Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Lightroom 3.0 Beta Now Available!  (Read 38260 times)
kers
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 707


WWW
« Reply #120 on: October 25, 2009, 02:59:42 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Christopher
well without samples your statement isn't really useful at all.

Ok- if you like
 here 2 samples- Off course it is only one image ( not a real test)  - both treated in the basic LR and ( neutral) NX2 way- and both had the basic sharpening that I use in photohop (smart sharpen 150%-0,20-0)
Try shadow/highlight to see the difference. ( these 100% samples are made with d3x 24mm pce and are from the extreme right side)
« Last Edit: October 25, 2009, 03:01:22 PM by kers » Logged

Pieter Kers
www.beeld.nu
NikosR
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 622


WWW
« Reply #121 on: October 25, 2009, 04:03:53 PM »
ReplyReply

Sorry, but what is the 'basic' LR way? Are you talking about the default conversion (i.e. no presets used and all sliders at default)?  Any serious user should know better than compare 'default' conversions unless one is interested in the best automatic conversion one can get. In that case I recommend DxO.  Please explain.
« Last Edit: October 25, 2009, 04:04:16 PM by NikosR » Logged

Nikos
Colorwave
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 974


WWW
« Reply #122 on: October 25, 2009, 05:28:01 PM »
ReplyReply

I guess this is a thread that one needs to be cautious about commenting on, including my earlier statement of optimism about the rendering qualities of LR3 before I had had the opportunity to put it through the paces that was put down by Jeff.  I understand unsubstantiated negative comments being unwanted, but I had thought a brief "here's hoping" sentiment would be acceptable, as it came with a thumbs up about the already solid interface.  Sorry about that.

I will keep it short and sweet, but just wanted to go on record as being favorably impressed with the new rendering of Phase One files, as compared to Capture One.  I had a chance to process a half dozen files, and like what I see.  I do a lot of art reproduction, and I don't shoot high ISO, or generally have noise issues with art or my personal work, but have found fine detail, and particularly the smoothness of solid colors and gradations to now be on par with C1 processing.  I can now use DNG Profile Editor profiles, which did me no good with C1, and only use C1 for tethered shooting.  I'm looking forward to it.  Thanks, Adobe, especially for the $19.99 upgrade path from LR2 to LR3.  <humor>
Logged

kers
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 707


WWW
« Reply #123 on: October 25, 2009, 06:45:26 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: NikosR
Sorry, but what is the 'basic' LR way? Are you talking about the default conversion (i.e. no presets used and all sliders at default)?  Any serious user should know better than compare 'default' conversions unless one is interested in the best automatic conversion one can get. In that case I recommend DxO.  Please explain.

Yes default but
even with fill light set to 100 and contrast set to zero the deep blacks are better with nx2 ( at least with my camera-Nefs )

and for DXO- the colours go everywhere- I only use it for stage photography- that program is not consistent. I never know what it does behind the scenes.

and i am serious  :-)  even when i take pictures

as for lightroom _ i do not like that they have different keys for zooming etc than in photoshop- It seems they want you to use one of both only.
So i stick to photoshop in combination with a flexible simple database i understand and like:  Iview ( now expression media )
Logged

Pieter Kers
www.beeld.nu
NikosR
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 622


WWW
« Reply #124 on: October 25, 2009, 11:18:04 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: kers
Yes default but
even with fill light set to 100 and contrast set to zero the deep blacks are better with nx2 ( at least with my camera-Nefs )

and for DXO- the colours go everywhere- I only use it for stage photography- that program is not consistent. I never know what it does behind the scenes.

and i am serious  :-)  even when i take pictures

as for lightroom _ i do not like that they have different keys for zooming etc than in photoshop- It seems they want you to use one of both only.
So i stick to photoshop in combination with a flexible simple database i understand and like:  Iview ( now expression media )

I think you have not taken the time to reasonably master the programs you are comparing your current editor against.
Logged

Nikos
Ralph Eisenberg
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 82


« Reply #125 on: October 26, 2009, 12:12:47 PM »
ReplyReply

I should just like to express a favorable, indeed very favorable opinion, of the quality of the conversions made by the Lightroom 3 Beta. Whereas up to now I've been using primarily Capture One Pro, particularly for portraits, because I'd always felt that the program offered superior conversions, I've been very impressed by two portraits that I've just brought through Lightroom 3. I feel that there has been a significant change here over the previous versions of the program.
Logged

Ralph
Josh-H
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1905



WWW
« Reply #126 on: October 27, 2009, 04:11:19 AM »
ReplyReply

Not sure if this link got posted or not - but there are also some quite good quick videos on LR3 Beta over at Photoshop User here:
Lightroom Beta 3 Videos
These are worth a look if you want a crash course in what the primary new offerings are in LR 3 Beta.
Logged

stewarthemley
Guest
« Reply #127 on: October 27, 2009, 04:14:51 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Ralph Eisenberg
I should just like to express a favorable, indeed very favorable opinion, of the quality of the conversions made by the Lightroom 3 Beta. Whereas up to now I've been using primarily Capture One Pro, particularly for portraits, because I'd always felt that the program offered superior conversions, I've been very impressed by two portraits that I've just brought through Lightroom 3. I feel that there has been a significant change here over the previous versions of the program.

Me too. For high ISO images with a 5D2 I found Raw Developer far superior but now LR3 is close enough and has extra features and a better workflow. I'm sort of sad in a way because I hate to see a Goliath threatening David. I guess that's progress/the power of big research budgets, but I really hope RD comes back with a sling in its hand. Nothing against Adobe, but we need the smaller guys to keep the big guys honest.

edited to clarify
« Last Edit: October 27, 2009, 04:51:42 AM by stewarthemley » Logged
mtomalty
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 534


WWW
« Reply #128 on: October 27, 2009, 02:25:27 PM »
ReplyReply


I've not been a Lightroom user, so far, but have been giving LR3b a test drive today and, as advertised, see that Luminace noise reduction is disabled.

What happens, though, is that when I work with an image that has previously been worked up in ACR using luminance NR, then the previously disabled
Luminance NR slider in LR3b becomes active.

Is this only respecting my previous settings or is the Lum NR setting from the beta being triggered?


Mark
Logged
Schewe
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 5255


WWW
« Reply #129 on: October 27, 2009, 03:35:35 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: mtomalty
What happens, though, is that when I work with an image that has previously been worked up in ACR using luminance NR, then the previously disabled
Luminance NR slider in LR3b becomes active.


Yeah, you need to update the version of the processing pipeline you are using before you can get to the new stuff. By default, any image that has been "touched" by Camera Raw and/or Lightroom will maintain the older version 1 rendering. In order to get to the new stuff you'll need to click on the Exclamation Point at the top left of the Develop panel. Note you can get back to the old rendering by then clicking in the History to a state prior to the update.

This has been done because Adobe wanted to make sure people were not FORCED into using the new rendering engine unless they wanted to. Not clear exactly how this is gonna be handled in the final GM when it ships but the odds are it'll still take an explicit command by the user to force a new rendering with the new processing.

Any image that has never been touched will pick up and use the new rendering by default in the beta...
Logged
Jeremy Payne
Guest
« Reply #130 on: October 27, 2009, 03:42:57 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Schewe
you'll need to click on the Exclamation Point at the top left of the Develop panel. Note you can get back to the old rendering by then clicking in the History to a state prior to the update

There's also 'Settings > Process Version' which lets you toggle back and forth as well.

Logged
pdm
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 20


WWW
« Reply #131 on: October 27, 2009, 10:16:45 PM »
ReplyReply

I am very disappointed with the new import dialog.  It lumps all photos into one big grid view instead of letting you import by shoot date. Some times I don't format the card between shoots, and as far as I can tell, I'd have to select images one by one to import.  I am very happy to see they added the ability to add custom text to naming, but they put it in the wrong place for me. I would rather have a folder named for the shoot or custom text than to have every file name contain that. I would very much like folders organized like 2009/2009-10-28-custom_text/filename.cr2.

Update: well, I see now that there are checkmarks on the destination folder area to pick what to import. Maybe it was obvious to some.
« Last Edit: October 27, 2009, 10:20:23 PM by pdm » Logged

--
Phillip Moore
pdmphotography.com
mtomalty
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 534


WWW
« Reply #132 on: October 28, 2009, 10:03:02 AM »
ReplyReply


Thanks for clearing that up, Jeff


MT

www.marktomalty.com
Logged
rosemanbridge
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 27


WWW
« Reply #133 on: October 30, 2009, 03:55:55 AM »
ReplyReply

Michael, Do I get a prize for creating a thread that has had over 10,000 views  
Logged
NikoJorj
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1063


WWW
« Reply #134 on: November 02, 2009, 11:30:36 AM »
ReplyReply

Wow! Very intersting bits in this thread.

I'll throw one particular request : now that the noise reduction is sooo good for "normal" noise, could it be possible to get some FFT filtering to filter out the very eye-catching banding noise, like eg Dfine does?
Logged

Nicolas from Grenoble
A small gallery
madmanchan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2100


« Reply #135 on: November 02, 2009, 12:20:03 PM »
ReplyReply

Nicolas, the current NR system in LR 3 beta does not attempt to address this, but I have noted your request.

BTW, I just noticed you're in Grenoble. A few years ago, I had the pleasure of visiting a lab there for about a week, and the surrounding valley.
Logged

ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6910


WWW
« Reply #136 on: November 02, 2009, 06:13:21 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

I'm mostly impressed with the new noise handling. I still feel something is missing. The images below are with old (V1) and new (V2Beta) noise handling on Sony Alpha 900 at 6400 ISO, a tremendous improvement. What I see with the new noice reduction is a tight, natural and sharp noise pattern but with some impulse noise (?) in the blue channel that should be possible to reduce. I essentially would advocate adding a hot pixel button. Now, I don't know what it should do. I can see that doing a small radius (2) median filter takes care of this, but also destroys much of the grain pattern.

Se samples (old and new rendering, median filter R2). Unfortunately the differences are much less visible on the screendumps than on my screen.

[attachment=17631:OldRender.jpg]
[attachment=17632:NewRender.jpg]
[attachment=17633:NewRendi...MedianR2.jpg]

Best regards
Erik



Quote from: madmanchan
Nicolas, the current NR system in LR 3 beta does not attempt to address this, but I have noted your request.

BTW, I just noticed you're in Grenoble. A few years ago, I had the pleasure of visiting a lab there for about a week, and the surrounding valley.
« Last Edit: November 02, 2009, 06:16:07 PM by ErikKaffehr » Logged

madmanchan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2100


« Reply #137 on: November 02, 2009, 07:17:05 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi Erik, I cannot be certain at this point, but I suspect that the impulse speckles you are observing should be treatable in the final version. If you would be willing to submit a sample raw file from your A900 (i.e., the .ARW file), that would be a big help. If this is ok with you, please use YouSendIt.com with target email address of madmanchan2000@yahoo.com. Thanks.
Logged

ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6910


WWW
« Reply #138 on: November 02, 2009, 07:48:29 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi Eric,

I sent you the file I was looking at. I also discovered that LR3Beta no recommends backing up the database before quitting. Great! The thing I had hard to appreciate was the import dialog but I only used it once. These things take some time to get accustomed to.

Best regards
Erik





Quote from: madmanchan
Hi Erik, I cannot be certain at this point, but I suspect that the impulse speckles you are observing should be treatable in the final version. If you would be willing to submit a sample raw file from your A900 (i.e., the .ARW file), that would be a big help. If this is ok with you, please use YouSendIt.com with target email address of madmanchan2000@yahoo.com. Thanks.
Logged

madmanchan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2100


« Reply #139 on: November 02, 2009, 09:07:36 PM »
ReplyReply

Thanks Erik. Got the file safely. I'll study it and see what can be done. To be honest, I'm not too familiar with the new Import myself, but my understanding is that you can now create Import presets. (Similar to Export presets, but now on the import side.) This should help simplify common import tasks.
Logged

Pages: « 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad