Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 2 [3]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Processin version 2010 vs 2003  (Read 10364 times)
RobertDowell
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 3



WWW
« Reply #40 on: April 04, 2010, 06:50:21 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Schewe
That's fine and a good reason the team decided to do the dual process route rather than forcing people to update. Note however, new images will by default, come in with Process 2010 unless you go in and change your ACR/LR "Default" for your camera...

Without changing the camera defaults that someone else has gone to a lot of trouble to make, I was wondering if it is possible to sync the process engine settings across multiple photos, in other words, if I find that Process 2003 is better on the image, can I sync it across multiple images?

The only reason I ask is that in some cases it might be preferable to use the older 2003 process engine as it produces a different transition effect between colours and shades, thus avoiding some of the unexpected optical illusions.  I have noticed, on the new process engine, that if you are not careful, you can bring in some additional problems, even with the default settings for sharpening.  It is like the Rembrandt effect, that happens between the interaction of one shade and another, to create a third shade that is not really there.  The 2010 Process, in certain photos using the default sharpening, produces an optical illusion of darker thinner lines around some objects with high contrast, but this is purely perception based on how the image is rendered.  I have found that it may be necessary to reduce the sharpening to 1 and increase the masking to create smooth tones between transitions.  This was not so much of a problem with the older process engine, but the transitions were rougher as a result.

After messing around a bit with the new controls I can see that it does produce some very good results.  The reason I guess I had my initial unfavourable impressions was due to the fact that everything in the noise reduction and sharpening sliders, including moderate changes, had become a great deal more aggressive, thus causing some problems with perception of the end results.
Logged

madmanchan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2108


« Reply #41 on: April 08, 2010, 11:42:48 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi Robert, if you turn on Auto Sync in Develop, you can sync Process Version across any number of images. Just select all the images in the filmstrip, go to the Camera Calibration pane, and choose PV 2003 from the Process popup menu. I believe you can also change process version "in batch" via Library. If you have multiple images selected in the Grid view, I think you can right-click/context-click and then change the process version from the subsequent popup menu.
Logged

Rory
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 162


« Reply #42 on: April 12, 2010, 02:57:45 PM »
ReplyReply

This has been a very useful thread.  Thanks to Eric and Jeff for insights into the interplay of the noise and sharpening controls.  I remember when I was first learning how to use ACR I found Jeff's overview of sharpening very helpful.

http://photoshopnews.com/2007/05/31/about-camera-raw-41/

I still refer to it occasionally.

Any chance you will publish an update for ACR 6 / Lr 3 in a future PhotoshopNews article Jeff?

Regards
Rory
Logged
Deep
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 174


« Reply #43 on: April 24, 2010, 01:59:59 PM »
ReplyReply

I have also found this a useful thread, thank you.  I was just playing with some files the other day on both versions and noticed that applying my usual preset (from LR 1.4, there never seemed to be any point to moving to LR 2) resulted in oversharpened images.  Now I know why.  

One photo in particular was very interesting, taken through a mesh curtain near the resolution limit of my camera.  With LR1, I could see the mesh but it came over much more "defined" in LR3.  No matter what I did with the early version, I could not reproduce this cleaner definition.  It was as if the lens was sharper or the anti alias filter on the camera had been removed.  Rather extraordinary!
Logged

Don
Pages: « 1 2 [3]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad