photos look ok & I'm getting better and realising when i've gone a bit too far with the exposure slider now. The midtones of my photos seem nicely brightened now, but i can't help noticing when looking at the images that the areas that should be white are falling short of being white, and in fact seem a little dull. So i have nicely brightened mid tones but with dull whites.

So to my question:

After increasing exposure and contrast, which slider should i use to make the whites less dull and more whiter? Is it the highlights slider, or the whites slider? So confusing, lol

[dj_paige]

Both highlights and whites will make your whites more white. I would probably start with using "whites", if that's your goal.

I get the feeling — not just in this post, but in other posts — that you are looking for the definitive answer, the solution that everyone (except maybe you) knows is THE RIGHT WAY to do this.

There is no definitive answer. You do what you need to do to make the photo look good to you.

And this isn't rocket science either — there's no reason you can't experiment and get your own answer. In less time than it took you to type the post above, you could have seen how the two sliders affected your image. (And by the way, there may indeed be some situations where you use "highlights" and other situations where you use "whites")

[Pbeck1]

Dj Paige

Sorry buddy, as i suspect you feel i'm asking too many questions that i should be finding out the answers to for myself via experimentation, like evrybody else had too! My only motive is wanting to get my family photos looking correct but still feeling a bit anxious that i don't quite know for sure what i'm doing. Apology with an excuse, sorry. Sorry too for hijacking this thread!

For those that may be interested i found this post too that describes the difference between whites vs highlights.

http://forums.adobe.com/message/4172268

[dj_paige]

I don't think you need to apologize for asking questions (although you did hijack this thread). The idea of asking questions in the forum is fine, especially for things that aren't obvious, like "what's the difference between highlights and whites?". But for things like "what slider should I use on this photo?", it does seem to me that asking in the forum isn't the best way to go.

[Pbeck1]

I wasn't asking about a single photo, but was asking about all my photos (with an 's' on the end). Sorry if Pedantic.

I should however of done some research myself instead of just asking here.

I do feel LR is only aimed at the professional photographer that has an understanding of image mechanics already, with very little (if any) official explanation of how things work, and in a way that the absolute beginner can understand. Maybe Adobe could address that? I'm not too sure how someone who knows nothing can sit there on his own and work it all out.

[hamish niven]

Hey Pbeck1

There are 100's and 100's of free and paid for tutorials out there for beginners, intermediate and advanced users of Lightroom, have a look here for a googled collection.

There are facebook pages that offer all sorts of info as well - ask to join this Lightroom / Photoshop based group.

You are probably unable to re shoot your family images, but the first rule of photography is get the exposure as correct as possible. If your images are not as exposed as you'd like either  - if possible, return and shoot them again or looking ahead, bracket one or two stops lighter and darker and go through you images to see what situations you need to over expose (snow scenes need +0.5 to +1 overexposure) or under expose (shooting in shadows you will probably need to underexpose by 0.5 a stop to make your images look correct) as the camera is often prone to over expose dark scenes and under expose very bright ones.

Try the tutorials, some are superb.

Lightroom is not aimed at just pro's, its aimed at anyone who wants to take the time to use it and with care make great images

Back to the original thread Lightroom is actually is irritating most pro's as well as casual users - the original thread was looking at what we'd wish Lightroom 5 to be if it was going to retain its status as one of the best RAW / DAM processing pieces of software.

Good luck

[dj_paige]

I don't feel at all that LR is aimed at professional photographers, although many LR users are professional photographers. I myself am not a professional photographer, and I would bet there are a lot of experienced LR users who are NOT professional photographers.

LR does require a certain amount of learning, and we joke in this forum about whether or not new users should be forced to sit through tutorials on how to use LR before the LR will actually work. If a photographic novice's goal is to download the software and then begin cranking out beautiful images on day 1 without any learning, then this is not the software for that person.

In your case, whether you are speaking of photo (singular) or photos (plural), it seemed like your question indicated that you didn't drag the sliders and see for yourself which one would give you the result you wanted. It would have taken 10 seconds of your time. I guess that's my problem.

As an anecdote, when LR4 was first released, I was all excited to learn about the new processing engine, and to see what it could do for my photos. So I tried to find some videos showing the difference between LR3 and LR4, specifically showing how to obtain higher image quality using LR4 compared to LR3 on the same photo. Maybe there are such videos, but I failed to find them. What I did find were videos that showed, for example, let's drag the whites slider to the right, and see what happens. Then, they showed what happens when you drag the black slider to the left. Thanks, video-maker, I could have done that myself. In my opinion, you wasted my time. Its as if you wanted to be a carpenter and make cabinets and tables, and all you could find were videos showing how to use each tool independently, but no videos showing how you put all of these together to make stuff. So, I started trying to work with LR4 myself. Like Rob Cole, I spent a lot of time working on it, and reworking on it, and I figured out a lot of stuff. Then Rob wrote his tutorial, and lo and behold, I had figured out a lot of what he had written ... but there were also things in his writings that I hadn't figured out. And I'm still learning. I don't claim to know or understand everything in the develop module, but I am very pleased with the way my images look so far, especially compared to earlier versions of LR.

So, I have a bias towards action and experimentation. Especially with LR, where your edits are non-destructive, you can easily try things and see what they do. If you still don't understand, then, in my opinion, that's the point in time to ask questions.

[Pbeck1]

DJ Paige

I think our mentality obviously is quite different: I learn best by following and re-following instructions in a list, and trying to understand why or how each instruction works. An analogy is if im lost on the streets and someone tells me to go that way, i would ask why they think it's best going that way. I like to understand instructions. I feel i was only asking you to fill in a few lines in an instruction list, explain why those instructions are given, just so i can understand what i yet dont know.

I took you're advice about looking for LR tutorials for beginners on the net, and found nothing for the absolute beginner to understand (again).

I did find this though, and this was the kind of thing i was looking for all along:

http://laurashoe.com/2012/01/10/using-the-lightroom-4-beta-basics-panel-recommended-workflow-and-vid...

Here’s my new workflow — working top down:

1. Set exposure for midtone (average) brightness (ignoring whether I am blowing out any highlights)

2. Set contrast for overall punchiness. If this brightens or darkens the image too much, fine tune exposure.

3. Use highlights to recover blown out highlights and set highlight brightness

4. Use shadows to add light into or darken the shadows

5. If needed, use Whites to further adjust the brightest tones (white point)

6. If needed, use Blacks to further adjust the darkest tones (black point)

7. I can then circle back to any slider to fine tune the adjustments.

If you continue to treat exposure as the white point, you will find that the other sliders, namely shadows and highlights, don’t have the power that you would expect them to.