Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have been struggling with my monochrom files since I got it. Somehow managing the finicky highlights and extreme amounts of shadow proved very difficult in LR4. Anyways, I wasnt getting the "look" I wanted - highlights still looked harsh and midtones ended up too dark. Basically the picture lacked the "pop" i was used to see from my M9 files processed throgh LR3. I couldnt lift shadows enough without the file becoming too flat. So most times I had to use photshop for every picture in the series, (which isnt exactly a time-saving workflow). That is, until recently, when I by accident discovered that it is possible to "resurrect" the LR3 settings that I loved so much. The Recovery function is my favorite way to calm down highlights, and the standard settings create a fairly bright file. I prefer to darken to taste rather than lighten to taste. So if you too are having a hard time with Monochrom files you should definitely try this:

 

Heres how you do it:

 

- Go to the bottom of the develop list and see the "Camera calibration" panel. It should be grayed out with the exception of Process. Change this to 2010, which is the code word for LR3. Voilà!

 

(If you did it right a small exclamation mark (!) will appear on the bottom right corner of your image)

 

(Why not just continue to use LR3? There are many other advantages with LR4 that are not affected by the choice of process. )

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!

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think one can also go back to LR 3.6 which is what I prefer. And it's a faster software.

 

But I do recognize that at some point we'll have to catch up. Just hope that LR 5 or LR 6 will be a good and fast program then.

 

I have a link on my website for the LR 3.6 installing file, so one can download it and run both 3.6 and 4.x side by side. The link is under the section "Editing in Lightroom 3 or Lightroom 4" here:

 

leica.overgaard.dk - Thorsten Overgaard's Leica Pages - Leica M Monochrom Henri Digital Rangefinder Camera - Page 22: "Night photography with the Leica M Monochrom"

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

LR 4 is a huge improvement IMO, in terms of both global and local controls. Speed was never my darkroom goal, and LR 4 better approximates my silver print control. But everyone has a workflow preference (often based on experience and habit) and that's what counts; whatever gets you there.

 

Jeff

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes- this can be done. And if it works for you all the better. But basically you can get all the pop and snap you want in Silver Efex.

Anyway I dislike LR in general, so why not take the file through Photoshop all the way?

Link to post
Share on other sites

so why not take the file through Photoshop all the way?

 

The way I see it, Photoshop is to Lightroom like a teaspoon to a shovel.

 

Although they both basically do the same thing, one offers precision while the other offers efficiency.

 

I often process hundreds of images in a day. Lets say I have 500 raw files and need to edit this down to maybe 50 candidates and perhaps like 10 selects in the end, all in a couple of hours. Usually it is not possible to make a decision about selection without processing a little bit, and here is where lightroom shines.

It offers 90% of the processing capabilities I neeed, while saving 90% time.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I felt more that way with LR2; now with LR4, I use Photoshop very little. LR5 will further narrow the gap. No cloud going forward for me. Different strokes.

 

Jeff

 

Same here. And often when I do use PS, it turns out to be me trying to salvage an image that was poorly exposed to begin with. i.e. I couldn't salvage it in LR and I think that I can on PS. Usually, I find it is not salvageable at all.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it takes time, patience and practice. MM files in Lightroom have a lot of information in them and there are many combinations of adjustments. It has taken me several months to re-learn the effects of the controls to get a spectacular tonal range. In the end I would prefer lightroom rather than cluttering my hard drive with DNGs and Tiffs... Although I really like the ease of using Silver Effects Pro...

 

David.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest malland

My feeling is that it's not desirable to go back to earlier versions because the White and Black sliders work much better in LR4. When you lift shadows, say, +50% go the other way with the Black slider: start at 1/2 of the Shadow increase, i.e. -25% in this case — or a bit more, if necessary. This makes a good starting point; same if you increase Exposure.

 

—Mitch/Paris

Lanka Footsteps [M-Monochrom/Sri Lanka]

Link to post
Share on other sites

Same here. And often when I do use PS, it turns out to be me trying to salvage an image that was poorly exposed to begin with. i.e. I couldn't salvage it in LR and I think that I can on PS. Usually, I find it is not salvageable at all.

The other way around here. Basically I only use LR when editing on the fly on my laptop.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think one can only go so far in LR or Aperture. I only do quick adjustments in LR and use Photoshop for those photographs that I really want to get right.

 

Careful processing in PS really brings out the best in my photographs as there is so much more control. It was, however, a very steep learning curve.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Software choice obviously has a lot to do with user interface preferences, and the willingness of that user to extract the most from any given system. The folks who only use LR for "quick adjustments" will never be satisfied comparing those results to those based on more careful PS actions. The later iterations of LR offer much more control, globally and locally, than the earlier versions. And if one spends time learning and using it to its maximum capability, the results can be seen in the prints. But if one doesn't like using it, then end of story.

 

Thorsten has described elsewhere why he prefers LR 3 to LR 4, and a lot has to do with a comfort zone he established with the former. He doesn't use many of the controls offered by LR, and prefers a streamlined workflow that has proven over a long period to work effectively for him. LR 4 just confuses and complicates matters. I, on the other hand, often use a more full array of LR controls, and the ones in LR 4 offer me more flexibility and control than the earlier version.

 

Once someone gains comfort with any given software interface, that is where they will spend the time to learn and use the system to suit their intent and meet their needs. No surprise there, and no right or wrong. I use both LR and PS, but now I don't need to use PS very much. But a big part of that is that I like the LR interface and I use it with careful intent to get as far as I can toward a final rendering, not just quick adjustments. Others don't.

 

Choices are good. And Adobe has made my choice even easier by sending PS to the sky.

 

Jeff

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest WPalank

LR4.x>SEP2>CS6>Tony Kuypers Luminosity Masks Actions (less than $20 ) I think.

Tony Kuyper Photography—Getting the Actions

 

Takes a while to wrap your head around it and the subtleties they evoke especially in print. Then one of the big Leica Bloggers ill write how they discovered them :(. David Nightingale turned me on to them about a year ago at Chromasia.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...