Rob Cole wrote: trshaner wrote: ...manual PV2012 adjustments take no longer than PV2010 and the results are superior. As Rob Cole mentioned, speed in PV2012 comes with practice. You will start to see a pattern to the settings adjustments dependent on image type (normal exposure and contrast, under-exposed, heavily clipped highlights). I noticed contrast was omitted from this procedure. I'm assuming this was on purpose. Yes, I have found the vast majority of my images require very little PV2012 Contrast adjustment. When using Contrast in the top down settings flow I generally end up reducing it to near '0' on the second pass. IMHO, PV2012's image adaptive controls reduce the need for midtone Contrast adjustment. By leaving Contrast out of the mix with PV2012 you reduce the number of adjustments required. This is also why LR4's Basic develop adjustments can be done as fast or faster than in LR3, at least once you gain experience. You can certainly use the Contrast control with PV2012, and it doesn't seem to matter when you throw it into the mix. I've never needed to use a setting greater than ±25, which is very subtle. Vidlife's said, "Is the Lightroom team working to fix this? anybody know," concerning PV2012 Auto Tone. Eric Chan has requested image files in this post, so I am sure they are looking at improvements. My guess is that there will never be one (1) Auto Tone button in PV2012 that will work for every image type. As has already been stated, the image adaptive controls can't read your mind. What might work is to provide multiple Auto Tone settings biased to 1) maximize highlight detail, 2) maximize shadow detail, or 3) a "balance" of both. This could be implemented using an 'Auto Tone' routine in that runs the background, and then display a "ring-around" with nine small images in the Loupe: You pick the specific 'Auto Tone' image setting that best matches the desired appearance.  Don't like the look? Go back and pick another one. This should enable quick auto toning with a high level of Basic panel adjustment accuracy. The review images can be kept small to reduce the background processing time. If nothing else this would be a great "learning tool" to help novice users and beginners get onboard LR! Cheers, TR ... View more

vidlife wrote: Thanks for the reply. You have confirmed my finding...... They took the AUTO out of Auto Tone. You are basically HAND toning each photo. I am looking for time savings. ($$$) LR3 is the Gold Standard for this Feature. Chris If the vast majority of your images respond better to LR3's Auto Tone why not just use it! Set or import the images to PV2010 with Auto Tone, and then convert them to PV2012 (click '!' 'Update All filmstrip pictures) in the Develop module. The PV2012 conversion does a pretty good job of retaining the tonality of the PV2010 settings. Then you can benefit from all of the other PV2012 features using your "preferred" LR3 Auto Tone adjustment point. If you intend on doing complete top-down settings adjustment in the Basic panel this won't save you much time. IMHO, manual PV2012 adjustments take no longer than PV2010 and the results are superior. As Rob Cole mentioned, speed in PV2012 comes with practice. You will start to see a pattern to the settings adjustments dependent on image type (normal exposure and contrast, under-exposed, heavily clipped highlights). General PV2012 Basic Panel Adjustment Tips: 1) Set Exposure to adjust the midtones. This means bright highlight areas will be noticeably clipped when all other settings are at a '0 starting point. I typically use +.5 to +1.0 EV for images with normal exposure. When adjusted properly the overall image should appear slightly over-exposed. 2) Set -Highlights to bring out detail in the overexposed highlight areas, but no more. 3) Set +Shadows to the same value as Highlights (i.e. -40 and +40). 4) Adjust Whites holding the ALT/Option key to just show white clipping. 5) Adjust Blacks holding the ALT/Option key to just show black clipping. With practice these five steps will only take a few seconds and the image should be useable. Making a second pass in the same order will help to "refine" the midtone balance and bring out more highlight and shadow detail. With experience the second pass should also take no more than a few seconds. If you have a "series of images" with the same subject and camera/lens settings, then go ahead and 'Sync' these Develop settings. That's the best way to speed up your image processing. ... View more

There are many variables that determine raw to JPEG conversion efficiency. These include using loss-less raw format (i.e. most cameras) versus lossy raw format (i.e. Nikon), amount of detail in the picture subject, and lens resolving capability (i.e. sharpness). It is not uncommon to see a 5 to 1 variation in JPEG file size for the same Quality setting, camera, lens, and Fstop setting. In fact this is a good way to determine the sharpness of a lens or lens Fstop setting. The JPEG file size will increase in proportion to the amount of detail captured in the raw image file. The more important question is just how much JPEG compression artifacting can you tolerate. Typically a LR Quality setting of 80-90 will show no visible artifacts, but lower quality settings may. It is dependent on subject, usage and your tolerance. If you intend on doing additional processing of the exported JPEG file I would suggest using a setting of 90, since repeated JPEG 'File Saves' cause cumulative image degradation. For low resolution screen images destined for Web posting and no further processing a Quality setting of 50-70 (or even less) should produce acceptable image quality. The best way to determine this is to run your own tests with your equipment and typical pictures you shoot. ... View more

I agree with your statement that 20 GB is probably ample for caching up to 40,000 raw files in LR4 and LR3.6 (see why below). Even using large 21Mp raw files that will hold up to 33,333 images before over-flow (20,000/0.6). I know this is going off topic, but I'm sure it's of interest. I also thought that LR4.1 PV2012 stores different ACR cache information than LR3.6 PV2010. What is interesting is that the "file size" of LR3.6 PV2010 created ACR cache files are identical in size to LR4.1 P2012 created files. Below is a screen shot showing a purged cache snapshot for three (3) Canon 5D2 MKII 21Mp CR2 raw files processed first in LR3.6, and then in LR4.1 in the same order. Cache0000000001.dat = Picture 1 in LR3.6 (530KB) Cache0000000002.dat = Picture 2 in LR3.6 (608KB Cache0000000003.dat = Picture 3 in LR3.6 (590KB) Cache0000000004.dat = Picture 1 in LR4.1 (530KB) Cache0000000005.dat = Picture 2 in LR4.1 (608KB) Cache0000000006.dat = Picture 3 in LR4.1 (590KB) What is more interesting is that the ACR cache .dat files are not being updated after making multiple changes to the images in LR3.6 and/or LR4.1 Develop module, only the 1 KB 'Index.dat' file is updated. I had always thought that changes made in the Develop module were updated in the ACR cache, but apparently that's not the case. I went back and hit 'Auto Tone' on each of the pictures, with no change even after zooming in to 100% on each picture. I also tried switching to the Library module and back to the Develop module, hitting 'Reset' on image, and repeating the same 100% viewing. You can see below that the 'Date Created' for the .dat image files is same as the 'Date Modified' (i.e. NOT modified), only the tiny 1KB 'Index.dat' is updated. Double click on the picture to see full-size: ... View more

So the question comes down to how large does your Camera Raw (ACR) Cache need to be and how often does it make sense to "purge" it. The last time I purged my 50 GB ACR cache was shortly after upgrading to LR3.0, which is almost two years ago. It was only after working in LR 4 for the past few months that it finally "over-flowed." I call that 50GB well spent, since I had virtually no performance issues with LR3 or LR4. And now I am starting LR4 "fresh" with the same 50 GB drive space. For reference I currently have about 16,000 image files imported into LR. BTW - I ran a check on cache file size for LR3.6 versus LR4.1 using a fresh ACR cache purge and they are identical in size. For my Canon 5D MKII they are running about 600 KB for both LR3 and LR4. Before purging the cache initially last week I noticed there were lot of ~1.2 MB cache files, so I assumed LR4 was creating smaller files. It looks like that actually happened with one of the LR3 updates. ... View more

ShotshotRu wrote: Trivial calculation: the default 1 GB value would allow for about 1000 overviews being permanently stored there... before some oldest ones get discarded. More than enough for everyday use I guess - save for the lucky few who process and reprocess frequently the same thousands of gigapixel shots. LR4 PV2012 is a vast improvement over LR3 PV2010, but requires a much longer "learning curve" than we experienced migrating from process PV2003 to PV2010. Most of us will want to start using PV2012 with "new" image files, AND go back to our existing PV2010 image files and start upgrading them to PV2012. This will be an "iterative process" where you may end up going back to the same pictures as you gain more experience with PV2012. In addition LR4 PV2012 puts more demand on system resources, causing performance degradation for some users. For these reasons it makes good sense to use a Camera Raw Cache size that can accommodate as many pictures as possible, at least initially. Given the size of today's hard drives something in the range of 20 GB to 50GB seems practical. After working with LR4 over the past few months I found my original 50 GB ACR Cache was full. If you intend on converting a high number of existing PV2010 images to PV2012 I also suggest purging your ACR cache. ... View more

Yep, same issue here. You can Export using 16 bit depth and ProPhoto RGB to create a copy, which is what you are actually working with in LR anyhow. It would be nice if 'Edit In' would give you a warning that "LR can only create a 16bit copy with adjustments applied, do you want to proceed," instead of simply failing. Perhaps log this a 4.1 bug? ... View more

Yes LR4.1 final Auto Tone Shadows = Highlights always. With my Canon 5D MKII CR2 images I get fairly consistent Highlights (H) = 0 and Shadows (S) = 0 with normal to moderate contrast images that have no highlight clipping. I'm getting ±50 with very high contrast images that have near clipped highlight areas, and lower settings for images with lower contrast. It's not perfect and still seems to underexpose pictures with fully clipped highlight areas, but not as often as 4.1 RC2. I still find doing full manual "top-down adjustment" starting with Exposure is the fastest method. My manual settings are typically about +.5 to 1.0 EV higher than LR4.1 final Auto Tone's, with the objective of maximizing highlights. Using a higher starting Exposure also helps in setting the other controls correctly, even when you have to go back and lower Exposure. ... View more

Blurb only provides one (1) printer profile for all paper types. It is CMYK and not useable in LR, only PS: http://www.blurb.com/resources/color_management I sent an email to Blurb Tech Support concerning the use of only one (1) printer profile. There response was that "they adjust the images" at the CMYK printer engine for the different paper types. If you soft proof in PS using the one (1) Blurb CMYK profile the benefit is questionable, since we do not know which paper it is targeting. Most out of gamut colors shouldn't look significantly different in the printed Blurb book compared to LR's sRGB soft proof image. IMHO – Monitor calibration accuracy, luminance setting (100 cd/M typical), and room lighting (subdued) will affect your printed book image matching more than anything else. ... View more

Those should work fine. Let us know how LR behaves after the memory upgrade. This way other forum members with the same issue will know what to expect. Moving from 4GB to 8GB also allows Windows 7 to use more memory, improving the overall responsiveness of your system. ... View more

Your processor supports two memory channels for dual interleaved operation, and provides a performance boost over single channel memory architecture. It also has Intel Flex Memory architecture supporting dual interleaved operation with unequal memory capacity in the two channels. So yes using 1 @ 2GB + 1 @ 4GB will work, but with reduced performance: 0GB - 4GB Address Space =Dual Interleaved Channels (your current setup) 4GB - 6GB Address Space = Single Channel (i.e. reduced performance) Since your objective is to maximize LR performance, I recommend replacing the 2 @ 2GB modules with 2 @ 4GB. Two 4GB DDR 1066 (PC3-8500) speed SO-DIMMs are compatible and will provide the best performance. It shouldn't cost you more than $45 for the pair. ... View more

I feel your pain. LR 1.0 started with fairly straightforward Basic tools in its Develop module, which have pretty much carried over unchanged into LR 2 and LR 3 version. LR 4 is definitely a bold departure from the familiar Develop tools, and for this reason alone it's understandable why so many people are objecting to the new PV2012 Develop module in LR4. So what could Adobe done instead? They could have launched LR 4 with the same Develop tools slightly enhanced, with new Map and Book modules, but providing only marginally better image quality. No question this would have caused most professional LR users to criticize Adobe for catering to the amateur photography market simply to make more money. Having worked as a computer system design engineer for 20 years and then another 25 years in sales & marketing positions, I’ve seen many bad business decisions made concerning product features and product pricing. IMHO–Adobe has taken a bold but necessary step by departing from the “original” LR Develop tools to make LR a better tool for professional photographers. There is no question that migrating images to LR 4 from previous LR versions is going to be challenging, and I believe this is where we should all be focusing our talent, time and energy. If you truly feel the benefits in LR 4 are out-weighed by the time required to use and/or learn the new tools, then stick with PV2010 in LR 4, or use LR3 and wait for LR 5. This in fact may be the best solution for people who process 100s or even 1,000s of images daily in their business practice, at least until the Adobe community has established some good migration techniques and LR 4 tool usage to speed the processes. I am sure Adobe is listening and will offer migration and productivity improvements to LR 4 in future update releases. I’m still taking this one-day-at-time and processing only new shoot images in LR 4 with PV2012, as I understand it there is an issue when migrating LR 3 catalogs to LR 4 concerning Tone Curve adjustments: http://feedback.photoshop.com/photoshop_family/topics/lr4_deleted_all_my_tone_curve_adjustments Until this apparent bug is corrected by Adobe I won’t be importing my LR 3 catalog into LR 4, and I suggest others should investigate if this may create issues when importing their catalogs. That said, I love the improvement to both highlight and shadow detail that PV2012 produces. I look forward to getting more experience with the new Develop tools, and useful tips right here in the Adobe Lightroom forums on ways to speed up conversion of existing images from PV2010 to PV2012…..once this bug has been fixed. BTW – I’m seeing only very minor performance differences with LR 4 using my Windows 7 64 bit system with Intel i7-860 quad core processor and 12 GB RAM. ... View more

Tony.S wrote: This is my biggest problem with PV2012. In my theatrical work, lighting changes dramatically from one shot to the next; hundreds of images must be processed individually. Fill Light was a fast correction which worked consistently from one image to the next. PV2012 requires a set of corrections, the effect of which change from one image to the next -- making for a much slower workflow. One of the reasons LR3 Fill Light works so well is that it adds halo artifacts, which in most cases is not desirable: http://forums.adobe.com/message/4241042#4241042 For your theatrical work I assume you are dealing with very high dynamic range images (i.e. very dark shadow areas) where the Fill Light halos are helpful. I felt the same way as you on initially using LR 4 Beta, that processing was going to take me at least twice as long to get the same image quality as in LR3. I do interior photography with natural lighting and perhaps a single flash used for "fill" lighting. LR3 Fill Light tool works amazingly well on these high dynamic range images, but I always felt the highlight areas were lacking in detail. After working on some of these images in LR4 final release I'm finding it only takes me slightly longer, and the results are nothing short of remarkable. Without even touching the Tone Controls I'm achieving results that look similar to HDR images, with both highlight and shadow detail that was not achievable in LR3. Rob Cole has a post on the LR4 Beta forum with some good LR develop tool tips that helped me to speed up my processing: http://forums.adobe.com/message/4235999#4235999 ... View more

I did read an item on the Internet by a fellow who calibrated U2711s with Spyder 3 Elite. Unfortunately, I cannot locate again but remember that this person suggested that I before I begin the calibration process I set the contrast to 50 (factory), brightness to 30, and the RGB sliders to 88 each. If you haven't done so already I suggest downloading and reading the Spyder 3 Elite user guide: http://spyder.datacolor.com/downloads/manuals/Spyder3Elite_User_Guide.pdf Use 120-140 cd/m2 Luminace,  2.2 Gamma and 6500K white point. I've never used the Spyder 3 Elite software, only the i1 Dsiplay 2 with its EyeOne Match 3 software. You want to select the calibration mode that allow you to assign and "manually set" the specific Luminace level (120-140cd/2) and 6500K white point using the displays Brightness, Contrast and RGB color controls to achieve the desired values. Suggest starting with Contrast at 50 and then use the Brightness control to set the Luminace to 120-140cd/m2. To be honest the Spyder 3 Elite User Guide at the above link doesn't explian "HOW" to make these adjustments, so I hope the software does that for you (i.e. "click NEXT to adjust your Brightness control," etc.). Perhaps one of the other forum members with experiece using the "Advanced" modes of the Spyder 3 Elitie software can provide some insight? ... View more

Is there a file with most of all the colors on it so I can download it, see it on my display screens, and print to compare how really good the match is. If you are really interested in more accurate color matching, I would start with the ColorChecker Passport. REASON: LR's Adobe Standard profile is at best a compromise, and the Camera profiles are an attempt at "recreating" the camera manufacturers profiles. Every camera's sensor varies slightly from the "target" spectral response, due to wafer process variations, etc. By using something like the ColorChecker Passport, you are creating a "calibrated profile for your specific camera(s). You can also use it for critical shoots to insure very accurate color matching, but that is normally not necessary once you have established profiles for normal lighting situations (Sunny, Cloudy, Tungsten). You can visually compare both the color accuracy on your display and print images to the ColorChecker Passport target to better determine your color matching accuracy. There are more expensive devices such as the Color Munki Photo for calibrating your printer, but these don't replace the ColorChecker Passport for insuring best color accuracy of the source (i.e. camera) image file. ... View more

Sounds like "double-profiling." When you select "managed by Lightroom" you also need to "turn off" color management in the Epson 3880 printer driver. These links may help: http://www.lightroomforums.net/showthread.php?8978-Epson-Stylus-Pro-3880-and-the-Print-module http://people.csail.mit.edu/ericchan/dp/Epson3800/index.html ... View more

1. Yes 2. You shouldn't have to do anything. Your Spyder software creates and assigns the new monitor profile for you after the calibration is completed 3. Yes and in the Custom preset mode. This is why I suggested naming the profiles when prompted to "save" them after the calibration process. Otherwise the Spyder software will just use a default name with something like the date. 4. At the link I posted it appears some say you should use the u2711.icm monitor profile, and others say use the Windows generic sRGB profile. Windows Color Management utility makes it easy to switch profiles so I would try all three options and see what it looks like in non-color managed apps (i.e. none, u2711.icm, sRGB.icc). "Will the Spyder calibration override this 40/40 setting?" To get the best calibration you need to use the "Advanced" mode of your Spyder software, which allows you to measure and adjust your display's 1) Contrast control 2) Brightness control and 3) RGB Color controls. The objective is to setup your display "natively" using its own controls and the Spyder measuring device as close as possible to 100 to 140 cd/m2 Luminance, 6500K Color Temperature and 2.2 Gamma. You want to do this BEFORE your software starts the calibration routine, which is what the "Advanced" mode will do. It should prompt you to set 1) Contrast control 2) Brightness control and 3) RGB Colors as three separate steps using the calibrator puck on-screen. You will need to adjust your display’s Brightness control to 30 or less to reach a 120cd/m2 Luminance. If you have to set it very low (0 to 10) you may get a better calibration using a 140 cd/m2 Luminance level. ... View more

Agreed! After reading the epic novel at the Whirpool link on the Dell u2711 the best solution is to calibrate each preset mode and create separate monitor profiles for each one. REASON: The Adobe RGB and sRGB preset modes are Dell factory calibrated at a Luminance of about 200 cd/m2! Photo editing applications require a luminance between 100 and 140 cd/m2 for print matching. When you lower the Brightness and/or Contrast controls to obtain a 100 to 140 cd/m2 luminance, the factory calibration is hosed and no longer accurate. Go ahead and create custom profiles using your Spyder for the three (3) preset modes – Standard, Custom Color, and sRGB. Just remember that you will have to manually reassign the appropriate profile when changing the display's preset mode, so give them those unique names. You can use the Windows Color Management application for this purpose, by pinning a shortcut to your taskbar. The Standard or Custom Color preset mode is what you want to use for Lightroom, Photoshop, and any other color managed applications. This leaves the sRGB as best for use with non-color manged apps. I don't see any need for the Adobe RGB mode, except perhaps at the factory 200 cd/m2 luminance level for some "special" purpose. http://www.sevenforums.com/tutorials/68252-color-management-shortcut-create.html The Dell internal LUT factory calibrations will not be over-written. They are only accessible using Dell factory software and/or hardware. This is unfortunate since the Adobe RGB and sRGB factory calibrated modes are useless for photo editing due to the 200 cd/m2 luminance level used. ... View more

Here's a link with information that pretty much corrborates everything I have said in this post about using and calibrating the Dell U2711: http://forums.whirlpool.net.au/archive/1511987 WARNING: It is a very looooooooooong thread, with a lot of banter. You may want to read it from the bottom-up, unless you have about an hour or more to decipher and digest all the information posted. It's also interesting that the "Standard" mode preset appears to provide a wider display gamut than the Adobe RGB factory calibrated mode. I'm not sure I can provide a definitive "best mode" to use, but clearly calibrating the monitor AND creating  a custom monitor profile will improve any mode you use. Whatever mode used make sure that you can set the display's Luminace to 140cd/m2 or lower, with 120cd/m2 probably better. NEC recommends 140cd/m2 for some of their displays, but room lighting needs to be brighter for accurate print matching. Most hardware calibrators provide a diffuser that fits over the calibration puck for measuring ambient light. This allows measuring and adjusting ambient light levels using the manufacturer's calibration software. ... View more

Question: "It would be excellent if I could use a calibrated “custom” present on the monitor for LR and CS5 and simply select one of the presets (sRGB or Adobe RGB) when I am not using LR and CS5. I am not running with any monitor profile and a generic PNP driver now and I am getting much better results than I expected. I would just un-select the profile when I did not want to use the calibrated “custom” preset." Dell Response: "Based on the data engineering provided me in the document I sent that is correct( Yes)." It is apparent your Dell contact, David Glickman is not an engineer, but merely "talking to engineers. I work in a very similar industry for a manufacturer of Intel embedded x86 products. Trust me when I tell you that things get lost in the "translation" process going back and forth between a customer service person (David Glickman) and the actual engineer who may be located in Taiwan with English not the primary language. Question: "Is it possible to revert to factory pre-tuned settings after I color calibrated my unit with my equipment?" Dell Response: "The customer should not re-calibrate and save your result in sRGB and Adobe RGB preset modes. Once overwritten, it is not possible to revert back to factory pre-tuned setting. The customer is advised to use the "Custom Color" preset mode to do their own calibrations." I believe what the "engineers" told him is that you should not make changes to the display's Brightness, Contrast, and RGB Color controls, and then save them to the Adobe RGB or sRGB modes. Only use the 'Custom Color' preset mode for this purpose. As I have already mentioned I don't believe your Spyder calibrator can do anything with the custom monitor profile other than load it into Windows 'Profiles' folder and assign it to the display. There needs to be an "option" in the calibration software to allow this, which you would have to select manually before calibrating the display. I don't believe that is currently the case, with exception of some NEC Spectraview and EIZO monitors when using their supplied software. SUGGESTION: Set your monitor to the 'Custom Color' preset and calibrate it normally. Make sure to 'Save' any changes to the display's Brightness, Contrast, and RGB color controls, etc. to the 'Custom Color' preset. It should look excellent in the Custom Color mode. Now how does it look in the Adobe RGB and sRGB modes? Probably NOT the same as before. Now go into Windows Color Management application and change the display's profile back to the Dell supplied profile you were using. I bet the Adobe RGB and sRGB modes look fine now. Here's what is happening to your display's screen data: Application (LR) Display Data > Sent internally via PCIe bus to Graphics Card LUT for correction using monitor profile > Externally transferred via DVI/HDMI/DisplayPort to Display LUT for correction using display's internal profile > Processed Image Data Displayed On-Screen I may be totally wrong in thinking the 'Custom Color' preset mode doesn't load the calibration monitor profile into the Display's LUT, but I doubt it. The "Suggestion" above will clarify the situation, and cause NO harm to the display's Adobe RGB and sRGB factory calibrations. ... View more

1. The ATI Firepro V5800 does not modify color for data passing through the graphics card. All color adjustment is through the profiles used with the display. This assumes the Dell supplied monitor profile is "linear," which as Andrew Rodney pointed out is the most desirable when using a display with it's own internal LUT. It makes no sense to correct the display data twice using two LUTs! 2. With the Dell U2711 any calibration done on the monitor "must" be done using the "custom" preset. When that is done the resulting profile will only apply to the "custom" preset leaving the other factory supplied presets in tact This not true – A hardware monitor calibration for your "custom" preset creates a new (non-linear) monitor profile, which gets loaded into your graphics card's LUT. Once you've done that the Adobe RGB and sRGB display preset modes are no longer calibrated! That's why I said the display manufacturers and monitor calibration equipment manufacturers need to start working together to create a standard method for creating an option to load the monitor profile into the graphics card LUT (as it is now), or the display LUT for montiors like the Dell U2711. Go ahead and try it, but please report back the affect to the Adobe RGB and sRGB presets after creating and loading the "custom preset" monitor profile with your Spyder HW calibrator. ... View more

I believe much of what the OP is complaining about is in fact due to the inacurrate histogram display in LR for non-linear gamma images such as sRGB (native or export destination profile). The Levels control in PS is typically used to set clipping levels and I assume the OP is seeing differences in the PS histogram when compared to LR's histogram: "Well, Exposure, Black and Brightness do not really works the same way that the Levels in Photoshop. The impact on the image is different....I am not able to tell you exactly how but, try it yourself." Perhaps the OP can provide a more detailed description of what he means by, "do not really work the same." ... View more

The imact on the image is bound to be different because ACR/LR is designed primarily as a raw processing engine and has to deal with linear encoded raw captures. The Levels command in Photoshop works on gamma encoded images, so it's really and apples/oranges difference. This is not the case when processing JPEG of TIFF images with a normal 2.2 Gamma sRGB profile. The OP has a valid complaint and as ssprengel pointed out LR is currently unable to display an accurate histogram for sRGB profiled images, or resultant histogram when exporting to sRGB. I agree it isn't necessary (or desireable) for LR's controls to have the same behavior as PS's 'Levels' and 'Curves' controls. But an accurate histogram display using the file's or target destination's color profile would be very helpful (and desireable). This will allow detecting clipping that may result in the exported image. ... View more

Well, Exposure, Black and Brightness do not really works the same way that the Levels in Photoshop. The impact on the image is different....I am not able to tell you exactly how but, try it yourself. I think what you are seeing is the difference in LR's histogram display when compared to PS's histogram display. Ssprengel pointed this out in his post: One thing that makes this suggested procedure more difficult in LR is that the histogram in ACR is determined by the output color space you have set and the shipping indicators match what the output will be, but in LR the histogram reflects the internal working color space of LR, so something showing as not clipped in LR’s histogram might actually be clipped in the output image when you set the color space in the Export panel and there’s no way to proof this beforehand. So the 'Level' controls in PS appear to have a different affect on the image file's histogram. As ssprengel also points out it would be nice if Adobe allowed "proofing" the image in LR with the export color space profile (i.e. sRGB). Try exporting a RAW image file to TIFF file format, ProPhoto RGB, and 16 bit. Open the TIFF copy in both LR and PS and try the 'Levels' adjustments in PS versus LR's Exposure, Blacks, and Brightness controls. The histograms and controls should function more similar. As ssprengel said, PS’s histogram is going to provide a more accurate indication of clipping in narrower gamut color spaces compared to LR’s Melissa RGB histogram. http://www.lightroomforums.net/showthread.php?12472-Histograms-in-Lightroom-and-Photoshop-don-t-match ... View more

I did speak with Datacolor and mentioned a comment that I had seen that the LUT tables in the monitors were not reachable with software. They gave me a program called Gammatest.exe wou which verified that the LUT tables were available to Spyder 3. 1) Did you run this test yourself and are you sure it indicated the 'Dell u2711 LUTs' were accessable, and it wasn't detecting the two LUTs in your ATI FirePro graphics card? 2) Did Datacolor provide you a procedure for having the Spyder software load the calibration data into the Dell u2711's display LUT? There would need to be an option in the Spyder software to convert the profile data to a format compatible with the Dell monitor's LUT hardware, and then a way to load it (DDC?). Perhaps Datacolor can provide you with more detailed instructions. If this is possible, you will still need to assign a monitor profile in Windows so applications can identify the display correctly (i.e. wide gamut Adobe RGB profile). A suitable profile may in fact be the Dell u2711.icm file provided on CD. IMHO – Wide gamut display technology has a long way to go before it is 'Plug & Play,' AND affordable. This will require Display manufacturers and Calibration Equipment manufacturers working together to develop compatible hardware and software. To my knowledge only EIZO and NEC have done so, but at a price only a professional can justify. In addition, 30 bit color support is needed to help prevent "stair-stepping" due to the extended gamut range. Currently only PS CS5 supports 30 bit color, but only when using a 30 bit graphics card with Open GL support. Lightroom currently does not support Open GL or 30 bit color. ... View more

Unfortunately under XP both monitors had to use the same profile which was less than optimum. Windows 7 and your dual LUT ATI FirePro graphics card will alow assiging a seperate HW monitor calibration profile to each of your displays. Your Spyder 3 software application will assign the calibration profiles automatically to tthe respective display, there is nothing you need to do. With XP if you were using a graphics card that had a dual LUT you could have downloaded the Microsoft Color Control Panel to assign the individual profiles. http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/article_pages/dual_monitor_calibration.html ... View more

I have opened up the disk and see that there is a file called monitor.exe but no instructions on procedure. I am reluctant to run this program without some explanation of its function. This is a monitor refresh rate utility and not want you want. Look for a file ending in .icm, like 'Dell_u2711.icm.' Without a profile assigned to each monitor most applications assume the device is sRGB profile as a default. You need to find the .icm monitor profile on the CD, copy it to C:\Windows\system32\spool\drivers\color folder, and then go to Control Panel > Color Management to add and assign as 'default' for each of your monitors. This will allow you to properly use the 'Adobe RGB' and 'sRGB display modes. Be aware that changing the display's Contrast and/or Brightness controls from the factory default settings (50?) may affect the color accuracy of the preset calibrations. Using a factory calibrated preset, with an internal LUT that is inaccessible by the user, calibrated at an inappropriate brightness level (i.e. for Gaming Applications), is simply a bad idea for professional photo editing usage. NEC's SpectraView displays use a software app that allows YOU the end user to calibrate the display's internal LUT, not the graphic card's LUT. The better solution dor the Dell u2711 is to set the display mode to a "user" custom setting, which I think is titled 'Standard....don't know! Then use you Spyder HW calibrator and software to create a custom profile. This allows adjusting the display's controls for luminance and color temp settings more suitable for photo editing (100 cd/M2 luminance and 6500K color temp), before the monitor profile is created! Try calibrating one (1) of your Dell u2711 displays and then compare it to the other u2711 display using its Adobe RGB and sRGB modes. Then you can judge the results for yourself! ... View more

"1. Why am I not seeing the disapointing performace that folks warned me about if I used wide gamut displays?" Are you using any non-color managed applications? "3. I am assuming that when I calibrate I will have to calibrate the Adobe RGB preset and each other preset if I choose to use any others." This was discussed at length on another LR forum post. The operating system has no way knowing which mode you are selecting with your display's internal controls, so it can switch your Spyder HW calibrated monitor profiles from the Adobe RGB mode profile to the sRGB profile. You would need to be able to create separate profiles and then switch them using your OS's color management profiling tools. Dell provides factory calibration of the displays Adobe RGB and sRGB modes using an internal LUT, which is not accessible by your Spyder HW calibrator. To use these factory calibrated modes you must install and assign the single monitor profile provided on the installation CD from Dell. Doing so will make it very difficult to calibrate and use both of your monitor's "built-in" Adobe RGB and sRGB modes. You would need to 1) switch the display's mode control and then 2) go into the OS's color management and reassign the correct profile. Best suggestion is to give up the factory calibrated display presets 'Adobe RGB and sRGB, use the 'User' custom mode only, and then calibrate the monitor with your Spyder HW calibration device. Your monitor will then only work as a "wide gamut" display, but a better functioning monitor for use with "color managed" applications. "One thing that has me puzzled is that when I display the Windows settings using the "Screen Resolution" the monitor is set to "True Color". I have seen that setting before on my previous system, XP Pro, and am wondering if I have missed something in my setup process." Display settings should to native resolution (2560 x 1440?), 32 bit "True Color" mode, and 60 Hz refresh......and I didn't even mention 10 bit color! ... View more