Luminance detail/contrast

Hi,
I'm trying to use the noise reduction options in Camera Raw 6.0 (CS5) but I can only access the Luminance slide. The Detail and Contrast slide remain light grey even when the Luminance slide is on 100 i cannot access the other 2 slides. Normally as soon as a value appears in the Luminance slide the other 2 pop to dark grey but this does not happen. What am I doing wrong???
Hope someone has an idea!
Thx

switch to process 2010 in camera calibration section

Similar Messages

In the PSE10 RAW editor, what do luminance detail, color detail, and luminance contrast sliders do f

What do the luminance detail, luminance contrast and color detail sliders do in noise reduction when editing RAW files in PSE 10?

Well, I understand it is a balancing act, but in PSE 10 we've gone from 2 sliders (luminance noise and color noise) to 5 sliders (added luminance detail, luminance contrast and color detail) to the noise menu. I can see the effect the first 2 have but am not convinced I see what the other three do.

Raw.plist - detail and noise characterization

While the Leica Digilux 2 is now supported (applause!!!), it's not on the "A list" of cameras (understandably so, it's not a best seller either).
Raw.plist has a number of keys for each camera. For this particular camera, there are some comments ("not detail characterized" and "not noise characterized") in the file that lead me to believe that someone knowledgeable with some free time could improve raw conversion for this camera.
Does anyone have an idea what the keys in this file mean (the matrices have been discussed in this forum)?
Here's a request to Apple: Please document this file and the camera characterization process. I'm sure that passionate photographers will find the time to improve their particular camera model and share the results.

Well, I understand it is a balancing act, but in PSE 10 we've gone from 2 sliders (luminance noise and color noise) to 5 sliders (added luminance detail, luminance contrast and color detail) to the noise menu. I can see the effect the first 2 have but am not convinced I see what the other three do.

Which Camera Raw functions are in Photoshop Elements?

At times I'll suggest something to do in ACR in conversations with other photographers. Sometimes I get a response that they can't find what I referred to in ACR. Usually turns out they are using Elements (PSE), which has a subset of ACR function. I've been looking for a list of ACR functions in PSE -- searching Adobe forums and products so far without success. I have tried to assemble such a list from what I have in ACR 6.3 and by reading the Adobe PSE9 help files (I don't have PSE). Here's what I've assembled. Anyone have any corrections or additions? Thanks.
Adjustment tabs that are not in PSE: Tone curves, HSL Grayscale, Split toning, Lens corrections, Effects (Grain, Post-crop vignetting), Presets, Snapshots
Detail Adjustment Tab - Noise Reduction: PSE has Luminance and Color; PS adds Luminance detail and contrast, Color detail
Tools that are not in PSE: Color sampler tool, Targeted adjustment tool, Spot removal, Local adjustments (Adjustment Brush and Graduated Filter)
Workflow options: PSE - depth only (8/16); in PS: Color space (target color profile), Size, Resolution, Sharpen for...
Save Image button: PSE saves only as DNG file type; in PS: Save as jpeg, tiff, psd file types
Question on PSE White Balance Pull-down list: Does PSE offer only As Shot or Custom? (No auto, daylight, ... flash?)

Here are some screenshots of pse9 and camera raw 6.3
(click on the images for larger view)
Hope they help.
MTSTUNER

Reducing noise in camera raw images

This question was posted in response to the following article: http://help.adobe.com/en_US/photoshopelements/using/WS287f927bd30d4b1f5548d97812e28a69a90- 7ffb.html

In the PSE10 RAW editor, what do luminance detail, color detail, and luminance contrast sliders do for noise reduction?

Help suggestions RAW JPG (noise / sharpness)

Hi,
Does anyone have a better suggestion for this picture to convert from RAW to JPG, particularly noise and sharpness.
I have put the standard JPG image (from the camera) + RAW file + XMP file at the following website WETRANSFER.COM
To download these files (12 MB) type: http://wtrns.fr/ZSrKp1UoL7P8Vw
(files available until 10 January 2013)
P1080056.JPG       =small JPG image from camera
P1080056.RAW     =Original RAW file
P1080056.XMP     =settings ACR (Noise + Sharpness + Main tabs used)
P1080056RAWJPG=image after conversion to JPG (adobe PS)
I use PS CS6 + ACR 7.0
example image (JPG from camera):

thanks you for the example YAMMER P.
questions:
Did you use the alt key for the BLACKS and WHITES in the main panel to see the limits for over- and underexposure?
How do you determine the amount CALRITY in the main panel.
How do you determine the amount DETAIL an MASKING in sharpness panel
How do you determine the amount LUMINANCE DETAIL in NOISE panel
Do you have any order for processing an image
For me...I think I know not enough of sliders like: CLARITY, DETAIL, MASKING, LUMINANCE DETAIL, LUMINANCE CONTRAST ...... especially when these are used together
maybe there are more suggestions?

Apparent Bug in Saving ACR Presets

I was experimenting with some Camera Raw presets for a new camera and discovered that when I saved a preset for the Detail panel, some of the values were omitted. Specifically, the preset did not save the values for Luminous Detail, Luminous Contrast, and Color Detail from the Noise Reduction section of the Detail Panel. Shown below is a preset I saved with dummy values to illustrate this problem. You can see that the three values I mentioned above are missing from the preset. Would someone please try this on their computer to see if this is indeed a bug or if I have something else going on?
I’m using Camera Raw 6.3 on a 64-bit Windows 7 computer. Photoshop version is 12.0.3x64, and Bridge is version 4.0.4.2. If this is an actual bug, maybe someone who has ACR 6.4RC could check to see if it’s still a problem in this newer version.
<x:xmpmeta xmlns:x="adobe:ns:meta/" x:xmptk="Adobe XMP Core 5.2-c004 1.136881, 2010/06/10-18:11:35        ">
<rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#">
<rdf:Description rdf:about=""
    xmlns:crs="http://ns.adobe.com/camera-raw-settings/1.0/">
   <crs:Version>6.3</crs:Version>
   <crs:Sharpness>37</crs:Sharpness>
   <crs:LuminanceSmoothing>56</crs:LuminanceSmoothing>
   <crs:ColorNoiseReduction>37</crs:ColorNoiseReduction>
   <crs:SharpenRadius>+1.3</crs:SharpenRadius>
   <crs:SharpenDetail>27</crs:SharpenDetail>
   <crs:SharpenEdgeMasking>48</crs:SharpenEdgeMasking>
   <crs:HasSettings>True</crs:HasSettings>
</rdf:Description>
</rdf:RDF>
</x:xmpmeta>
Thanks,
Chuck

I got a lot more - including I think the ones you're saying you're missing - when I tried it with 6.3, as shown below.
Did you check all the boxes in the dialog asking you what you wanted to save?
-Noel
<x:xmpmeta xmlns:x="adobe:ns:meta/" x:xmptk="Adobe XMP Core 5.2-c004 1.136881, 2010/06/10-18:11:35        ">
<rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#">
<rdf:Description rdf:about=""
    xmlns:crs="http://ns.adobe.com/camera-raw-settings/1.0/">
   <crs:Version>6.3</crs:Version>
   <crs:ProcessVersion>5.7</crs:ProcessVersion>
   <crs:WhiteBalance>As Shot</crs:WhiteBalance>
   <crs:Exposure>-0.25</crs:Exposure>
   <crs:Shadows>0</crs:Shadows>
   <crs:Brightness>+50</crs:Brightness>
   <crs:Contrast>+25</crs:Contrast>
   <crs:Saturation>-8</crs:Saturation>
   <crs:Sharpness>15</crs:Sharpness>
   <crs:LuminanceSmoothing>40</crs:LuminanceSmoothing>
   <crs:ColorNoiseReduction>0</crs:ColorNoiseReduction>
   <crs:ChromaticAberrationR>0</crs:ChromaticAberrationR>
   <crs:ChromaticAberrationB>0</crs:ChromaticAberrationB>
   <crs:VignetteAmount>0</crs:VignetteAmount>
   <crs:ShadowTint>0</crs:ShadowTint>
   <crs:RedHue>0</crs:RedHue>
   <crs:RedSaturation>0</crs:RedSaturation>
   <crs:GreenHue>0</crs:GreenHue>
   <crs:GreenSaturation>0</crs:GreenSaturation>
   <crs:BlueHue>0</crs:BlueHue>
   <crs:BlueSaturation>0</crs:BlueSaturation>
   <crs:FillLight>0</crs:FillLight>
   <crs:Vibrance>0</crs:Vibrance>
   <crs:HighlightRecovery>0</crs:HighlightRecovery>
   <crs:Clarity>0</crs:Clarity>
   <crs:Defringe>2</crs:Defringe>
   <crs:HueAdjustmentRed>+1</crs:HueAdjustmentRed>
   <crs:HueAdjustmentOrange>+3</crs:HueAdjustmentOrange>
   <crs:HueAdjustmentYellow>+5</crs:HueAdjustmentYellow>
   <crs:HueAdjustmentGreen>-5</crs:HueAdjustmentGreen>
   <crs:HueAdjustmentAqua>-25</crs:HueAdjustmentAqua>
   <crs:HueAdjustmentBlue>0</crs:HueAdjustmentBlue>
   <crs:HueAdjustmentPurple>0</crs:HueAdjustmentPurple>
   <crs:HueAdjustmentMagenta>-3</crs:HueAdjustmentMagenta>
   <crs:SaturationAdjustmentRed>-5</crs:SaturationAdjustmentRed>
   <crs:SaturationAdjustmentOrange>-4</crs:SaturationAdjustmentOrange>
   <crs:SaturationAdjustmentYellow>+1</crs:SaturationAdjustmentYellow>
   <crs:SaturationAdjustmentGreen>+8</crs:SaturationAdjustmentGreen>
   <crs:SaturationAdjustmentAqua>-2</crs:SaturationAdjustmentAqua>
   <crs:SaturationAdjustmentBlue>-13</crs:SaturationAdjustmentBlue>
   <crs:SaturationAdjustmentPurple>-2</crs:SaturationAdjustmentPurple>
   <crs:SaturationAdjustmentMagenta>-2</crs:SaturationAdjustmentMagenta>
   <crs:LuminanceAdjustmentRed>-5</crs:LuminanceAdjustmentRed>
   <crs:LuminanceAdjustmentOrange>-3</crs:LuminanceAdjustmentOrange>
   <crs:LuminanceAdjustmentYellow>0</crs:LuminanceAdjustmentYellow>
   <crs:LuminanceAdjustmentGreen>+8</crs:LuminanceAdjustmentGreen>
   <crs:LuminanceAdjustmentAqua>+12</crs:LuminanceAdjustmentAqua>
   <crs:LuminanceAdjustmentBlue>0</crs:LuminanceAdjustmentBlue>
   <crs:LuminanceAdjustmentPurple>0</crs:LuminanceAdjustmentPurple>
   <crs:LuminanceAdjustmentMagenta>0</crs:LuminanceAdjustmentMagenta>
   <crs:SplitToningShadowHue>0</crs:SplitToningShadowHue>
   <crs:SplitToningShadowSaturation>0</crs:SplitToningShadowSaturation>
   <crs:SplitToningHighlightHue>0</crs:SplitToningHighlightHue>
   <crs:SplitToningHighlightSaturation>0</crs:SplitToningHighlightSaturation>
   <crs:SplitToningBalance>0</crs:SplitToningBalance>
   <crs:ParametricShadows>0</crs:ParametricShadows>
   <crs:ParametricDarks>0</crs:ParametricDarks>
   <crs:ParametricLights>0</crs:ParametricLights>
   <crs:ParametricHighlights>0</crs:ParametricHighlights>
   <crs:ParametricShadowSplit>25</crs:ParametricShadowSplit>
   <crs:ParametricMidtoneSplit>50</crs:ParametricMidtoneSplit>
   <crs:ParametricHighlightSplit>75</crs:ParametricHighlightSplit>
   <crs:SharpenRadius>+0.5</crs:SharpenRadius>
   <crs:SharpenDetail>100</crs:SharpenDetail>
   <crs:SharpenEdgeMasking>0</crs:SharpenEdgeMasking>
   <crs:PostCropVignetteAmount>0</crs:PostCropVignetteAmount>
   <crs:GrainAmount>0</crs:GrainAmount>
   <crs:LuminanceNoiseReductionDetail>100</crs:LuminanceNoiseReductionDetail>
   <crs:LuminanceNoiseReductionContrast>0</crs:LuminanceNoiseReductionContrast>
   <crs:LensProfileEnable>1</crs:LensProfileEnable>
   <crs:LensManualDistortionAmount>0</crs:LensManualDistortionAmount>
   <crs:PerspectiveVertical>0</crs:PerspectiveVertical>
   <crs:PerspectiveHorizontal>0</crs:PerspectiveHorizontal>
   <crs:PerspectiveRotate>0.0</crs:PerspectiveRotate>
   <crs:PerspectiveScale>100</crs:PerspectiveScale>
   <crs:ConvertToGrayscale>False</crs:ConvertToGrayscale>
   <crs:ToneCurveName>Custom</crs:ToneCurveName>
   <crs:ToneCurve>
    <rdf:Seq>
     <rdf:li>0, 0</rdf:li>
     <rdf:li>34, 22</rdf:li>
     <rdf:li>67, 60</rdf:li>
     <rdf:li>138, 144</rdf:li>
     <rdf:li>193, 204</rdf:li>
     <rdf:li>255, 255</rdf:li>
    </rdf:Seq>
   </crs:ToneCurve>
   <crs:CameraProfile>Camera Standard</crs:CameraProfile>
   <crs:CameraProfileDigest>F0D06C559756F7BD7331A9DB44BF84DD</crs:CameraProfileDigest>
   <crs:LensProfileSetup>LensDefaults</crs:LensProfileSetup>
   <crs:HasSettings>True</crs:HasSettings>
</rdf:Description>
</rdf:RDF>
</x:xmpmeta>

PS CS5 64Bit Vanishes!

I would normally call it a crash "but it seems different"
NO ERRORS, NO MESSAGES, NO NOTHING..
I work in 64Bit PS... usually on large format artwork.. files as large as 500" X 120" @100 dpi..
When working in the 32bit version.. NO ISSUES..
When working in 64bit...
I will be going to "SAVE" a file... and WHILE NAVIGATING the file manager... "clicking into folders" or "creating a new folder"
The entire program just vanishes... in a split second... This happens maybe once or twice a day..
What I have done..
1) I tried adjusting the OPEN GL settings to "BASIC"
2) I insatlled the new update to Photoshop 12.. sumthin'
3) and I also updated the display drivers to latest version..
Any thoughts? Losing a HUGE HUGE project with no chance of saving is terrible.

Bah, I thought I was onto something, because I had been able to complete the same edits on the same image 4 times successfully where I
hadn't been able to do so before, but it just failed again (this time with a crash when trying to open the same raw image again after saving and closing).
Could be two different bugs I suppose... It did take a lot longer to reproduce the problem.
Here's a detailed edit log of what I did:
2011-06-30 18:15:24 File IMG_5060.CR2 opened
Open
   C:\MMEDIA\Photos\2011\06\Starmus Trip to Tenerife - Canary Islands\IMG_5060.CR2
   As: Camera Raw
   Model: “Canon EOS 40D”
   Settings: Custom
   White Balance: As Shot
   Without Convert to Grayscale
   Exposure: 0.4
   Blacks: 4
   Brightness: 50
   Contrast: 25
   Saturation: 2
   Sharpen Amount: 28
   Luminance Noise Reduction: 40
   Color Noise Reduction: 7
   Chromatic Aberration R: -13
   Chromatic Aberration B: -3
   Vignetting Amount: 0
   Shadow Tint: 0
   Red Hue: 0
   Red Saturation: 0
   Green Hue: 0
   Green Saturation: 0
   Blue Hue: 0
   Blue Saturation: 0
   Fill Light: 25
   Vibrance: 0
   Recovery: 0
   Clarity: 0
   Defringe: 2
   Hue Adjust Red: 1
   Hue Adjust Orange: 3
   Hue Adjust Yellow: 5
   Hue Adjust Green: -5
   Hue Adjust Aqua: -25
   Hue Adjust Blue: 3
   Hue Adjust Purple: 0
   Hue Adjust Magenta: -3
   Saturation Adjust Red: -5
   Saturation Adjust Orange: -4
   Saturation Adjust Yellow: 1
   Saturation Adjust Green: 8
   Saturation Adjust Aqua: -2
   Saturation Adjust Blue: 13
   Saturation Adjust Purple: -2
   Saturation Adjust Magenta: -2
   Luminance Adjust Red: -5
   Luminance Adjust Orange: -3
   Luminance Adjust Yellow: 0
   Luminance Adjust Green: 8
   Luminance Adjust Aqua: 12
   Luminance Adjust Blue: 0
   Luminance Adjust Purple: 0
   Luminance Adjust Magenta: 0
   Split Tone Shadow Hue: 0
   Split Tone Shadow Saturation: 0
   Split Tone Highlight Hue: 0
   Split Tone Highlight Saturation: 0
   Split Tone Balance: 0
   Parametric Shadows: 0
   Parametric Darks: 0
   Parametric Lights: 0
   Parametric Highlights: 0
   Parametric Shadow Split: 25
   Parametric Midtone Split: 50
   Parametric Highlight Split: 75
   Sharpen Radius: 0.5
   Sharpen Detail: 100
   Sharpen Masking: 0
   Post Crop Vignetting Amount: 0
   Grain Amount: 0
   Luminance Noise Detail: 100
   Color Noise Detail: 50
   Luminance Noise Contrast: 0
   Lens Profile Enable: 1
   Transform Distortion: 0
   Transform Vertical: 0
   Transform Horizontal: 0
   Transform Rotate: 0
   Transform Scale: 100
   Tone Curve: 0, 0, 34, 22, 67, 60, 138, 144, 193, 204, 255, 255
   Camera Profile: “Camera Standard”
   Camera Profile Digest: “F0D06C559756F7BD7331A9DB44BF84DD”
   Lens Profile Setup: 2
   Lens Profile Name: “Adobe (Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM)”
   Lens Profile File: “Canon EOS-1Ds Mark III (Canon EF 28-135mm f3.5-5.6 IS USM) - RAW.lcp”
   Lens Profile Digest: “948982B3427086C43F8A1A3DE06A7C95”
   Lens Profile Distortion: 0
   Lens Profile Aberration: 100
   Lens Profile Vignetting: 50
   Process Version: 84344832
   Retouch: “”
   Red Eye: “”
   Local Adjustments: “”
   Crop Top: 0.036
   Crop Left: 0
   Crop Bottom: 0.964
   Crop Right: 0.995
   Crop Angle: -1.409
   Without Constrain Crop
   Space: ProPhoto RGB
   Depth: 16 Bits/channel
   Scale: 1.58
   Resolution: 100
   Resolution Unit: Pixels/inch
   Output Sharpen For: None
Play action “Convert ProPhoto to sRGB” of set “Hot Keys”
Crop
Crop
   To: quadrilateral
   Center: 1974.5 pixels, 3010.5 pixels
   Corner: 87.9 pixels, 0 pixels
   Corner: 3493.3 pixels, 0 pixels
   Corner: 4020.9 pixels, 6021 pixels
   Corner: 0 pixels, 6021 pixels
   Target Width: 0 pixels
   Target Height: 0 pixels
   Target Resolution: 0 per inch
Magic Wand
Set Selection
   To: 3990 pixels, 5965 pixels
   Tolerance: 12
Expand
Expand
   By: 3 pixels
Feather
Feather
   Radius: 2 pixels
Fill
Fill
   Using: content aware
   Opacity: 100%
   Mode: normal
Deselect
Set Selection
   To: none
Select history state -3
Fill
Fill
   Using: content aware
   Opacity: 100%
   Mode: normal
Select blur
Deselect
Set Selection
   To: none
Blur Tool
Blur Tool
HDR Toning
Scripts
   File: C:\Program Files\Adobe\Adobe Photoshop CS5 (64 Bit)\Required\HDRToning.jsx
    “undefined”
Shadows/Highlights
Shadow/Highlight
   Shadow: Parameters
   Amount: 25%
   Tone Width: 13%
   Radius: 100
   Highlight: Parameters
   Amount: 0%
   Tone Width: 25%
   Radius: 100
   Black Clip: 0.005
   White Clip: 0
   Contrast: 12
   Color Correction: 0
2011-06-30 18:19:31 File C:\TEMP\PrettyApartmentInLasAmericas6.psd saved
Save
   As: Photoshop
   In: C:\TEMP\PrettyApartmentInLasAmericas6.psd
2011-06-30 18:19:42 File C:\TEMP\PrettyApartmentInLasAmericas6.jpg saved
Save
   As: JPEG
   Quality: 10
   With Optimized
   Matte: none
   In: C:\TEMP\
   With Copy
Select history state -13
Select last history state
2011-06-30 18:20:26 File PrettyApartmentInLasAmericas6.psd closed
2011-06-30 18:20:26 File C:\TEMP\PrettyApartmentInLasAmericas6.psd saved
Close
   Photoshop
   C:\TEMP\
   Saving: yes
Immediately upon doing File - Open and selecting the very same raw file again, Photoshop crashed with this error:
Faulting application name: Photoshop.exe, version: 12.0.4.0, time stamp: 0x4d9d8f8e
Faulting module name: unknown, version: 0.0.0.0, time stamp: 0x00000000
Exception code: 0xc0000005
Fault offset: 0x000000007788004f
Faulting process id: 0x1938
Faulting application start time: 0x01cc37719d27c9c9
Faulting application path: C:\Program Files\Adobe\Adobe Photoshop CS5 (64 Bit)\Photoshop.exe
Faulting module path: unknown
Report Id: 2aa969ef-a367-11e0-ba04-005056c00008
I was offered the opportunity to Debug, and when I did so Camera Raw.8bi was on the Call Stack.
-Noel

What does a camera add to a Raw file to make a finished Jpeg version?

I've used Lightroom 4 for a while now but have only ever used Jpegs, and mostly using just the basics panel and curves. I want to try developing Raw files now too.
I was wondering, compared to a Raw file what extra steps does the camera add to make a Jpeg file of the same image, essential steps that you would consider doing yourself to a Raw file in Lightroom too?
I'm aware of Noise reduction, but am a little unsure about the rest.
Many thanks.

Pbeck1 wrote:
my original question I feel is still partly unanswered, and that is: For a beginner to Raw editing, is there some sliders that should always be checked &/or adjusted without fail (even if you decide that no adjustment is needed).
Answer:
* white balance is critical, so it should always be considered on every photo, even if no adjustment required.
* make sure you set camera profile according to taste (and after you gain experience, you may want to roll your own).
* set lens corrections by default: CA + profile (I use a percentage of 100 for vignette correction by default, depending on lens).
* fixed default for Lr color noise reduction (Lr default is usually fine). (color noise reduction is auto-adaptive, so you really don't need to set based on ISO, although you may need to up it on some photos to get all color noise, or down it on some photos to eek out max detail.
* luminance noise reduction and sharpening should be set (initially) based on ISO range.
Then adjust the basics. If toning can't be perfected with basics, supplement with tone curve, if still some imperfect areas, touch up with locals. Use HSL if need be, and so on and so forth.
Fair enough?
PS - I consider a default of 30 for luminance noise reduction to be *extremely* high. I start at zero for low ISO shots, and ramp it up to 25 for highest ISO shots. But consider that Lr's sharpening detail slider should only be used at lower ISOs (that's just my opinion/taste - ymmv). I set detail at 20 for lowest ISO shots, and ramp it down to zero for high ISO shots (as a default - I sometimes up it or down it afterwards). If sharpening detail is kept low, you won't need so much Lum. NR.
Notes:
* color noise reduction detail matters very little except at highest ISOs, in which case you can up it to eek out more detail, usually at the expense of more noise (so it needs to be balanced with amount).
* likewise luminance NR contrast has only a very subtle effect at highest ISOs, and can pretty-much be ignored unless you are really wringing out the detail.
* luminance noise reduction detail however can be important for not losing hard-won detail in the interest of noise control - consider uping it if you need to preserve detail in birds feathers or stone... - crank it down if you just want it clean - detail not important..
What else you need to know?
To summarize:
===========
Lens corrections are a necessity in most cases, and you need to figure out how you like NR & Sharpening set by default. Camera profile determines the general look and feel of the photo and as such can be considered setting #1 (white balance is also setting #1 - yep: there are two #1s ;-}).
Many photos can then be adjusted satisfactorily just using the basic sliders. What's needed after that, really depends on the photo, and you...
Final thoughts are about sharpen masking. I used it a lot in the beginning, then noticed yucky artifacts / sparkling stuff scattered about..., and stopped using it entirely for years. It's undesirable side-effects are most noticeable when sharpening detail is up (and/or sharpening amount). Moral of the story, if you keep sharpening detail (and/or sharpening amount) down, you can also use sharpen masking to keep from sharpening noise in "sky" and "skin", as another way to keep from needing so much lum. NR. Anyway, I'm using it again now, albeit very judiciously. Tip: press Alt key when adjusting sharpen mask slider.
Put another way: sharpen masking masks (disables) sharpening in some places, but not others. Whether the transitions between masked regions and adjacent unmasked regions looks like hell or not depends on how much noise is being sharpened in the unmasked regions, since it's not being sharpened at all in the masked regions. Unfortunately, the situation can not be improved by increasing global noise reduction, since that makes the masked regions smoother too (as well as the unmasked regions).
Bottom-line (imo): If low-noise is the priority over sharpening, then keep sharpening amount and detail low and use masking. If sharpening is a priority over over noise, then leave masking off and crank up sharpening til heart's content. If both sharpening and noise are priorities, there is no choice but to sharpen and/or noise reduce via locals, since using sharpen masking in conjunction with high sharpening (detail and/or amount) on a noisy (or even semi-noisy) photo, looks like cr@p (yes: that's just my opinion), regardless of global lum. NR setting.
PS - Some people use sharpen masking with sharpening detail (and/or sharpening amount) up too and don't know what the heck I'm talking about - YMMV...
Although I use zero sharpen masking by default, some people use light sharpen masking in default settings, and some people use heavy sharpen masking as default. Worth considering how much of it you tend to like...
UPDATE:
~~~~~~~
Settings you usually don't have to mess with, as a beginner: and why.
* Camera calibration color sliders: white balance suffices.
* Effects: most are "advanced" / optional (although you may want to explore post-crop vignette amount as your first foray).
* Lens corrections: you need chromatic aberration at a minimum, and some profile-based correction by default is usually good, but the rest are "advanced".
* Detail (covered above).
* Split toning: "advanced".
* HSL: "intermediate".
* Tone Curve: consider using the parametric curve sliders, if you are beginner; point curve & channel curves are advanced; moving the parametric range-changing doo-hickeys: let's call that "advanced" too.
* Locals and such can be considered not for begginers, but they will need to be used too at some point for optimal results. I mean, even beginners need to get the red-eye out sometimes, or kill dust spots... And you can get by without gradients or paint for a while, but not for long...
Have fun,
Rob

PV2010 Color Noise Reduction Robs Dark Tones

No pun intended.
I thought at first it was the raw-conversion/de-mosaicing, but its turned out to be the color noise reduction.
Here is a the latest example of a picture that looks better in PV2003 than PV2010 no matter what I do, because of loss of clarity / contrast / dark-tones resulting from the new Color Noise Reduction algorithm. Note: This loss can not be restored using clarity or contrast sliders.
This probably ought to be a feature request: A slider that controls the coarser aspects of color noise reduction (color waves or clarity/contrast) versus the most localized aspects (color specs). In this instance, just getting rid of the specs without trying to reduce the waves might leave the dark tones(?) - Something like that. In any case, there is room to improve color noise reduction so that it leaves the dark tones / contrast / clarity in certain cases like this.
(Its a 100% crop of a section of a fish under water)
PV2003:
PV2010:
The difference is striking when viewing the whole photo from afar...
PS - I just discovered that minimizing noise reduction will maintain the dark tones better - I've therefore added down-throttling of color noise reduction to my PV2003 -> PV2010 practice.
Rob

dorin_nicolaescu wrote:
Luminosity Contrast slider also helps maintain some darker tones.
Indeed it do.
And, last but maybe (or maybe not) least, one can cheat a bit at the end and add some grain, to give the illusion of greater detail / texture. So, if you really want to preserve full detail when converting high ISO shots from PV2003 to PV2010, you need to:
1. Crank up the luminance noise reduction detail slider pretty darn high (if not all the way up).
2. Crank up the luminance noise reduction contrast slider pretty darn high (if not all the way up).
3. Minimize color noise reduction amount.
4. Crank up the color noise reduction detail slider fairly darn high (not all the way up! - color artefacts - bleh).
5. Maybe add a touch of grain (pretty darn low).
(I've left out the luminance NR amount slider and sharpening because they are the more obvious ones).
I'm guessing I'm not the first person to fall into the trap of trying to recover detail lost by noise reduction by decreasing luminance noise reduction amount and increasing sharpening detail (and maybe amount too), and winding up right back where you started - too much noise. The detail/contrast sliders of the noise reduction controls really work a lot better for that, and minimizing color noise reduction is also a hot tip for you detail junkies.
I hope I'm not the last person on this forum to realize what is now seeming sort of obvious to me, whilst everyone has a good laugh...
(I had previous just left color noise reduction and detail, plus luminance NR contrast at their defaults (I discovered the importance of the lum.NR detail slider long ago...) - but not anymore. It has helped me to articulate all this - hope it helps somebody else too..........
Rob

LR JPEG compression vs. Photoshop JPEG compression

I haven't found any documentation of the meaning of the 0 - 100% JPEG compression value in LR's (v1 or v2) Export File window. And the default value of 100% is overkill and results in huge files. At least I'm familiar with the Photoshop's 0-12 JPEG quality scale with associated quality names: Low, Medium, High, and Maximum.
Via trial and error, I have found that LR has the same 13 quality levels as Photoshop and gives the same results, they are just mapped on a 0 - 100% scale. This also means that changing a few percent may not make any change at all, since a quality change only happens about every 7 percent.
For those who might find it useful, here is a table of the mappings:
The first column is the Photoshop compression number and name; the second column in the range of Lightroom percentages that will give the same results.
0-Low 0-7%
1-Low 8-15%
2-Low 16-23%
3-Low 24-30%
4-Low 31-38%
5-Med 39-46%
6-Med 47-53%
7-Med 54-61%
8-High 62-69%
9-High 70-76%
10-Max 77-84%
11-Max 85-91%
12-Max 92-100%

I looked at this again using PS's 'Baseline Standard' JPEG format option instead of 'Baseline Optimized. LR does not provide the format options Standard, Optimized, and Progressive, but appears to use 'Baseline Standard.' The equivalent compression level LR file size is within 16KB of PS's file size, which is probably due to slight differences in in the file metadata.
This pretty much confirms LR and PS use the same 'Baseline Standard' JPEG compression algorithms. The PS level 7 reduced quality is also seen at LR's level 54-61 JPEG Quality setting. Jeffrey Friedel mentions this in his analysis of LR's JPEG Quality settings and a reply from Brian Tao:
http://regex.info/blog/lightroom-goodies/jpeg-quality
Jeffrey Friedel's comment:
One thing I find interesting (but don't understand) is that in the first example, the difference in file size between the 47〜53 quality and 54〜61 quality is considerable (49k to 66k bytes), while in the second example, the the same two levels of quality produces essentially the same file size. There seems to be some kind of switch in compression algorithm once Lightroom is at a quality setting of 54 or above that puts the emphasis on encoding the easily-discernible smooth gradients of the sunset example, and if they are lacking in the image, as with the reed-window-shade example, the attempt at extra quality fails, and the file size does not increase. That's my guess, but it's just a guess.
Brian Tao's Reply:
This is due to the downsampling (basically, a reduction in resolution) of one or more of the image channels before passing it to the actual compression routine. Human vision is much more sensitive to changes in luminance (brightness) than chrominance (colour). JPEG takes advantage of this by reducing the amount of colour information stored in the image in order to achieve higher compression ratios. Because it is colour and not brightness that is sacrificed, this is called “chroma subsampling”. Look up that term in Wikipedia for a far better and more detailed description than I can provide here.
In a nutshell, Adobe products will use either a 4:4:4 subsampling (which is no subsampling at all, and thus full resolution) or 4:2:0 subsampling (both red and blue channels are reduced to one-quarter resolution before compression). There is no switch to specify the amount of subsampling to use. In Photoshop, the change from 4:2:0 to 4:4:4 happens between quality 6 and 7. In Photoshop’s Save For Web, it happens between quality 50 and 51. In Lightroom, you already noticed that something unexpected happens between 47-53 quality and 54-61 quality. Guess what levels those correspond to in Photoshop? 6 and 7… exactly as expected.
You can very easily demonstrate this by creating a worst-case scenario of JPEG chroma subsampling. Create a small image in Photoshop with a pure blue (RGB = 0,0,255) background. Now type in some pure red text (RGB = 255,0,0). For maximum effect, turn off anti-aliasing, so each pixel is either full on red or full on blue. Zoom in to 500% or so for a clear view of the pixels. Now save the image as a JPEG. With the JPEG quality dialog visible, you will see a real-time preview of the effects of JPEG compression. Start at 12, and work your way down to 0, one step at a time. Watch what happens when you go from 7 to 6. You can do the same with Save For Web and with Lightroom to confirm where they switch from 4:4:4 to 4:2:0.
The file size discrepancy is more noticeable in the sunset shot because most of the information (relatively speaking) is needed to encode the gradual change in chrominance values. There is virtually no luminance detail to worry about, except around the silhouette of the bird. But in the photo of the reed window shades, the fine detail and texture and lack of colour result in practically no difference going from 4:4:4 and 4:2:0.
Because of this hidden (and inaccessble) switch, I have been recommending that to be safe, one should never go below quality 7 in Photoshop, or 51 in Save For Web. In Lightroom, this corresponds to quality 54.
Hope this helps.

Develop module & library module aren't matching

When I am editing, my photos look how I want them to in the develop module, but when I switch over to the library they look different. Some photos it doesn't apply the clarity, highlights, noise reduction, or sharpening. I haven't had this problem up until a month or two ago. It used to be the same between the two modules and I no problems editing. Now it's a pain to edit because I have to switch to the Library to see what the image is really looking like, go back to develop to try and change it, but cant end up getting it to look how I want. Images look the same zoomed in, but not in normal view. I am on Windows, Lightroom 3.6. I have tried reupdating the software, downloading an older version. also updated my video driver, and nothing helped. trying to avoid reinstalling all of lightroom because I do not want to lose any previewly modified images.
first one is the view from develop. you can tell its a lot more noisey.
second picture is from the library. it's a lot more smooth.
so basically my images aren't being shown correctly. I have looked through a lot of discussions on here and no one seems to have an answer...please help me! editing should be fun, not frustrating.

Rivosyke wrote:
Thanks for the response. This appears to be more the issue with image that is exported is using the algorithm for the library module as opposed to the changes made using the develop module. The histograms are different when switching between the two modules (Library/Develop) for the same image.
Camera: D7100
Image Type: RAW
ISO: 3200
Bingo! You're using an ISO 3200 image with fairly high sharpening settings, which is going to increase noise in the image. If you view the image at 1:1 in the Develop module the noise should very visible. The Develop module and Library module 1:1 previews should both show the noise and look very close to each other. The reason why less than 1:1 Zoom previews (i.e. Fit, Fill, 1:4) and histograms look different is explained in my reply #29 under this heading MORE THAN YOU PROBABLY NEED TO KNOW (For Techno Geeks & Nerds Only). The Export module uses the same Bicubic algorithm as the Library module, which is why the Library module's preview is more accurate than the Develop module. Virtually all image editors (not just LR) use the same Bicubic resizing algorithms and will produce the same discrepancy when compared to LR's Develop module preview.
Fortunately there is a very easy solution to this issue. Unfortunately many people prefer to complain, say it is a LR "bug," and don't listen further to suggestions on "fixing" the issue. If you fall into the latter camp don't bother reading further! Sorry if this sounds crass and cynical, but I can only provide advice. Whether you believe me and try it is your decision! It works for me using five different camera models with both raw and JPEG image files.
High ISO and/or High Sharpening Preview Discrepancy Fix
1) Set Develop module to 1:1 Zoom View.
2) a. Adjust Sharpening panel settings for desired look.
b. With noisy images it's best to keep the Detail setting no higher than 35.
c. Try using the Masking slider to reduce noise in even toned areas.
3) Increase Detail panel Color setting until the color noise is barely visible.
4) If there is still some residual color noise try increasing the Color detail setting to ~80.
4) Increase the Detail panel Luminance setting until noise is barely visible or gone.
5) If the image has lost significant sharpness try increasing the Luminance Detail setting to ~80.
6) If necessary go back to steps # 2-5 and make small adjustments to the Sharpening and NR settings.
Now compare the Develop and Library previews at Fit view or better yet at 1:8, 1:4, or 1:3. They should look very close to each other with the Develop preview very slightly sharper. Full-size and reduced size Exports should look very close to what you see in the Develop module. When Resizing images don't forget to add Export Output Sharpening. When images are Resized the Output Sharpening setting has more influence on image sharpness than the LR Develop Sharpening settings. For most images the Screen Standard setting should produce crisp images. If you want more try the High setting. I generally find the Screen Low setting produces the most natural look. YMMV dependent on lens performance, camera shake, focus issues, or simply poor lighting (cloudy, foggy, etc.).

The workings of Photoshop's color management

Hey guys!
I've been spending some time researching and trying to understand the workings of Photoshop's color management and come across a lot of fuzzy and contradicting information, particularly regarding the Proof Setup. I think I have figured some of it out but (for the ease of my sleep) I figured to ask a couple of direct questions just to be sure. I guess it's more of a curiosity thing.
I'm on a Mac OS X 10.8, Photoshop CS6, calibrated standard gamut monitor, working in sRGB for web.
1) From what I gathered, to achieve as precise color as possible on my display, all I have to do is set Working Space to sRGB or have images with embeded sRGB tag and have my calibrated monitor ICC profile loaded in the OS X. In that way, all the images and colours in Photoshop will adhere to sRGB and my calibration profile will make sure my monitor is actually displaying correct sRGB colours (to the best of it's ability anyways). Correct?
2) I have come across a lot of 'quick tips' where people mention using the Proof Setup > Monitor RGB as a way to monitor colours for web and then I've seen people saying that's not right. From what I understand, the Monitor RGB function strips the embeded tag and ignores the working space of the image, instead showing you the RGB values in the 'native' colour space of the monitor, which in my case would be sRGB-ish. Kinda bypassing Photoshop's color management, but not the display calibration profile. Correct?
3) When viewing an sRGB tagged image, toggling the Proof Setup: Monitor RGB on and off has absolutely no effect. Am I right in assuming that it's because the sRGB tag is getting "switched off" but since the monitor is standard gamut, the native color space is still sRGB?
What I find weird is when I change the display profile in OS X from my calibrated one to, for example, a Generic RGB, toggling the Proof Setup: Monitor RGB has effect - the image brightness changes visibly. If my assumption above was correct, it shouldn't happen, right? Hence my confusion.
Thanks!
Kris

In terms of Calibration, it's useful to keep this in mind: Calibration ideally places a device in a known, desried and repeatable state. In terms of a display, the 'ideal' calibration for most is one in which the display and the print produce a visual match. YMMV a great deal! You can calibrate a display such it doesn't produce a match quite easily, getting calibration to produce the match takes work! If any of the targets aim points (White Point, Luminance and contrast ratio) is less than ideal, the calibration doesn't produce a visual match. See: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/why_are_my_prints_too_dark.shtml
In theory, if you didn't need to match the display to a print, you don't have to even calibrate the display for an ICC workflow. But you should <g>. You could simply profile it's current behavior which would work in an ICC workflow because you built a profile that reflects the current display conditions. The display will change over time because a display, unlike say an Epson Pro printer, is unstable and it's behavior will change over time. You need to calibrate or get that display back to it's original condition ideally. With the Epson, it's very, very stable (although I'd point out, not necessarily calibrated ideally, if we had more control over the native driver, we could 'adjust' or calibrate a more linear behavior). So with an Epson, you build a profile on top of the less than ideal driver conditions but the driver and the rest of the system is super stable and consistent. You simply need a profile to define that behavior and you're done. The printer and inks are very stable so you could also in theory place a different driver or RIP and calibrate better behavior and profile.
I'd forget the 'calibrate' a display to sRGB on a modern LCD unit short of perhaps an Eizo or NEC SpectraView system. The sRGB color space is based upon a theoretical CRT display circa 1994 or so, with very defined primaries and conditions. There is no real 'standard' to how one can and should define the display, especially if you want to visually match a print next to the display. The illuminant used to view the print plays a huge role! So providing one set of calibration aim points and expecting all displays to produce a match is pie in the sky. Might be close, might be spot on (I wouldn’t depend on that), might be way off. All explained in the URL above. If one setting worked properly, we'd all use that one setting and calibration products wouldn’t vary from only a few presets (kind of uselss) to products like Eizo and NEC which provide a huge number of options for setting white point as just one example.

LCD color display monitor

I have a HP LCD color display monitor - product 20555SH249 Product # P8740AA
Model # HSTND 2171-A1. Recently in the left hand upper corner a box has appeared saying Luminance
has Contrast in red and Brightness (blue) another line. Please help me get rid of this as it is very annoying.
Can't click on it as can't get my cursor on it. If I leave the computer for a while it will go away but as soon as
I return and type anything it is back.
Thank you
Pauline Fenner
This question was solved.
View Solution.

I removed the serial # - did not know that was a problem.
Still need answer to my question - Why do I get the box with luminance in the left hand corner -
it is a problem trying to properly using my computer.
Thanks,
Pauline Fenner

CF10 Production Best Practices

Is there a document or additional information on the best way to configure multiple instances of CF10 in a production environment? Do most folks install CF10 as a ear/war J2EE deployment under JBoss or Tomcat with Apache as the webserver?

There’s no such document that I know of, no.
And here’s a perfect example where “best practices” is such a loaded phrase.
You wonder if “install CF10 as a ear/war J2EE deployment under JBoss or Tomcat with Apache as the webserver”. I’d say the answer to that is “absolutely not”. Most folks do NOT deploy CF as a JEE ear/war. It’s an option, yes. And if you are running A JEE server already, then it does make great sense to deploy CF as an ear/war on said container.
But would it be a recommended practice for someone installing CF10 without interest in JEE deployment? I’d say not likely, unless they already have familiarity with JEE deployment.
Now, could one argue “but there are benefits to deploying CF on a JEE container”? Sure, they could. But would it be a “best practice”? Only in the minds of a small minority I think (those who appreciate the beenfits of native JEE deployment and containers). Of course, CF already deploys on a JEE container (Tomcat in CF10, JRun in CF 6-9), but the Standard and Enterprise Server forms of deployment hide all that detail, which is best for most. With those, we just have a ColdFusion directory and are generally none-the-wiser that it runs on JRun or Tomcat.
That leads then to the crux of your first sentence: you mention multiple instances. That does change things quite a bit.
First, a couple point of clarification before proceeding: in CF 7-9, such “multiple instance” deployment was for most folks enabled using the Enterprise Multiserver form of deployment, and created a Jrun4 directory where instances were installed (as distinguished from the Enterprise Server form I just mentioned above, which hid the JRun guts).
In CF10, though, there is no longer a “multiserver” install option. It’s just that CF10 Enterprise (or Trial or Developer editions) does let you create new instances, using the same Instance Manager in the CF admin that existed for CF Enterprise Multiserver from 7-9. CF10 still only lets you create with the Enterprise (or trial or developer) edition, not Standard.
(There is a change in CF10 about multiple instances, though: note that in CF10, you never see a Tomcat directory, even if you want “multiple instances”. When you create them, they are created right under the CF10 directory, as siblings to the cfusion directory (and while that cfusion directory previously existed only in the CF 7-9 multiserver form of deployment, it does not exist even in CF10 Standard, as the only instance it can use.)
So all that is a lot of info, not any “best practices”, but you asked if there was any “additional info”, and I thought that helpful for you to have as you contemplate your options. (And of course, CF10 Enterprise does still let you deploy as a JEE ear/war if you want.)
But no, doing it would not be a best practices. If someone asked for “the best way to configure multiple instances of CF10 in a production environment”, I’d tell them to just proceed as they would have in CF 7-9, using the same CF Admin Instance Manager capability to create them (and optionally cluster them).
All that said, everything about CF10 does now run on Tomcat instead of JRun, and some things are improved under the covers, like clustering (and related things, like session replication), because those are now Tomcat-based features (which are actively updated and used by the Tomcat community), rather than JRun-based (which were pretty old and hardly used by anyone since JRun was EOL-ed several years ago).
I’ll note that I offer a talk with a lot more detail contrasting CF10 on Tomcat to CF9 and earlier on JRun. That may interest you, snormo, so check out the presentations page at carehart.org.
Hope all that’s helpful.
/charlie
PS You conclude with a mention of Apache as the web server. And sure, if one is on a *nix depoyiment or just favors Apache, it’s a fine option. But someone running CF 10 on Windows should not be discouraged from running on IIS. It’s come a long way and is now very secure, flexible, and capable, whether used for one or multiple instances of CF.

Luminance detail/contrast

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for