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. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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 | |
|
|
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 |