M9: Lightroom 3.0 beta vs. ACR 5.6 beta

[smoody]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I've been testing out how the two raw conversion apps handle shadow detail having heard that Lightroom 3.0 was superior. I was curious if, perhaps, the new ACR beta incorporated the new LR3 algorithms It doesn't appear that it does yet.

 

Here are two conversions of the same shot. If you look at the black tiles against the wall, you can see the reflection of the checker board floor tiles much clearer in the LR3.0 beta conversion... [edit: these shots were taken at iso 640]

 

first the ACR5.6 beta:

 

 

and now the LR3 beta:

 

 

Even though it's just a small amount of shadow detail, tthe difference is significant in my humble opinion. The reflected tiles are much clearer/cleaner on my Spyder calibrated screen.

 

My only issue is that if I develop in LR3 and then use the "Edit in..." menu option to edit it in PS CS4, it gives me the ACR conversion. To get the full detail in the LR3 beta, it seems like I have to save it as a 16 bit tiff and then open it in PS CS4, which is sort of a drag, but I'm not an experienced LR user and if anyone has a better workflow to get the full benefit of the LR3 raw conversion imported into CS4, I'd appreciate info about it. Note: I also tried editing it from LR3 as a smart object, but that still gives me the ACR conversion -- something that was a non-issue when the two apps used the same conversion engine.

 

Scott

[epand56]

They seem almost the same to me. Lightroom and ACR are from the same parents.

[hoppyman]

I think that you may just be seeing some variation in settings between the two programmes. I would expect that the Raw conversion engine in both is identical.