LR Tools, which ones do you use?

[Glenn NK]

A trick I learned on the Lightroom forum:

While working on, "Exposure, Highlights, Shadows, Whites, Blacks", hold down the Alt key when the mouse is on one of these five sliders - the screen goes black (or white) except for any areas that are blown out. (Highlights and Whites will have a white screen; Exposure, Shadows and Blacks will have a black screen). The areas that are blown will show up as multi-coloured pixels. Note that in older version of LR, these terms are a bit different.

A note on Vibrance/Saturation: Vibrance mainly increases weaker colours of the image; Saturation is applied to all colours equally. Vibrance is also much better to use on people's faces as it helps to control the colour orange (which isn't a flattering colour for skin). This is out of Martin Evening's book (all issues from one to five).

Glenn

[NorthernFocus]

Hi Dan,

I read your response that the adjustment brush in Lightroom was pretty primitive. I say not so after you are used to using it....

Joe, now that I have a few hours using LR and the brush tool, it has grown on me. It is still pretty basic relative to other tools that automatically find edges much better. But in most cases the benefits of using the tool within LR on the base image outweigh the benefits of jumping out to another editor and creating another copy of the image. And as you said, speed and accuracy of using it improve with use. The brush and gradient tools in LR can accomplish about 90 percent of what I need out of "masking".

[dan marchant]

It is still pretty basic relative to other tools that automatically find edges much better.

Are you using the automask option to find edges? Also, when trying to mask something with a lot of detail the automask can be unhelpful as parts of your target may remain unmasked. A good trick is to mask with automask turned off, then hold Alt to switch to the remove mask tool but set that to Automask on. This will erase any of the mask that overflowed the edge of your target area. A third trick for particularly difficult edges is to not paint up to the edges of the subject and then to alter the brush to a wide feather and low flow (between 50-60 for both) so that you create a smoother transition between the adjustment mask and the rest of the image. Lastly, remember that you can overlay multiple adjustment brushes.

[FlyingSquirrel]

Coming in late to this, sorry to bring up the old thread.

Many of you know I dislike LR as a primary editing tool, preferring to use PS for doing up my best shots. I like the control and features available in PS, and I am very experienced and adept at using it. I have found some of the tools in LR to not be sufficient for me (not enough control or precision). That said, I only have LR4, and have not tried the newest and best versions.

I do however use LR for the RAW adjustments: exposure tweaks, wb/temp, highlight / shadow, some color adjustments, a little adjustment brush here and there when I believe the result will be better in LR vs PS (I often use LR adjustment brush for local exposure tweaks, such as brightening the eyes or shadowed areas of animals, or other various tasks where LR has the advantage).

One thing I really like about LR Color adjustments is the control and accuracy/effectiveness that you can get making tweaks to specific colors. This can be done in PS, but I prefer to do it in LR since (as far as I know) the adjustments are being applied using the RAW file, which has more data. Anyway, I find the results are better in LR for color certain color adjustments. If I have adjusted the wb/temp and other stuff in a photo, and find it has a color cast such as a blue cast on a neutral subject, I will go to the blue color slider and increase the saturation to +100 to see where the blues are, then if they are not needed in the photo, I will slide it down to -100 or close to it, which removes the blue cast. As an example, I have done this on a Red Winged Blackbird that had a blue cast on the feathers. Blue wasn't needed anywhere in the photo, so when I put blues to -100, the bird became neutral and looked great. If the blues are needed somewhere in the photo, then I don't do this. I wish I could do this with adjustment brush, but I am not aware of a way to adjust individual color sliders with the adjustment brush. In that case I do a similar adjustment in PS and just use a mask for the Hue/Sat adjustment layer(s)

I am not sure if it was mentioned by anyone, but one MAJOR difference between the Basic tone adjustments and the Tone Curve panel is that, in the tone curve panel, you can adjust the range of tones covered by the different sliders, by moving any of the three sliders just at the bottom edge of the graph. In other words, you can decide what is considered to be a shadow, or a highlight, etc, so when you change that it changes what is then affected by the sliders beneath it (highlights, lights, darks, shadows). Hopefully that made sense.

Someone mentioned Clarity in LR as a kind of Local Contrast Enhancement (LCE) and said it was easy and flexible...easy yes, flexible, no. I never use clarity because (in LR4) you only get one adjustment: the amount. You don't get to pick the radius of the effect, which to me renders it almost useless. (edit- when I say radius, I don't mean where the effect is applied, but literally, the radius of pixels that the program uses to apply the contrast adjustment) But that is just my opinion, as someone who is a control freak. I do my LCE in PS with various layers, masks, and blending modes. I also do all noise reduction and sharpening in PS as I have found LR tools for those to be lacking, even with the masking options and what not that you are giving. To each their own.

I will say, LR is superb at cataloging, managing files and metadata, searching, etc. I love it to death for all of those type of features. But for now, PS remains my go to tool for finalizing my best photos.

[Shadowman]

Coming in late to this, sorry to bring up the old thread.

Many of you know I dislike LR as a primary editing tool, preferring to use PS for doing up my best shots. I like the control and features available in PS, and I am very experienced and adept at using it. I have found some of the tools in LR to not be sufficient for me (not enough control or precision). That said, I only have LR4, and have not tried the newest and best versions.

I do however use LR for the RAW adjustments: exposure tweaks, wb/temp, highlight / shadow, some color adjustments, a little adjustment brush here and there when I believe the result will be better in LR vs PS (I often use LR adjustment brush for local exposure tweaks, such as brightening the eyes or shadowed areas of animals, or other various tasks where LR has the advantage).

One thing I really like about LR Color adjustments is the control and accuracy/effectiveness that you can get making tweaks to specific colors. This can be done in PS, but I prefer to do it in LR since (as far as I know) the adjustments are being applied using the RAW file, which has more data. Anyway, I find the results are better in LR for color certain color adjustments. If I have adjusted the wb/temp and other stuff in a photo, and find it has a color cast such as a blue cast on a neutral subject, I will go to the blue color slider and increase the saturation to +100 to see where the blues are, then if they are not needed in the photo, I will slide it down to -100 or close to it, which removes the blue cast. As an example, I have done this on a Red Winged Blackbird that had a blue cast on the feathers. Blue wasn't needed anywhere in the photo, so when I put blues to -100, the bird became neutral and looked great. If the blues are needed somewhere in the photo, then I don't do this. I wish I could do this with adjustment brush, but I am not aware of a way to adjust individual color sliders with the adjustment brush. In that case I do a similar adjustment in PS and just use a mask for the Hue/Sat adjustment layer(s)

I am not sure if it was mentioned by anyone, but one MAJOR difference between the Basic tone adjustments and the Tone Curve panel is that, in the tone curve panel, you can adjust the range of tones covered by the different sliders, by moving any of the three sliders just at the bottom edge of the graph. In other words, you can decide what is considered to be a shadow, or a highlight, etc, so when you change that it changes what is then affected by the sliders beneath it (highlights, lights, darks, shadows). Hopefully that made sense.

Someone mentioned Clarity in LR as a kind of Local Contrast Enhancement (LCE) and said it was easy and flexible...easy yes, flexible, no. I never use clarity because (in LR4) you only get one adjustment: the amount. You don't get to pick the radius of the effect, which to me renders it almost useless. (edit- when I say radius, I don't mean where the effect is applied, but literally, the radius of pixels that the program uses to apply the contrast adjustment) But that is just my opinion, as someone who is a control freak. I do my LCE in PS with various layers, masks, and blending modes. I also do all noise reduction and sharpening in PS as I have found LR tools for those to be lacking, even with the masking options and what not that you are giving. To each their own.

I will say, LR is superb at cataloging, managing files and metadata, searching, etc. I love it to death for all of those type of features. But for now, PS remains my go to tool for finalizing my best photos.

I know it might be time consuming, but a comparison of edits would be useful, how far can you take an image in LR vs PS, obviously, PS has so much more. I read either in a LR tutorial or on their website, that most LR users use the software for prepping the image before moving the photo to another software package of choice. The marketing statement was "why not do it all in LR"? I'll see if I can find the exact words.

[Shadowman]

Coming in late to this, sorry to bring up the old thread.

Many of you know I dislike LR as a primary editing tool, preferring to use PS for doing up my best shots. I like the control and features available in PS, and I am very experienced and adept at using it. I have found some of the tools in LR to not be sufficient for me (not enough control or precision). That said, I only have LR4, and have not tried the newest and best versions.

I do however use LR for the RAW adjustments: exposure tweaks, wb/temp, highlight / shadow, some color adjustments, a little adjustment brush here and there when I believe the result will be better in LR vs PS (I often use LR adjustment brush for local exposure tweaks, such as brightening the eyes or shadowed areas of animals, or other various tasks where LR has the advantage).

One thing I really like about LR Color adjustments is the control and accuracy/effectiveness that you can get making tweaks to specific colors. This can be done in PS, but I prefer to do it in LR since (as far as I know) the adjustments are being applied using the RAW file, which has more data. Anyway, I find the results are better in LR for color certain color adjustments. If I have adjusted the wb/temp and other stuff in a photo, and find it has a color cast such as a blue cast on a neutral subject, I will go to the blue color slider and increase the saturation to +100 to see where the blues are, then if they are not needed in the photo, I will slide it down to -100 or close to it, which removes the blue cast. As an example, I have done this on a Red Winged Blackbird that had a blue cast on the feathers. Blue wasn't needed anywhere in the photo, so when I put blues to -100, the bird became neutral and looked great. If the blues are needed somewhere in the photo, then I don't do this. I wish I could do this with adjustment brush, but I am not aware of a way to adjust individual color sliders with the adjustment brush. In that case I do a similar adjustment in PS and just use a mask for the Hue/Sat adjustment layer(s)

I am not sure if it was mentioned by anyone, but one MAJOR difference between the Basic tone adjustments and the Tone Curve panel is that, in the tone curve panel, you can adjust the range of tones covered by the different sliders, by moving any of the three sliders just at the bottom edge of the graph. In other words, you can decide what is considered to be a shadow, or a highlight, etc, so when you change that it changes what is then affected by the sliders beneath it (highlights, lights, darks, shadows). Hopefully that made sense.

Someone mentioned Clarity in LR as a kind of Local Contrast Enhancement (LCE) and said it was easy and flexible...easy yes, flexible, no. I never use clarity because (in LR4) you only get one adjustment: the amount. You don't get to pick the radius of the effect, which to me renders it almost useless. (edit- when I say radius, I don't mean where the effect is applied, but literally, the radius of pixels that the program uses to apply the contrast adjustment) But that is just my opinion, as someone who is a control freak. I do my LCE in PS with various layers, masks, and blending modes. I also do all noise reduction and sharpening in PS as I have found LR tools for those to be lacking, even with the masking options and what not that you are giving. To each their own.

I will say, LR is superb at cataloging, managing files and metadata, searching, etc. I love it to death for all of those type of features. But for now, PS remains my go to tool for finalizing my best photos.

I know it might be time consuming, but a comparison of edits would be useful, how far can you take an image in LR vs PS, obviously, PS has so much more. I read either in a LR tutorial or on their website, that most LR users use the software for prepping the image before moving the photo to another software package of choice. The marketing statement was "why not do it all in LR"? I'll see if I can find the exact words.

[Downrigger]

An alternative to PS, I think, is to stay with LR and add the NIK software, which provides point control when/if you need it. Regardless of PP software, I feel the problem is to try to take pictures that don't need a lot of help, and to have the good sense to delete the ones that do before going nuts with them on whatever software one is using.

[NorthernFocus]

I agree, Matt, that LR can't touch PS or even PSE for fine work. But then neither of them can touch LR for processing the lighting/colors. I was doing my RAW lighting/color corrections in Nikon software assuming that the OEM should know how best to handle their own proprietary files. Then I would export to 8bit tiff and do any cloning, layer work, etc, in PSE. Boy was I wrong about the RAW processing. LR kicks butt in that regard. It is astonishing how much better shadows/highlights can be pulled out of the RAW file with LR. Based on some stuff I've read I guess it was with LR4 that they made the big improvements in RAW processing and even more so now with LR5.3. So I guess I'm really not that late to the party. Chances are that ViewNX/CaptureNX were just as good or better for RAW processing prior to LR4. Either way, I'm loving it now.

Regarding the brush tool, it takes a bit of practice but it is getting better.

[FlyingSquirrel]

Regardless of PP software, I feel the problem is to try to take pictures that don't need a lot of help, and to have the good sense to delete the ones that do before going nuts with them on whatever software one is using.

So true, and thanks for pointing this out. Planning, preparation, research, practice, hard work, time in the field, etc simply will always be the way to go, at least for me, personally. Lots of people think PS or whatever can do everything and fix everything. They are really letting themselves down with that kind of thinking.

That said, there is more work to be done on RAW files than with, say, a jpg. But that is in terms of bringing tones, colors, and sharpness up to reality, and has nothing to do with cloning out a background full of twigs

[Downrigger]

It took me a while to learn how to use it, not I would not want to be without it.

Joe - I can only hope to someday, even occasionally, obtain results like yours, but I have to comment on this shot, in all humility.
This looks to me as though the ducks have been perfectly shot on a bright day, and somehow pasted onto another image of a softened background on a dimmer day. It is not only a great example of use of the brush, but to me a caveat about getting more local enhancement than I might want.

[Sponge]

While working on, "Exposure, Highlights, Shadows, Whites, Blacks", hold down the Alt key when the mouse is on one of these five sliders - the screen goes black (or white) except for any areas that are blown out. (Highlights and Whites will have a white screen; Exposure, Shadows and Blacks will have a black screen). The areas that are blown will show up as multi-coloured pixels. Note that in older version of LR, these terms are a bit different.
Glenn

Just to add, the Alt key technique also helps a lot with the Masking slider in the sharpening part of the detail panel to see where the sharpening is being applied exactly (everything in white).

[Sponge]

I just watched a good video on Lightroom's Tone Curve on slrlounge.com and thought I'd share. I usually use the sliders in the basic panel to make tone adjustments but after watching this video I think I'm going to try to get to grips with the Tone Curve as well. At 6:50 it starts to show where it's different than the other tone tools in Lightroom.

[Mike Buckley]

I usually use the sliders in the basic panel to make tone adjustments but after watching this video I think I'm going to try to get to grips with the Tone Curve as well.

Once you gain command of that capability, you will exert far more control over your image than the sliders provide.

[NorthernFocus]

Once you gain command of that capability, you will exert far more control over your image than the sliders provide.

Not sure if you mean curves alone or in combination with the sliders. I disagree with the former, agree whole heartedly with the latter. Speaking in reference to LR5.3, I have no idea regarding prior versions. As I understand from reading "expert opinions", with LR4 and again with 5, the algorithms behind the sliders are much improved versus prior versions.

[Downrigger]

I just watched a good video on Lightroom's Tone Curve on slrlounge.com and thought I'd share.

Yes, this is helpful - at least in the sense it conveys how powerful the curve tool is. Here's my quibble with it and I hope I'll get corrected if wrong.

With the sliders you can add or decrease luminosity for different portions of the histogram. To me, the different, and distinct power afforded by curves is that you can adjust where you want to place either increased or decreased SLOPE to the curve. Regions of the luminosity range with increased slope for the curve show more contrast (greater increments output per increment in input), and flattened areas of the curve show less contrast for that part of the luminosity range.

Thus, the sliders allow you to adjust where you want luminosity, and you can do that with the curve too, but more importantly and specifically the curve tool allows you to adjust where in the luminosity range you want more contrast (steeper rise in output per rise in input). I don't think the video succeeded in conveying what I think is this, critical point.

For example - adding slope in the curve in the midtones is similar to adding clarity with the clarity slider, but more controlled by the user.

Right?

[Mike Buckley]

Mark,

I didn't view the video but I did read the other part of the tutorial and it fails to explain the very important point that you mention. Everything in your post is accurate in my mind except for one nuance (see below).

To expand on your point, using a slider to brighten or darken a particular range of luminosity affects the slope of the curve but does so beyond the user's control. Yikes! Even more constricting, using a slider affects a particular range of luminosity that is also beyond the user's control. Double yikes! Using the "Edit Point Curve" mode solves all of those limitations and puts all aspects of the curve -- amount of brightness, degree of the slope and range of luminosity being affected -- solidly in the user's control.

If Lightroom would eventually allow an adjusted curve to be applied to a particular area of the image rather than only to the entire image, that would be the cat's meow.

That takes me back to your point that adding slope to the curve provides the user with more control than using the clarity slider. That's true when adjusting the entire image. However, one advantage of the clarity slider over any aspect of the Curve tool is that it can be applied to a portion of the image using either the radial filter or the adjustment brush.

[NorthernFocus]

The sliders and curve tool are simply presenting a different user interface to accomplish the same thing. When you move the sliders, the histogram shifts to reflect the changes. The displayed histogram reflects the "output" values after the changes. The format for the curves tool it to keep the input histogram static and to visually reflect the changes via the curve which also happens to be the method of control. Simply different strokes on how you want to see the underlying data, if one cares.

Mike, whether one or the other allows more control or simply the illusion of more control is a topic that could be debated endlessly. Having never used the curve tool previously, I don't have that pre-established comfort level with it. So from my perspective they are much of a muchness. One thing that is cool, however, is that they are additive. You can manipulate the histogram with the sliders and the result then becomes the input histogram for the curves tool. So both are useful. For example you can use the sliders to spread out the histogram in highlights, shadows, or overall and then selectively manipulate the curve tool to increase contrast in the desired area where you want to bring out detail.

So I think rather than debate which is better, we should be glad of the fact that we have them both

But yes, it would be so much better if curves could be selectively applied. But I guess that's what PS lets you do with layers...

[Downrigger]

If Lightroom would eventually allow an adjusted curve to be applied to a particular area of the image rather than only to the entire image, that would be the cat's meow.

Thanks for the clarifications, Mike. Yes - using the sliders has, necessarily, effects on the curve slope - and you can't see where they happen. They are hidden even when one looks at the curve. And yes, you can adjust local clarity with brush or (either graduated or radial), but there is no way do do so with curves, which is too bad. I don't use PS but guess that PS has that helpful enhancement.

The real question is: why use both/one or the other/in which order, and how are they different?

Here's my guess...They seem like two different tools to do the same thing but I think they can best used slightly differently, to the user's advantage.

My sense is that the sliders move the whole histogram around - you can shove one end of the histogram or the other right through blown if you want. So with them you can get a rough distribution of luminosities more or less where you want them. By contrast, with the curve adjustment, you are redistributing luminosity and (input/output slopes) mostly within the constraints of the curve you are starting with, having set the sliders. So, I use the sliders first as a coarse adjustment if there are major or obvious excesses or deficiencies in the luminosity curve relative to my intentions for the image. Then I use the curve tool to fine tune that, and try to put contrast (steep) where the image needs it (or remove it [flat] where it doesn't).

Again - correct me if I'm wrong.

My real question is... how come we have to figure that out for ourselves? You'd think Adobe might want to provide this information explicitly - or do they assume most users are just a lot brighter than I am?

[Mike Buckley]

Dan,

I'm not suggesting that one tool is better than the other. Instead, I'm explaining that one tool provides more control. It's up to each user to determine which method or combination of methods for adjusting the curve meets their needs.

However, it's really not accurate to say that the method of using sliders and the method of using points on the curve is merely a different interface that accomplishes the same thing. I can produce virtually an infinite number of curves using the points that simply cannot be produced using the sliders. While I understand that perhaps similar curves could be produced using the sliders, the exact curves could not. That's not an illusion; that's a fact.

Whether or not that fact is important is up to each user. I suspect it probably will not be at all important to most users. For me and others who desire maximum control of the curve, that fact is important.

[Mike Buckley]

using the sliders has, necessarily, effects on the curve slope - and you can't see where they happen. They are hidden even when one looks at the curve.

We're not communicating well about that. When I move the sliders, I can see the curve changing. Try running that by me again.

To be clear, I don't use Lightroom for the kinds of edits that we're discussing. I use my primary software application to do that, which has no sliders for adjusting the curve, only points. So, I don't have an idea about the ideal workflow with regard to perhaps using both the sliders and the curve points. Even so, the workflow you described certainly makes sense.

One point that hasn't been mentioned in this recent discussion is that the effect of the Curve tool's sliders can be fine tuned using the three "handles" located on the graph's X-axis. You might want to try using that capability before doing even more fine-tuning using the curve points.

I'm not sure, but I have the impression that some people think that it's possible to adjust the curve without affecting the histogram. On the contrary, no matter what method is used to adjust the curve, doing so will always affect the image's histogram. Indeed, I can't think of any adjustment that could be made in the Develop module that wouldn't affect the histogram at least to a small degree.

In some software packages such as my primary app, the histogram is used only to display data. In Lightroom, the histogram both displays the data and can be used to change the data (the image). I haven't explored its use in any detail, but it seems to have several capabilities built into it that might be worth exploring.

Similarly, some programs have separate Levels and Curve tools. Lightroom's Curve tool conveniently has the Levels tool built into the tool that makes use of the points. My guess is that the Levels adjustment is so important that it's probably also available elsewhere in the Develop module and that I haven't yet noticed it.

You mentioned that Adobe doesn't provide a suggested workflow with regard to the various capabilities built into the Curve tool. If that's true, you're right that's really sad.