Exposure, Contrast and Blacks slider behavior

In the Basic panel of the Develop module, when you double click on "Exposure", "Contrast" and "Blacks" the values default to +0.70, +29 and +15 respectively. Does anyone know the rationale for this?

Can't reproduce - they all go to zero for me.
win7/64

Similar Messages

At the develop stage, I seem to have lost the section for exposure, contrast, whites, blacks, clarity etc. Can you please help?

At the develop stage, I seem to have lost the section for exposure, contrast, whites, blacks, clarity etc., can you help please?

Right Click (CTRL Click on Mac) on any Panel header in the Develop module (ie. Tone Curve, HSL, etc) and put a check mark next to Basic to unhide it.

Recovery and Black Point on JPEG images

I'm not a big fan of trying to do much editing on JPEG images aside from non-exposure/white balance type stuff. I'll crop and straighten, etc.
My question pertains to (for those in the know) applying slight Recovery and Black Point correction to images that aren't shot in RAW format. A) will applying these slight changes having any effect (hopefully a positive one) on the images? B) if not, will it indeed have a negative effect?
Thanks for your time and expertise.
Mac

Jim,
Thanks for chiming in on a topic where I didn't expect to get many replies. All of your comments are well appreciated. I was basically asking because I was under the impression that unless your master is in RAW format, making adjustments to exposure, contrast and even recovery and black point would not do much and could even be detrimental to things such as skin tone, etc. I like to shoot in RAW for the reason of being able to have more fine control to adjustments, but for everyday shots and portraits I don't always go to RAW format since a lot of the time I have trouble getting the shot right with the manual controls. I also don't want the large RAW files for every shot that I take. Still, a lot of JPEG's need adjustments, even if just minor tweaks. The tweaks I make look fine on the screen, but I wasn't sure if they would look okay when printed out and I didn't want to spend countless hours making adjustments and spend (waste) money on prints that weren't going to come out good.
Anyway, that is the background to my thinking in making this post. Thanks again for chiming in.
Mac

The basic sliders disappeared. Including the Exposure, Contrast, Highlights, Shadows, Whites, Blacks, Clarity and Vibrance Sliders are no longer available. I need help to get them back

The basic sliders disappeared. Including the Exposure, Contrast, Highlights, Shadows, Whites, Blacks, Clarity and Vibrance Sliders are no longer available. I need help to get them back on the program.
I can't figure out where the sliders went and how to put them back on. Anyone have any suggestions?
Thanks

In Lightroom, go to the Window menu, select Panels, select Basic

Exporting slide show from iPhoto to QT raises contrast and darkens images?

I have been using iPhoto to create slide shows (with transitions) which I then save as QuickTime (.mov) files. I add soundtracks to the QT.mov file in QuickTime Pro and burn the finished slide show to CD's for my friends and coworkers.
The original photographic image files come from several sources; mostly a digital camera, but often scanned color slides (from the dim, distant past). All of the images have been (painstakingly!) corrected in PhotoShop, and saved as finished size Jpeg files.
When I import the images into iPhoto, edit and arrange them in a folder and preview the show as a slideshow in iPhoto, the images still look perfect.
When I save the show by exporting it to QuickTime, all of the images get darkened and the image contrast increased.
This is making me nuts.
To quantify the unwanted "enhancement" that iPhoto seems to be applying to my images, I experimented in PhotoShop; I can make the original (correct) image match the "QT enhanced" image by decreasing the "Lightness" slider by -8 to -12, and increasing the "Contrast" slider by +11 (in whatever units PhotoShop sliders are calibrated).
The resulting change in the images is infuriating: the darkening increases the color saturation and blocks up the shadow details so that many images are unusable.. black skin tones, for example, become a dark red/brown color with an unnatural gradation from light to dark.
Further experimentation using IDVD and QuickTime slide shows (without transitions) made from sequencial files directly in QT seem to indicate that the problem is not in QuickTime itself, but rather in the transition from iPhoto to QuickTime when I export the finished folder as a slide show.
It seems like iPhoto is "enhancing" or "tweaking" the images as it exports them to QuickTime: It adds contrast and reduces brightness, both of which might serve to add "snappiness" to a lot of generic snapshots that people shoot, but my images have already been fixed (thank you) and really don't need anyone's generic "tweak"
Does anyone know what it's doing, and more importantly to me, how do I turn the damned thing off?
G5 dual 2.3Ghz Mac OS X (10.4.6) Terabytes of disc space.

iPhoto can make two different types of slide show movies. It would help to know which you're making.
One is made via the File/Export to QuickTime movie and makes a 4 track file with a simple fade effect. These use the Photo-JPEG codec.
The other is a 30 fps "video" using H.264 video codec via the "Share" menu.
A third method (rarely used) is to Export to iDVD. This makes an absurdly high data rate MPEG-4 video. This is also found under the Share menu.
The MPEG-4 video codec also includes an "automatic" gamma correction feature which compensates for the gammas difference between Mac's and PC's.
Try one export to iDVD. Include your audio track prior but use a high quality (.aiff) sound file. No need to actually "burn" the DVD. You can even close iDVD after it opens. You'll find the new movie in your Users Movie folder.
Open it with QT Pro and export to a new .mov file. Adjust the data rate to something more reasonable and add some audio compression.
If the colors still look too dark you can use the built in Filters in the Export dialog. You can adjust B&C or HSL or even use ColorSync Profiles that can help correct the image quality (if needed).

I like the "whites" and "blacks" sliders in lightroom with the option key pressed- is there a corresponding slider in aperture? thank you

i like the "whites" and "blacks" sliders in lightroom with the option key pressed- is there a corresponding slider in aperture? thank you

There's no exact analogue to the "whites" slider in Aperture. But you could do it with curves if you wanted. You can set the white point using the curves tool as well.

Start an adjustment with Whites and Blacks?

Martin Evening in CS6 for Photographers recommends adjusting an image using Exposure, Contrast, then fine tune with Highlights and Shadow. Says use Whites and Blacks only if necessary. Julieanne Kost has a pithy video on ACR in which she starts by setting Whites and Blacks (which harkens back to Bruce Fraser/Real World Photoshop advice using Levels in Photoshop). http://tv.adobe.com/watch/photoshop-cs6-featuretour/adobe-camera-raw-70-in-photoshop-cs6/
I know I can see what works best for an image, etc. Wondering what is the recommended procedure.

Hi bmad,
I too would love to see a thorough treatise on the new basic sliders, with full disclosure of image adaptive behavior.
But, my guess: Adobe will leave that to 3rd parties, who may or may not ever tackle such an undertaking, with the kind of detail that would please the most curious users.
Anyway, there was a fair amount of back & forth about this in the beta forums way back when.
Eric Chan who implemented the software, was in the camp of:
* Set exposure 1st
* The rest in the order presented.
* Blacks & whites last as more of a fine-tuning of clipping points.
But, I came to accept fairly quickly that leaving blacks & whites til the end was not always going to work for me.
I regularly end up with blacks between -20 and -50, or more.
And, it's not too unusual for me to end up with +whites up to 40, or more...
Likewise, I've had a few photos with +blacks=100 & -whites = 100.
Those kinds of settings can not wait til the end as fine tuning!
Anyway, part of this depends on personal tastes.
+whites is a lot like +exposure, except it pulls harder on the upper most end. Exposure reaches further into the midtones and shadows.
So if you like your shadows and midtones bright, and highlights not as bright, then you may prefer +exposure over +whites.
In a way, +whites is kinda like:
+exposure +contrast -highlights
So, it's possible that two people can end up with similar pictures, even though they started with different sliders...
Personally, I often adjust exposure & whites simultaneously: almost think of them as a related pair. But, that only works for the more normal photos.
When large -whites values will be needed for taming the highlights, (and often +blacks complements it in that case) then the whole game changes...
I have my speculation about how the design / implementation of PV2012 came about, but I'm probably wrong, and for all practical purposes - it doesn't matter anyway.
Truth betold, the end result only depends on the final values of the sliders, not how you got there.
I think the biggest thing that people who've done their time on the learning curve want to depart on those less traveled in the PV2012 journey is:
Don't bring PV2010 thinking (or other less image-adaptive technologies) into PV2012, or it's a recipe for frustration.
e.g. Some people look at a photo and think: gee, the highlights seem bright enough already, so I think I'll try and boost the bottom up treating shadows slider like Lr3 fill light slider. Those people fairly quickly get on the forum and start screaming about how PV2012 doesn't work very well, and they want Lr3 fill back, when what they need to do is +exposure +shadows -highlights instead.
So if you always keep in mind that exposure (perhaps in conjunction with whites) is the primary means for setting overall image brightness, and shadows & highlights sliders balance around it, you'll probably be OK regardless of where you start.
Pop-quiz:
Suppose the picture looks almost perfect as is, except the highlights are too bright. What is the best thing to do?:
A. -highlights
B. -exposure -highlights +shadows
Answer: Usually B
Why? Because -highlights = +shadows is a sweet spot in PV2012, and the -exposure +shadows will keep the bottom end the same, and drop highlight brightness too, so less -highlights is needed for bringing the highlights down: Net effect: about the same, except you keep PV2012 in it's sweet spot.
In my opinion, contrast should usually be put in the ballpark early on after exposure, but fine-tuning contrast can wait til exposure/whites & blacks are more solid. It's not unusal for me to have highlights & shadows be the very last sliders tweaked.
I think one of the reasons contrast slider is up top near exposure in the slider order is to steer people away from attempting to use highlights/shadows for contrast control. Contrast is more for midtone separation, and highlights/shadows as compensation for over/under brightness of highlights & shadows due to settings of exposure and contrast.
PS - Don't forget to add a touch of clarity, if it's one of those kinds of pictures ;-}
Cheers,
Rob

Develop module sliders for overall exposure, contrast, saturation etc. are gone.

The Develop module used to have sliders for overall exposure, contrast, saturation as well as highlights, whites, blacks, shadows, vibrance, clarity etc. Now these functions are only to be found in Library Quick Develop as left/right buttons. I miss the sliders in Develop. There are similar sliders there, but only relating to specific colors, not the overall image. How do I get the sliders back?

Right-click (Ctrl-click on Mac) on any panel group tab e.g Detail, Lens Correction etc and make sure all are checked (see image below).

Establishing White Point and Black Point

Hi,
How do I Establishing a White Point and a Black Point in Lightroom 1.4.1 and especially in Lightroom 2 Bata?
Thank You,
Hersul

The last post by OP might have closed this thread, but given the relative lack of activity on this and LR2 forums (summertime?) - I'll go a little deeper.
i White point
- If your white balance is right from the start, you just use the Exposure slider to set the white point. If not, first set the white balance - that effectively sets a preliminary white point for each channel separately, or, to be more precise, matches the right side of the histogram for each channel - then set the Exposure. So, with the white point you have complete control over the histogram, as well as over each channel.
i Black point
- here the situation is different. You can move the left side of the main (composite?) histogram using the Blacks slider, but there's no means for moving channels separately. In theory, with digital capture, there probably should not be need for this, blacks should be always black, so that's OK, but...
I once had a batch of pics scanned from film. The film was poorly developed so it has some strong brown-magenta cast in the shadows. In Photoshop it was a piece of cake to set the black point by dragging the left ends of each channel to the left edge of the histogram (heck, even Auto Level did a wonderful job). In Lightroom, there's just no way you can correct this, because you can't control the channels separately.

Blacks Slider

Just spent a couple of hours investigating the new develop module in a bit more detail. I've been trying to simulate my LR3 presets (both colour and black and white) using the LR4b 2012 process. Here are some thoughts:
1. The new process certainly has it's strengths.
2. It's a much bigger change, both in terms of how you apply adjustments and the underlying code than the 2003 to 2010 change. I could update most 2003 edits to 2010 with only barely visible perceptual differences. Not so with 2010-2012.
3. There seems to be much more localised adjustment going on in LR4b. It's hard to quantify, and I certainly see the power of it, but it's possible to end up with an image that looks 'over-processed' much more easily then in LR3. Specifically:
- Adjustments rarely seem to apply in a linear fashion. Obviously the sliders target different points of the histogram/image, but the response seems not to be linear.
- While the highlight tool in LR3 used to pull back the highlights, used in larger amounts it could be used to flatten the lighting image overall. I have yet to find an analogue for this in LR4b. Reducing the contrast slider has a different effect as does clarity. The closest thing is reducing the whites but the effect is somewhat different.
4. In b&w editing the blacks slider has an excessively limited range. I am bottoming out while trying to add sufficient black levels to well exposed images. This is a big problem for me as I like to produce deep rich b/w images. I never got NEAR the top of the blacks slider in LR3 but am bottoming the LR4b blacks out at -100 and wanting more from time to time.
Thoughts welcome!

You don't have to update your existing photos - in fact, I'd suggest not doing so unless you want to reprocess. Leave them on PV2010 and when you come to a photo that you want to use the new sliders on, then you reprocess. It's a completely different process so there isn't a simple one-button-upgrade as there was for 2003-2010.
Yes, the new sliders are image-adaptive rather than linear. Just be gentle with them.
For your B&W's, try the Tone Curve and see how that does for you.

Does lightroom 3 have black slider?

Does lightroom 3 have a black slider?

Yes:
Why do you ask?
I mean, it's behavior, along with many others (e.g. exposure, clarity, ..), changed, starting with Lightroom 4 (process version 2012), but all Lightroom versions since 1 have a blacks slider in basic section.
Or am I missing the thrust of the question?
Rob

Blacks Slider Problem!

Hey,
I shoot with a Nikon D300s and use lightroom to process my images. I was recently trying some grided portraits where I was exposing the model's face and letting everything in the background go pure black. I chimped a lot and also confirmed that the background was truly black, by zooming in so I can see just the background, then using the RGBL histograms to make sure they all read 0. However, when I opened the RAW images in Lightroom and pulled the blacks slider that defaults to 5, back to 0, the histogram miraculously showed no clipping in the shadows and my background was now a murky gray. Does this mean that lightroom is actually pulling detail out of the RAW, or is it just shifting the blacks to ~90% gray.
My light meter told me, that in several of my shots, the background was almost 6 stops or more underexposed, which to my knowledge translates to pure black, where the sensor is picking up no light and hence no detail. I hope someone here can clarify my doubt and tell me if I am missing something or doing something.In fact I took and image at f8.0 1/250th with the lens cap on and Lightroom still pulled back "something from nothing". 'Black' @ 5 gave me R:0 G:0 B:0, where 'Blacks' @ 0 gave me R:5 G:2 B:3. Could someone please explain what the issue is here?

Nikon D300 has more than 6 F stop dynamic range:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond300/page20.asp
Sensitivity
Shadow range
Highlight range
Usable range
ISO 100*
-5.2 EV
3.3 EV
8.5 EV
ISO 200
-4.7 EV
4.1 EV
8.8 EV
ISO 400
-5.1 EV
4.1 EV
9.2 EV
ISO 800
-5.1 EV
4.1 EV
9.2 EV
ISO 1600
-4.3 EV
4.1 EV
8.4 EV
ISO 3200
-4.0 EV
4.0 EV
8.0 EV
ISO 6400*
-3.7 EV
3.9 EV
7.6 EV
As already mentioned camera histogram displays are created using a JPEG processed RAW image, so not a good indicator of the RAW data!
Download a copy of RAWnalyze 2.10.4.0 to view your RAW images "in the raw" and determine your camera's black levels.
http://dave-anderson-photo.com/blog/2010/08/23/gabor-rawnalyze-author-rip/#more-163
Suggest also reading the documentation:
http://www.oitregor.com/numeric/Rawnalyze/Rawnalyse_doc/datas/RawnalyzeGuide.htm
You may also be interested in using UniWB:
http://www.malch.com/nikon/UniWB.html
By trying to expose for deeper blacks you are actually doing the opposite of UniWB! The objective of UniWB is to use the maxium signal highlight range of your camera when determing exposure settings. This lowers noise in the shadow areas, especially at higher ISO settings. How you set the Black slider and tone adjustments to "crush" blacks is up to you!
Message was edited by: trshaner
Added comment about UniWB.

The tone 'black' slider is it black

using a canon 5d when they are imported into lightroom, the files get a 5 point black (by default)in the basic tone control. This slider seems to turn some of the lower tones before black a dark red? has anyone else notice this?
If I turn this slider control to '0' and use the contrast slider below in the basic develop tone control, I get a much more neutral lower tone and the dark red effect does not appear.
If I export the adjusted file with a value on the black slider with a value other than 0 it also appears in the file
anyone have any ideas why this happens? Without using the black slider it become difficult (more steps) to adjust the lower portion of the file
thanks

>Do you, by chance, know why? The only reason I can think of is that it allows a little leeway with which to reduce shadow clipping.
The defaults were apparently designed to give a fairly neutral rendering with average contrast and probably represent a simple compromise. I know they tested this with hundreds and hundreds of images from different types of photography. Most well-exposed images should have only a tiny bit below 5 blacks. That said, it is normal (and often desirable) to have some real black in your images and there really is no reason in general to decrease that slider. Don't worry too much about the warnings. If it is just in a few shadow areas, it is fine. I rarely decrease the black slider, but I often increase it to get better contrast and nicer shadows, especially after adding a little shadow fill.

White and black point vs ??

I never know which forum to post these things, so I'll start with the photographers.
 
 These three shots are as follows: (1) the camera raw version, (2) where I moved the sliders from the ends to approximately the beginning/end of the major portion of the histogram, and (3) using the threshold control to find the white and black points in the main part of the picture.
 
 Then, in the two adjusted versions, I lightened the image with the curves control.
 
 In both these cases, I used the grey dropper to touch the same spot on one of the rocks, to get the apparent neutral point.
 
 It seems to me that the threshold method to find the white and black points is preferred, based on the overall color and appearance of the finished adjustment.
 
 But, I've found on some images where the histogram has missing black and missing white, if I adjust the sliders to these two ends, I get pretty much the same outcome, as far as the contrast, color, and grey point.
 
 Could I have some advice on the preferred method to use in handling my image adjustments? Doing it the threshold method takes more time, and sometimes it's difficult to find the white and black points, or even the grey point.
 
 Thanks.
 
 Al
 
 
<a href="http://www.pixentral.com/show.php?picture=1SlEeG9kfwzD34gVOEcCbg7Ktp83p3" /></a>
<img alt="Picture hosted by Pixentral" src="http://www.pixentral.com/hosted/1SlEeG9kfwzD34gVOEcCbg7Ktp83p3_thumb.jpg" border="0" />
 
 
<a href="http://www.pixentral.com/show.php?picture=1tIEs4eAyKz4sxamyVaYRlKjTIIfKj" /></a>
<img alt="Picture hosted by Pixentral" src="http://www.pixentral.com/hosted/1tIEs4eAyKz4sxamyVaYRlKjTIIfKj_thumb.jpg" border="0" />
 
 
<a href="http://www.pixentral.com/show.php?picture=17K3ewFXsGo4K2uH5TGfO06CdVayyn1" /></a>
<img alt="Picture hosted by Pixentral" src="http://www.pixentral.com/hosted/17K3ewFXsGo4K2uH5TGfO06CdVayyn1_thumb.jpg" border="0" />

Yes the image was purposely underexposed. What I was trying to accomplish was to speed up the shutter speed to remove the slight blurring and compensate by pulling data from the shadows. Even though the lens has an image stabilizer the amount of light wasn't enough for a proper sharp shot.
this image is before touch up
These two images are F/5.6, 1/20, ISO 800
After touch up
Better lit scene but shows slight motion blur
This last image is F/5.6, 1/4, ISO 800
I believe that I will have to wait next year and hope I have a faster lens by then. I just don't think the 28mm-135mm f/3.5-5.6 lens is fast enough. I was trying this without a tripod to get in tighter.
Also I was taking these shots without the flash to get the drama of the tree lights.
What I would have prefer is a shutter speed of 1/125 or better as it helps with my hands shaking I believe the slowest should be 1/60
And the lower the ISO the better for noise.
These preferences are what I am used to with my Canon G3 that does not have IS.
I am getting so off track here, lol. But anyways, here are the pictures.

Recovery, and Black Point Not Working in 2.0

I imported RAW pics from my old database (converted to 2.0). Wanted to try the new exposure adjustments, mainly recovery and BP. The HUD only lets me adjust exposure and brightness, the recovery and black point are grayed out and cannot be adjusted.
Has anyone got this adjustment to work? I am using the trial version. No, I am not in the preview mode. The master is Canon RAW from 40D.

Got it. Thanks! Just figured it out too that you need to choose the v2.0 RAW conversion on the RAW Fine Tuning adjustment toggle.
Recovery and BP adjust a lot more sluggish on my MBP w/4G Ram then it does in the tutorial video. This is concerning since in have only imported about 40 pics so far.
Time will tell.

Exposure, Contrast and Blacks slider behavior

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for