Develop module more pixelated than library module - why?

[andrewb99642613]

The 1st attached pic is a screen shot of part of an image zoomed 11:1 in library module, 2nd is same thing done in develop mode and looks more pixelated. Am I correct in believing the image shown in library mode is a preview / jpeg one and the one one in develop is the actual raw image? If so why does the develop module one look less detailed than the library one? By the way if I turn on 'use graphics processor they both look pixelated.

[Akash Sharma]

Hi Andrewb,

Sorry that Lightroom is showing your images with some grain unexpectedly in the Develop module with 11:1 zoom in ratio.

The actual preview of an image in Develop module cab only be viewed at 1:1 zoom in.

This discussion might be helpful: Image in Lightroom Develop Module looks dramatically different than image in Library module or expor...

Am I correct in believing the image shown in library mode is a preview / jpeg one and the one one in develop is the actual raw image?

That is correct. Develop module shows the rendered preview of your image but it is best viewed in 1:1 ratio.

This means that your GPU processor have some issues and is showing the rendered preview pixelated. Could you please take a look at this article Adobe Lightroom GPU Troubleshooting and FAQ and let us know if that helps?

Thanks,

Akash

[andrewb99642613]

"This means that your GPU processor have some issues and is showing the rendered preview pixelated"

This is not the problem, the preview looks sharper than the develop view. The theads above all assume the opposite. Another way to ask the question would be "Why does turning off GPU pixelate library view"?

[GoldingD]

You are wrong, you never ever see RAW images in anything. In Lightroom you see JPEG previews.

Why There are 6 Types of Lightroom Previews and How to Use Them

Also, note that Library module uses a different color space for viewing than the Develop module. Library uses Adobe RGB, Develop uses ProPhotoRGB, you cannot specify other.

How to manage color in Lightroom Classic

https://digital-photography-school.com/everything-need-know-lightroom-colour-space/

Now one oddity is found in Preferences, in the Performance tab, the option to use Graphics Processor. That option is not all it should be. More useful for 4K and beyond, and a bit hit and miss in what GPUs work with it or not. Often it can make things worse. And it will affect Develop module, it will not affect Library module. Try it on, then off, each rig can be different.

https://www.lightroomqueen.com/lightroom-performance-debunking-myths/

A fairly new wrinkle in this is the capability to use embedded previews, they could look even worse, but for the Library module. And apparently not when you zoom in.

https://havecamerawilltravel.com/lightroom/lightroom-classic-new-embedded-previews/

Ok, that one does not at all relate to your issue.

And to throw another variable in the mix is calibration (profile) of the monitor. Although that could show up in colors being off, not the pixelation.

How to manage color in Lightroom Classic

I would expect the Develop to look better than the Library.

[GoldingD]

Inquiry, what is your System Information as shown by Lightroom?

In LR click on Help, then System Information, then Copy. Paste that into a reply.

Interested in data from first line down to just past plug-in info.

Mostly interested in LR version, OS build, Display resolution, GPU make/model and driver version, if LR is using DirectX (WIN) or Metal (MAC) instead of OpenGL (troublesome), and any known troublesome plug-ins (probably having nothing to do with your issue), but the overkill is just fine and easier.

[andrewb99642613]

I made an error in my first post  - "if I turn on 'use graphics processor they both look pixelated" should have read "if I turn OFF 'use graphics processor' both library preview and develop view look pixelated". On very close examination the images appear identical at 1:1 (between library & develop modules) but when zoomed past 1:1 the library image appears to have softer edges to individual pixels. It appears to me that the GPU is effectively up-scaling the image in the library module when zoomed in past 1:1. I guess there is no way to know what the gpu is doing but I sure would like to duplicate the effect as I want to print some small images at large scale, I am going to try re-sizing them in photoshop. Both monitors are calibrated with the latest datacolor device. Here are my system specs as requested:

Lightroom Classic version: 8.2.1 [ 1206193 ]

License: Creative Cloud

Language setting: en

Operating system: Windows 10 - Home Premium Edition

Version: 10.0.18362

Application architecture: x64

System architecture: x64

Logical processor count: 8

Processor speed: 4.0 GHz

Built-in memory: 16319.4 MB

Real memory available to Lightroom: 16319.4 MB

Real memory used by Lightroom: 1165.3 MB (7.1%)

Virtual memory used by Lightroom: 1935.7 MB

GDI objects count: 820

USER objects count: 2692

Process handles count: 2910

Memory cache size: 1.3MB

Internal Camera Raw version: 11.2.1 [ 159 ]

Maximum thread count used by Camera Raw: 5

Camera Raw SIMD optimization: SSE2,AVX,AVX2

Camera Raw virtual memory: 462MB / 8159MB (5%)

Camera Raw real memory: 472MB / 16319MB (2%)

System DPI setting: 120 DPI

Desktop composition enabled: Yes

Displays: 1) 1920x1080, 2) 2560x1440

Input types: Multitouch: No, Integrated touch: No, Integrated pen: No, External touch: No, External pen: No, Keyboard: No

Graphics Processor Info:

DirectX: AMD Radeon (TM) R9 390 Series (8.17.10.1404)

Application folder: C:\Program Files\Adobe\Adobe Lightroom Classic CC

Library Path: C:\Users\andrew bennett\Pictures\Lightroom\Lightroom Catalog-2.lrcat

Settings Folder: C:\Users\andrew bennett\AppData\Roaming\Adobe\Lightroom

Installed Plugins:

1) AdobeStock

2) Facebook

3) Flickr

4) LogiOptions

5) Nikon Tether Plugin

Config.lua flags: None

Adapter #1: Vendor : 1002

Device : 67b0

Subsystem : 6566103c

Revision : 80

Video Memory : 8171

Adapter #2: Vendor : 1414

Device : 8c

Subsystem : 0

Revision : 0

Video Memory : 0

[GoldingD]

From your system info, nothing stands out yet.

However, I notice LogiOptions plugin. Be aware of:

Logitech mouse, keyboards could be vulnerable to 'MouseJack' - Business Insider

Vulnerability: Logitech Options users should uninstall immediately (updated)

[GoldingD]

Graphics Processor Info:

DirectX: AMD Radeon (TM) R9 390 Series (8.17.10.1404)

Not sure how to translate that version as opposed to what is shown at AMD website. Searching via google on ‘AMD R9 390 Series (8.17.10.1404)‘ leads me to:

AMD Radeon™ R9 390 Previous Drivers | AMD

not very satisfied that that search turned up the correct info

And I suspect a new one, although perhaps by just two days exists:

AMD Radeon™ R9 M390 Drivers & Support | AMD

Release notes does not indicate any LR issues.

I could have this wrong.

If this was a NVIDIA GPU,  then I could convert what LR states into what NVIDIA. states. AMD not so much.

I have this suspicion that the 17 in (8.17.10.1404) refers to 2017, but I do not find on the web AMD v17.10.1404,or. could this be v17.10.1? very old then

[GoldingD]

So using google to see how one would check for an AMD GPU driver update leads me to:

How to Find Driver Information and Check for Updates Within Radeon Settings | AMD

Remember that using Windows update is not the way to handle GPU driver updates.

[GoldingD]

I do not recall an bug like this related to LR Classic v8.2.1, so an update might not be the solution.

But, I also, do not remember a system requirement that would preclude you from updating to v8.3.1

[andrewb99642613]

I manually updated the drivers recently. I'm satisfied that the pixelated view (in develop) is actually the correct one to be editing, and that's the main issue. Why the library view looks 'better' with the gpu on is a mystery but I think I'll just leave it off. Thanks for your help

[Todd Shaner · Accepted solution]

At the link provided by Akash Sharma I explain why the Library and Develop module previews look different. I've copied that text below.

"The Develop module uses a simpler algorithm for creating the Loupe preview to prevent adjustment slider lag. The Library module creates a Preview file, which is created using the Bicubic algorithm (same as the Export module), which provides much more accurate interpolation. BTW- The most accurate view in the Library module are the pyramid Zoom settings 1:16, 1:8, 1:4, etc. rather than Fit of Fill. This is because a 2nd interpolation is applied to Fit and Fill previews, which may slightly soften the image detail. The 1:1 view is the most accurate, but of little value for most viewing purposes."

Both the Library module and Export modules use Bicubic interpolation. Because of this the Library preview is actually the most accurate since it reflects what you will see if exporting the image file to a larger size (i.e. upscaled).

andrewb99642613  wrote

Why the library view looks 'better' with the gpu on is a mystery but I think I'll just leave it off.

If the Library module looks the same (i.e. pixelated) as the Develop module at >1:1 Zoom view the most likely cause is an incompatible graphics driver.

[TheDigitalDog]

I see no visual difference at 4:1 in Develop with GPU setting on or off.

Ditto at 1:1 in both modules.

So yeah, if toggling GPU on and off provides a visual difference, something is broken and best keep GPU settings off.

[Knicker]

A parallel thread to this one was started by the OP here on Digital Photography Review (DPR). The "answer" post here along with the post by the Adobe staff member (Akash Sharma) were cited in the DPR thread as authoritative. I expect that the "answer" post and this thread in general might also be cited in the future in other threads in this forum (just like the related 2017 thread was referenced above). Therefore, it's important to get things right and to be clear about what's really going on in the Adobe products when the user zooms in and zooms out. As things stand now, there are two statements that are incorrect or, at least, unclear and easily misinterpreted. First there is this statement by Todd Shaner in the "Answer" post:

If the Library module looks the same (i.e. pixelated) as the Develop module at >1:1 Zoom view the most likely cause is an incompatible graphics driver.

Second, this statement in Akash Sharma's post:

Develop module shows the rendered preview of your image but it is best viewed in 1:1 ratio. This means that your GPU processor have some issues and is showing the rendered preview pixelated.

As best I can tell both of these claims are based on an incorrect assumption that Adobe uses the same interpolation and resampling process for zooming in on the image display as it does when zooming out. The referenced 2017 thread discussed how, when zooming out, there may be differences in the appearance of the displayed image between the Library and Develop modules. That's correct. It's also true in Photoshop vs ACR, depending on how Photoshop's image interpolation preference is set in the Preferences > General tab. However, something different happens when you zoom in. As far as I can tell, all of the Adobe display modes being discussed here disregard interpolation when zooming in because the whole point of zooming in is to magnify the actual pixel structure at the current pixel dimension settings. Thus, pixelation is exactly what one should expect when zooming in. This is easily confirmed by just going to any image and zooming to 8:1 in LR or 800% in PS. You will see the actual pixel structure of the image magnified and more visible. You will NOT see the pixels interpolated so that edges appear smooth. In this regard, zooming in is fundamentally different from an actual image upsizing/resampling to 800%. When upsizing/resampling through an export in LR or image size change in PS, Adobe is indeed applying an interpolation algorithm. Depending on which algorithm is applied (in PS), you'll get varying degrees of pixelation/smoothing. In particular, it's noteworthy that use of the "nearest neighbor" option will result in a highly pixelated look that's virtually identical when displayed at 100% to what a 800% zoomed display of the original image (pre-upsizing) looks like.

With that in mind, the two quoted statements above need to be reconsidered. Images viewed at a zoomed setting in the Library module should normally look pixelated, just as they do when zoomed in in the Develop module. At least, that's what I see (and expect to see) in LR Classic CC when I look (regardless of whether the GPU acceleration is turned on or off). Likewise, "the rendered preview" looking "pixelated" in the OP's zoomed in screen grabs is expected and, therefore, is not a symptom of the GPU having problems. Of the two screen grabs posted by the OP, the pixelated one is the expected on in both modules. The real mystery is why his Library module (not the Develop module) image viewed zoomed in showed antialiasing-type smoothing when the OP's GPU was turned on. It appears that the GPU is stepping on the Library modules zoom function and imposing an antialiasing algorithm to it, but is (correctly) not interfering with the Develop module's zoom function. Whatever the source of the problem, the bottom line is that visible pixelation when zooming in is the expected and correct behavior by which "incompatible graphics driver" issues must be assessed.

[TheDigitalDog]

Knicker  wrote

As things stand now, there are two statements that are incorrect or, at least, unclear and easily misinterpreted.

There is a difference between incorrect and for some, easily misinterpreted.

I suggest you start a new thread here with your questions. The original question (Am I correct in believing the image shown in library mode is a preview / jpeg one and the one one in develop is the actual raw image? If so why does the develop module one look less detailed than the library one? By the way if I turn on 'use graphics processor they both look pixelated.) was answered.

[Knicker]

If the "Answer" was incorrect, misleading or easily misinterpreted in some way, isn't the best place to discuss that in the same thread as the answer post was given?

I will defer to the moderator(s) on whether this thread or a new one is the proper procedure. Either way, I sincerely hope the individuals to whom my post is directed see it and are given the opportunity to respond. The goal is clarity on this issue. As it stands now, I don't see how the OP's second question is correctly addressed by the post marked as the "Answer".

[TheDigitalDog]

Knicker  wrote

If the "Answer" was incorrect, misleading or easily misinterpreted in some way, isn't the best place to discuss that in the same thread as the answer post was given?

I will defer to the moderator(s) on whether this thread or a new one is the proper procedure.

You already have. PLEASE start a new thread with your question as the original poster.

[Todd Shaner]

Knicker  wrote

With that in mind, the two quoted statements above need to be reconsidered. Images viewed at a zoomed setting in the Library module should normally look pixelated, just as they do when zoomed in in the Develop module. At least, that's what I see (and expect to see) in LR Classic CC when I look (regardless of whether the GPU acceleration is turned on or off). Likewise, "the rendered preview" looking "pixelated" in the OP's zoomed in screen grabs is expected and, therefore, is not a symptom of the GPU having problems. Of the two screen grabs posted by the OP, the pixelated one is the expected on in both modules. The real mystery is why his Library module (not the Develop module) image viewed zoomed in showed antialiasing-type smoothing when the OP's GPU was turned on. It appears that the GPU is stepping on the Library modules zoom function and imposing an antialiasing algorithm to it, but is (correctly) not interfering with the Develop module's zoom function. Whatever the source of the problem, the bottom line is that visible pixelation when zooming in is the expected and correct behavior by which "incompatible graphics driver" issues must be assessed.

After reading the above post I rechecked the Library and Develop module previews at >1:1 Zoom view with 'Use Graphics Processor' checked and unchecked. What I did differently this time is to close and restart LR after each change to the LR Preferences setting. Here's what I'm seeing, which correlates with what the OP Is seeing when using any Zoom size greater than 1:1 such as 11:1.

                                           Use Graphics Processor

                                             Checked    Unchecked

Library Module Preview       Smooth        Pixelated

Develop Module Preview     Pixelated      Pixelated

I agree with Knicker that the LR previews at >1:1 (100%) should appear the same as in PS. That is to say both the Library and Develop module previews should appear pixelated since no interpolation should be applied same as in PS. At the very least if Adobe is applying interpolation to upscale the image at >1:1 Zoom views then the Library preview should appear the same (i.e. smoothed) with 'Use Graphics Processor' checked and unchecked. In my opinion the LR previews should not have upscaling applied to the >1:1 Zoom view so they appear the same as in PS. This would seem to make the most since to prevent confusion as we see in this post.

I suggest creating a Problem Report at the Photoshop Family forum, which is monitored by Adobe staff. Please place a link to this post in that report for further information and place a link to the report back here for others who land here. Add your 'Me To' vote and 'Follow.'

Post a Conversation | Photoshop Family Customer Community

[TheDigitalDog]

I agree with Knicker  that the LR previews at >1:1 (100%) should appear the same as in PS. That is to say both the Library and Develop module previews should appear pixelated since no interpolation should be applied same as in PS.

And on this end, they do; exactly match at 1:1 (100%) or greater (4:1). On a TIFF (you can't view a raw in Photoshop, you can in ACR).

Here's the same TIFF in Library at 4:1 and Photoshop at the same zoom ratio; they match exactly (as does the same zoom in Develop):

Library top, Photoshop bottom. And this is exactly what I see in Develop too.

IF you don't see a match, then report it as a bug (or futz with GPU) and then start a new thread about this bug.

[Todd Shaner]

Andrew, just to clarify what you're seeing please provide the below table with your views at 4:1 and higher (11:1). Make sure you are closing and relaunching LR after each change to the LR Preferences> Performance> 'Use Graphics Processor' checkbox. Also please provide the LR version and OS version you are using. I've already suggested this be reported at the Photoshop Family forum and this will help with creating that report. Thank you.

                                           Use Graphics Processor

                                             Checked    Unchecked

Library Module Preview       Smooth        Pixelated

Develop Module Preview     Pixelated      Pixelated

[TheDigitalDog]

https://forums.adobe.com/people/Todd+Shaner  wrote

Andrew, just to clarify what you're seeing please provide the below table with your views at 4:1 and higher (11:1). Make sure you are closing and relaunching LR after each change to the LR Preferences> Performance> 'Use Graphics Processor' checkbox. Also please provide the LR version and OS version you are using. I've already suggested this be reported at the Photoshop Family forum and this will help with creating that report. Thank you.

                                           Use Graphics Processor

                                             Checked    Unchecked

Library Module Preview       Smooth        Pixelated

Develop Module Preview     Pixelated      Pixelated

There's nothing to report out of the ordinary: I launched LR, I opened the image you see above and zoomed in within Library. I opened the TIFF in Photoshop, I zoomed it to the same zoom ratio; they match. As expected. GPU is on for both as I always have it, because there are no issues on this end. I see on reason to turn either off.

[Todd Shaner]

thedigitaldog  wrote

https://forums.adobe.com/people/Todd+Shaner   wrote

Andrew, just to clarify what you're seeing please provide the below table with your views at 4:1 and higher (11:1). Make sure you are closing and relaunching LR after each change to the LR Preferences> Performance> 'Use Graphics Processor' checkbox. Also please provide the LR version and OS version you are using. I've already suggested this be reported at the Photoshop Family forum and this will help with creating that report. Thank you.

                                           Use Graphics Processor

                                             Checked    Unchecked

Library Module Preview       Smooth        Pixelated

Develop Module Preview     Pixelated      Pixelated

There's nothing to report out of the ordinary: I launched LR, I opened the image you see above and zoomed in within Library. I opened the TIFF in Photoshop, I zoomed it to the same zoom ratio; they match. As expected. GPU is on for both as I always have it, because there are no issues on this end. I see on reason to turn either off.

Andrew, I was asking you to provide your results for trouble shooting purposes only. Anyhow it's obvious this is a Windows only bug since both you and Knicker are on a Mac and can't see the issue.

Akash Sharma do you need any further information to file a bug report for this issue? Please let me know. It's appears to be a bug in the DirectX display path implementation used on Windows systems, but not on Mac platforms.

[Knicker]

Thanks, Todd, for re-opening the thread and following-up with your own testing! It's interesting that your system's behavior seems to match the OP's - i.e., with the GPU on you get antialiasing applied in the Library module. As an, fyi, on my iMac, turning the GPU on (with full close/restart of LR as you've suggested) does NOT result in smoothed/antialiased zoomed displays. Same is true with the GPU off on my iMac. The question is: which way is the unintended/buggy behavior? My expectation is for all zooms to behave identically and that zooming in should, under all normal circumstances, retain the same pixel structure and just magnify that structure rather than resample/interpolate it. If I read you correctly, you're agreeing with that. The bad news is that would mean that your system (like the OP's) is buggy.   (Better yours than mine! )

[TheDigitalDog]

Knicker  wrote

The question is: which way is the unintended/buggy behavior?

That should be fairly obvious; the behavior that matches Photoshop. And other applications too.

And as indicated, there are bugs for some folks (and not for others). Thanks to GPU issues as outlined.

Use "The Google Machine" and search for GPU bugs; you'll find lots and lots of hits and it's been this way for years; nothing new.

Just like for decades, people have been told they need to delete preferences for Adobe app's. Nothing new, often works.

[TheDigitalDog]

thedigitaldog  wrote

That should be fairly obvious; the behavior that matches Photoshop. And other applications too.

More proof of concept: LR Library and Preview on the Mac, same zoom ratio (1:1). So yeah, there's three app's that all match. And one where no GPU options exist.

Enough said or needs to be said.