Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Retaining Both Lightroom 4+ and Lightroom 3.6 for Photo Processing  (Read 8620 times)
Schewe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5541


WWW
« Reply #20 on: November 21, 2012, 02:24:13 PM »
ReplyReply

....I thought the whole point behind color management was to avoid this kind of experimenting when trying to match print to screen and to ensure WYSIWYG.

The OP was using the old Brightness slider in the Develop module to adjust images intended for B&W output through a specialty rip, so there was no color management in the classic sense. The QuadToneRIP doesn't use ICC profiles (although one can make them for the purposes of soft proofing). The rip actually uses specialty curves to control the B&W toning to achieve neutral or warm results. While there are some controls on the driver that can impact ink limits and gamma, tuning the results using those sliders requires trial and error.

The reason that Lightroom 4 added the Brightness and Contrast slider in the print module was because for some people, there may be limited ability to darken the display output. Certain iMacs screens for example can NOT be dimmed down to the standard 140 cd/m2 even using hardware based display profiling. For people who simply can't get their display and print viewing luminosity to match, the use of the Brightness slider is offered. It's useful in those limited situation because then you don't have to alter the image settings in Develop, you simply apply an adjustments at print time.
Logged
JimAscher
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 345



WWW
« Reply #21 on: November 21, 2012, 03:23:40 PM »
ReplyReply


...The reason that Lightroom 4 added the Brightness and Contrast slider in the print module was because for some people, there may be limited ability to darken the display output. Certain iMacs screens for example can NOT be dimmed down to the standard 140 cd/m2 even using hardware based display profiling. For people who simply can't get their display and print viewing luminosity to match, the use of the Brightness slider is offered. It's useful in those limited situation because then you don't have to alter the image settings in Develop, you simply apply an adjustments at print time.

This, Jeff, is of course my situation (and problem) exactly.  When I find the appropriate additional brightening level in LR 3.6 to match in printing the tonality of my preferred monitor image, I save that image (with a separate designation) with the Export function.  I am still struggling with being able to achieve these results with LR4 in combination with QTR.  However, in spite of your patient guidance to date in this regard, my level of comprehension is regrettably lagging behind.  I still don't understand what very specific steps I must take.  But I haven't yet given up. 
Logged

Jim Ascher

See my new SmugMug site:
http://jimascherphotos.smugmug.com/
Steve House
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 227


« Reply #22 on: November 21, 2012, 04:49:46 PM »
ReplyReply

T...When I find the appropriate additional brightening level in LR 3.6 to match in printing the tonality of my preferred monitor image, I save that image (with a separate designation) with the Export function.  .... 

I'm curious .... f you hold up the print beside your monitor after printing using your procedure, does it more closely match the image you had on the screen BEFORE you dialed in the final pre-printing brightness boost or the on-screen image AFTER dialing in the brightness boost?
Logged
JimAscher
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 345



WWW
« Reply #23 on: November 21, 2012, 05:19:27 PM »
ReplyReply

I'm curious .... f you hold up the print beside your monitor after printing using your procedure, does it more closely match the image you had on the screen BEFORE you dialed in the final pre-printing brightness boost or the on-screen image AFTER dialing in the brightness boost?

Steve:  I should have been more precise.  I compare the printed version of the image whose brightness I've increased with the original monitor version I was seeking to emulate.  (The modified version will of course appear much brighter on the monitor.)
Logged

Jim Ascher

See my new SmugMug site:
http://jimascherphotos.smugmug.com/
Steve House
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 227


« Reply #24 on: November 22, 2012, 08:34:11 AM »
ReplyReply

Steve:  I should have been more precise.  I compare the printed version of the image whose brightness I've increased with the original monitor version I was seeking to emulate.  (The modified version will of course appear much brighter on the monitor.)
What kind of illumination are you viewing the printed image under? The differences you are seeing between the finished print and the screen image WITHOUT the pre-print brightness adjustment could be accounted for in a couple of ways - one being that the monitor brightness is too high and the other is the print viewing illumination is too low. If the print that comes off of the printer is darker than the image you see on the monitor, it could be that the monitor is too bright or it could be that the light hitting the paper is too dim (or a combination of both).  Since you can't get the monitor illumination down far enough to get a match, what is rattling around in my head is perhaps you are experiencing the latter situation and your print-viewing illumination might be too low.   Most references seem to suggest one use a source of 2000 lux +/- 500 lux for evaluating prints and 500 lux +/- 50 lux for general display lighting.  The x-Rite calibrators can measure ambient lighting levels.
« Last Edit: November 22, 2012, 09:39:06 AM by Steve House » Logged
JimAscher
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 345



WWW
« Reply #25 on: November 22, 2012, 09:48:14 AM »
ReplyReply

What kind of illumination are you viewing the printed image under? The differences you are seeing between the finished print and the screen image WITHOUT the pre-print brightness adjustment could be accounted for in a couple of ways - one being that the monitor brightness is too high and the other is the print viewing illumination is too low. If the print that comes off of the printer is darker than the image you see on the monitor, it could be that the monitor is too bright or it could be that the light hitting the paper is too dim (or a combination of both).  Since you can't get the monitor illumination down far enough to get a match, what is rattling around in my head is perhaps you are experiencing the latter situation and your print-viewing illumination might be too low.   Most references seem to suggest one use a source of 2000 lux +/- 500 lux for evaluating prints and 500 lux +/- 50 lux for general display lighting.  The x-Rite calibrators can measure ambient lighting levels.

Steve:  A direct, un-brightened print of my original monitor image is so much darker than the monitor image as to preclude (for me) any of the possible explanatory factors you raise.  The separate (Dell) monitor I use for my black-and-white work has been calibrated, and its illumination is in fact quite low.  And I've tried different levels of room illumination.  The disparity between direct print and monitor is just too great, and reducing the brightness with LR 3.6 as I've described has been my only (and quite workable, for me) solution.  Thanks for your further thoughts.  Jim
Logged

Jim Ascher

See my new SmugMug site:
http://jimascherphotos.smugmug.com/
Steve House
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 227


« Reply #26 on: November 22, 2012, 12:08:39 PM »
ReplyReply

Steve:  A direct, un-brightened print of my original monitor image is so much darker than the monitor image as to preclude (for me) any of the possible explanatory factors you raise.  The separate (Dell) monitor I use for my black-and-white work has been calibrated, and its illumination is in fact quite low.  And I've tried different levels of room illumination.  The disparity between direct print and monitor is just too great, and reducing the brightness with LR 3.6 as I've described has been my only (and quite workable, for me) solution.  Thanks for your further thoughts.  Jim
I'm not thinking so much about general room illumination as I am direct light falling on the print as you might have in, say, a viewing booth.  Such a viewing light would be much brighter than the general room illumination.
Logged
JimAscher
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 345



WWW
« Reply #27 on: November 22, 2012, 12:26:25 PM »
ReplyReply

I'm not thinking so much about general room illumination as I am direct light falling on the print as you might have in, say, a viewing booth.  Such a viewing light would be much brighter than the general room illumination.

Steve:  What I have to consider (understandably?) is the illumination of the printed photo when it is displayed for viewing by third parties.  That criteria is what i must consider, and work towards, in matching up my monitor image with my paper print.  And this is my guide in determining the amount of brightness I must add with LR 3.6 to achieve this.  Thanks again, Jim 
Logged

Jim Ascher

See my new SmugMug site:
http://jimascherphotos.smugmug.com/
jazmatazIII
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2


« Reply #28 on: November 30, 2012, 06:09:07 PM »
ReplyReply

 Quote from: JimAscher on November 18, 2012, 10:23:30 AM
Steve:  Your further, and very much appreciated, more detailed explication would be foolish for me to ignore, and not give a try.  I'm not certain that my (Dell) monitor's brightness control will permit me to dial down to the extent required, but what can I lose in trying (except the need to reset if it doesn't work)?  It just took me so long over time to evolve my current practice (and settings) that I am (possibly understandingly) loathe to mess with it all.  But I will.  Thanks again.  And also to Jeff, for so much more to think about and experiment with.  Jim

Steve:  My present established brightness level on my Dell is 36.  Bringing it down to its minimum (of zero) I regret still doesn't reduce the brightness level sufficiently for me to employ your otherwise highly logical and attractive solution.  Many thanks again.  Jim

AND

Quote from: Schewe on November 21, 2012, 02:24:13 PM

...The reason that Lightroom 4 added the Brightness and Contrast slider in the print module was because for some people, there may be limited ability to darken the display output. Certain iMacs screens for example can NOT be dimmed down to the standard 140 cd/m2 even using hardware based display profiling. For people who simply can't get their display and print viewing luminosity to match, the use of the Brightness slider is offered. It's useful in those limited situation because then you don't have to alter the image settings in Develop, you simply apply an adjustments at print time.

This, Jeff, is of course my situation (and problem) exactly.  When I find the appropriate additional brightening level in LR 3.6 to match in printing the tonality of my preferred monitor image, I save that image (with a separate designation) with the Export function.  I am still struggling with being able to achieve these results with LR4 in combination with QTR.  However, in spite of your patient guidance to date in this regard, my level of comprehension is regrettably lagging behind.  I still don't understand
Quotewhat very specific steps I must take.  But I haven't yet given up. 


Jim and Jeff

I had this problem with my iMac and was able to get the luminance down to 100 cd/m2 and lower if needed. The solution was to put a neutral density filter over the monitor screen, I used a sheet of Lee filters #298 0.15ND (- stop), and then profiled the monitor.

Jack

 link: Colour Information and Spectral Charts for LEE Lighting Filters
Logged
JimAscher
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 345



WWW
« Reply #29 on: November 30, 2012, 08:59:50 PM »
ReplyReply

Jack:  That sounds like a brilliant solution, which I must try.  However, my dedicated Dell monitor is already so "subdued" in luminance, that I might end up with too dim a monitor to be of much use.  I'll report back.  Thanks, Jim
Logged

Jim Ascher

See my new SmugMug site:
http://jimascherphotos.smugmug.com/
David Luery
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 19


« Reply #30 on: December 01, 2012, 01:55:33 PM »
ReplyReply

As far as using the QTR in Lightroom, the QTR driver installs like any other print driver which you can select in the Print Settings/Page Setup (depending on OS) dlog in LR.

Jeff,

Would I be correct in thinking that this is possible on a Mac but not Win 7 computer? 

Thanks,

David
Logged
Schewe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5541


WWW
« Reply #31 on: December 01, 2012, 02:48:46 PM »
ReplyReply

Would I be correct in thinking that this is possible on a Mac but not Win 7 computer? 

Don't know...I've not downloaded and installed the Win version...buy you can try it for yourself HERE.
Logged
Steve House
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 227


« Reply #32 on: December 02, 2012, 08:40:28 AM »
ReplyReply

Jack:  That sounds like a brilliant solution, which I must try.  However, my dedicated Dell monitor is already so "subdued" in luminance, that I might end up with too dim a monitor to be of much use.  I'll report back.  Thanks, Jim
Well, no matter how dim you get it the monitor tones will always be different then the same tones in the print, simply due to the fact the monitor is emitting light while the paper is reflecting it.  If you were to take a spot meter reading of  the light coming from various points in the image on the screen and compare it to the reading on light reflected off the same areas of the print it would be very rare if they were ever the same. But if I see the same relative separations amongst the various high values and low values, on the screen and in the print, if I can say "this cloud will be slightly darker than the paper base and the detail will be discernible in those 'black' shadows" I'm happy because then I can look at the screen and translate what I see there into what the print will look like. The screen image will have served its purpose.  I'm not interested in whether or not there is a perfect match between the on-screen image and the print as long as I can look at the screen and accurately predict what I'm going to get in the print.  If for some reason I'm going to show the image digitally I'd probably make a virtual copy and "re-develop" the copy for optimum appearance on the screen - again, there's no reason that image and a print from the same raw file have to match as each of the different viewing scenarios has a different "optimum" appearance.  It's just like in the film days where you'd make slightly different appearing prints depending on whether it was intended for gallery viewing or half-tone print reproduction in a book or some such.
Logged
JimAscher
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 345



WWW
« Reply #33 on: December 12, 2012, 09:37:42 PM »
ReplyReply

With the help and advice of many on this and other forums, I think I've finally solved my problem of how to switch from Lightroom 3.6 to Lightroom 4 and still print with QTR.  (You may recall that my problem stemmed from the fact that Lightroom 4 dropped the Brightness slider available as a basic control in previous versions, which control had enabled me to brighten my photos for the printed version to match the edited version on the monitor  Lightroom 4 had moved the Brightness slider to the Print module).

Well, I've belatedly discovered that QTR has similar dual brightness sliders, one labeled "Gamma," which increases the brightness of mid-tones, and the other labeled "Ink Tone, which brightens the shadows. And seemingly (miracles of all miracles), when these two sliders are each set at maximum, my printing with QTR results in a print on paper almost exactly matching the tones of the image on my monitor.  More fine tuning of the sliders may be necessary, but I am thinking I might well splurge and upgrade now to LR 4.  Thanks again to all.

Logged

Jim Ascher

See my new SmugMug site:
http://jimascherphotos.smugmug.com/
Peter Langham
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 19


« Reply #34 on: December 12, 2012, 11:07:34 PM »
ReplyReply

David and Jeff,   QTR operates as a stand alone package on windows and as a print driver on mac, so that you can open QTR through LR on mac and would have to export it on windows machine.
Logged
JimAscher
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 345



WWW
« Reply #35 on: December 18, 2012, 03:59:32 PM »
ReplyReply

After all the agonizing I've done, and lay behind my initiating this thread, Victoria Bampton has just informed me that I can indeed retain LR3.6 Basic Brightness slider in LR4.  I'll quote her"

"There's technically no need to keep 3.6 - the Brightness slider's still
in LR 4 as long as you set it to PV2010 in the Calibration panel."

I've tried it and it works.  Now my problem is well solved, and I can upgrade to LR4 and not need to retain LR 3.6.  Thanks again to all who contributed.  Jim
 
Logged

Jim Ascher

See my new SmugMug site:
http://jimascherphotos.smugmug.com/
Anthony.Ralph
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 43



« Reply #36 on: December 19, 2012, 03:43:02 AM »
ReplyReply

After all the agonizing I've done, and lay behind my initiating this thread, Victoria Bampton has just informed me that I can indeed retain LR3.6 Basic Brightness slider in LR4.  I'll quote her"

"There's technically no need to keep 3.6 - the Brightness slider's still
in LR 4 as long as you set it to PV2010 in the Calibration panel."

I've tried it and it works.  Now my problem is well solved, and I can upgrade to LR4 and not need to retain LR 3.6.  Thanks again to all who contributed.  Jim
 

Whilst I am delighted that Victoria was able to help you to resolve your requirements, I would point out that I told you the same thing in the second post in this thread  Grin

Anthony.
Logged
JimAscher
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 345



WWW
« Reply #37 on: December 19, 2012, 05:28:47 AM »
ReplyReply

Whilst I am delighted that Victoria was able to help you to resolve your requirements, I would point out that I told you the same thing in the second post in this thread  Grin

Anthony.

Anthony:  Rereading your (very) earlier posting, you're absolutely right.  I obviously failed to fully comprehend it.  I had not realized that what you were indicating I could do could occur entirely within Lightroom 4 itself.  I should have followed up with you for additional clarification -- and saved myself (and perhaps others) considerable time.  My apologies, and again thanks.  Regards, Jim
Logged

Jim Ascher

See my new SmugMug site:
http://jimascherphotos.smugmug.com/
Rory
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 190


« Reply #38 on: December 19, 2012, 08:33:06 AM »
ReplyReply

Anthony:  Rereading your (very) earlier posting, you're absolutely right.  I obviously failed to fully comprehend it.  I had not realized that what you were indicating I could do could occur entirely within Lightroom 4 itself.  I should have followed up with you for additional clarification -- and saved myself (and perhaps others) considerable time.  My apologies, and again thanks.  Regards, Jim

It was also pointed out in this thread that in order to use the brightness slider in LR4 you will have to use process 2010.  This means you cannot use the process 2012 tone controls, negating much of the advantage of updating to LR4.  I suppose you could export a file adjusted using process 2012 to a TIF and then re-import into LR and make a final adjustment with process 2010 in the TIF file.  All besides the point now that you found a solution outside of LR.
Logged
JimAscher
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 345



WWW
« Reply #39 on: December 19, 2012, 10:11:16 AM »
ReplyReply

  ...I suppose you could export a file adjusted using process 2012 to a TIF and then re-import into LR and make a final adjustment with process 2010 in the TIF file.  All besides the point now that you found a solution outside of LR.

Rory:  You have correctly stated the exact workflow sequence I would (and will begin to) employ to utilize LR 4 to gain the final print quality I was able to achieve previously with the LR 3.6 Basic Brightness slider, but benefiting from the use of the improved LR 4 Basic sliders.  As such, I will not have to rely from any new use of the QTR Gamma slider.  Your further clarification (and reminder) is appreciated.  Jim
Logged

Jim Ascher

See my new SmugMug site:
http://jimascherphotos.smugmug.com/
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad