Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 ... 11 12 [13] 14 15 ... 19 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: What are you wishing for in LR5 ?  (Read 66981 times)
Schewe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5500


WWW
« Reply #240 on: March 02, 2013, 10:03:21 PM »
ReplyReply

For doing what types of adjustments?

And before you answer, remember who's asking...if anybody can make something happen, it's this guy :~)

(but you gotta make a real good use case and describe exactly what you are trying to do and why the current toolset fall short)
Logged
ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7670


WWW
« Reply #241 on: March 03, 2013, 07:26:04 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

I would use it like the gradient filter.

As an example, I use it to darken skies in Photoshop. What I do is that I duplicate the image and use multiply. Than I select blue channel (Alt-CMD-5) and create a layer mask on the top layer. Would be nice to be able to do this in LR without going to Photoshop.

So what I would like to do is essentially to apply corrections depending on the luminosity of the region.

Best regards
Erik

For doing what types of adjustments?
« Last Edit: March 03, 2013, 07:28:38 AM by ErikKaffehr » Logged

jjj
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3539



WWW
« Reply #242 on: March 05, 2013, 12:31:15 AM »
ReplyReply

How about it being time that LR CAN read all PSD file formats, and not just Max compatible! 

This is a pain not only for new files, but all the old folders I want to import have many non-max-compat files and I would need to open each individually and save!  I just cancel out of it, and how I remember to Sync the folder later and hope it prompts me again.
Simply write an action to do the job for you and then batch process from Bridge - Menu/tools/Photoshop/Batch IIRC, not near computer to check. I did just that and another one to convert my Duo/Tritoned  PSD files so they then appear in LR. And set PS to save files for max compatibility to avoid issue in future.
Logged

Tradition is the Backbone of the Spineless.   Futt Futt Futt Photography
jjj
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3539



WWW
« Reply #243 on: March 05, 2013, 12:33:12 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

I would use it like the gradient filter.

As an example, I use it to darken skies in Photoshop. What I do is that I duplicate the image and use multiply. Than I select blue channel (Alt-CMD-5) and create a layer mask on the top layer. Would be nice to be able to do this in LR without going to Photoshop.

So what I would like to do is essentially to apply corrections depending on the luminosity of the region.

Best regards
Erik

I tend to use -ve highlight attribute on grad filter as a way of doing that.
I also use the blue channel control to alter saturation and luminance as another quick and dirty sky adjustment.
« Last Edit: March 05, 2013, 12:34:50 AM by jjj » Logged

Tradition is the Backbone of the Spineless.   Futt Futt Futt Photography
jjj
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3539



WWW
« Reply #244 on: March 06, 2013, 06:51:53 AM »
ReplyReply

My wish list comes from someone who's recently migrated from Aperture to Lightroom. Most of the friction comes from the library module. It's capable, but cumbersome.

What I'd like to see there:

1.) a closer link between the filter bar and smart albums. Unless I'm missing something, there's no way to save the results of using the filter bar as a smart album. Equally, there's no way to have a live preview of a smart album: you first set up the criteria, then see what you get.
Being able to create collections from criteria you've set in filter panel could be handy for many people.

Quote
2.) creating new sets, collections and smart collections is unnecessarily cumbersome. If I right click on a collection set and pick "new collection", don't pop up a dialogue box - create the collection inside it with the cursor ready to name it.
Yup. +1

Quote
And let me rename something by simply double clicking on it! It works for the finder & windows explorer, it should work for LR too.
Likewise not being able to rename things inline is a clunky [and unnecessary] aspect of a programme that in general makes using a computer easier.

Quote
3.) it would be fantastic if develop included a grid view. In the longer term, the web/slideshow/book functions really do feel modular - you generally don't do those things till you've culled your images - but develop and library seem two sides of the same coin. Rating and adjusting, tweaking and choosing, those often go hand in hand. I'd love to see those modules combined or, if that's not possible, grow closer together.
I use two monitors and have grid or second loupe view on second screen - which works really well. On laptop I simply use 'D' and 'G' shortcut keys to swap between grid/library view and develop module. Some people use the strip of thumbnails along bottom, but I find it too fiddly to be of any use. Much easier and quicker to swap to grid view.

Logged

Tradition is the Backbone of the Spineless.   Futt Futt Futt Photography
hjulenissen
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1683


« Reply #245 on: March 06, 2013, 08:00:28 AM »
ReplyReply

I find the distinction between the graduated filter and the brush a little artificial. In the end, they end up being rendered as a spatially variable control parameter to one or more functions, right?

So why can I not draw the mask using a simultaneous combination of primitive  circles, triangles, lines, brushes etc with various opacity, edge hardness etc? That would make for one less "top-level" icon, the unification of two related concepts and more flexible editing.

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

Posts: 5500


WWW
« Reply #246 on: March 06, 2013, 12:32:12 PM »
ReplyReply

So why can I not draw the mask using a simultaneous combination of primitive  circles, triangles, lines, brushes etc with various opacity, edge hardness etc?

Because that's not the way it was designed and coded...the gradient is (I think) a simple vector drawn gradient over which the the gradation occurs. The brush is a painted mask that must be stored parametrically. It doesn't actually create a mask, it stores the mask in X Y coordinates and then uses those numbers to render the mask during processing. Both functions, the gradient and the brush are totally different concepts in terms of describing the way an adjustment will be applied locally.

And believe me, what the engineers have already done is pretty darn remarkable mathematically and in code. Yes, I would like to be able to modify a gradient with a brush...but in the grand scheme of things, the way things are at the moment (things can always be added–hint, hint) allows for pretty useful local control over the raw processing. If you need more complicated adjustments or greater precision, there's this little application called Photoshop...you may have heard of it?
Logged
hjulenissen
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1683


« Reply #247 on: March 06, 2013, 12:48:38 PM »
ReplyReply

Because that's not the way it was designed and coded...the gradient is (I think) a simple vector drawn gradient over which the the gradation occurs. The brush is a painted mask that must be stored parametrically. It doesn't actually create a mask, it stores the mask in X Y coordinates and then uses those numbers to render the mask during processing. Both functions, the gradient and the brush are totally different concepts in terms of describing the way an adjustment will be applied locally.
The way Lightroom is presented makes us (users) prone to not care about how it is coded. That is a great quality! It also makes you wonder "how could things be even better for the user", instead of "ah, I understand why the application has this quirk because the underlying algorithm has to ..."

Eventually, no matter if it is a vector or a bitmap, I assume that the parameters are somehow transferred to a "fixed" image processing pipeline. If the gradient and the brush are both affecting WB, then I assume that they are somehow merged into something that can control the WB-processing-thingy, instead of doing two pixel-affecting WB-processing-thingys in series.

The reason I am requesting this is that I often find the application of brush tedious, time-consuming, and difficult to align to large simple geometric shapes. The gradient, on the other hand, is very coarse and always straight. I might like to make a general outline of the horizon using something like the gradient (or perhaps a smooth low-order spline), then use something like the brush to add/detract to it to work my way around trees or other irregularities. Then I'd like the two of them linked to e.g. pull down the exposure of my sky. Perhaps there is some neat work-around inside Lightroom that I did not think of?
...there's this little application called Photoshop...you may have heard of it?
Tried it... not anyhing for me. I can code basic image processing easier (and a lot more satisfying) in MATLAB than I can navigate the frustrating endless popup windows, minimal icons and OS-alien interface concepts. If I can't do the simple stuff within an hour ("hello world"), I seem unable to motivate myself to work until I am able to do the fancy stuff (and I am impressed by the stuff photoshop-jockeys produce). Photoshop feels to me much like Wordperfect did in the late 80s: a mature product that did everything the core users expected it to do and blistering fast, but soon to be beaten commercially by the (in many ways inferior) Microsoft Word that made basic chores simpler for basic users.

Perhaps I am just lazy and a cheapskate...

-h
« Last Edit: March 06, 2013, 01:03:02 PM by hjulenissen » Logged
Schewe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5500


WWW
« Reply #248 on: March 06, 2013, 02:05:41 PM »
ReplyReply

The way Lightroom is presented makes us (users) prone to not care about how it is coded. That is a great quality! It also makes you wonder "how could things be even better for the user", instead of "ah, I understand why the application has this quirk because the underlying algorithm has to ..."

I'm just explaining why what you are asking for would be a MAJOR bit of engineering...and unlikely to be done. On the other hand, there may be other approaches that could be done...like maybe a radial based gradient. But having the graduated filter and the adjustment brush work together to modify the adjustment area interactively is simply not in the cards based on the way the features were designed. Sorry, but I'm trying to explain why what you think you want likely won't happen so you can move on to some other feature request that might.
Logged
John Cothron
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 170



WWW
« Reply #249 on: March 06, 2013, 02:44:05 PM »
ReplyReply

User defined fields, specifically for those of us who are still scanning film and wish to store film specific information in metadata.  This would alleviate the need for things like EXIF tool.  Also a general notes field, over and above the current caption field but with the same characteristics.   I apologize if these have already been mentioned.
Logged

john beardsworth
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2832



WWW
« Reply #250 on: March 06, 2013, 03:07:19 PM »
ReplyReply

User defined fields....
You can add them but only through the SDK - look up my Big Note plug-in as an example. However, I agree LR should have built-in custom fields, as they are in most other cataloguing apps.
Logged

John Cothron
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 170



WWW
« Reply #251 on: March 06, 2013, 03:26:39 PM »
ReplyReply

You can add them but only through the SDK - look up my Big Note plug-in as an example. However, I agree LR should have built-in custom fields, as they are in most other cataloguing apps.

I actually use your Big Note plug-in for exactly that purpose.  The only issue I have with that is running out of space.  It has a character limit of some number (haven't counted), while the caption field seems to be a "memo" type field with lots of storage available. 
Logged

Chris Kern
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 126


« Reply #252 on: March 06, 2013, 06:11:42 PM »
ReplyReply

I'm trying to explain why what you think you want likely won't happen so you can move on to some other feature request that might.

I'm interpreting this as a hint that the feature-set for LR 5 isn't fixed yet—that your friends at Adobe are still interested in hearing what else their customers want most to see in the next major rev.

I have been doing a lot of both exterior and interior architectural shooting lately.  Strictly amateur: my wife and I are building a new house and I'm documenting the construction.  While the combination of the LR4 automated and manual “lens correction” controls almost always permits me to achieve the result I want, often a lot of fiddling is involved.  Specifically, on some shots I find I need to make many repetitive, finicky, vertical, horizontal and rotational adjustments before the perspective looks correct to me.  (I'm not working with a T/S lens.)

Maybe there's no way around this other than improving my capture technique and/or technology.  I've tried other software, including DxO and Photoshop, that doesn't perform perspective correction any better than LR.  Or any worse, for that matter.  In other words, I pretty much can get where I want to be whatever product I use, but it frequently takes longer than I would like.  (This is my first experience with what for me is high-volume PP.)  What I'm looking for is a simpler but equally-effective toolset rather than an improvement in core functionality.

Anyway, since these days easily 90 percent of what I shoot is post-processed exclusively in LR, I thought I'd throw this into the ever-enlarging request queue.
Logged
Schewe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5500


WWW
« Reply #253 on: March 06, 2013, 09:16:28 PM »
ReplyReply

I'm interpreting this as a hint that the feature-set for LR 5 isn't fixed yet—that your friends at Adobe are still interested in hearing what else their customers want most to see in the next major rev.

It's always useful to have the LR engineers get feedback from customers...and feature wishes. But realize that what can be done, version to version, is outside of the engineer's hands and in the hands of the product managers who determine feature triage. As for whether or not LR5 features are or are not "fixed yet", I could not answer...but I don't think you should try to read the tea leaves.  Nothing I've said so far in this thread should be taken as an indication LR5 is or is not feature locked. Fact is, nothing is ever truly feature locked until the final GM version of any software ships. And now that Lightroom has joined Photoshop in the Creative Cloud, not even that is set in stone.

Don't try to read the tea leaves, just make your tea and drink it :~)
Logged
David Eichler
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 340


WWW
« Reply #254 on: March 12, 2013, 07:54:47 PM »
ReplyReply

Would like the ability to batch export multiple presets.
Logged

jwlimages
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 59


« Reply #255 on: March 14, 2013, 12:06:22 PM »
ReplyReply

I have a request for a simple addition to the UI - in Grid view, how about adding arrows to the scroll bar for more precise scrolling through images?

My primary catalog is only 16K images or so, but moving through it in grid view is so awkward when limited to clicking in or dragging the scroll bar. Simply adding arrows would allow for much more precision moving around the catalog.

I know the Mac UI guidelines seem to be trying to eliminate scroll arrows - they're hidden until I hover/click in the scroll bar area. But it seems like they would be a big help to navigation in Grid view. Anyone else find their absence an issue?

John
Logged
Schewe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5500


WWW
« Reply #256 on: March 14, 2013, 12:17:21 PM »
ReplyReply

Anyone else find their absence an issue?

Nope...I use a scroll wheel mouse. Trying to scroll by clicking with the mouse is, kinda antiquated...even if you are on a laptop, gestures work better (well, on the Mac). So, I doubt this will happen...sorry.
Logged
jwlimages
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 59


« Reply #257 on: March 14, 2013, 12:33:52 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi Jeff,

Quote
Nope...I use a scroll wheel mouse.

-- for me, that's about as imprecise as dragging the little "box" in the scroll bar. Oh well...

John
Logged
Bryan Conner
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 520


WWW
« Reply #258 on: March 14, 2013, 12:37:54 PM »
ReplyReply

Anyone else find their absence an issue?



I do not find their absence an issue either.  I use the up and down arrows on my keyboard to move one row at a time and the page up, page down keys if I wish to move in greater increments.  I think they are called page up and page down on an English keyboard.  On my German keyboard they are called Bild up and Bild down.
Logged

nufarydyna
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1


« Reply #259 on: March 15, 2013, 01:44:09 PM »
ReplyReply

I am surprised that nobody so far mentioned output modules. Slideshow is probably most underdeveloped module in LR. It does not have Ken-Burn effects, limited transitions and it does not allow use more than one piece of music. So, if your slideshow is longer than 3-4 min than you have to use one of symphonies by Gustav Mahler Smiley
Also book module which I use extensively needs some improvements, mainly more flexibility with page layouts. I do not ask for InDesign type of capabilities, but at least something like picture package in LR print module.
Logged
Pages: « 1 ... 11 12 [13] 14 15 ... 19 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad