Still no perspective control or lens correction?

Did I miss somelthing or is there still no perspective control or lens correction in the latest release of Aperture? I was very excited to hear about the new MBP's and an updated version of Aperture today, but very disappointed to see no mention of perspective control among the New Features.
Lightroom has had this feature for years and so has Capture One. As an architectural shooter, I think it's definitely time for me to switch. I know there are plugins for this, but I hate creating a new image for a very simple adjustment to perspective and would prefer an easier and non-destructive option.

There's a pretty decent amount of stuff for a incremental (free) update. I'm as anxious as anybody for the mythical Aperture 4 that fulfills all of our hearts desires. I imagine it's been so long between major versions because of all the iCloud and no Retina Display stuff they've had to work in, but at least they are still making it a priority. Fingers crossed we'll see 4 later in the year.

Similar Messages

LightRoom Lens Correction ... huge list (of some of which I have never heard!), but still no mention of Zuiko (Olympus) lenses in the drop-down, even in my 4th update: version 5.6. Anyone know why Olympus has been ostracised in this application?

I am now using a new Nikon, but I still have thousands of images captured with my (very good) Olympus E500, but still frustrated that its lenses do not appear in the drop-down list in the lens correction module ... not even in the latest update, version 5.6

What camera? Is it a mirrorless? Most of those have lens profiles that are built-in and always on so there’s nothing in the list.

Use Lens Correction or Transform/Skew for Vertical Perspective??

I recently visited the Redwoods in California and took many photos of trees with a wide angle lens, which as you know causes the trees to bend inwards. I have tried using both Filter/Distort/Lens Correction and Transform/Skew to attempt to correct the problem. It is my observation that Lens Correction reduces the number of pixels by producing a trapezoid shaped image with the sides slanting inwards. Skewing does the opposite: increases the pixels by creating a trapezoid with the sides slanting outwards.
What are the pros and cons of using each method to correct vertical perspective? How will the image quality differ with each method? Thanks!!

Anthony,
Click on the link to see this short QT video tutorial:
http://photoshopnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/psn-perspectiveacr-low.mov

Filter distort lens correction perspective

In using this filter, half the frame gets smaller and half the frame gets bigger, so which resampling method is being used since bigger and smaller have their own best methods?

Steve, you are in the wrong forum, try the Photoshop forum where this question belongs.
besides that. Using perspective can also be done in the Transform menu (cmdA - CmdT) will give you the frame with little squares. Using right mouse click gives you various options to transform the image in a better way then the lens correction does. This filter is better for pin and cushen problems...

Vignette Correction + Lens Correction in Camera Raw / Lightroom

Ok i merge 2 requests for both camera raw and lighroom...
-> Vignette Specific Correction: Using preset for Lenses like Canon DPP Does for Peripherical Illuminance Correction, the vignette tool in lighroom is good but can't adapt to a variable vignette profile of each lens...
+ Ability to user to add them using a png 24 bit or similiar for Lenses not present on the DB (think using old lens, with adaptors, old zeiss without automatic controls that obviously will be not profiled by Canon, Nikon, Sony.. for their bodies)
-> Lens Correction based on Preset... + exif reading like in photoshop cs5 + manual adjustments
thank you

So you use Photomatix to create a 32-bit HDR file and then tone that 32-bit file in ACR? Are the Photomatix 32-bit files that much different than the PS-CC 32-bit files? The Photomatix 32-to-16-bit conversion is quite a bit different and perhaps preferable, but I didn’t realize the 32-bit result file is also that much different. It’s been a while since I’ve tried 32-bit HDRs and even longer since I’ve tried them in Photomatix so things may have changed or I’ve forgotten.
If you are using Photomatix, then you are not using an Adobe raw conversion at all, so Adobe settings and raw lens profiles are not seen and used at the initial raw-conversion stage in Photomatix.
The choices would seem to be that you can use Adobe products to create 16-bit TIFs as an input to Photomatix, or hack an Adobe raw lens profile to be used with non-raw files in ACR, or do your lens profile corrections after you’ve saved your 32-bit HDR image back as a 16-bit one and use the lens corrections area in Photoshop if that is still possible, nowadays.

Erratic behaviour of Manual Lens Correction in Develop Module

64 bit Windows 7
Sometimes - not always - using the manual lens correction, with Constrain Crop activated, leads to the image jumping around very quickly and erractically and it being impossible to achieve fine control using the mouse: tiny movements of the slider by dragging with the mouse result in large jerky movements of the image. I have only used this for correcting converging verticals and cannot comment on the other adjustments.
Moreover, on a subsequent crop when this has happened, it may be impossible to crop as you would like using the crop tool - the top edge of the image jumps above the intended crop outline. The only way to get the crop you want when this happens is to adjust each edge individually, rather than by dragging the corner.
Apologies if I have not explained this well. In short, it seems to be a bug whereby proper mouse control of the lens correction is lost. I often correct converging verticals in buildings and have never seem the same behaviour in version 3. I cannot always replicate it in version 4, but it happens a lot.
Hope this feedback helps. I cannot see that it has been reported elsewhere in this forum.

Hmmm, this is going to be tricky. I just tried to replicate it on two photos on which I know I had the problem, by going back to the original import setting, but both behaved fine this time! Both, as it happens, were portait format, having been rotated 90 degrees counter-clockwise from the original. I cannot recall, I am afraid, whether or not other ones with which I had an issue had been rotated first. I will try to replicate and keep more detailed notes. In at least these two instances, I had not applied a lens correction profile first. The vertical transformation slider would be set to somewhere between -25 to -35.
Having played about with this for a while now without full replication, I have one idea which may or may not be correct. When I reset the Develop settings and started on the Lens Corrections first, absolutely nothing untoward happened. Now I have gone back and done a number of other adjustments first (as I would often do, before correcting the perspective). In this case, the vertical adjustment slider seems more sensitive to small mouse movements - definitely discernible, but not nearly as bad as the examples I have seen previously when I was not looking for them, nor is there yet any sign of the cropping problem. Maybe the effect becomes more pronounced as the number of edits accumulates before applying the manual Lens Corrections. If this is correct, I do not know whther the effect is cumulative across all edits to all images (as if memory is not being released - but that should not be a problem, since I have 12GB of RAM and nothing else running) or whether it is a per image phenomenon, since I have only recently re-opened Lightroom. You will know better than I whether this is a possiblity, but it is just a thought as I play with this without so far being able fully to replicate the issue. I have some work to do on a number of images and if I get time, I will come back to these images to see if the problem manifests itself more clearly after a larger number of edits across multiple images in a single session without closing Lightroom.
I am very sorry this is so vague and quite speculative. I hope I will be able to give you more accurate feedback later.

Does the lens correction profile for the Canon 24-70 eliminate all distortion?

The new Camera Raw seems excellent in the Lens Correction...I will be photographing dancers and will have only 9 feet to work with. I would like to use the widest lens I can with lens correction. The question is whether this new program will flatten out the 24mm lens or if I should use the 35.
Roger Minkow

To add to Eric's great explanation, the corrections here are for barrel and pincushion distortion. That can be present in a lens of any focal length.
What isn't corrected is the effect in wide angle lenses where there is spreading of the image of three dimensional objects away from the center of the field. It happens at any distance, not just close up. It is caused by the extreme angle of projection from the back of the lens to the flat film/sensor plane. Think of a straight on photo of a building that has equal size columns across the facade with a wide angle lens. The columns at either end of the image appear wider than the (same width) columns in the middle. Retrofocus design wide angle lenses help a little bit (the rear of the lens is further from the focal plane than in a standard wide angle), but the distortion is usually there.
There is also distortion from being too close to the subject. Focal length doesn't really matter in that, except that longer lenses don't have the field of view to take in the close subject and can't usually focus that close. So we associate this distortion with wide angle lenses. This sort of distortion would be that where a person's nose in the middle of the frame looks very large and there is quick falloff in size to the eyes, ears, background. I think of this as more an issue of perspective, and this is controlled by camera placement, not by focal length or lens design.
Another good page on Paul Van Walree's site is http://toothwalker.org/optics/misconceptions.html
John

Camera Raw 6.5 - Lens Corrections

Hello: I know a 50mm lens is more commonly used for portrait shots but I like that I can be "POSITIONED CLOSER" to the subject when using a 35mm lens. Camera Raw 6.5 >Lens Corrections >Profile Make and Model and Profile, recognizes both of my lenses. My question is . . . can Camera Raw 6.5 "PROFESSIONALLY" eliminate the "distortion advantage" a 50mm lens has over a 35mm lens or am I still better off using the 50mm lens ? Thank-you, MLR

Rick McCleary wrote:
A lens does not have perspective.
Perspective is a function of the distance from viewer to subject.
Perspective is completely independent of lens, camera, or the clothes you're wearing; it's determined only by the point in space from which a subject is viewed.
Perhaps technically correct but not practically relevent...
While it's true that the "perspective" is dictated on the distance from camera to subject, in practical terms if you fill the frame with the exact same subject size, the viewpoint (and hence the "perspective") will be different...
As a result a full frame face shot with a 35MM vs a 50MM lens will indeed have a different perspective. As indicated by the OP, a face will elongate with a full frame shot of a face taken with a 35MM lens vs a longer lens. This is the practical impact of focal length. The longer the lens the more confessed the perspective.
And this has zero to do with "lens distortions" which are a technical defect of the optical properties of a lens such as barrel distortion, CS and vignetting.
The lens dictates the point of view of the image…a wide angle lens will have a forced perspective while a longer lens congresses the perspective. ACR can correct for barrel distortion, CS and vignetting but nothing relating to perspective.

Lens Correction and Cropped Pixels

I'm starting out as an architectural photographer, and as I don't yet have a perspective correcting lens to adjust images in-camera, I need to use the Lens Correction tools in Photoshop and ACR. I prefer to use them over the Free Transform tool for the sake of accuracy (and convenience), but I do have an issue with the tools. When I correct the perspective of an image and then process, whatever extends beyond the boundary of the canvas winds up being automatically deleted, and it seems as if there's no setting to prevent this from happening. As there is sometimes a piece of a photo that I would like to be able to retain (i.e. extra sky, the top of a building, etc.), I understand that I can scale down the image in the Lens Correction tool and then re-crop after processing. Of course then this causes the image to still be smaller than I would like it to be (in certain cases where the distortion correction is more extreme, an original 21MP photo might become a 12 or 13MP photo after processing in the Lens Correction due to scale-down).
Is there any way that the Lens Correction tool will allow for pixels extending beyond the boundaries of the canvas to remain uncropped, thus allowing me to expand the canvas in order to reclaim the extra information?

Yammer P, yes the list is shorter because it's a jpeg rather than raw, and we have more profiles for raw than for jpeg.
For the set of lenses supported in CS5's initial release, we created profiles for both raw and jpeg. Since then, we have been concentrating on raw-based lens profiles, for a number of reasons (one of which is that we feel we can consistently deliver the highest quality results this way). This is why you see some lenses supported with raw & jpeg profiles, but many more supported with raw only.
CS5's Lens Correction plug-in does indeed let you choose raw-based lens profiles even though it is processing a rendered file (e.g., jpeg, tiff). This will work in many (but not all) cases for distortion correction, but will often work poorly for chromatic aberration and vignette correction. I don't recommend this workflow and it is a key reason we don't let users mix/match in ACR & LR.
Eric

Lens correction feature completely missing from Develop Module

The lens correction feature has gone missing from the Development Module. It was missing before I upgraded to 5.6 and is still missing. Previously, it was present, so I am wondering if I did anything to hide or remove it?

Right-click on one of the other section headings, such as Tone Curve, Basic, etc. Make sure there is a checkmark in lens corrections. This is how you control which develop features you want displayed on your system. Sometimes features disappear mysteriously.

Improving the perspective control grid

The perspective control for photos is for me the best thing that has happened to LR. I can ( just ) about cope with the speed reduction, but the control for verticals, for rotation and for horizontals is superb.
At the moment it appears that the centre of the photograph is the point where the rotation and the vertical and horizontal transforms reference from.
As soon as you select the Vertical / horizontal / rotate / distort, the grid appears that aids you in setting the verticals etc.
There is no way of seeing the central point, where these transformations occur, you ony have the grid, so I am thinking that when you press the modifier keysthe control / shift / alt keys, a cross appears over the central point of the grid. This would give you the location of the central point. Plain and simple.
As soon as you release the modifier keys, this disappears, so you can just see the grid.
This would speed up rotation tremendously, as this is your reference point, at the moment, I juggle the rotation and vertical to get where I want to be.
Alternatively, like the Crop has various layouts, so pressing "O" could scan through these same grids, but we will need a central point because at the moment the crop does not have a grid to mark the centre of the image.
LR 4 may enable you to pick your reference point to do the transformations from, then, apply the same principal to that point with the overlaid rotation marking cross.
Any thoughts?

function(){return A.apply(null,[this].concat($A(arguments)))}
hamish niven wrote:
Would be an interesting combination, however, none of lightrooms controls use any controls like the PS transform controls, so I think its unlikely they will do that.
Good luck, but try the arrows and expecially zoomed in and see if learning a new trick works for you
Using the arrows is old hat. I agree this helps for small adjustments. I use it all the time. I also like your idea of establishing a reference point.
Regarding your statement that no LR controls are like the PS transform - I disagree. The LR crop tool is similar (size, aspect and rotation). All I am suggesting is that the vertical and horizontal transforms be added to the LR crop tool, similar to how the PS crop tool (not the PS transform tool) works. There is no reason why zooming into the image could not be supported.
Consider this example. You are copying a document that is rectangular and located on a desk. You cannot place your camera directly over the document, so you take it at an angle. Then you want to correct in post processing. Using the PS crop tool, all you have to do is drag the four corners of the crop rectangle to the four corners of the document. Done. Try that in the current LR implementation. It can be done, but takes a ton of fiddling.
So, I still want both ways of correcting perspective, and I do not think this is against the "LR way of doing things". Adobe modified the crop tool, based on beta tester feedback, and they may well again. At least I know they will look at this carefully and come up with improvements based on their track record.
Cheers
Rory

Feature Suggestion: ruler guides instead of grid in Lens Correction

In my work, I photograph two dimensional artwork in artist's studios or galleries which do not have the space, time, or facilities to allow for perfect positioning when taking a picture. Since these photos are intended for print, it is essential that they are well aligned w/o being distorted. While just eye-balling works well for ordinary photos, these are doubly complicated because the image itself is contained within a four-sided shape that has to be "square."
I often need to use the custom tab of Lens Correction to adjust vertical or horizontal perspectives. In these cases, the problem isn't the distortion inherent in a particular lens, it is a problem due to the angle of the camera or to where I had to stand to take the photo, usually w/o tripod and often not hanging on the wall.
If I had the same kind of dragable guides I have in photoshop and could set them before starting, I wouldn't have to eye-ball it so much. I have to keep going back to PS to see if I nailed it and (usually) start over. The grid is not much help, regardless of size, because I have to choose whether to position it for the horizontal line I'm trying to achieve or for the vertical, but not both. (Not to mention that dragging and positioning the grid isn't exactly a piece of cake!). If I could place four guides where I need them, I would be better able to tell how each nudge of the slider is affecting the image.
It's hard to describe the problem but, if you create a square custom shape then use the 3-d controls to turn it sideways a few degrees and tilt it slightly back, you see what I'm up against.

There would also be able to simply add the "perspective"as in Photoshop, probablyeasier to develop and integrate the interface.

Lens Correction Filter Canvas Extension

Ever since the Lens correction filter was introduced, I have was frustrated by the fact that the part of the image, which gets shifted off-canvas when adjusting the perspective, gets cropped.
As a workaround, I have made it a habit to first float the background layer, then extend the canvas size all around by ten percent, before entering the Lens Correction Filter dialogue.
Would it not be a lot neater if this functionality was included/ not needed in the Lens Correction Filter?

Hi,
Have you tried turning off the "Auto Scale Image" check box, located right below the automatic correction check boxes? Using the Vertical/Horizontal Perspective sliders will still crop a tiny bit, but it should be significantly less with Auto Scale Image turned off.

Perspective control with crop tool?

This may have already been addressed somewhere in the archives but I've been away from this forum for quite some time, so forgive me if it's an old topic.
Anyway, I've recently been on location photographing a variety of architectural exteriors and interiors and would love having a perspective correction - heck, why not go for the gold and ask for a 'Free Transform' option! - as part of the crop tool. Granted, there is 'sorta' that in the lens correction tools, but not quite the same.

There have been a few posts asking for a better UI to control the perspective correction. Personally I favour the photoshop crop transform approach too.
Rory

My Lightroom lens corrections need correcting. Is this normal?

I have bought myself my 1st DSLR camera (Nikon D3100) as i now want to shoot Raw instead of Jpeg. I've always shot Jpegs in the past with my old cameras. The in-camera Jpegs from my new Nikon don't show any lens distortion. However, when i open the Raw (NEF) files in Lightroom and tick 'enable profile correction' in the Lens corrections section, the distortion correction seems too much and i have to manually adjust it every time.
The lens profile comes from Lightroom itself (not from other users), & so this doesn't seem quite right to me that the correction is somewhat wrong each time.
I'm wondering if i'm doing something wrong or that maybe its even normal to have to adjust the correction further yourself each time (and perhaps most users have to do that too)?
I've included 3 Jpegs of the same image to demonstrate the problem (detailed below):
1) The export from Lightroom with the lens distortion corrected by Lightroom (note the straight red line).
2) An exported Jpeg version of the uncorrected Nef from Lightroom (to show the full original lens distortion)
3) The original in-camera Jpeg (obviously the distortion corrected by the camera)
I've drawn straight red lines on to the images to demonstrate the differences.
Any ideas?
^ above image is a Lightroom exported Jpeg (from NEF) with lens correction ON (note the red line along the top of the roof)
^ above image is a Lightroom exported Jpeg (from NEF) with NO lens correction yet, thus showing original distortion.
^ above image is the ORIGINAL in-camera JPEG showing no distortion at all (note the red line along the top of the roof).
P.s i've taken different shots too and the problem is the same for them all (at least at 18mm anyway).
Additional information:
The Nikon D3100 has an APS-C sensor (I'm not sure if that's significant or not). Also the lens described in the profile correction matches the one from my camera.

Rob Cole wrote:
Hi Paul,
I'm really not sure exactly what DxO outputs when you choose DNG:
It's not raw data, yet preserves some ability to do raw things in Lightroom, like white balance and camera profiles.
I dunno about pulling from highlight/shadow "reserves", but note: it's different than a DNG-wrapped tif or jpeg, it may be able to pull from the highlight/shadow reserves as can be done via the DNG used for smart previews - I just don't know.
trshaner: do you know for sure that a DxO DNG hard-clips shadows/highlights, or are you just "extrapolating/assuming/educatedly-guessing"?
Regardless, DxO has some auto shadow/highlight recovery (for those extreme black/white tones) that is quite good - don't sell it short.
Google 'dxo linear dng highlights.' Here's one that supports what I said:
http://forums.adobe.com/thread/663428
I've tried using Canon's DPP for the same purpose with TIFF output AND with DPP's highlight recovery. I can't get the same highlight recovery with the TIFF as compared to the raw inside LR with PV2012.
Rob Cole wrote:
I still think about it when Lr's lens corrections are wonky. But my problem with Lr's lens corrections have more to do with vignetting than distortion (because I mostly shoot nature, not buildings...), and I can add manual correction and/or a dab of paint to the automatic corrections, which saves me the complication of front-ending via DxO. If distortion is your primary concern, consider balancing auto with manual distortion corrections (I've not done much of that, so no guarantee...). Also, there's the upright feature in Lr5...
What's wrong with simply changing the Lens Profile 'Amount' settings from 100 if a specific lens profiles is "over-correcting" or "under-correcting? Don't forget most zoom lenses have a "complex" moustache shaped distortion, which is NOT easily corrected with LR's Manual Distortion control. You can certainly try both, but there's no way to save the Manual Distortion "correction" setting to a specific lens profile's defaults.
Rob Cole wrote:
PPS - DxO's purple fringe tool will get the fringe out without the artifacts of Lr's global defringer, however it may also take away real image color sometimes, and can't be done locally, so one may ultimately get better results in Lr if willing to spend a while painting local defringing.
I've never seen any artifacts caused by the LR Defringe tools (see image posted of Canon 8-15mm Fisheye lens CA), but you do need to be very careful concerning the actually settings used. After using the eyedropper tool to sample a fringe area I fine tune the settings to eliminate desaturation of areas that have similar color as the fringe area. Once you have the correct settings save it to a Develop preset for manual application. For example with my Canon 8-15mm F4L Fisheye zoom I have two (2) Develop presets of 8-12mm (Purple 2, 30/55) and 13-15mm (Purple 4, 30/55). There is no need to use Local controls with Defringe if you follow my suggestions for manually tuning the settings to prevent desaturation in like colored areas. IMHO the LR CA and Defringe tools are darn near perfect when you use them correctly!

Still no perspective control or lens correction?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for