Actual Image Size - there's more there than you think!

[bullmoon]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I remember reading a post a while back about there actually being more pixels in the image than is shown, for example, in Lightroom.  I have never before been able to "find" these, but today I was adjusting the vertical distortion (keystoning) and while Lightroom indicated I was about to lop of a good bit of the side of the photo, after I completed the adjustment "more" photo appeared magically to fill in what I cut off - specifically, part of a tree that originally didn't show up came into the corrected photo!  Not that I cared for this photo, but could be handy in many cases.

[jankap]

You mean in the Develop phase? You can zoom in (cmd grid) or out (cmd -). Lightroom is not so simple to manage as it seems to be.

 

[scroy]

17 hours ago, bullmoon said:

I remember reading a post a while back about there actually being more pixels in the image than is shown, for example, in Lightroom.  I have never before been able to "find" these, but today I was adjusting the vertical distortion (keystoning) and while Lightroom indicated I was about to lop of a good bit of the side of the photo, after I completed the adjustment "more" photo appeared magically to fill in what I cut off - specifically, part of a tree that originally didn't show up came into the corrected photo!  Not that I cared for this photo, but could be handy in many cases.

This I believe was mentioned in an article by Thorsten. Capture One seemed to be showing more information that Lightroom.

[marchyman]

Lightroom shows a 6000 x 4000 pixel image for the Q.  The actual number of pixels in the DNG are 6120 x 4016.  I believe the "extra" pixels are designed and used to compensate for lens distortions at the corners.  Raw developers that do not follow the adjustments built into the DNG (there's another thread on this) may show all of the pixels.

I was not aware of Lightroom doing this when playing with the Transform tool.