What happens when you change your Camera Raw 'Workflow Options' color space to sRGB and then try 'Edit in PS' with LR 'External Editing' color space also set to sRGB? ... View more

I've used every version of LR since 1.0 with PS and never had an issue with the wrong color profile being assigned to an Export or 'Edit in PS' image. Currently I am using both LR4.4.1 and LR5.2 Final with PS CS6 on my Windows 7 system with no such issues. The only other suggestion I can provide is to uninstall PS and LR, manually delete the PS and LR Preferences files, and then a reinstall both using a new download of the latest PS and LR installers. ... View more

I suggest discussing the i1 Display, Passport, and TV settings issues after you've resolved the PS issue. They are separate but related issues which you should probably discuss in a separate post. Your Samsung TV setup controls are different than mine, so the specific settings I posted would not apply. The point is that the out-of-box settings are not necessarily optimal for photographic slideshows or even Blu-ray movie playback. I have one (1) custom set of settings that I now use for all viewing. It shouldn't be necessary to adjust the TV differently for different sources or types of Blu-ray disks (Cable, Blu-ray, etc.). I think you will find that your LR edited images will look more "accurate" after hardware calibration of your monitor with the i1 Display device. howdego wrote: My workflow is to do most of my editing in LR, resize, fix if necessary and maybe sharpen in PS, and save back to LR as a PSD.  That way I keep the image in 16 bit, with all its layers, so I can make additional changes before exporting to Proshow. What you've just described can probably all be done from inside LR, except for the "layers." What are you adding to the image in layers? howdego wrote: Don't see why saving as a TIFF would affect the quality of the picture, and it would add more steps to my workflow.  TIFF and PSD are a lossless file format that supports 16 bit/color. JPEG is lossy and only supports 8bit/color. If your intention is to edit the PS file further in LR TIFF or PSD will provide the best results. Once your LR editing is 100% complete you can export with resizing and output sharpening  in sRGB JPEG format based on your image usage in ProShow. I don't use the ProShow plugin so can't give advise. I prefer to be in control of the resizing and output sharpening process, but the ProShow plugin may work fine by itself howdego wrote: However, I guess working in prophoto in both LR and PS, would be ok if the monitor is calibrated and in sRGB mode, as even if there are more colors in the image data, my monitor will only see the sRGB gamut, just as my TV does.  Do I have that right? Is the gamut of your TV really sRGB and are you using a wide-gamut or standard gamut monitor? For most images the onscreen image differences you see between the computer monitor and TV screen should be minimal, assuming both are calibrated or at least properly adjusted. If you really want to see what your LR/PS images will look like on your TV you need to soft proof them using a profile that matches you TV's LCD screen. One example here: http://forums.audioholics.com/forums/televisions-displays/79910-tv-calibration.html ... View more

howdego wrote: Oh, one more thing.  I did lose the ProShow Producer plug-in from the export file window.  Any idea where it is stored? C:\Users\USERNAME\AppData\Roaming\Adobe\Lightroom\Modules There are two ProShow plugins you will need to 'Add' back from inside the LR Plugin Manager. ... View more

howdego wrote: I am, however, trying to decide on the right color space to use, which is how I noticed this problem. I rarely make prints of my photos.  I make bluray movies using Proshow Producer.  I recently got a new monitor and Samsung LED HDTV, and found that my photo videos did not display right and I am trying to find out why.  I found the normal viewing settings of the TV have too much color and sharpness, so I established another group of settings for photos, which helped.  However, I am still not satisfied. These are two separate but related issues. 1) It's almost impossible to get accurate Color and Luminance level rendering inside LR if you don't use a hardware monitor calibrator to adjust your computer monitor. 2) LCD TV's use settings to "enhance" color, brightness, and contrast that is usually very, very inacuuarte. But this is what most non-photography people seem to like so TV manufacturers crank up the "default settings." I also have an older 52" Samsung TV (LN-T5265F) that I've manually adjusted for more accurate color. Try using the 'Movie' mode, which is the most accurate mode and turn the Backlight setting down. Here are the settings I use with my Samsung TV. I assume your Samsung TV's controls are similar: Setup Screens HDMI 1 (Cable Box) & Coax (Cable) HDMI 2 (Panasonic Blu-Ray Player) PICTURE - 1 Movie Standard Dynamic Movie Standard Dynamic Contrast 82 82 82 82 82 82 Brightness 43 45 45 43 45 45 Sharpness 25 25 35 15 15 25 Color 42 45 45 44 45 45 Tint 77 R 77 R 84 R 77 R 77 R 84 R Backlight 5 6 7 5 5 6 PICTURE - 2 Color Tone Normal Normal Normal Normal Normal Normal Detailed Settings Black Adjust Off NA NA Off NA NA Dynamic Contrast Low NA NA Low NA NA Gamma -1 NA NA -1 NA NA Color Space Auto NA NA Auto NA NA White Balance R-Offset 13 NA NA 13 NA NA G-Offset 15 NA NA 15 NA NA B-Offset 17 NA NA 17 NA NA R-Gain 15 NA NA 15 NA NA G-Gain 12 NA NA 12 NA NA B-Gain 17 NA NA 17 NA NA My Color Control Pink 15 NA NA 15 NA NA Green 15 NA NA 15 NA NA Blue 15 NA NA 15 NA NA White 15 NA NA 15 NA NA Edge Ehnacement On NA NA On NA NA xvYCC Off NA NA Off NA NA Digital NR Low Low Low Low Low Low Active Color Off(NA) Off(NA) Off Off(NA) Off(NA) Off Dnie Off(NA) Off Off Off(NA) Off Off SETUP - Screen 2 Energy Saving Off Off Off Off Off Off SETUP - Screen 3 HDMI Black Level Low Low Low Low Low Low Film Mode Off(NA) Off(NA) Off(NA) Off(NA) Off(NA) Off(NA) howdego wrote: So it occurred to me that some colors might be wrong, or too saturated, because I am not seeing them on my monitor as they will appear on the HDTV.  I am thinking that since sRGB is my final color space, I would try to do everything in the sRGB space, including setting my monitor to sRGB (I have a Dell 2413 which supports adobeRGB too).  I was inn the process of trying this when I found the issue at hand.  Might you have any thoughts about this color space choice If you have a wide-gamut monitor you are better off using it in Adobe RGB mode with a monitor calibrator. But then the monitor will not look correct in non-color managed applications: http://www.gballard.net/photoshop/srgb_wide_gamut.html You can circumvent this issue by using your monitor in sRGB mode, but I'd still suggest you use a hardware monitor calibrator. Either way it is imortatnt that you have a proper monitor profile assigned in Windows or OS X Color Management. The monitor manufacturer provides these, but they don't always work well with LR for numerous reasons. To insure the best image quality you should do all of your editing in PS using 16 bit TIFF with ProPhoto RGB profile format until you are ready to Export. For use with ProShow you can use TIFFs or JPEGs, but use sRGB color profile to avoid any color management issue. JPEGs are fine and a LR Quality higher than 80 (10 in PS) is a waste of disk space for slideshow images. In short you've got a lot of "variables" between the uncalibrated monitor and out-of-the-box non-adjusted TV. The former requires a good hardware calibrator aad the latter a good "eye" to adjust it. ... View more

howdego wrote: I am not trying to change my color settings.  I just noticed this happening, and I am trying to find out why.  I am beginning to believe after these exchanges with you that either LR or PS is corrupted, as all settings seem correct.  Resetting my LR preferences file might be something I could try, but I will have to do some fixing thereafter as I use the ProShow plug-in.  So if you cannot think of anything else, I guess that is my next step. I also use the ProShow Producer plugin. Resetting LR Preferences should not affect any of your plugins, just the settings in the Preferences panel. Try resetting your LR Preferences file. I usually rename the current file by adding a .old extension to the name. I had a number of issues with LR and PS where resetting the preferences fixed the problem. http://members.lightroomqueen.com/index.php?/Knowledgebase/Article/Vie w/1148/198/how-do-i-delete-the-lightroom-preferences-file If the above doesn't fix it then try restting PS Preferences: http://forums.adobe.com/thread/375776 Logic would say this has to be a LR Edit In PS issue, but I'd still try the PS Preferences reset if the LR reset doesn't fix it. Again, I usually first rename the current preferences file by adding a .old extension to the name. That way you can restore it and you original preferences if it doesn't help. It will NOT affect any of your PS plugins, just PS preferences settings and anything "wacky" with PS's defaults that is causing the problem. Ditto LR..... Also post a screenshot of your LR Preferences> External Editing panel so we aren't overlooking something there. ... View more

It seems you are changing your PS Color Settings. I suggest leaving both LR External Editing Preferences and PS Color Settings with ProPhoto RGB, TIFF, 16 bit format. If you decide you want to 'Save' the file inside PS as an sRGB JPEG (instead of TIFF), convert the profile, and use 'Save As.' You'll need to do a folder Synchronize to import the JPEG back inside LR for these exception cases, but this is not a big deal. This insures the best image quality when applyng PS edits. I would suggest resetting your LR Preferences file. I usually rename the current file by adding a .old extension to the name. http://members.lightroomqueen.com/index.php?/Knowledgebase/Article/View/1148/198/how-do-i-delete-the-lightroom-preferences-file ... View more

Please post a screenshot of the PS profile mismatch warning you are seeing, which should look like this based on what you are saying: ... View more

ssprengel wrote: Rotate the JPG left then right and it'll work to...just something to rewrite the image data, which might be all the PixRecovery program is doing. I used a lossless JPG rotator to keep from degrading the image.  For example: http://download.cnet.com/JPEG-Lossless-Rotator/3000-12511_4-10503383.h tml XnView has a JPEG Lossless Transformations utility with the option to use EXIF rotation value, so no rotation needs to be applied. It worked with the OP's JPEG allowing it to import into LR. You can use it on single images (under 'Tools') or with Batch Processing. I don't believe PS or Adobe Bridge has lossless transformation capability. Bridge  let's you rotate the image thumbnail, but the JPEG image data isn't modified (just the EXIF Rotation data?). Lossless JPEG applications list: http://jpegclub.org/losslessapps.html XnViewiew JPEG Lossless Transformation Utility (Also under 'Tools') Message was edited by: trshaner Adde URL link ro list of lossless JPEG applications. ... View more

It appears opening the JPEG file(s) in almost any photo application with 'Save' capability fixes the issue. XnView  is free and has a 'Batch Processing' utility (Windows Only): http://www.xnview.com The file opens in LR with the sRGB color profile and metatdata intact after saving inside XnView. I'm not saying it will work with every file that exhibit this behavior, but it's worth a try. If that doesn't work try Rob's suggestion using PixRecovery. ... View more

howdego wrote: As I described, it doesn/t seem to matter what I set the External Editing color space to be.  PS sees every image coming in as adobeRGB.  So if the LR target space is sRGB, or adobeRGB, and PS color space is sRGB, I get an error in both cases.  I should not if the target is srgb.  On the other hand, if the target inj LR is sRGB, and PS color space is adobeRGB, I do not get an error.  The image just opens.  This should not happen, should it? Just to be clear the LR 'External Editing' color space setting only affects the 'Edit In' PS color profile. For 'Exports' you need to set the Color Space under 'File Settings' in the Export module. What are your PS Edit> Color Settings. This is what I suggest using with LR, which will indicate a profile mismatch for anything except ProPhoto RGB: As a test try setting BOTH the External Editing Preferences and Export>File Handling> Color Space to ProPhoto RGB color profile and do an 'Edit In' PS and an Export. With the two files open in PS see what profile shows at Edit> Convert to Profile under 'Source Space.' Tell me what you see here for each file! ... View more

The JPEG file opens fine in PS CS6, Windows Photo Viewer, Windows Live Photo Gallery, and XnView, but I get the same "unsupported" error message with LR4.4.1. PS and EXIF tool shows  'Color Space' with sRGB assigned. If I 'Open and Save' the file in PS with no changes it opens fine in LR. LR is the only application that can't open this file. ... View more

howdego wrote: I have a Sony NEX6 camera.  I have taken pictures in the camera sRGB color space and the AdobeRGB space, which I used for this test. Since I shoot in RAW, this should not matter, so I don’t think it is the issue, and, in fact, I get the same result no matter which color space the camera is in. Raw image files do NOT have a color space assigned to them, only JPEG camera files. howdego wrote: If LR export and PS color space are the same, why should there be a mismatch, and why is PS not seeing the sRGB space?  Might there be a setting in Lightroom or Photoshop that I am missing? You need to slelect the target color space with your Preferences> 'External Editing'> Color Space, or in the Export module 'File Settings'> Color Space. ... View more

Thanks Eric that's the "missing link" and a very helpful tip! It wasn't mentioned in any of  articles at the Google link I posted or by Mark Alan Thomas. You can then continue to edit the exported "positive" TIFF image inside LR as a normal picture. Perhaps someone at Adobe could add that tip to the Lightroom 'Help.' I use scanner software and PS for initial capture of my film scans and don't have the "negative" issue. But I still do most of my post-scan processing inside LR because it's faster, provides good results, and allows cataloging all-in-one application. ... View more

Film scanner software with negative film color profiles will give the best results, but you can get good results using just LR. Do a Google search using the two keywords Lightroom and negative. ... View more

Personally, I think your looking at this bass-ackwards. If you want to select specific image types for website use I'd suggest first searching by keyword criteria such as 'ocean.' Then select the ones you think are best regardless of size. If they aren't the right size then simply Export them and create the size you want. Why the heck would you want to "limit" your selection of images by "size?" It simply makes no sense, especially when hard drive storage is dirt cheap today–Just my 2 cents worth! This table may give you a better idea of JPEG file sizes based on LR's compression settings 0-100. In case you weren't aware there are really only 13 different compression levels in both LR and PS and one of them is virtually useless (54-61%). See this post: http://forums.adobe.com/message/5641903#5641903 The file used for comparison is from a 5D MKII, but the compression 'Size' and 'Step' data applies to most any "typical" image type. PS LR LR Equiv Size Size % Step % 0    0 0-7%       675 5% -11% 1   10 8-15%       756 5% -23% 2   20 16-23%       983 7% -14% 3   30 24-30%    1,137 8% -14% 4   35 31-38%    1,318 9% -16% 5   40 39-46%    1,569 11% -24% 6   50 47-53%    2,051 14% -4% 7   55 54-61%    2,127 15% -27% 8   65 62-69%    2,894 20% -25% 9   70 70-76%    3,863 26% -31% 10   80 77-84%    5,570 38% -35% 11   90 85-92%    8,566 59% -41% 12 100 93-100% 14,579 100% Notice the anomaly between PS 6-7 steps. There's more information at the above link. ... View more

I agree with Ddegannes, Eric Chan has offered to investigate better documentation of the automatic lens corrections. You can't ask for more than that since there may be some 3rd party non-disclosure issues. The most logical explanation is that the X100 support was provided before roll-out of  "automatic" lens corrections and the X100s support after roll-out. I agree it is very confusing as to what lens corrections should or should not be applied to the X100s  raw image files. PhotographyFan wrote: They have a profile that corrected geometric distortion in X100 raw files but none specifically for the X100s which has the same geometric distortion.  That's what has me wondering what is going on. I can't speak for Adobe, but this may be due to a difference in "philosophy" of providing "automatic" lens corrections for "fixed lens" cameras versus providing lens profiles for DSLR cameras. DSLR camera users typically want more control of how the camera creates the image, and point-and-shoot (i.e. fixed lens) camera users want to well....point & shoot! So Adobe is trying to make it "simpler" for point-and-shoot users by bringing the raw image as close as possible to the in-camera JPEG. This has been a complaint by many LR users–"Why does my raw file look different than my camera JPEG"..... Technically the X100 lens by-it-self is the same as the one on the X100s body. I believe the only thing that changed is better anti-reflection coating on the X100s lens elements. This is no different than using say a Canon 50mm F1.4 lens profile for a 1Ds MKII with a 5D MKII body, since they are both 1.0 crop bodies. The primary difference is that you need to know what is being applied automatically to the X100s raw files by LR so you don't double-correct with the X100 lens profile. From my testing LR is applying chromatic aberration and vignetting correction to X100s raw files and no lens corrections to X100 raw files. Both the X100 and X100s cameras apply ONLY chromatic aberration and vignetting lens corrections to the in-camera JPEG and nothing to the raw file. So the only benefit to using the X100 lens profile with X100s raw images is to remove a tiny amount of distortion that probably isn't visible in most images. You can leave 'Remove Chromatic Aberrations' unchecked or checked, since it "automatically" detects lateral CA and only applies correction when it is present. For axial CA you'll still need to manually correct using the Defringe tool. If you don't understand the different types of CA I suggest reading the Adobe article– It's a very useful tool: http://blogs.adobe.com/lightroomjournal/2012/04/new-color-fringe-correction-controls.html ... View more

My guess is that neither the X100 or X100s images have distortion lens corrections applied in-camera or "automatically" inside LR for both JPEG and raw file types. This would indicate both Fujifilm and Adobe have determined that the distortion is so low it's unnecessary. Scroll down to Geometric Distortion here: http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/X100/X100A4.HTM This is NOT the case when using the wide-angle adapter as indicated in this review: http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/tag/x100-wide-angle-converter/ The in-camera JPEGS do have distortion correction applied, but obviously not the raw image. The aw image will require a different amount/type of correction inside LR and perhaps a new Lens Profile. You could try using a combination of the X100 profile and/or 'Manual' Distortion correction and save as a Develop preset. Hopefully this clears up the picture (pun). ... View more

I'm not sure you will get a response from Eric Chan for the reasons ssprengel listed in post #26. Vignetting and rectilinear distortion correction to make your digital camera images "100% perfect" is generally unnecessary and can even degrade the image quality. Distortion Correction Cons 1) Crops the image to maintain straight image borders–You lose  the image peripheral area that is corrected. Wide and ultra-wide zoom lenses generally have significant barrel distortion. Applying 100% correction "effectively" increase the focal length, which means that expensive 12-24mm zoom lens may provide something closer to a 14-26mm lens. 2) Wide angle lenses generally exhibit barrel type distortion, which actually helps to reduce corner and edge "stretching." By correcting this distortion to make it 100% "geometrically correct" the elongation will become more noticeable. In fact there is software available that can apply "non-rectilinear correction" (volume anamorphosis) to wide angle images to remove some of the elongation. This "added distortion" can actually improve certain images (i.e. people pictures). Good information here: http://forums.adobe.com/message/4516863#4516863 As Eric outlined at the above post you can simply use the 'Manual' Lens Corrections Distortion slider to add barrel distortion. http://feedback.photoshop.com/photoshop_family/topics/correct_stretching_effect_from_an_ultra_wide_angle_lens Vignetting Correction Cons 1) Most people are accustomed to seeing some vignetting in photographs and in fact vignetting is sometimes "added" to images to focus attention on the central subject. 2) Wide and ultra-wide angle lenses usually exhibit significant vignetting especially at wide apertures, which can be as much as -3EV. You will need to apply +3EV of exposure compensation in the extreme corners to achieve 100% vignetting correction. This will significantly raise shadow noise and can also reduce image quality due to lens defects such as astigmatism, and coma. So what should you do with your FinePix X100s raw images? See 'SUGGESTION to the OP' in my post #23...no sense retyping it here. ... View more

I downloaded the X100ShVFAB.JPG and X100ShVFAB.RAF images from the link ssprengel provided. I also created a TIFF image using RawDigger as the raw converter. The image size from RawDigger is 4926 x 3296, requiring cropping in PS to the actual viewable image size of 4896 x 3264. I could see no difference in distortion between the RAF, JPEG, or RawDigger TIFF, which indicates LR is NOT automatically applying distortion lens correction. (Click on image to see full-size) 1) Applying the LR X100 lens profile with default 100 Distortion setting removes the small amount of visible distortion in the RAF raw test chart image. In my opinion the distortion observed in the X100s chart image is very low and probably not visible in most subjects. The test chart was obviously shot at fairly close distance, which for most lenses  increases geometric distortion. With the lens focused at or near infinity  the distortion will probably be even lower. Applying the X100 lens profile to these image may in fact increase distortion. 2) Viewing the images at 1:1 view chromatic aberrations are corrected in both the RAF raw file and JPEG file, but not in the RawDigger TIFF. LR is "automatically" applying chromatic aberration correction with the 'Remove Chromatic Aberration' option unchecked (i.e. automatically). The  X100s JPEG apparently has chromatic aberration correction applied in-camera, same as the X100's JPEG. 3) Both the X100s RAF raw file and JPEG have vignetting correction applied when compared to the RawDigger TIFF. No additional vignetting correction is needed. SUGGESTION to the OP: 1) LR's 'Remove Chromatic Aberration' tool under Lens Corrections> Color is not required. You can leave it unchecked. You may however need to use the 'Defringe' tool when other types of chromatic aberration are present in the image file. 2) You can apply the X100 lens profile to specific raw images (i.e. close-up shots that show the distortion) without Vignetting being applied. The best easiest way to do this is by changing the X100 lens profile defaults. Select an X100S RAF file, check 'Enable Profile Corrections,' select the X100 profile, move the Vignetting slider to '0,' and go to 'Setup' and select 'Save New Lens Profile Defaults.' You can then apply the lens profile as needed to specific images that have visible distortion. It may also be helpful if you use the Fujifilm wide-angle adapter, but it may also require its own lens profile. SUGGESTION to Adobe's Eric Chan: From the limited Fujifilm X100s image samples reviewed it appears Adobe has done a very good job of applying the in-camera JPEG corrections to the RAF raw image conversion. It would be extremely helpful if Adobe would list the supported camera lenses that use "automatic" lens corrections, including what is applied. I suggest adding this to the 'Lens Profile Support' list (and other places?): http://helpx.adobe.com/x-productkb/multi/lens-profile-support-lightroom-4.html Thank You, Todd Shaner ... View more

You are correct I was unaware of that post with comment from Eric Chan. DPReview indicates the X100 only applies chromatic aberration correction to the in-camera JPEG, which may also be the case for the X100s. So you think LR is applying distortion and vignetting correction "automatically" to both JPEGs and raw images? Shooting a "brickwall" or similar subject and checking inside LR as outlined should give you enough precision to determine if distortion and vignetting is being corrected (i.e. virtually none) in the JPEG, raw or both image files. The only uncertainty would be whether LR or the camera is applying the corrections to the JPEG. You can also try applying the X100 lens profile to the raw file and then A/B compare it to the JPEG. If there is double-correction it should be glaring obvious. It appears the same 23mm F2 lens is used on both the X100 and X100s. ... View more

What a difference one-letter makes! At least we know the available Adobe lens profile works fine with the predecessor X100 raw files. ssprengel wrote: My guess would be that Adobe does what the camera does, and if there is no way to turn off the lens corrections in the camera then Adobe has them automatically enabled all the time, like they do with many other point-and-shoot and mirrorless cameras, nowadays. The only way I'm aware of that LR can apply lens corrections is with the Profile and Color panels in the Develop module. Both of which can be manually enabled or disabled. It should be  easy to check if LR is applying any lens corrections by comparing the JPEG and raw images inside LR: Shoot a large "evenly lit" 2D subject with linear detail, such as a brickwall. Use maximum aperture and widest zoom setting, which is probably worst case for both vignetting and distortion. Make sure the camera is perpendicular to the subject so that there is no convergence (horizontal and vertical lines parallel to the viewfinder frame) Open both images in LR and adjust the raw image using the Basic controls to match the JPEG image in tonality as close as possible. Adjust the Exposure setting as required so that the central area of both images is identical. Use the White Balance eydropper to sample the RGB levels in each image corner and then the center of the image. If the corner areas of the raw file are different than the JPEG then LR is not applying corrections, but the in-camera JPEG is corrected. If they both show "falloff" then neither is corrected. For distortion simply A/B between the JPEG and raw image in LR. With a subject like a brickwall it will be very obvious if either file has distortion. If they both look the same but the lines show bowing then neither image has distortion lens corrections applied, etc......... It's probably easier and quicker to test than typing it here! The key is to use an evenly lit 2D subject with nice straight lines. ... View more

With LR4.4.1 an Adobe (Fujifilm FinePix x100) lens profile is available, which does apply both Distortion and Vignetting correction when enabled. The lens apparently has low distortion and I see only a small amount of correction applied using the LR lens profile. Vignetting correction even at F8 is very noticeable using the F8 ISO 200 raw file downloaded from here: http://s3.amazonaws.com/movies.dpreview.com/fujifilm_x100/DSCF3989.zip If the in-camera JPEG and raw file look the same without the LR lens profile applied, the camera is not applying Lens corrections to the JPEG. I don't see any issues inside LR with the RAF raw file. ... View more

George, that's a great idea for adjusting the Sharpening and NR controls. We're always told to set NR and Sharpening at 1:1 view only, but as I mentioned it's not a good indicator of what you'll see in  print enlargements or down-sized screen images. Another "helper" is to hold down the Option or ALT key when adjusting the Sharpening controls: http://www.ephotozine.com/article/sharpening-in-lightroom-21123 Who shows their pictures at 1:1 (100%) or views a 40" x 60" enlargement from 18" away? Regardless of the view size (1x, 2x) used for adjusting your image, you can use LR's 1:2 (.5x) view size to get a better idea of what actual resized screen output and prints will look like. Use a reasonable Sharpening Amount and sufficient NR to remove most of the noise, and LR's 1:2 image view will be very accurate. If your image looks noisy, soft, or over-sharpened at 1:2 view you probably need to do some more adjusting. It it looks good the majority of your LR print and screen output should be excellent! I suggest using LR's full-screen mode (CTRL+SHIFT+F) with the 1:2 Zoom view. ... View more

PV2012's  shadow recovery capability may show visible noise in properly exposed images shot at even ISO 100. The solution is to increase your Noise Reduction and perhaps Sharpening settings to compensate. Lightroom does a good job with most DSLRs. Also keep in mind that noise you see at 1:1 view may not be visible in print or resized screen output, especially when shooting at very high ISO settings. The best way to determine this is to Export or Print an image at your target size and then examine it for visible noise. You'll develop (pun) a better correlation between noise in the onscreen 1:1 view and what you'll likely see in the final output image. With noisy high ISO images LR's down-scaled view (<1:1) may be very inaccurate when using insufficient Luminance NR and/or over-sharpening. If that's the look you want then your only option for previewing in LR is to use 1:1 view. I suggest using sufficient Luminance NR and moderate sharpening, which will provide more accurate down-scaled views inside LR. If interested there's more information here on LR's down-scaled view issues: http://feedback.photoshop.com/photoshop_family/topics/afm8rbh6tnc31 NOTE: The above report is marked 'Not a problem' because there is a work-around." Adobe currently has no solution other than the suggestions provided. ... View more

While DPI resolution, bit depth, and color profile have little use with camera image files they are VERY useful with Exported image files processed in LR. They are also useful with non-camera images imported into LR, such as scanner output files. The purpose of processing our image files in LR is for use in other applications. I have posted a Feature Request with suggested changes to make LR more useful for ALL file types.  Please add your +1 vote and/or comments. http://feedback.photoshop.com/photoshop_family/topics/gw73zjy55amnv Thank You, Todd ... View more

Pbeck1 wrote: Am i right in thinking that those settings pretty much cover me for lens distortions for any picture i may now develop from my camera, no matter what the aperture may be (although vignetting would have to be manually)? Distortion will remain the same regardless of aperture, but vignetting wil  change in a non-linear manner with aperature for both amount and midpoint. You can see test results here: http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Lens-Vignetting-Test-Results.aspx?Lens=662 At some point you might want to run the same lens profile creation setup to include images for the other suggested aperature settings. Pbeck1 wrote: Can my profile be saved with my catalogue? I.e travel with the catalogue if it's moved from Pc to Pc? Not way that I'm aware of. You will need to "manually" install the profile(s) you created (or downloaded) here with Win 7: C:\Users\your user name\AppData\Roaming\Adobe\CameraRaw\LensProfiles\1.0 ... View more

Pbeck1 wrote: I've just been doing some Lightroom distortion correction tests and have concluded the following about the problems i was experiencing: The distortion anomalys get worse the further away the subject is. Less of a problem is focal length (how zoomed in i am), but things do get slightly worse at 18mm (aps-c) and much less so at 24mm, and insignificant by 35mm. So i'm pretty much safe when zooming above 24mm and shooting a subject thats not too far away. All quite do-able considering i mainly take images of my child. I just need to make a chart now of the 'amount' of manual distortion correction i should apply on top of Adobe's at the various values of focal length and distance combinations. Hmmm, more lost sleep, lol Based on your test the "worst-case" LR Lens Profile Distortion correction is distant subjects shot at 18mm. Your 18-55mm lens exhibits barrel distortion at the 18mm setting (CF to infinity). The distortion visible in the posted image (i.e. roofline) is pincushion type of 1% or less, which indicates a very small amount of "over-correction" is being applied by the lens profile. As already suggested you should try lowering the Lens Corrections> Profile> Distortion Amount from 100, which will reduce the over-correction. You may find that this alone substantially corrects the issue across all focal lengths and then you can save it as the new Lens Profile Default Settings. ... View more

Rob Cole wrote: - it just occurred to me that a radial gradient might be nearly perfect (meaning: convenient enough ;-}) for fixing this problem in Lr5 - will be exploring more as time goes on... Great Idea! As long as the maximum Feather setting is similar to LR's Adjustment Brush it shpould work fine. Then you can create Develop presets for quick Sharpening Falloff Correction using different Sharpening and Noise settings. ... View more

Rob Cole wrote: I'm still trying to figure out how to best take advantage of lens softness correction. I mean, the distortion and vignette correction are easy - turn Lr's off and use DxO's. Chromatic aberration? - dunno (maybe toss a coin...). But, one of DxO's most coveted features is the lens falloff correction: Result is very similar to original nef in Lr (sharpness/noise-wise), except with a modicum of sharpness falloff somewhat corrected. Here's what I use inside LR, which works similar to DxO's "softness correction:" Unfortunately there's no way to save it as a Develop Preset, but you can create an Adjustment Brush preset. I use this with PS's Adaptive Wide Angle Filter, which can introduce softness in stretched areas. Apply it to one image and then Copy & Paste 'Brush' to all images in a series with similar lens settings. It works quite well without creating over-sharpening halos. The  brushed area isn't that critical, but it works best with  'Feather' at 100 maximum. Try processing an image with DxO's softness correction and then in LR with this method. I'd be interested in the results...... ... View more