• Global community
    • Language:
      • Deutsch
      • English
      • Español
      • Français
      • Português
  • 日本語コミュニティ
    Dedicated community for Japanese speakers
  • 한국 커뮤니티
    Dedicated community for Korean speakers
Exit
0

Enhance Details = The Emperor's New Clothes

Engaged ,
Feb 16, 2019 Feb 16, 2019

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

So Adobe just proved to me that they are so out-of-touch as to what LR power-users are asking for, they've actually tried to sell me on this new 'Enhance Details' stuff which is little more than the equivalent to the Emperor's New Clothes (if you have no clue about that reference, please Google the story).

Did the engineers actually succeed in adding this feature to Lightroom without anybody calling them out on it? What have they been doing for the past 10 years to improve performance? Zilch. Sorry, LR Team, but someone needs to hold you accountable for this update.

'Photos will look *slightly* sharper when viewed at 1000%, and will take at least 10 seconds to convert each image on a fast graphics card'

I thought April Fool's Day was at least 6 weeks away, and even then, the jokes aren't supposed to be real.

Views

958

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines

correct answers 1 Correct answer

Community Expert , Feb 17, 2019 Feb 17, 2019

https://forums.adobe.com/people/bob+frost  wrote

And the Enhanced dng files are about 5 times larger than my nefs!!!

The Enhanced DNG is a fully rendered or demoisiced file (i.e. it's no longer raw), hence the significant increase in size. One reason for them being stored as a DNG rather than say TIFF is that the former is larger again.

If you want to see an example of where 'Enhanced Details' has improved the rendering then check this thread out Enhanced details - bringing life to 20D photos  Whet

...

Votes

Translate

Translate
Community Expert ,
Feb 17, 2019 Feb 17, 2019

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

You really don't have a clue what "power users" told Adobe about it. Look, the Enhance Detail process is slow, it clutters up the catalogue with big duplicate images, and one shouldn't need to adopt methods like Difference mode layers or Apply Image (to save you any Googling) to see if there's any benefit. It is somewhere between subtle and invisible, depending on the image. Will I use the feature - no, or maybe only as a curiosity. Should they not have released it? It's probably a first step for something down the track, and only time will tell. But hey, apart from ongoing performance efforts (see here), what have Adobe ever done for us, eh?

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Advocate ,
Feb 17, 2019 Feb 17, 2019

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

And the Enhanced dng files are about 5 times larger than my nefs!!!

Bob frost

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Expert ,
Feb 17, 2019 Feb 17, 2019

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

https://forums.adobe.com/people/bob+frost  wrote

And the Enhanced dng files are about 5 times larger than my nefs!!!

The Enhanced DNG is a fully rendered or demoisiced file (i.e. it's no longer raw), hence the significant increase in size. One reason for them being stored as a DNG rather than say TIFF is that the former is larger again.

If you want to see an example of where 'Enhanced Details' has improved the rendering then check this thread out Enhanced details - bringing life to 20D photos  Whether same was/is an example of the type of artefacts Adobe expects Enhanced Details to reduce isn't clear yet, but I have many similar images where I see the same improvement.

FWIW, I share John's view regarding how effective it is overall, and whether it will feature in my workflow.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Advocate ,
Feb 17, 2019 Feb 17, 2019

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

So it's equivalent to a psd or tiff from Photoshop. Having looked at a few Enhanced dngs, my feeling is that I can achieve far greater improvements to my nefs using Photoshop's tools than I can with these E-dngs.

My initial impression is that it only enhances parts of the image that are absolutely in focus. Is that correct or haven't I looked at enough yet?

Bob Frost

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
LEGEND ,
Feb 17, 2019 Feb 17, 2019

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

https://forums.adobe.com/people/bob+frost  wrote

So it's equivalent to a psd or tiff from Photoshop.

No, not really.

Author “Color Management for Photographers" & "Photoshop CC Color Management/pluralsight"

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Expert ,
Feb 17, 2019 Feb 17, 2019

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

https://forums.adobe.com/people/bob+frost  wrote

So it's equivalent to a psd or tiff from Photoshop.

No, the Enhanced Details DNG is more like the DNG you get when you merge to HDR or panorama: It's more raw than a TIFF so you have the full raw range of adjustments when process it, but since it's been demosaiced it's not quite raw any more. It's somewhere in between raw and TIFF.

https://forums.adobe.com/people/bob+frost  wrote

my feeling is that I can achieve far greater improvements to my nefs using Photoshop's tools than I can with these E-dngs.

Maybe not. I found a link by a blogger that shows more of what Adobe was going after:

Adobe Camera Raw 11.2 “Enhance Details”

That link shows examples of moire patterns and false color that are addressed by Enhanced Details. The improved demosaicing of Enhanced Details can minimize or remove these raw processing artifacts. Those problems may not be solved as easily using, for example, advanced Photoshop sharpening detail enhancement techniques since they're not sharpness problems, they're raw data detail interpretation problems that also produce color issues.

https://forums.adobe.com/people/bob+frost  wrote

My initial impression is that it only enhances parts of the image that are absolutely in focus. Is that correct or haven't I looked at enough yet?

That should be correct, since out of focus areas don't have detail to enhance. But beyond that, Enhance Details seems to work best on images that have been photographed with inherent sharpness (no motion blur, focused sharp lens, detail in subject). I don't think it helps images with handheld motion blur, misfocused lens, etc. In other words, I think it helps you get the detail that's already there, not to make unsharp content "look" sharper.

Also, Enhance Details improvements are great for pixel peepers but not necessarily for everyone else. If you exclude high magnification inspections on screen, the differences don't seem to be easily visible except on very large prints.

My own images seem to be in the categories that Enhanced Details doesn't help much, so I won't be using it often. But at least I think I understand how to recognize the type of image I might want to try it with in the future.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
LEGEND ,
Feb 17, 2019 Feb 17, 2019

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

https://forums.adobe.com/people/Ian+Lyons  wrote

https://forums.adobe.com/people/bob+frost   wrote

And the Enhanced dng files are about 5 times larger than my nefs!!!

The Enhanced DNG is a fully rendered or demoisiced file (i.e. it's no longer raw), hence the significant increase in size. One reason for them being stored as a DNG rather than say TIFF is that the former is larger again.

Right. Not only that, but there are, according to Simon Chen, two versions of the DNG, one being Enhanced, one not so other products can access that data IF necessary.

It's rather silly for some here to compare two DNG's that are partially rendered to an NEF which isn't. A TIFF with dozen's of layers is going to be larger on disk (Big Deal) than a JPEG that's flattened. If you need layers, you live with the increase in size (again, big deal). Adobe doesn't put a gun to anyone's head to use lots of layers or Enhanced Detail. If you find neither useful, don't use em.

Yeah, the file's bigger. If people don't use the previews and examine IF they should even convert, they are missing how the new feature was designed to be used. It does make a visible difference on some images. Other's not at all.

Author “Color Management for Photographers" & "Photoshop CC Color Management/pluralsight"

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
LEGEND ,
Feb 17, 2019 Feb 17, 2019

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
LEGEND ,
Feb 17, 2019 Feb 17, 2019

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

JBedfordPhoto  wrote

'Photos will look *slightly* sharper when viewed at 1000%, and will take at least 10 seconds to convert each image on a fast graphics card'

It's a little better than that with Fuji X-Trans sensor RAF files, which seem to benefit the most. The rest of the Bayer sensor camera world won't see much detail improvement except in areas with color aliasing (zebra stripes). Even then you need to look at Zoom View 2:1 or higher to really see it. Se this post in the Photoshop Family forum where I did some tests:

Manage Workspace - Get Satisfaction

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Engaged ,
Feb 18, 2019 Feb 18, 2019

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Hi Todd, I have an XPro-2 and X-T2 and see little to no difference. I've been testing with landscape shots at F8 and up, with fast shutter speeds and low ISOs, too. I just had my eyes checked (20/20) and use a 4K monitor so I'm being as objective as possible.

The detail enhancements might be useful to some, but for me, if I'm being this particular about details, I'm hopping over to Photoshop where, in my opinion, this enhancement would be better featured.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
LEGEND ,
Feb 19, 2019 Feb 19, 2019

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

LATEST

The vast majority of subjects and shot types exhibit no benefit from Enhanced Details processing. This is for both X-Trans and Bayer sensor cameras.

I shoot with Canon L series lenses, which are Canon's best optics and 99% of my CR2 raw files exhibit very few imperfections (i.e. aberrations). How do you make an almost "perfect" image better? I only see detail "improvement" in image files that exhibit Bayer sensor color aliasing zebra stripes. Even then it isn't obvious until viewed at 2:1 Zoom.

X-Trans sensor don't exhibit this issue, but do see improvement in foliage shots at 2:1 Zoom View as at shown the below link. IMHO this is overkill–Who wants to add 20-30 sec of AI processing to simply make these X-Trans images look "normal?" A better solution is for Adobe to fix the X-Trans demosaicing process. Since the current LR/ACR processing algorithms were designed for Bayer sensor type raw data this apparently isn't a simple task. It probably requires a complete redesign of the processing engine.

Manage Workspace - Get Satisfaction

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Participant ,
Feb 18, 2019 Feb 18, 2019

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

When I open an enhanced DNG file in photoshop, it has the same file size as the non enhanced DNG. How come?

Jos

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
LEGEND ,
Feb 18, 2019 Feb 18, 2019

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

The Enhanced Details DNG mystique at work?

The only difference between the raw and Enhanced DNG files is how fine-detail demosaicing is handled. Other than that they both have the same pixel dimensions (Megapixels). They will also have same file size when exported in LR.  . Please read reply #3 above.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines