Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 ... 6 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Lightroom 4 BETA - Its here  (Read 23538 times)
Alan Goldhammer
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1711


WWW
« Reply #20 on: January 10, 2012, 08:53:33 AM »
ReplyReply

Just an aside on the XP issue.  The vast majority of the XP users in the US are in corporations whose IT policies dictate that uses stay on XP until there is a good reason to upgrade (XP has proven stability as an OS and they didn't want to risk moving up to Vista which was a good decision).  Many also run older versions of MS Office for the same reason.  We are beginning to see a migration to Win7 but it's pretty slow.  The other key thing is that any computer(s) used in key systems for manufacturing are routinely subject to exacting regulatory requirments and upgrades to a new OS or program usually requires revalidation to assure that there is no change in the control parameters (which is why Y2K caused a lot of headaches for multiple industries - I was in the pharmaceutical industry at the time and staffed a workgroup that was addressing this issue).

I would be surprised if there is a significant user base of individuals using XP; all of the Win users I know are now on Win7.
Logged

RFPhotography
Guest
« Reply #21 on: January 10, 2012, 09:40:23 AM »
ReplyReply

Still no support for 32 bit image formats.  Very disappointing.  The rest of the upgrades are good but lack of 32 bit image support seems odd.  Editing ability would be great but they can't even be catalogued.
Logged
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9226



WWW
« Reply #22 on: January 10, 2012, 09:40:41 AM »
ReplyReply

Andrew only just touches on it near the end of the video. But what I think is particularly cool is that once you have selected to view the soft proof image and have made the virtual copy to make adjustments to it - if you then hit the before /after compare mode (so you have the non-soft proofed image next to the soft proof) you can very easily tweak the soft proofed image to much better match the original - thats just a way cool feature that used to be a bit of a pain to do in PS as you had to duplicate the image, set it side by side and then match zoom and location.

I’m hoping to do another more in depth video on this although I think I mentioned you can use before and after. This was my first video (tesitn the video waters). There is more to cover on soft proofing, believe me. This was more an intro.

One thing I will say to be careful of is having the profile setup wherever you use the soft proof. For example, load an image, make a soft proof. Now quit LR and move the profile out of the Profiles folder or take the library to another machine without the profile. Not sure how this pans out on Windows, hopefully someone will give it a try. But on Mac OS X, the missing profile either causes an initial black preview since it has gone missing or crashes if you toggle the rendering intent.
Logged

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

Posts: 9226



WWW
« Reply #23 on: January 10, 2012, 09:45:52 AM »
ReplyReply

Something I just noticed: When LR creates the virtual copy for soft proof adjustment it adds the printer and  profile name - very cool (and critical information). But, shouldn't it also add the rendering intent to the filename?

I wish it did (and did request this if memory serves). But with the public beta, now is the time to make these kinds of suggestions! Doesn’t seem to involve big engineering.

It would also be kind of cool if the Print module picked up the profile and rendering intent. Not sure how that would work with existing print templates however. More the reason to tag the name with the rendering intent, you could just load the profile and intent from the name data.
Logged

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

Posts: 2110


« Reply #24 on: January 10, 2012, 10:50:43 AM »
ReplyReply

Andrew, as I noted earlier, the Print module does automatically pick up the render intent (but it doesn't pick up the profile automatically).  So, if you are using a print template in Print module that refers to a specific profile, and you are printing a proof copy that uses the same profile, Lr will automatically pick up the correct render intent saved with that proof copy.  In principle this means you can do side-by-side perceptual/relative colorimetric (test) prints on the same sheet of paper.
Logged

kwalsh
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 92


« Reply #25 on: January 10, 2012, 10:59:45 AM »
ReplyReply

Still no support for 32 bit image formats.  Very disappointing.  The rest of the upgrades are good but lack of 32 bit image support seems odd.  Editing ability would be great but they can't even be catalogued.

According to this:

http://www.lightroomqueen.com/2012/01/09/whats-new-in-lightroom-4-0-beta/

Quote
Lightroom 4 now imports 32-bit HDR files without resorting to workarounds, although editing still takes place in 8 or 16 bit.

Sounds like it will catalog them but still 16-bit editing.

Ken

EDIT: Looks like Lightroom Queen got this one wrong, see posts further down the thread.  No support for 32-bit.
« Last Edit: January 10, 2012, 01:33:20 PM by kwalsh » Logged
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9226



WWW
« Reply #26 on: January 10, 2012, 11:03:05 AM »
ReplyReply

It is not working for me Eric. Maybe I'm missing the correct steps.

I made a VC with a profile. It is higlighted. If I click the Print module button, I see no template seletected which seems correct. But I also see in Print, a different profile selected, not the VC specifed profile or intent. What might I be doing wrong?
Logged

Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/
RFPhotography
Guest
« Reply #27 on: January 10, 2012, 11:03:28 AM »
ReplyReply

According to this:

http://www.lightroomqueen.com/2012/01/09/whats-new-in-lightroom-4-0-beta/

Sounds like it will catalog them but still 16-bit editing.

Ken

Interesting.  Adobe doesn't even state that in their information.  

http://blogs.adobe.com/lightroomjournal/

I'm creating a catalogue as I write this so will see what happens.

EDIT:  Well, I'd like to know how she's doing it because it didn't work for me.  Pointing the Import dialogue directly to a folder with nothing but 32 bit images and the message in the middle window is "No photos found". 
« Last Edit: January 10, 2012, 11:28:28 AM by BobFisher » Logged
eleanorbrown
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 632


WWW
« Reply #28 on: January 10, 2012, 11:09:08 AM »
ReplyReply

Unless I am missing something, I can't get LR4 to import the changes to RAW files made in LR3.  Any suggestions?  Thanks, Eleanor
Logged

john beardsworth
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2892



WWW
« Reply #29 on: January 10, 2012, 11:11:17 AM »
ReplyReply

Unless I am missing something, I can't get LR4 to import the changes to RAW files made in LR3.  Any suggestions?  Thanks, Eleanor
In LR3, have you saved the metadata back to the files? Cmd S / Ctrl S.

Directly upgrading catalogues is disabled until full release.

John
Logged

Steve House
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 227


« Reply #30 on: January 10, 2012, 11:43:01 AM »
ReplyReply

It (WinXP) was still being sold as the supplied OS on new systems in 2009. They might have stopped shipping it now, but it's still a popular OS in actual use.


2009 is 2 to 3 years ago, depending on when in '09 you're referring to.  That's a long time at the pace technology moves today.  The OS itself is 10 years old ... that's eons in software lifecycle terms.
Logged
eleanorbrown
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 632


WWW
« Reply #31 on: January 10, 2012, 11:46:12 AM »
ReplyReply

Thanks John. Eleanor
In LR3, have you saved the metadata back to the files? Cmd S / Ctrl S.

Directly upgrading catalogues is disabled until full release.

John
Logged

madmanchan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2110


« Reply #32 on: January 10, 2012, 11:55:53 AM »
ReplyReply

Lr 4 Beta does not support 32-bit (i.e., floating point) image formats.  That said, you can do a lot of tone mapping with the new PV 2012 controls in the Basic panel (even for 16-bit raw images, which are by definition HDR relative to common output media like displays and print).
Logged

RFPhotography
Guest
« Reply #33 on: January 10, 2012, 11:57:24 AM »
ReplyReply

Lr 4 Beta does not support 32-bit (i.e., floating point) image formats.  That said, you can do a lot of tone mapping with the new PV 2012 controls in the Basic panel (even for 16-bit raw images, which are by definition HDR relative to common output media like displays and print).

Then perhaps someone should tell The Lightroom Queen that she should amend her posting.

That aside, Eric, lack of support for 32 bit image formats is a pretty big missing puzzle piece.  I'd venture there are far more people doing HDR than doing video so at least the ability to catalogue those images would be a big plus. 
« Last Edit: January 10, 2012, 12:05:34 PM by BobFisher » Logged
madmanchan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2110


« Reply #34 on: January 10, 2012, 11:58:41 AM »
ReplyReply

It is not working for me Eric. Maybe I'm missing the correct steps.

I made a VC with a profile. It is higlighted. If I click the Print module button, I see no template seletected which seems correct. But I also see in Print, a different profile selected, not the VC specifed profile or intent. What might I be doing wrong?

The profile won't carry over to Print.  The profile selected in Print is still handled independently.  (For example, if you choose a print template, Print should choose whatever profile is associated with that template.)  However, the render intent that is used to print the image should be carried over from the proof copy (whatever render intent is associated with the proof copy), as long as the profile selected in the Print Job matches the profile used in the proof copy.  Note that this will not be reflected in the UI in any way, except the tooltip explanation for the render intent.
Logged

digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9226



WWW
« Reply #35 on: January 10, 2012, 01:02:39 PM »
ReplyReply

The profile won't carry over to Print.  The profile selected in Print is still handled independently.
Got it. That would be somewhat useful I suppose. As I mentioned, not sure how you’d handle a template otherwise.
 
Part of my confusion here is that if I highlight a VC in Develop and go directly into Print, no template is highlighted on the browser which I think is problematic. I DO see the name of the template selected in the text (upper left side) if I have the Show Overlay on. If it is not on, then this is quite confusing. The highlight behavior of the Template Browser is a bit odd.

Quote
 (For example, if you choose a print template, Print should choose whatever profile is associated with that template.)
 
Makes sense if one has the Info Overlay on and examines the text.

Quote
However, the render intent that is used to print the image should be carried over from the proof copy (whatever render intent is associated with the proof copy), as long as the profile selected in the Print Job matches the profile used in the proof copy.  Note that this will not be reflected in the UI in any way, except the tooltip explanation for the render intent.

The tooltip says that Proof Copies matching this profile will use their own intent. So IF I have the proof copy set for Perceptual but click on RelCol, in this one case, I’ll still get Perceptual right? I see one of the two intents highlighted which indicates to me which intent is active. One could have RelCol highlighted but based on the VC, Perceptual will be used instead right? That way, if I have 4 images ganged up, 2 are set for Perceptual as VC’s but the template is set for RelCol, the other two (non VC’s with soft proof) will use that Rel Col intent and the two VC’s will use Perceptual?
Logged

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

Posts: 2110


« Reply #36 on: January 10, 2012, 01:09:14 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi Andrew,

I can't speak to the template implementation (in terms of which one gets selected when you go to Print) -- unfortunately, I just don't know.

As for Print using the stored render intent when printing a proof copy with matching profile, you are correct.  Even though the Perceptual | Relative Colorimetric buttons don't reflect what is stored in the proof copy, Lr will use whatever intent you used when soft proofing with that proof copy.

So, suppose you are printing a bunch of images, and some of them are proof copies, and some of them aren't.  The ones that are proof copies will use the stored render intent, and the ones that aren't will use the render intent that you've chosen in the Print Job panel (either Perceptual or Relative Colorimetric -- whichever one is highlighted).
Logged

digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9226



WWW
« Reply #37 on: January 10, 2012, 01:30:03 PM »
ReplyReply

So, suppose you are printing a bunch of images, and some of them are proof copies, and some of them aren't.  The ones that are proof copies will use the stored render intent, and the ones that aren't will use the render intent that you've chosen in the Print Job panel (either Perceptual or Relative Colorimetric -- whichever one is highlighted).

Super cool and useful. Thanks.

Since this is a soft proof discussion, here’s another mystery. I’ve created an ICC profile of Melissa RGB. I just used Photoshop, loaded ProPhoto and altered the Gamma setting. Save it out etc. Now I can load it in LR and soft proof. I’m wondering why when I toggle on and off soft proof using the two, there is a difference in the histogram. It isn’t a lot, but it does look different. I looked at both in the ColorSync utility, the primaries are as expected, identical. Could it be the conversion from internal Melissa RGB to ICC profile (Melissa RGB) to the Histogram which is showing rounding errors or something? I see ‘holes’ in the Melissa RGB Histogram which seems a tad odd.

Toggling my Melissa RGB to ProPhoto, bigger difference as expected, mostly due to the gamma setting.
Logged

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

Posts: 2890


« Reply #38 on: January 10, 2012, 02:00:45 PM »
ReplyReply

 

As for Print using the stored render intent when printing a proof copy with matching profile, you are correct.  Even though the Perceptual | Relative Colorimetric buttons don't reflect what is stored in the proof copy, Lr will use whatever intent you used when soft proofing with that proof copy.

So, suppose you are printing a bunch of images, and some of them are proof copies, and some of them aren't.  The ones that are proof copies will use the stored render intent, and the ones that aren't will use the render intent that you've chosen in the Print Job panel (either Perceptual or Relative Colorimetric -- whichever one is highlighted).

So if that profile later on gets a Print Adjustment linked in another job your proof copy print recall may not deliver the same print? Despite the rendering intent being correct. Or is the link not activated in that case? If the last is true what happens with more images ganged, among them the proof copy, is the Print Adjustment not linked to the profile with all or just not linked to the proof copy? That Print Adjustment and more its link to the profile may proof a xxx*.


met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst
330+ paper white spectral plots:
http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm



« Last Edit: January 10, 2012, 02:10:39 PM by Ernst Dinkla » Logged
Hans Kruse
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 806



WWW
« Reply #39 on: January 10, 2012, 02:05:00 PM »
ReplyReply

I have played with the beta during today and I think it is a great update with a lot of good stuff.

Interesting with the changed sliders in the basic section in the develop module. I know many people found the exposure and brightness slider confusing, but I liked the two different buttons. It's still not quite clear to me how exactly the two buttons have been integrated into one. It's not entirely clear to me if I should still set the white point with the exposure slider. Before I could set the white point with the exposure slider and adjust the overall brightness independently.

It seems that the replacements for the recovery and fill light works really well although I haven't made enough adjustments that I have become really familiar with them.

One thing I had been hoping for was an auto button so that a proof (virtual) copy could be automatically adjusted to match the image that the proof copy was made from. This would likely (provided it was a good algorithm to match the look of the proof copy relative to the "original") provide a version that could be used directly in a print. And in some cases be a point from which further adjustments could be done manually. I did notice that there is a print adjustment function where brigtness and contrast can be adjusted also. This is great but my thought is that the suggested auto button would still be great to have to adjust on an image by image basis and the print adjustment is a more general adjustment.
Any thoughts on this?
« Last Edit: January 10, 2012, 02:07:21 PM by Hans Kruse » Logged

Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 ... 6 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad