Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 8 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: ACR 4.4 and Clarity  (Read 70505 times)
dwdallam
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2044



WWW
« on: March 21, 2008, 01:21:12 AM »
ReplyReply

What is clarity in ACR 4.4?
Logged

Czornyj
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1304



WWW
« Reply #1 on: March 21, 2008, 01:35:36 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
What is clarity in ACR 4.4?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=183147\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

It's something like UnsharpMask Filter with a very large radius
« Last Edit: March 21, 2008, 01:35:48 AM by Czornyj » Logged

Marcin Kałuża
dwdallam
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2044



WWW
« Reply #2 on: March 21, 2008, 04:49:17 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
It's something like UnsharpMask Filter with a very large radius
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=183150\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Why do they put shit like that in the RAW converter?
Logged

michael
Administrator
Sr. Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4729



« Reply #3 on: March 21, 2008, 06:26:49 AM »
ReplyReply

1- I don't mean to be a prude, but gratuitous swearing isn't appropriate here.

2 - Because it's a fantastic tool, and also the more that you can be non-destructively in the raw converter the better your images. I happen to think that Clarity can be one of the most useful tools in Lightroom (and Cameras Raw for that matter).

If you don't like a tool, don't use it.

Michael
Logged
b2martin
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 130


« Reply #4 on: March 21, 2008, 07:32:28 AM »
ReplyReply

I agree.  I would like to see something like Nikon's Upoint in the RAW converter.
Logged
k bennett
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1410


WWW
« Reply #5 on: March 21, 2008, 07:46:37 AM »
ReplyReply

Why put it in the raw converter? Because it saves me from having to run every single image through Photoshop for local contrast enhancement. If you don't want to use the Clarity slider, don't.
Logged

Equipment: a camera and some lenses.
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8027



WWW
« Reply #6 on: March 21, 2008, 08:38:05 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Why do they put s*&t like that in the RAW converter?
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Its IN the converter because the job of a Raw converter is to go from scene referred colorimetry (Raw) to output referred rendered pixels!!! Its yet another useful rendering control.

If you have to ask such questions, you're the perfect candidate to read this:

[a href=\"http://wwwimages.adobe.com/www.adobe.com/products/photoshop/family/prophotographer/pdfs/pscs3_renderprint.pdf]http://wwwimages.adobe.com/www.adobe.com/p...renderprint.pdf[/url]
Logged

Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/
Peter_DL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 413


« Reply #7 on: March 21, 2008, 12:40:49 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
It's something like UnsharpMask Filter with a very large radius
Or, see Andrew's description here (post #5):
http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=78965

--
Logged
Schewe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5253


WWW
« Reply #8 on: March 21, 2008, 01:39:45 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Why do they put shit like that in the RAW converter?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=183163\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Because Thomas Knoll knows a whole lot more about raw processing than you do?
(I'm just asking...cause it seems you need to learn a whole a lot about a variety of thing)
Logged
Adam L
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 175


WWW
« Reply #9 on: March 21, 2008, 01:49:23 PM »
ReplyReply

I needed a chuckle this afternoon.  This thread was just the ticket.  
Logged

"That's a lot of money to move a few pixels around"
dwdallam
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2044



WWW
« Reply #10 on: March 22, 2008, 03:41:46 AM »
ReplyReply

The information I like best here was:

1. Don't use the "S" word.
2. If you don't like a tool, don't use it.
3. You don't know as much as Thomas Knoll.

Got a pretty good laugh out of me in a juvenile sort of way.

--------

So this tool is a Local Contrast Enhancement for ACR and Lightroom, and doesn't "really" sharpen the image, even though it appears that way? So it's a one step LCE tool?

The reason I'm asking about sharpening is that I was under the impression sharpening was what you do last in processing--after resizing and whatever else you want or need to do to the image. I think that is why in the last ACR book I read, which was Bruce Fraser's  Real World ACR (but like CS I think),  the author I believe said don't use sharpening in ACR, but wait till you get to PS instead.
« Last Edit: March 22, 2008, 03:44:45 AM by dwdallam » Logged

michael
Administrator
Sr. Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4729



« Reply #11 on: March 22, 2008, 07:34:23 AM »
ReplyReply

The world has changed over the past few years with advancements in tools like Camera Raw and Lightroom. If you are taking the path of doing virtual / non-destructive image editing in the raw converter then you want to do as there as possible and as little as possible in Photoshop.

Sharpening needs to done at least twice, once as input sharpening (which all digital images need to one extent or another) and the second time as output sharpening, which varies depending on the device, ie: web or print, glossy or matte, etc.

So doing input sharpening in the raw converter makes sense and then doing your output sharpening in Photoshop (if that's where you print from).

The sharpening tool in Lightroom is very powerful. If you want a highly automated sharpening workflow look at Photokit Sharpener, an automation plug-in for Photoshop. With this you want to turn sharpening off in Lightroom.

Many choices. There is no one correct path. And yes, Vibrance is a form of local contrast enhancement, similar to sharpening, but not the same. Worth experimenting with.

Michael
Logged
situgrrl
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 342


WWW
« Reply #12 on: March 22, 2008, 07:51:05 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Many choices. There is no one correct path. And yes, Vibrance is a form of local contrast enhancement, similar to sharpening, but not the same. Worth experimenting with.

Michael
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=183456\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I assume that's meant to be "Clarity" rather than "Vibrance" but it does lead me to ask what "Vibrance" is, vs "Saturation" as I see they do similar things - without *quite* being the same.

Thanks

Charly
Logged

francois
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6429


« Reply #13 on: March 22, 2008, 08:03:45 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I assume that's meant to be "Clarity" rather than "Vibrance" but it does lead me to ask what "Vibrance" is, vs "Saturation" as I see they do similar things - without *quite* being the same.

Thanks

Charly
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=183460\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Vibrance is a kind of selective saturation. It saturates less "already saturated" colors and more unsaturated colors. In addition, it preserves skin tones.
« Last Edit: March 22, 2008, 08:04:13 AM by francois » Logged

Francois
michael
Administrator
Sr. Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4729



« Reply #14 on: March 22, 2008, 08:04:51 AM »
ReplyReply

Sorry, I meant clarity (too much vino last night).

Vibrance is a form of Saturation but which holds back on increasing saturation on things that are alrady saturated, so as to wok more strongly on colours which are less saturated. It also has protection for skin tones.

Michael
Logged
mbridgers
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 156


« Reply #15 on: March 22, 2008, 09:38:24 AM »
ReplyReply

Gosh, it seems like a Camera Raw tutorial video would be just the ticket.
 
Logged
NikoJorj
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1063


WWW
« Reply #16 on: March 22, 2008, 10:23:34 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
So this tool is a Local Contrast Enhancement for ACR and Lightroom, and doesn't "really" sharpen the image, even though it appears that way? [{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Local contrast enhancement is not sharpening - the confusion is understandable, as LCE has often been made with sharpening tools (used outside the manual's recommendations), but it's as far as using a screwdriver to drive screws on one hand, and to open beer cans on the other hand.
As said, it would be a pity not to make LCE, which is only a tone correction, in a raw processor.

And talking about sharpening, did you read [a href=\"http://www.creativepro.com/article/out-of-gamut-thoughts-on-a-sharpening-workflow]this article by Bruce Fraser[/url]? It explains well (and I've heard it did define) the input/output sharpening concepts of which Michael wrote about.
Quote
The sharpening tool in Lightroom is very powerful.
If I may add a little something : the input sharpening is remarkable indeed. For creative or output sharpening in LR, we all put a great hope in LR2.0!
Logged

Nicolas from Grenoble
A small gallery
michael
Administrator
Sr. Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4729



« Reply #17 on: March 22, 2008, 10:26:10 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Gosh, it seems like a Camera Raw tutorial video would be just the ticket.
 
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=183484\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

On the editing bench.

Michael
Logged
Schewe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5253


WWW
« Reply #18 on: March 22, 2008, 11:03:50 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
The reason I'm asking about sharpening is that I was under the impression sharpening was what you do last in processing--after resizing and whatever else you want or need to do to the image. I think that is why in the last ACR book I read, which was Bruce Fraser's  Real World ACR (but like CS I think),  the author I believe said don't use sharpening in ACR, but wait till you get to PS instead.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=183431\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Actually, Bruce didn't use Camera Raw's sharpening because before CR 4.1, it was a crude & blunt instrument. Which is why Adobe hired Bruce to consult with them about improving it. CR 4.1 embodies pretty much all the principles of PhotoKit Sharpener's Capture Sharpening and is arguably better (although requiring a bit more fiddling to nail the needed results).

But you are also mixing up the don't sharpen in Camera Raw with the old school thought to only sharpen at the end of a process. As other have stated, the ideal method is to use a sharpening workflow with the only end stage sharpening being output sharpening once the image is in its final size & resolution and the method of output is known.

In the grand scheme of things, Thomas Knoll, the primary author of Camera Raw, wants Camera Raw to be the best raw processor out there. As a result, Camera Raw has grown considerably since it's early functions and capability. Rather than fight the concepts and the logic of why things are the way they are, it behooves users to actually learn to be fluent in the use of the varied functionalities so they can take full advantage of what is now possible in Camera Raw.
Logged
dwdallam
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2044



WWW
« Reply #19 on: March 22, 2008, 03:32:24 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Actually, Bruce didn't use Camera Raw's sharpening because before CR 4.1, it was a crude & blunt instrument. Which is why Adobe hired Bruce to consult with them about improving it. CR 4.1 embodies pretty much all the principles of PhotoKit Sharpener's Capture Sharpening and is arguably better (although requiring a bit more fiddling to nail the needed results).

But you are also mixing up the don't sharpen in Camera Raw with the old school thought to only sharpen at the end of a process. As other have stated, the ideal method is to use a sharpening workflow with the only end stage sharpening being output sharpening once the image is in its final size & resolution and the method of output is known.

In the grand scheme of things, Thomas Knoll, the primary author of Camera Raw, wants Camera Raw to be the best raw processor out there. As a result, Camera Raw has grown considerably since it's early functions and capability. Rather than fight the concepts and the logic of why things are the way they are, it behooves users to actually learn to be fluent in the use of the varied functionalities so they can take full advantage of what is now possible in Camera Raw.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=183507\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


I'll learn them. I'm just having some problems finding up to the minute explanations of the functions. I know that's just a matter of lag time between production and people getting around to explaining it.
Logged

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 8 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad