Jump to content

LightRoom 2 with no Develop import settings masks hot pixel - D-Lux 4

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hello folks,


I have a hot pixel (bright white at 1/2000/sec in a dark room) which C1 Pro can't mask out, so I thought I'd try a LightRoom trial just for the hell of it. I noticed that I can see the pixel briefly until LR renders its preview, and then the pixel disappears! This is fine and dandy, but I want control over masking of the pixel - I don't want any software 'automagically' doing anything to the image. If it masks my hot pixel it may be doing other things without my knowledge.


I created a new develop profile with all options unchecked just to make sure that the defaults aren't including dust removal etc.I import the file using this empty develop profile and make sure to uncheck the box that identifies duplicates. Again I see the same behaviour - the pixel is visible briefly until the image rendering is complete and then it disappears.


Is this expected behaviour? I can't find reference in the documentation for it.




Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't tried a print, but I did some digging on the LR forums and apparently this is a 'feature' which is automatically applied only when importing a RAW file and is apparently baked into ACR which LR uses for the import.


I'm still digging to find documentation for ACR that explains this behaviour and the parameters around it. It seems odd that it can't be managed somehow.


There is at least one other person who finds it presumptive on Adobe's part as I do, but most seemed to welcome the feature.


I'll let you know as I find more.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I can't find any specific documentation covering this, but it clearly does 'work'. It occurs to me this may actually be part of the demosaicing process rather than some sort of correction done to the resulting image. This seems to make sense to me on an intuitive level though I can't really explain why.


I also imagine such an algorithm would rely on a conspicuous difference in light level between adjacent pixels over a relatively large area. Demosaicing must use a block of pixels to do interpolation, which may be big enough to determine relatively well whether a photoelement is really out of whack or not.


So I'm less creeped out now :). In fact, as long as the pixel doesn't jar, regardless of whether it was really 'out' or not, this is probably selective enough to make no difference to the final image, especially seeing there's a boatload of interpolation going on anyway.


It just bites to have to fork out $300 for LR when I already own C1 Pro. Then again, LR is looking pretty durn good...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Create New...