A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital Photography
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Lightroom vs. Apertu Curves



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old August 12th 14, 03:56 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Savageduck[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16,487
Default Lightroom vs. Apertu Curves

On 2014-08-12 14:21:28 +0000, Sandman said:

In article 201408120638074435-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom, Savageduck wrote:

On 2014-08-12 11:47:45 +0000, Sandman said:


Sandman:
But, alas, no extended range here (or with the poorer version
of curves) so no way - as far as I can make out - to actually
access all that glorious image data from within Lightroom.

Anyone knows if I've missed something?

Eric Stevens:
Before I comment, I would like to try another approach. Can you
post a copy of the original in an editable form?

Sandman:
Certainly.


http://sandman.net/files/DSC01476.ARW


After looking at that RAW file I can see the problem came from a
need for a -4 Grad ND filter. Shooting wide open at f/1.8 & ISO 100
didn’t help. It looks as if you metered on the tree or roof in the
center, and that led to those exposure settings and the blown
highlights. If anything this might have been a case for HDR, or at
least some exposure bracketing to play with. There is no getting
away from the serious clipping. You were correct there was data
further to the right in the histogram, but it was useless as the
clipping had mostly blanketed it.


The topic is not this image and what is truly clipped from it or not. The
topic is accessing image data that is outside the 8 bit spectrum of the
Lightroom histogram, which can be done in Aperture.


OK.

This was not a thread about how I save this one image, the image is
irrelevant to the topic and was just an example. You're focusing on the
wrong thing.


OK.

There is data in that image not represented by the Lightroom histogram. Or
the Aperture histogram. There is a method in Aperture to *access* that data
by shrinking the 11 bit actual histogram to fit a 8 bit histogram.


Well there is little point in showing data which is blown beyond the WP
clipping spike. It is useless no matter what you do or what magic you
blow on it.

As far as I can make out, there is no way to do this in Lightroom. Correct?


Correct for LR on its own, but your extended histogram is visible if
you take the round trip to PS. However, that is irrelevant in the case
of this image, beyond the clipping spike, that data is blown anyway.
When opened in PS and the curves histogram is checked you will see it
extended beyond the clipping spike and it is beyond recovery.

Perhaps a different example where you didn't have blown highlights
might have been better for the purposes of this discussion. The image
you used had too many exposure issues (see above) to truly illustrate
your point.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

  #12  
Old August 12th 14, 04:17 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Floyd L. Davidson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,138
Default Lightroom vs. Apertu Curves

Sandman wrote:
In article , Floyd L. Davidson wrote:

Sandman:
Here's an example of a feature I'm missing in Lightroom.


I use curves extensively, it's the holy grail of exposure editing.
If you're not using it, start using it!


A curves tool does not edit exposure


Captain literal strikes again.


The fact is that a curves tool does not change
"exposure" (brightness is the correct term). It is a
tone mapping tool.

Until you understand that, all you'll do is make silly
statements such as you did for the rest of your post.

What you want to adjust, for the purposes stated, are brightness and
contrast.


Then you didn't understand the purpose stated. No surprise there, Floyd.


See what I mean by silly...

--
Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)
  #13  
Old August 12th 14, 04:26 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24,165
Default Lightroom vs. Apertu Curves

In article , Floyd L. Davidson
wrote:

Here's an example of a feature I'm missing in Lightroom.

I use curves extensively, it's the holy grail of exposure editing. If
you're not using it, start using it!


A curves tool does not edit exposure, it changes the
tone mapping. You are only moving points between the
maximum white and the maximum black in relation to each
other.

What you want to adjust, for the purposes stated, are
brightness and contrast. A 'contrast' adjustment changes
the data's range of darkness and brightness. A
'brightness' adjustment moves the range toward one end
or the other of the scale. A curves tool doesn't move
the range nor does it compress or expand it. Curves
moves a portion of the range in one direction or the
other, but cannot go past either end. Areas within the
range are compress and expanded, but not the range.


curves can easily adjust brightness or contrast and even includes
presets to do so.

When done with a RAW converter brightness and contrast
adjustments can be dramatic in effect. If you try it in
an editor with the RGB image produced by the converter
the effect will be significantly reduced, and in
particular if the image has been formatted and saved as
a JPEG.


lightroom *only* works on the raw data (assuming the original is a raw,
that is, otherwise it obviously can't).

regardless, the workflow is the same no matter whether it's raw or jpeg
and there is no perceptual difference with any adjustments.

i suspect you'll say that's not possible, but it is.
  #14  
Old August 12th 14, 04:26 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24,165
Default Lightroom vs. Apertu Curves

In article , Floyd L. Davidson
wrote:

Here's an example of a feature I'm missing in Lightroom.

I use curves extensively, it's the holy grail of exposure editing.
If you're not using it, start using it!

A curves tool does not edit exposure


Captain literal strikes again.


The fact is that a curves tool does not change
"exposure" (brightness is the correct term). It is a
tone mapping tool.


adjusting exposure is not the same as adjusting brightness.

in fact, adjusting brightness or contrast is rarely needed, since
levels & curves do a much better and more effective job.

Until you understand that, all you'll do is make silly
statements such as you did for the rest of your post.


take your own advice.

you don't use the software being discussed, which would be step one.
  #15  
Old August 12th 14, 04:50 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Sandman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,467
Default Lightroom vs. Apertu Curves

In article , Floyd L. Davidson wrote:

Sandman:
Here's an example of a feature I'm missing in
Lightroom.

I use curves extensively, it's the holy grail of exposure
editing. If you're not using it, start using it!

Floyd L. Davidson:
A curves tool does not edit exposure


Sandman:
Captain literal strikes again.


The fact is that a curves tool does not change "exposure"
(brightness is the correct term). It is a tone mapping tool.


Until you understand that, all you'll do is make silly statements
such as you did for the rest of your post.


Keep playing that violin, Floyd.



--
Sandman[.net]
  #16  
Old August 12th 14, 05:20 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Sandman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,467
Default Lightroom vs. Apertu Curves

In article 201408120756364045-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom, Savageduck wrote:

Sandman:
There is data in that image not represented by the Lightroom
histogram. Or the Aperture histogram. There is a method in
Aperture to *access* that data by shrinking the 11 bit actual
histogram to fit a 8 bit histogram.


Well there is little point in showing data which is blown beyond the
WP clipping spike. It is useless no matter what you do or what magic
you blow on it.


I am not talking about data that may or may not be outside the 11 bit data
in the RAW file, I am talking about the data that exists between the 8 bit
data you can see on your monitor and the 11 bit of data that exists in the
image.

You see that data very clearly in one of the screenshots:

http://sandman.net/files/aperture_curves.png

That's the 8 bit luminance data as shown in the curves. It goes from 0 to
255 for each channel, creating a 24 bit image, which your screen has no
problem showing.

http://sandman.net/files/aperture_extended.png

There you see the curves set to "extended", which widens the area and the
original "normal" luminance data is still shown in a lighter area of the
curves UI. As you can see, there is image data that extends further than
255 points in this image. That's image data that is in the file but can't
be displayed by your monitor.

http://sandman.net/files/apterture_extended2.png

Here you see that I have moved the whitepoint from 255 to a value over it,
which effectively compresses the range from, say 300 to 255, meaning that I
am bringing luminance data into range.

That's data recovered from RAW that couldn't otherwise have been displayed
on your monitor, and the red arrow shows you what data that is. Here are
two screenshots that may illustrate this a bit more clearly:

http://sandman.net/files/aperture_curves_normal.png

Here you see the normal 8 bit of image data with hot highlighted.

http://sandman.net/files/aperture_curves_extended.png

And here you see me having extended the white point into the data in the
extended range, clearly showing that less is blocked. This image shows you
what is truly blocked in the sensor data.

Sandman:
As far as I can make out, there is no way to do this in Lightroom.
Correct?


Correct for LR on its own, but your extended histogram is visible if
you take the round trip to PS. However, that is irrelevant in the
case of this image, beyond the clipping spike, that data is blown
anyway. When opened in PS and the curves histogram is checked you
will see it extended beyond the clipping spike and it is beyond
recovery.


Not true, or at least - how? Photoshop only has a 8 bit curve editor. Each
point on the curve can only have a value from 0 to 255. And as I've said,
there is data in the raw file beyond that point. This is also true of the
Abode Camera Raw dialog as well.

Perhaps a different example where you didn't have blown highlights
might have been better for the purposes of this discussion. The
image you used had too many exposure issues (see above) to truly
illustrate your point.


Not at all. I am not interested in the blown out parts, I am interested in
the parts that aren't blown out, but can't fit in a 8 bit colorspace and
thus *appear* blown out. Parts that *are* blown out in 8 bit but not in 11,
12 or 14 bits. If this was a Hasselblad shot, there would be even more data
hiding in the extended range outside the scope of your monitor.




--
Sandman[.net]
  #17  
Old August 12th 14, 05:27 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Floyd L. Davidson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,138
Default Lightroom vs. Apertu Curves

nospam wrote:
In article , Floyd L. Davidson
wrote:

Here's an example of a feature I'm missing in Lightroom.

I use curves extensively, it's the holy grail of exposure editing.
If you're not using it, start using it!

A curves tool does not edit exposure

Captain literal strikes again.


The fact is that a curves tool does not change
"exposure" (brightness is the correct term). It is a
tone mapping tool.


adjusting exposure is not the same as adjusting brightness.


Isn't that rather obvious from what I said. "Exposure"
can only be changed with shutter speed and aperture,
before the picture is taken. Which does not stop
several software programs from incorrectly labeling the
brightness adjustment as "exposure".

in fact, adjusting brightness or contrast is rarely needed, since
levels & curves do a much better and more effective job.


Curves, as I've noted, simply doesn't do that and
therefore cannot be "more effective".

Until you understand that, all you'll do is make silly
statements such as you did for the rest of your post.


take your own advice.

you don't use the software being discussed, which would be step one.


I suppose for someone who doesn't understand it that would seem to
be true. It isn't.

--
Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)
  #18  
Old August 12th 14, 05:31 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Floyd L. Davidson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,138
Default Lightroom vs. Apertu Curves

nospam wrote:
In article , Floyd L. Davidson
wrote:

Here's an example of a feature I'm missing in Lightroom.

I use curves extensively, it's the holy grail of exposure editing. If
you're not using it, start using it!


A curves tool does not edit exposure, it changes the
tone mapping. You are only moving points between the
maximum white and the maximum black in relation to each
other.

What you want to adjust, for the purposes stated, are
brightness and contrast. A 'contrast' adjustment changes
the data's range of darkness and brightness. A
'brightness' adjustment moves the range toward one end
or the other of the scale. A curves tool doesn't move
the range nor does it compress or expand it. Curves
moves a portion of the range in one direction or the
other, but cannot go past either end. Areas within the
range are compress and expanded, but not the range.


curves can easily adjust brightness or contrast and even includes
presets to do so.


That is not true. It can only remap tones within the
preset confines that exist.

When done with a RAW converter brightness and contrast
adjustments can be dramatic in effect. If you try it in
an editor with the RGB image produced by the converter
the effect will be significantly reduced, and in
particular if the image has been formatted and saved as
a JPEG.


lightroom *only* works on the raw data (assuming the original is a raw,
that is, otherwise it obviously can't).


And since it can and does do both, we can't assume that
it is either.

regardless, the workflow is the same no matter whether it's raw or jpeg
and there is no perceptual difference with any adjustments.


Abject ignorance.

i suspect you'll say that's not possible, but it is.


--
Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)
  #19  
Old August 12th 14, 06:02 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Savageduck[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16,487
Default Lightroom vs. Apertu Curves

On 2014-08-12 16:20:56 +0000, Sandman said:

In article 201408120756364045-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom, Savageduck wrote:

Sandman:
There is data in that image not represented by the Lightroom
histogram. Or the Aperture histogram. There is a method in
Aperture to *access* that data by shrinking the 11 bit actual
histogram to fit a 8 bit histogram.


Well there is little point in showing data which is blown beyond the
WP clipping spike. It is useless no matter what you do or what magic
you blow on it.


I am not talking about data that may or may not be outside the 11 bit data
in the RAW file, I am talking about the data that exists between the 8 bit
data you can see on your monitor and the 11 bit of data that exists in the
image.

You see that data very clearly in one of the screenshots:

http://sandman.net/files/aperture_curves.png

That's the 8 bit luminance data as shown in the curves. It goes from 0 to
255 for each channel, creating a 24 bit image, which your screen has no
problem showing.

http://sandman.net/files/aperture_extended.png

There you see the curves set to "extended", which widens the area and the
original "normal" luminance data is still shown in a lighter area of the
curves UI. As you can see, there is image data that extends further than
255 points in this image. That's image data that is in the file but can't
be displayed by your monitor.

http://sandman.net/files/apterture_extended2.png

Here you see that I have moved the whitepoint from 255 to a value over it,
which effectively compresses the range from, say 300 to 255, meaning that I
am bringing luminance data into range.

That's data recovered from RAW that couldn't otherwise have been displayed
on your monitor, and the red arrow shows you what data that is. Here are
two screenshots that may illustrate this a bit more clearly:

http://sandman.net/files/aperture_curves_normal.png

Here you see the normal 8 bit of image data with hot highlighted.

http://sandman.net/files/aperture_curves_extended.png

And here you see me having extended the white point into the data in the
extended range, clearly showing that less is blocked. This image shows you
what is truly blocked in the sensor data.


You have shown all that before and nothing has changed by repeating yourself.

You haven't extended anything other than the sensitivity on my BS
meter. All you have shown us is the clipping beyond that WP spike. Show
us where you get this figure between 255 & 300 that represents workable
data. All that stuff in that red zone is gone never to be seen again.


Sandman:
As far as I can make out, there is no way to do this in Lightroom.
Correct?


Correct for LR on its own, but your extended histogram is visible if
you take the round trip to PS. However, that is irrelevant in the
case of this image, beyond the clipping spike, that data is blown
anyway. When opened in PS and the curves histogram is checked you
will see it extended beyond the clipping spike and it is beyond
recovery.


Not true, or at least - how? Photoshop only has a 8 bit curve editor. Each
point on the curve can only have a value from 0 to 255. And as I've said,
there is data in the raw file beyond that point. This is also true of the
Abode Camera Raw dialog as well.

Perhaps a different example where you didn't have blown highlights
might have been better for the purposes of this discussion. The
image you used had too many exposure issues (see above) to truly
illustrate your point.


Not at all. I am not interested in the blown out parts,


You should be, they are an indication of bad metering and/or bad
exposure setting, and dare i say it questionable shooting on your part.
perhaps if you had waited another 30-45 seconds for the Sun to drop
behind that roof you might have had a better chance of selling it.
....and it is in the blown parts you claim there is this phantom data
which somehow exists in this mysterious area beyond 255.

I am interested in
the parts that aren't blown out, but can't fit in a 8 bit colorspace and
thus *appear* blown out. Parts that *are* blown out in 8 bit but not in 11,
12 or 14 bits. If this was a Hasselblad shot, there would be even more data
hiding in the extended range outside the scope of your monitor.


But it isn't a Hassy shot, the highlights are blown, and there is
nothing to recover. If there was you should be able to do that with the
magic tools you have available in Sweden, and then present us with this
wonderful image with its extended histogram data restored in all its
glory, but you can't because that data does not exist on your computer
or mine. The best that can be done is band-aid work.


--
Regards,

Savageduck

  #20  
Old August 12th 14, 06:03 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Floyd L. Davidson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,138
Default Lightroom vs. Apertu Curves

Sandman wrote:
In article 201408120756364045-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom, Savageduck wrote:

Sandman:
There is data in that image not represented by the Lightroom
histogram. Or the Aperture histogram. There is a method in
Aperture to *access* that data by shrinking the 11 bit actual
histogram to fit a 8 bit histogram.


Well there is little point in showing data which is blown beyond the
WP clipping spike. It is useless no matter what you do or what magic
you blow on it.


I am not talking about data that may or may not be outside the 11 bit data
in the RAW file, I am talking about the data that exists between the 8 bit
data you can see on your monitor and the 11 bit of data that exists in the
image.


I thought your first reference to 11 bit data was a typo, but here you are
repeating that. It isn't 11 bit data. The ARW file is 14 bits per sample.

You see that data very clearly in one of the screenshots:

http://sandman.net/files/aperture_curves.png

That's the 8 bit luminance data as shown in the curves. It goes from 0 to
255 for each channel, creating a 24 bit image, which your screen has no
problem showing.

http://sandman.net/files/aperture_extended.png

There you see the curves set to "extended", which widens the area and the
original "normal" luminance data is still shown in a lighter area of the
curves UI. As you can see, there is image data that extends further than
255 points in this image. That's image data that is in the file but can't
be displayed by your monitor.

http://sandman.net/files/apterture_extended2.png

Here you see that I have moved the whitepoint from 255 to a value over it,
which effectively compresses the range from, say 300 to 255, meaning that I
am bringing luminance data into range.

That's data recovered from RAW that couldn't otherwise have been displayed
on your monitor, and the red arrow shows you what data that is. Here are
two screenshots that may illustrate this a bit more clearly:

http://sandman.net/files/aperture_curves_normal.png

Here you see the normal 8 bit of image data with hot highlighted.

http://sandman.net/files/aperture_curves_extended.png

And here you see me having extended the white point into the data in the
extended range, clearly showing that less is blocked. This image shows you
what is truly blocked in the sensor data.

Sandman:
As far as I can make out, there is no way to do this in Lightroom.
Correct?


Correct for LR on its own, but your extended histogram is visible if
you take the round trip to PS. However, that is irrelevant in the
case of this image, beyond the clipping spike, that data is blown
anyway. When opened in PS and the curves histogram is checked you
will see it extended beyond the clipping spike and it is beyond
recovery.


Not true, or at least - how? Photoshop only has a 8 bit curve editor. Each
point on the curve can only have a value from 0 to 255. And as I've said,
there is data in the raw file beyond that point. This is also true of the
Abode Camera Raw dialog as well.

Perhaps a different example where you didn't have blown highlights
might have been better for the purposes of this discussion. The
image you used had too many exposure issues (see above) to truly
illustrate your point.


Not at all. I am not interested in the blown out parts, I am interested in
the parts that aren't blown out, but can't fit in a 8 bit colorspace and
thus *appear* blown out. Parts that *are* blown out in 8 bit but not in 11,
12 or 14 bits. If this was a Hasselblad shot, there would be even more data
hiding in the extended range outside the scope of your monitor.


It has nothing to do with color space.

When working with the RAW conversion stage, set
brightness (or "exposure" if they call it that)
correctly. Gamma and other parameters may interact with
it to some degree.

The primary reason for adjusting brightness and gamma,
or in fact for using a curves tool too, in the converter
stage rather than later, is because interpolation the
RAW data produces a 16 bit depth RGB image. If the
image is or has been converted to JPEG it is in an 8 bit
format. But, even in a 16 bit format the histogram will
almost always show values of 0 to 255 (8 bit depth) even
if the actual data set being edited is larger.

Note that the horizontal scale on an histogram is rarely
ever marked in fstops. Cameras generally have a very
non linear scale while editors are "somewhat" close.
But just because there are 6 or 8 or 16 vertical index
marks on a histogram does not suggest the number of
fstops of range covered. (Histograms of JPEG images
cover about 9.5 fstops.)

The mere concept of having the information presented via
a "curves" tool is what is confusing you. They might
well show it to you in that context, but what they are
doing is allowing you to go back to the RAW converter
and change brightness. If you are aware of that,
conceptually, it isn't at all hard to understand.

--
Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Lightroom and Aperture, shared library? Sandman Digital Photography 15 May 15th 14 05:09 PM
PhotoShop Elements, Aperture and Lightroom nospam Digital Photography 0 May 23rd 08 10:09 PM
PhotoShop Elements, Aperture and Lightroom C J Campbell Digital Photography 1 May 23rd 08 10:08 PM
Aperture, Lightroom: beyond Bridge; who needs them? Frank ess Digital Photography 0 June 4th 07 06:42 PM
Lightzone/Lightroom/Aperture D.M. Procida Digital SLR Cameras 20 April 27th 07 07:00 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:42 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.