LR 2.7 and ACR 5.7 are out

For those who read via e-mail and cannot see the forum annoucement...LR 2.7
and ACR 5.7 are available on Adobe Updates:
http://www.adobe.com/downloads/updates/

Thanks!
Just to make sure: Is it confirmed that the new demosaicing is in there ... to know that I have to readjust NR and sharpening?
Franz

Similar Messages

New Perian and Flash Player Version are out...

Perian version 1.1.2
http://perian.org/
Repair your permission before and after installation...then restart.
You can install this from the Perian System Preferences Panel
Flash Player 10,0,12,36
http://www.adobe.com/shockwave/download/download.cgi?P1ProdVersion=ShockwaveFlash
I would suggest using Adobe Flash Player Uninstaller program before installing the new version.
http://kb.adobe.com/selfservice/viewContent.do?externalId=tn_14157
Make sure all browsers are closed before using the above Adobe uninstaller/installer.
Remember to rebuild you permissions. Flash is really bad for not having the right permissions.
Message was edited by: David M Brewer

Thanks for the heads up!

I unpluged my headphones, and now when they are out my computer is on a permeant mute.

I tried to change my output setting to internal speakers, but the setting doesn't even seem to be there.
I did some reasearch and it says that it must be something in my earphone jack.Because even when i unplug them a red light is still shining in there.
What can i do to fix it?

Try plugging and unplugging the headphones several times, and see if that turns it from digital out (red light) to analog out (no red light) Sometimes rebooting the computer with the headphones plugged in, then pulling them out will reset it. There are a couple of more things to check, but start wit these

Updated to 5.0 and now TV shows are out of order

I just updated to software version 5.0 and now the TV shows in the Computers section are listed non-alphabetically and not even numerically by season. Has anyone else noticed this?

I'm cynical but it's all moving to the cloud - they couldn't care less anymore about local streaming so won't pay attention to things like this. They never fixed glaring backward steps in terms of content organisation of streamed content on ATV2 vs ATV1. They never ported iTunes LP and Extras which are pointless except on AppleTV.
It'll all be about tweeting what you last watched, viewing your most frequently played/bought on your MugWall, and some AI determining what you ought to rent/buy/watch next.
Argghh........!

HELP. ............Hi folks hope some one can help me please.Having a problem in Bridge I open my images in ACR, as I open files in a folder and lets say they are labeled in yellow they are all going back to the camera raw default , in other words no ma

HELP. ............Hi folks hope some one can help me please.Having a problem in Bridge I open my images in ACR, as I open files in a folder and lets say they are labeled in yellow they are all going back to the camera raw default , in other words no matter what work I have done, inc cropping they all go back to ,as they came out of camera. What on earth is happening? I am on PS CS6. I might point out everything was working normally up to yesterday, when this first started.
I recently changed computer to 64bit from 32bit, not sure if this causing the problem or not. Any help would be appreciated.

Robert,
Would you be so kind to rephrase your question with concise, precise information and without any "let's say that" hypotheticals? Sorry, I can't quite follow you.
Also please give exact versions of Photoshop CS6 (13.what.what), of Bridge and of your OS.
Thanks.
BOILERPLATE TEXT:
If you give complete and detailed information about your setup and the issue at hand, such as your platform (Mac or Win), exact versions of your OS, of Photoshop and of Bridge, machine specs, what troubleshooting steps you have taken so far, what error message(s) you receive, if having issues opening raw files also the exact camera make and model that generated them, etc., someone may be able to help you.
Please read this FAQ for advice on how to ask your questions correctly for quicker and better answers:
http://forums.adobe.com/thread/419981?tstart=0
Thanks!

After editing file in ACR 8.6 (Mac) , the file (NEF and XMP) modification dates are not updated

With both my Mac's, reset Photoshop C (2014) to previous version 2014.0. Now find that after editing file in ACR 8.6 (Mac) , the file (NEF and XMP) modification dates are not updated. Reloaded camera raw, etc., but still find modification dates are not updated, either using Finder or using Bridge to view dates. Editing other files, PSD, DNG, TIFF, etc., are updated and the information is correctly displayed.

Ok, not entirely sure what I did but it's now working (Bizarre!). The only thing I did was 'eject' the ACR 8.6 .dmg file from the finder side bar and restart PS CC, so that may have been where I was going wrong all along!
However, I now have another issue in that there is no preview of the shot in Finder on my iMac when I highlight the NEF file. I assume this is simply because Apple haven't yet released an update for the new D810 NEF files and so the computer doesn't know what it's looking at?!?
If anyone has any other ideas though, then I'm more than willing to listen.
Thanks again.

Need help with Olympus E-M1 and ACR 8.3 Results

Hi:
1. I'm fairly familiar with photoshop and ACR, but definitely not an expert.   I'm also very familiar with the Olympus RAW files since the E-5 (I've owned the E-5, E-M5 and several Pens); I now recently purchased the E-M1 and I've been having problems getting decent images out of the RAW files (compared to the prior Olympus RAW files).
2. Problem: it just "feels" that the overall tone curve is more abrupt, especially in the highlights.    With the prior Olympus RAW files, the transition from moving the exposure slider to the right and then getting blown out highlights was more gradual;   there just seems to be an overt decrease in "headroom" when dealing with highlights in the E-M1 RAW files.   I know this makes no sense in that the dynamic range is supposed to be greater with this camera compared to the prior ones.
3. Problem: In relation to the above issue, it also seems that the highlight slider is not as specific as it used to be in that when I move it to the left, more of the histogram seems to be affected as opposed to the bright / highlight region.   It now seems to basically counteract any adjustments made to the exposure.   Again, this may be my imagination but it just feels this way.
4. Problem: In relation to the above issue, the other strange observation I've had is that although the histogram of the image shows no clipping, the image may have very bright areas with almost imperceptible detail;   when I click on it and view that data point within curves, it shows it to be well below 255.    In my lame flower shot example (it's not a good example but I couldn't find anything else right now), I would have guessed that in the brighest petal area, that it would be something like 250, but it's only 220.   But when I zoom in, there's really no texure or detail or data.
5. The above issue in re: highlight rendering and control may or may not be related but it's the first time, I've been having issues and I've never had such problems with either ACR or prior Olympus cameras and thus I'm wondering if this is some issue with how ACR interprets the E-M1 file. I did do some comparison with Capture One 7 and that does a definitely better job of highlight recovery in that it seems to more preferentially target just the highlights and definitely does a better job with color rendition.   I have Olympus Viewer 3, but it's so slow and lame, that I haven't done much testing with it.   Any thoughts and advice much much appreciated.

Also, you might want to upload your raw file, a full-size JPG of what you posted, above, and an example from C1 to www.dropbox.com and post a public link, here, for others to experiment with.

Capture vs. Content Sharpening in Lightroom and ACR

Hi,
I have a question regarding sharpening in Lightroom and ACR. In the information I have read, many authors point out that Lightroom and ACR's detail panel is optimized to provide control over capture sharpening. In a post that I read recently by Jeff Schewe, he clarified that and said that we are really sharpening for both capture and content with the detail panel in Lightroom.
That is confusing to me because after reading Bruce Fraser's book on sharpening, capture and content sharpening were treated as two different processes. If I understood correctly capture sharpening for digital captures was based on the characteristics of the camera and the file size of the image, with larger megapixel files receiving a smaller radius. In addition, I read that the radius in content sharpening is dictated by the dominant characteristics of the subject matter being sharpened, with high frequency subject matter receiving a smaller radius and low frequency receiving a higher radius.
The reason I am confused is that it appears that capture and content sharpening for the same digital capture can at times be quite different. For example, I believe that the book suggests a radius for an 11 megapixel capture of .4. If the image content calls for a sharpening radius of 1.3, what do I do? In Lightroom/ACR I can only choose 1 radius.
In all the reading I have done regarding the proper use of Lightroom and ACR, it suggest that you should use a radius that is suited to the image content. So it appears that we are that we are being encouraged to perform content sharpening only with Lightroom and ACR. What happened to the "capture" sharpening portion of the process?
Since Lightroom and ACR are capable of recognizing the camera make and model as well as the file size, are they applying capture sharpening behind the scenes that is tailored to that specific camera and file. If not, then how are we achieving both capture and content sharpening in the same operation?
Sharpening for both capture and content in one pass would seem to conflict with some of the basic concepts elaborated on in Bruce Fraser's book. I am assuming that since Lightroom is using Photokit Sharpener routines, that they have accounted for the capture portion of the sharpening, but I don't see that stated explicitly anywhere in anything that I have read. If they have, I say kudos to everyone involved as that would be great. I'm just looking for a clearer understanding of what's happening.
If anyone can shed some light on this topic I would be very appreciative.
Thanks,
John Arnold

>Since Lightroom and ACR are capable of recognizing the camera make and model as well as the file size, are they applying capture sharpening behind the scenes that is tailored to that specific camera and file. If not, then how are we achieving both capture and content sharpening in the same operation?
The answer is that the detail section crosses over into creative territory and is not strictly "capture sharpening," although that is what is mostly meant to do.
Following the ultimate logic of the "sharpening workflow" might make you conclude that Capture sharpening and output sharpening are purely scientific steps where you should not make ANY creative decision at all and that creative decisions are only to be made in the creative sharpening step. In the real world, there are creative decisions and decisions determined by the content matter that enter into the capture step too just like in the output step. You might like extra-crunchy prints for example, but somebody else might prefer softer prints making you approach the output sharpening with a creative intent. The sharpening workflow was probably (Jeff will know more about the history) more of an attempt to arrive at a more rational way of approaching the process and to provide a guideline. It is probably not meant to rigidly separate the workflow up in defined steps where in the 1st step you're not allowed to think or look at the image, in the second step you can go completely wild, and in the last step you have to close your eyes again. The goal was probably to make the photographer realize that the different steps have a different purpose. Not to make you turn off your creative genius or to treat the process like a black box.
My approach to this, inspired in some part by Jeff's many posts on this, is to make the image look good at 1:1 using the detail tool in Lightroom/ACR. This is inherently driven by content of course as you use visual feedback. If your image is large swaths of plain color separated by sharp transitions with little structure, you probably do not want a high setting on the detail slider as you might induce halos and you probably want to use some masking. Conversely, if you shoot brick architecture, a high detail value might look good. If you shot at high ISO, you might need a different approach again to not blow up noise. Also, portraits might need a different approach. After the 1:1 optimization, I sometimes selectively sharpen (or blur!) parts of the image (rare but can be effective - example would be people's eyes). Then for the output step I use appropriate output sharpening for the medium according to my taste. You see that this is not rigidly following the workflow, but still is in the spirit.

Problem with JPGs Downlaoded with Nikon Transfer - Can't Apply Develop Settings in Bridge CS4 and ACR 5.3 Settings Don't Stick

I have found what I believe is a "problem" with JPGs downloaded using Nikon Transfer (ver 1.4.1) and processing same in Adobe Bridge CS4 (Develop Settings) and/or Adobe Camera Raw 5.3 (Photoshop CS4 and Elements 6 as hosts).
Anyone using these programs in their workflow?
The problem, quite simply, is that neither ACR settings (nor Bridge CS4 Develop Settings) "stick" when applied to JPGs that have been downloaded via Nikon Transfer ver 1.4.1.
The same images from the same cameras (D300 and D90), downloaded moments later using Nikon's predecessor software PictureProject work just fine in both Bridge and ACR. Develop Settings appled in Bridge immediately are seen, and JPGs opened in ACR, and settings applied, then "Done" immediately stick and are reflected in Bridge.
If someone else is processing their JPGs in this manner, please let me know, as I have reported the problem to both Nikon and Adobe, and although I have tested it on two different cameras and two differnt laptops, I would like to get an impartial result as well.
One other test, the problem does not seem to affect Nikon's RAW (NEF) format files downloaded from a D2x using Nikon Transfer. More/different test are forthcoming.
Thanks
jeff

ALoverofNikon wrote:
I have generally thought that using the camera manufacturer's software was the safest and most conveneint
Can't say one way or another on that statement about using manufacturers' software. Since Adobe has to interpret each camera models' RAW format having the latest ACR seems to be the best option. But if the manufacturers' software is more convenient, and you get the same results then use it. But it does appear you are not getting what you want, so suggest you try a duplicate test run with images straight from the card reader to Bridge and see if you still have same problems.
I do know it is widely recommended that using a quality card reader gives you more reliable data than getting the pictures straight from the camera. Does not seem intuitive, but that has been experience of many.

Roundtrip and ACR

Hello,
I find the ACR adjustments in Bridge and LR to be much more intuitive than Aperture. But, I don't want to switch to LR since Aperture (to me) wins hands-down as an overall better application.
Until I really get a good handle on working with Aperture adjustments, I was thinking of a different workflow option for images that I need to externally edit in PS3. Basically, I was hoping to be able to roundtrip from Aperture to PS3, then open ACR to do the preliminary adjustments before the PS3 edits. It looks to me that this isn't possible - or maybe I'm just overlooking something.
Does anyone know if this is possible - or perhaps have another approach?
Thanks in advance,
Dave

I've designated Bridge as my external image editor and specified TIFF for the output format. When Bridge opens as the external editor, I open the TIFF version in ACR, edit, then open in CS3. After tweaking in CS3 with full use of my third-party plugins I save as TIFF, overwriting the original Aperture TIFF version. Back in Aperture, Viewer shows the changes made in ACR and CS3.
PSD files cannot be opened by ACR, so TIFF is the only format for roundtripping to ACR that doesn't have the possibility of compression artifacts.
Note that Aperture does the RAW conversion and ACR is used as an image processor for TIFF files, then CS3 is used for refinements to the ACR adjustments. ACR's RAW conversion is bypassed. Also note that the TIFF files are large, so there are no savings in storage space from all-Aperture processing. All versions are managed through Aperture, though.
One inconvenience: even though I select multiple images to open with Bridge as external editor, only one file appears in Bridge so I can't do batch processing. If anyone figures out a workaround, please let us know!

Color Profiled Screen and ACR or Lightroom (Vista)

Hi,
My screen is calibrated and works with an .icc profile. I have set up the proofing colors in Photoshop to be my .icc profile. I do not attach any profiles to my pictures when I edit them in Photoshop and so they look the same in Photoshop and in non-color managed internet browsers. I also have a good correspondence between colors I see there and the printed pictures.
My problem is with how I see the colors when I open a file in Adobe Camera Raw, Bridge and Lightroom (actually in Windows Gallery too but this would be a topic for a different forum). They look very saturated, especially yellows, and very far from what I see on my camera (Canon 350d) screen, Explorer or the Canon's Raw Converter.
This problem is driving me crazy and I think I have tried everything with ACR and Bridge I could think of. Yesterday I have tried Lightroom and the colors there are absolutely the same as in ACR and Bridge. Which probably means that this is not a matter of the software version, but of something else I am missing.
Is there anyone who have had the same problem? How did you solve it? Is there anyway to set up something like proofing profile in either of those programs? Or is there any other way to fix this?
Thank you very much,
Vera

Thank you Zeno, I will try to reset them.
My problem is with how ACR shows colors though, not how it converts them.
If I open a RAW file in ACR the colors look really ugly. I convert it to JPEG without touching anything. If then I open this JPEG in Photoshop or IE the colors are fine. There are slight differences in colors if I compare them to JPEG I get from the Canon's software. But this is to be expected and can be corrected by the camera calibration.
I do not think that the way ACR displays colors can be corrected by this calibration.

Corrupt shadows in LR 2.2 and ACR

Hi there!
I have an issue with both LR 2.2 and ACR for Windows XP.
I calibrate my monitor with Colovision Spyder (first version) which then creates an ICC profile and a LUT for the graphics adapter. I calibrate for gamma 2.2 and color temperature 6500K.
With the monitor profile loaded in the windows monitor preferences I get both in LR 2.2 and ACR (CS3 and CS4) horribly looking shadows, like they are over lightened, with plenty of noise showing even at low iso settings. With the same settings, Nikon View NX shows the photos with good shadows rendition (it darkens them). I get the same issue even if I export the file as JPG from LR 2.2 and open it in PS CS4. But not if I export from Nikon View NX and open in CS4!
The problem appears to disappear if I remove the profile from windows monitor preferences (so that I loads a default sRGB profile instead).
Now this to me does not seem a very good long-term solution, but just a work-around, since I am not exploiting the ICC profile I created for my monitor.
I worked with this settings before with no problems, before upgrading to LR 2.2 (i tried unistalling and cleaning, but to no avail) and recalibrating.
Does anyone have similar problems?
Has anyone idea to permanently solve this issue?

In article <[email protected]>, [email protected]
wrote:
> Of course, my display is not using your display profile either and Picasa
> strips all metadata from your files, so also icc profiles if they were
> attached. My guess is that your monitor profile is bad. You might want to try
> recalibrating or borrowing/getting another calibrator.
This could very likely be the cause... to wit:
I recently had my Mac laptop's HD replaced. When I got it back from
service and went on to browsing images LR, I noticed very strong
posterisation in the dark areas of images, that looked fine before.
Turned out while the techie managed to migrate all of the data from the
old HD just fine, somehow the calibration was lost in the process.
After re-calibrating the display all was back to normal.
Cheers Martin

LR 4.3 and ACR 7.3 compatability

I received the familiar alert "This version of Lightroom may require the Photoshop Camera Rawy plug-in version 7.3 for full compatability" and accidentally clicked "don't show again" and "open anyway". How can I get back to having the choice to "Render using Lightroom" when I export using command-E?

rickpatrick wrote:
If I understand correctly, when I click "render using lightroom" in LR 4.3 the result is the same as would be the case if I had CS6 and ACR 7.3. Am I right?
Yes but...
There are two behaviors and it depends on whether or not ACR and LR are in-sync...
If out of sync, Lightroom will render the file using the LR 4.x engine but it needs to save the file with a -Edit BEFORE sending it to Photoshop.
If ACR & LR are in-sync, LR sends the image to ACR and ACR renders it and the file will only be saved when you save it from Photoshop (to where you save it).
In the out of sync situation, the -Edit file is manditory, in the synced case, the file is only saved when you save it from Photoshop.
However, in both cases, the rendered image will be the same. The only difference is the file handling.

Color in both Bridge CS5 and ACR look yellow.

The color in my images are all yellow. I've seen some posts but so far no answer to the problem. Can anything at all be done to fix this problem. It it very, very frustrating. Because it's so yellow I cant use ACR for anything at all. Please help
Igor

Ok, for anyone having this problem with both Bridge cs5 and ACR. Here is what solved my problem. All images were looking yellow both in bridge and Camera Raw, so after I did a back up of my harddrive as a System Image all problems were gone! I have no idea what happened, but now the colors are just fine. The problem corrected itself. So, there you have it. Problem fixed.

Aperture and ACR workflow

For those who find Aperture's Camera RAW conversion too primitive, the program can be used in a simple workflow that maximizes your productivity while insuring maximum quality conversion.
1- IMPORT your RAW images into Aperture and add keywords and other tags.
Aperture brings in the RAW image UNALTERED.
2- COMPARE AND SORT your images using the EXCELLENT TOOLS in Aperture.
You can also freely experiment with versions to test ideas for everything from exposure to B&W conversions.
3- SELECT YOUR BEST IMAGES inside Aperture.
Most of us working in the professional world are really only interested in using the top 1% or less of a typical shoot. It is only those that need to be converted as output for Giclee printing or as digital masters for retouching and CMYK printing.
4- EXPORT THOSE BEST IMAGES using the export "DIGITAL MASTERS..." command.
Many of us find Aperture's RAW conversion to be excellent but for those who don't, you can choose at this point all your selected images, which by now should be a very short list, and export them as UNALTERED RAW files to a folder outside of Aperture.
5- CONVERT those exported camera RAW images using whatever conversion program you want, for many it will be ACR, and do any extra retouching in Photoshop.
And for those worried about Aperture's filing system, you can store these exported "Best Images" exactly like you used to do, in old fashioned folders on your hard disk, in whatever categories make sense to you.
For those of us producing professional work on always shorter deadlines, Aperture is an outstanding tool that makes our job much easier.
Mac OS X (10.4.3)

Tom, first allow me to congratulate you on starting a practical thread. Now that many of us own Aperture, and I'm not saying the issues threads aren't useful, figuring out where it fits in our workflow is a fine idea.
Here is my (pre-Aperture) workflow, and some ideas for an interim (working with what we have) post-Aperture flow. I'd really appreciate any advice or suggestions.
Pre: Conversion mostly in ACR/Bridge (occasionally in C1Pro-generally fleshtones). Color Space generaly set in camera as Adobe RGB, same for PS. Preliminary sharpening with PhotoKit, noise reduction if necessary with neat image or noise ninja, adjustments, aspect ratio crops, etc. Save as TIFF/16bit layered if necessary/add "Base" to filename when saving. Reopen in PS for output specific sharpening, save flattened copy. Open in ImagePrint-Print. Library has been on external HDs, backed up to duplicate HDs which are taken off premises. Current library size:700Gigs and growing fast.
Post: Import into Aperture from Card, also backup RAWs to DVD. As suggested here, do sorts and picks in Aperture. Maybe do some crude adjusting for low res images for client proofs (web or contact sheets-sorry, haven't tried using Aperture with Epson drivers or tried the web posting). Export RAW picks for conversion and editing elsewhere (I have tested and the camera EXIFs are still there in PS (I'm not sure they will be on re-import?). So, now I've got a RAW with an attached .xmp, one or more Tiffs. I can reimport the TIFFs, but can I re-associate them with the Master? Is there any way that I can import the .xmp and associate it with the master? So, I can pick, web, go to printer and archive (although I'll hit a disk space issue-ideas there?)
I tried to do this without asking for changes in Aperture, but not using Aperture where I felt it was immature. There are already enough discussions about conversion, editing and storage. The interface is promising and I would welcome any shortcuts you can come up with. Meanwhile, I'm going to try with new shoots, and a few existing shoots for experimanetation, but leave my old library intact. Then I'm going to put Aperture's library on an 800Gig external eSATA RAID0 -two disk; and back up to another. Wish me luck.

LR 2.7 and ACR 5.7 are out

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for