post process: Process 2010 or 2012 for MM 246

[Akaki]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Dear members, what is your experience with post process in LR 6?

Which process 2012 or 2010 is better for you and why.

For me personaly 2012 works better with MM 246, but some artificial details comes out, not always.

2010 works works also great but has some limits for me, it's more natural but with limits.

what is your experience?

thank you

 

koka

Edited December 23, 2015 by Akaki

[jaapv]

Use process 2012 for every new file to be edited for any camera.  Process versions are not camera-specific.

 

Process 2010 and process 2003 are meant to be used with images that already have been edited  before, using those  older processes in case you want to retain your edits, as those edits may be lost when using a newer process.
 
Use Process 2012 for all new files and for those files you want to postprocess from scratch.


https://helpx.adobe.com/lightroom/kb/import-presets-lightroom-3-lightroom.html

https://helpx.adobe.com/creative-suite/using/process-versions.html

 

 

Personally I always use the newest process version even for older files, I find that the results are always better than before. (possibly not just because of the new process version, but due to creeping up the learning curve over time as well )

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[Joakim]

I have always used the latest process that a software has for any camera, I think it would make matters to complicated working with different processes and there are plenty enough of tools and methods in todays post-processing software for me to adjust my images the way I want. 

[Akaki]

Thanks a lot especialy to Jaap, great link with explanation of Light room. 

[Jeff S]

i always use the latest, but there are folks like Thorsten Overgaard, who routinely writes about his preference for older LR controls.  He doesn't switch around; he just prefers the old iteration. There are technical improvements with later versions, but there's no law when it comes to creative processes.

 

For a more practical, user based summary of the potential benefits of process 2012, this old article at LuLa by Charles Cramer is informative...

 

https://luminous-landscape.com/tonal-adjustments-in-the-age-of-lightroom-4/

 

Jeff

[Akaki]

Jeff S

Thank you.

I was inspired by Thorsten Overgaard and many details was logical and help me a lot in first steps with monochrome, but then I find my self to much in frames and I start make different settings include 2012. Personally for this moment I am sure the 2012 is more adapted to MM 246 then 2010. It's personally for sure i don't make deep research. But I am spend less time with 2012 then 2010 to get what I want. 

Edited December 24, 2015 by Akaki

[Joshua Lowe]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I've played with both and have pretty consistently stuck with 2012.  The "Fill Light" slider in process 2010 is a little easier for me to understand, but in the end I'm almost always happier with my results when using 2012.  

 

This is the great thing about Lightroom's non-destructive nature.  You're free to play around with all of this stuff to your heart's content without consequences other than lost time.

[Overgaard]

I prefer the 2010 for M9 and M240 files and try to use it for SL and Q as well. On the M246 I tried both and stuck with 2010 as the most natural look. 

 

The fill light is more extreme (or simply more fill light) in the 2010 but in many ways I think you should expect that new sensors are tuned for the 2012 Process. But I consistently find the 2012 to artificial/plastic for me and stay with 2010. 

 

What I recommend is what I do myself: From time to time I do a test round and make a decision that I follow. I can't go back and forth all the time, so I decide on a workflow I follow. And then I will test again six months later or whenever I feel it is necessary; and then I follow that decision. Same with Capture One that I consistently have tested whenever they made a new version. I feel that at some point this might suit me better; but not so far. They might get there and I think that Lightroom has to end or be reprogrammed at some point, so someone might take over the lead. 

 

I also keep an eye out for Phocus (from Hasselblad) and Sinar editing software if they start supporting Leica models. 

 

If we had the time, we could treat each file individually to the best result, but with the amount of pictures we shoot (and how tiresome it is to sit by a computer), speed is of essence. So that means deciding on a tool and using it to its best. But also review ones decisions and workflow from time to time. 

[Jeff S]

I prefer the 2010 for M9 and M240 files and try to use it for SL and Q as well. On the M246 I tried both and stuck with 2010 as the most natural look. 

 

 

 

Yep, we know...post #5.  

 

Jeff

[Overgaard]

Yep, we know...post #5.  

 

Jeff

 

The point is I know there are other processes :-) (that I consistently don't use).

[NERICSSON]

First of all, thank you Thorsten for your informative and inspiring work at your site. 

 

I like the simple approach used in the article about M9 and B&W, http://www.overgaard.dk/leica-M9-digital-rangefinder-camera-page-16.html

 

Since I  have always used process 2012 I find it tricky to achieve the same outcome as shown in the video, are there some understandable links between the 2010 sliders and 2012 sliders in the basic panel?
Going back and forth between the processes I notice that a 2010 slider affect several of the 2012 sliders in the same time?

 

Are all changes from process 2010 to 2012 related to the Basic section or are there further changes? 

 

I Perceive that my DNG pictures from the Q looks more "washed out" in 2012 than in 2010 with default settings  

/Niklas

[Akaki]

Thank you Thorsten, for this moment I still prefer 2012, but… I try again 2010 after one mounth working with 2012.

Edited January 3, 2016 by Akaki

[Rick]

2012

[Akaki]

process 2010 -

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Edited January 4, 2016 by Akaki

[Akaki]

Process 2012

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[Akaki]

I try to understand deference more precisely  I am not sure it's shows clear, any were I upload first part. I thing have to use tripod.

[Jeff S]

Either of those could be made to look a hundred different ways.  For me, 2012 process provides more tools to get there and refine.  Thorsten likes the fact that he doesn't have to do much to the 2010 initial rendering to get the 'look' he wants.  My intent, on the other hand, is to spend time with every photo I make that is print worthy, and the effort and time is worth it if the image warrants.  In addition, one can alway make pre-sets to save time.  Different strokes...

 

Jeff

Edited January 4, 2016 by Jeff S

[NERICSSON]

After testing to toggle between 2010/2012 on default settings I think the biggest difference comes in the details in the highlights with the 2012 as the better

[Alberti]

I also keep an eye out for Phocus (from Hasselblad) and Sinar editing software if they start supporting Leica models. 

 

Phocus does support Leica files but unfortunately I have not been able to use Phocus Mobile without the attached "server" (iMac) on my iPad yet. So stand-alone in the field is not possible without having a portable at hand.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear