Guest guy_mancuso Posted August 21, 2007 Share #21 Posted August 21, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) Not from me, Anthony. I've downloaded the Beta, I have the trial, I have been on a short workshop, but my mind doesn't mesh with the program. C1 and PS for me.... And that happens both ways , some love the work flow of C1 and the opposite is true for LR. The key is finding what is comfortable for you. I love C1 myself and still use it. I honestly go back and forth between them but the have there differences both good and bad Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted August 21, 2007 Posted August 21, 2007 Hi Guest guy_mancuso, Take a look here Pushing the M8 in Lightroom. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Jack_Flesher Posted August 21, 2007 Share #22 Posted August 21, 2007 Have to say this is one area of the country where lighting ratios are at there worst and makes for a great test area for this kind of testing. It just does not get any brighter than anywhere I know in this country. Folks have the luxury of having overcast and such , here it either bright as heck or less bright. LOL High contrast lighting is the bain of travel and street photography -- it seems as though we're almost never in the right place for the shot with ideal lighting unless we're very lucky However, there is still a lot you can do with a properly exposed file to beging with, and Guy's was properly exposed with no large areas of blown highlights, and enough exposure to get some detail in the shadows -- IOW he centered the histogram as much as possible without clipping too much off the top... I'd rather have had the raw to work on, but you can do quite a lot with even a jpeg. Here is my version, copying his original (darker) jpeg into CS3 and woking with some adjustment layers, curves, hue/sat and selective brightness/contrast: I spent less than 5 minutes on it so it's far from perfect, but you get the idea: If I had the raw, I might be able to render a bit more detail in the bright highlights, but it's important to point out they are not fully blown here. With some more time, I could carefully mask and hold the highlights back even more. Cheers, Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted August 21, 2007 Share #23 Posted August 21, 2007 Thanks Jack as always my brain power behind my processing. Also i could have done more after the fact of the raw processing in CS3 to take it even further. But the neat thing here and Jack will agree is the flexible file that the M8 does have. This is all great stuff for M8 shooters Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
guy Posted August 21, 2007 Share #24 Posted August 21, 2007 The dress does look very dark blue here that part might be some reflectence though, which would be normal for a shiney rayon dress. To paraphrase Father Dougal in "Father Ted", "I once bought a pair of black socks from a non-priest-supplier, and it turned out they were just very very very very very very VERY dark blue." Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack_Flesher Posted August 21, 2007 Share #25 Posted August 21, 2007 and Jack will agree is the flexible file that the M8 does have. Indeed it is and I do agree! Also, the point I want to hammer home, so will repeat it here for emphasis, is the importance of a PROPER INITIAL EXPOSURE in gleaning the most from your files. Cheers, Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
guy Posted August 21, 2007 Share #26 Posted August 21, 2007 Indeed it is and I do agree! Also, the point I want to hammer home, so will repeat it here for emphasis, is the importance of a PROPER INITIAL EXPOSURE in gleaning the most from your files. Umm, what was your point exactly? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Pope Posted August 21, 2007 Share #27 Posted August 21, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) I have downloaded the trial version of Lightroom and am not finding it user friendly. What can it do that I can't do already in Photoshop 7 ? So many people speak higly of Lightroom but so far I'm not seeing the advantages. Any help would be gratefully received. FWIW, I think lightroom is worth persevering with. I found the user interface to be quite cluttered at first but you can hide the various panes. I like it because: a) it enables me to keyword my shots as I import them and I find the cataloging very useful indeed - my shots are now so much better organised. the library functions enable me to choose the best shots quickly and easily using the pick function and then rank picked shots using the 5 stars. c) the developing functionality is very good indeed - version 1.1 has a better sharpening tool. d) I can use it with my Canon EOS and Ricoh GRD and have a consistent user-interface. e) it automatically backs up my raw files to an external HD as they are imported f) any changes made to the original raw (or jpg) files are non-destructive. Moreover, the database can be backed up automatically (which reminds me - must find the backup db files and bung them somewhere else...) g) there's no need to go through an intermediate step to create a .tiff file as is necessary with the likes of C1 or Rawshooters (which Lightroom is based on). Once I got my head around it, the workflow was quick and easy. PS (7 in my case too) is better for removing dirt and stuff like that. I like LR so much I haven't gotten around to loading Capture 1 yet and I rarely use PS now. Take your time and have a read of the help files, which are very good BTW. That's my 0.2p worth... Cheers Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
woodyspedden Posted August 21, 2007 Share #28 Posted August 21, 2007 I use Lightroom nearly exclusively now- really like it and rarely need more functionality. That was a great example, Guy. Also, the black dress was not manipulated in any way? Just IR filter? Case closed. BTW, still love the CV15, converts the M8 to a point and shoot. As a final aside, my wife pulled out the M8 at a party the other day and a guy next to her said, "I can't believe you have one of those things..." He was a long time Leica user and the M8, a year later still draws wows. Most importantly, the images do. Fun stuff. Peter Peter I agree with the use of Lightroom but for selective changes Photoshop is still a must. So long as Lightroom is limited to global changes only many images will still require PS Woody Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
guy Posted August 21, 2007 Share #29 Posted August 21, 2007 Peter I agree with the use of Lightroom but for selective changes Photoshop is still a must. So long as Lightroom is limited to global changes only many images will still require PS Woody Absolutely agree, and it's a big gripe with Lightroom. A point I kept hammering on the Adobe beta testers' forum, and which hasn't yet been addressed, is the need for a selection tool to facilitate dodging and burning. Adobe's general response to requests for more features in LR is to point out that it's differentiated from PS by being a tool for "photographers" rather than "image manipulators", and that they're restricted (or specialised) the feature set accordingly. But dodging and burning, and masking, are absolutely time-honoured traditional darkroom techniques, so I think there's a very fine argument to be made for their inclusion. Of course, without them in LR, we have to buy LR and PS. Wonder why Adobe are dragging their heels? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
farnz Posted August 21, 2007 Share #30 Posted August 21, 2007 Guy and Jack, I can't help noticing that in the pp'ed versions you've posted, the diagonal line just right of centre where the edge of the roof shadow plays across the shop front there appears to be something strange happening. In Guy's version there are 2 lines where there was one in the original and in Jack's version there is a single thick dark line where there was none before. Do you think that these artifacts have been created by LR's processing algorithms or something else? And how would you recommend fixing them? (Guy: happy 6,000th and please keep going! ) Pete. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack_Flesher Posted August 21, 2007 Share #31 Posted August 21, 2007 Guy and Jack, I can't help noticing that in the pp'ed versions you've posted, the diagonal line just right of centre where the edge of the roof shadow plays across the shop front there appears to be something strange happening. In Guy's version there are 2 lines where there was one in the original and in Jack's version there is a single thick dark line where there was none before. Do you think that these artifacts have been created by LR's processing algorithms or something else? And how would you recommend fixing them? (Guy: happy 6,000th and please keep going! ) Pete. Pete: The difference in my case is most likely because of jpeg compression and resultant artifacting, and quite probably the same issue for Guy's original too. In my case, I copied an un-compressed jpeg, proessed it and reposted it as a compressed jpeg, and then you viewed it uncompressed in a web browser. Often that will impart an artifact that with kind of "over-sharpened edges" look... The best way to eliminate it is to view the image in a photo editor as a tiff and not on the web as a jpeg Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mitchell Posted August 21, 2007 Share #32 Posted August 21, 2007 For me, Lightroom is the first photo program that's been intuitive, easy and quick to use. Yes, you can't work on selected parts of an image, but it is very easy take an image to PS, make changes, and return with changes instantly reflected in LR. It's also great to print directly from raw images without saving print sizes. Lightroom saves me a lot of grief. Best, Mitchell Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlesphoto99 Posted August 21, 2007 Share #33 Posted August 21, 2007 Guy and Jack, I can't help noticing that in the pp'ed versions you've posted, the diagonal line just right of centre where the edge of the roof shadow plays across the shop front there appears to be something strange happening. In Guy's version there are 2 lines where there was one in the original and in Jack's version there is a single thick dark line where there was none before. Do you think that these artifacts have been created by LR's processing algorithms or something else? And how would you recommend fixing them? (Guy: happy 6,000th and please keep going! ) Pete. Due to inaccurate masking on Jack's and too heavy a use of both fill light and recovery on Guy's. Best to limit yourself to one or the other with Lightroom or it will create problems where the two meet. Nothing's perfect.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
farnz Posted August 21, 2007 Share #34 Posted August 21, 2007 Thanks, Jack. When I look at the original at 400% I see a darker line at the boundary between the highlit area and the shadow area so it seems to have been caused by the proximity of the two extremes; I was forgetting that the files are heavily compressed. Pete. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted August 21, 2007 Share #35 Posted August 21, 2007 Due to inaccurate masking on Jack's and too heavy a use of both fill light and recovery on Guy's. Best to limit yourself to one or the other with Lightroom or it will create problems where the two meet. Nothing's perfect.... I think it was me with the clarity slider. This one is a little strange and still trying to get it better. It seems to build contrast between light and dark Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlesphoto99 Posted August 21, 2007 Share #36 Posted August 21, 2007 I think it was me with the clarity slider. This one is a little strange and still trying to get it better. It seems to build contrast between light and dark Haven't really played with that one yet. I just know there was another thread on here about the overuse of fill and recovery at same time. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack_Flesher Posted August 21, 2007 Share #37 Posted August 21, 2007 I think it was me with the clarity slider. This one is a little strange and still trying to get it better. It seems to build contrast between light and dark Yeah, that makes sense too. I don't use it, but when I experimented with that slider it looked like it was increasing local contrast. LC could add a contrast line at the transition area between light and dark that gets exaggerated on downsizing, only to be further emphasised on the jpegging. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted August 21, 2007 Share #38 Posted August 21, 2007 Yes it's all about balance with them. The second series one is clean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ho_co Posted August 22, 2007 Share #39 Posted August 22, 2007 Well, yesterday a Czech friend of mine said "Oh- you have bought a Zorki!" when I pulled out my M8...... Jaap--At least, the fact that Zorkiis didn't require filters to avoid magenta problems kept them relatively affordable! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
volkerhopf Posted August 22, 2007 Share #40 Posted August 22, 2007 Anthony remember also ACR 4 which comes with CS3 is the same exact raw processing engine as Lightroom , so the same controls and features are there. So reality is you don't have to buy LR to get those controls. Now LR claim to fame is more on the management side of the house and setting up web galleries and such , so these are really only added features to the processing engine of ACR. But i could do the exact same thing in ARC, it is just not glorified like LR. The raw side is the same, but for those who want to manipulate JPEGS or TIFFS LR is much more user friendly. But in my opinion where LR shines is when you print. CS3 is cumbersome compred to LR Regards Volker --------------------------------------------- Canvas and Fine Art printing par excellence Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.