Tone curve fix

where is that fix for the tone curves? I assume to 4.1rc doesn't retroactively fix this

B r e t t wrote:
nice, way to go Adobe
when it says the RC runs out in June, how would that affect using it to fix this?
Not at all. Another version will be out before then, even if it's another RC.

Similar Messages

Fix 'Recovery' slider & add 'Color Correction' slider to Tone Curve

My requests:
1.) Please change the behavior of the 'Recovery' slider so that it attacks very-blown-out-highlights more rigorously than less-blown-out-highlights.
2.) Please add a 'Color Correction' slider to the Tone Curve that is analogous to the 'Color Correction' slider built into the 'Shadows/Highlights' tool in Adobe Photoshop & Apple Aperture.
To more clearly understand what I'm asking for, let me compare Aperture vs. LR's handling of Highlight Recovery, and why I prefer how Aperture recovers my highlights with its Shadows/Highlights tool vs. how LR recovers my highlights with the 'Recovery' slider OR Tone Curve.
1.) Aperture's 'Shadows/Highlights' tool recovers highlights by attacking the brightest parts of the highlights more harshly than the lesser bright parts of the highlights (th extent of luminosities attacked is adjustable using the 'High Tonal Width' slider). LR's "Recovery' tool doesn't seem to, among highlights, preferentially attack the brighter parts of the highlights over the less bright highlights. In fact, sometimes it leaves THE brightest parts of my image nearly untouched! I've posted an image below that shows this.
2.) Aperture's 'Highlights' tool recovers highlights WHILE maintaining color saturation (you can control the extent to which this saturation is maintained using the 'Color Correction' slider under Advanced settings fo the Shadows/Highlights tool). LR's 'Highlights' within the Tone Curve desaturates colors as highlights are 'recovered' by bringing 'Highlights' down. Again, I've posted an image below that shows this.
Here is an image that clearly shows the different behaviors of Aperture's Shadows/Highlights tool vs. LR's Recovery tool vs. LR's 'Highlights' slider within the Tone Curve:
http://web.mac.com/rishisanyal/Lightroom/HighlightRecovery_LRvsAperture.jpg
I believe that LR's 'Recovery' slider has much room for improvement (i.e. attack the blown-out highlights more harshly than the less-blown-out highlights), and the addition, to LR's Tone Curve, of a similar 'Color Correction' slider as Aperture's & PS CS3's very own 'Shadows/Highlights' tools have, would be very welcome.
Thank you for your consideration,
Rishi

More for your eyes to feast on:
http://web.mac.com/rishisanyal/Lightroom/HighlightRecovery_LRvsAperture_2.jpg
http://web.mac.com/rishisanyal/Lightroom/LR_FailsToDecreaseBlownOutHighlights.jpg
Funny thing is, LR just seems unwilling to touch (255,255,255) blown-out highlights. In all my test images with a blown-out sun, LR leaves the sun at (255,255,255) after all combinations of exposure, recovery, and Tone Curve manipulations. Whereas Aperture will bring it down to something like (128,128,128). Which seems more logical, to me, if one is trying to darken the image or darken highlights... right?
Also, if you look at the Seattle & Mt. Rainier image, no matter what I try, LR will not get rid of that brighter 'halo' to the upper left of Mt. Rainier. It just won't! 'Recovery' ends up highlighting just that bubble, and decreasing the Highlights in the Tone Curve just turns it into a grey, desaturated, halo. I'm telling, it just won't get rid of that halo! It has a love affair with it! :)
Aperture immediately gets rid of it with its Highlight slider, and Photoshop's 'Shadows/Highlights' tool also gets rid of it after a bit of manipulations/tweaking.
Now, I try to avoid Aperture at all costs, but, for all these images, seems like I need to use Aperture as my 'external editor' just to fix the highlights!
Any suggestions are very much welcome & appreciated.

Bug in Camera Raw's tone curve?

Phil Harvey has released ExifTool 8.04 yesterday, and in the release notes he says, 'WARNING: Some Adobe utilities (Camera Raw 5.6, DNG Converter 5.6, Lightroom 2.6) have a bug which causes the tone curve to be incorrect for edited ARW images from some Sony cameras (A500, A550, A700, A850, A900, and maybe others)'.
Can any Sony Alpha users confirm this? And will there be an intermediate bug fix, or will we have to wait for the next ACR version? Does anyone know when the bug was introduced, i. e. does it make sense to revert back to ACR 5.5?
UPDATE: I have tried editing an A900 ARW raw file with ACR 5.6. I have changed the tone curve, saved the file, inspected the XMP file, loaded and edited the raw file again, saved it again, inspected the XMP file again. As far as I can tell, no problems with the tone curve. So I am wondering if Phil's allegation holds any water in the first place, and if so then under which circumstances the bug will emerge.

This means, that offsets within a tag are wrongly assumed to be fixed; my comment above related to the offsets to the tags themselves.
Sorry for the confusion.
Gabor

Brush mode: Tone curve, etc

Well, I'm new for LR, I'm trying to tweak a certain part in the photo by using Tone curve and else, but I don't think the LR would allow me to do that in the "Brush Mode", am I correct?
Because, I need to change some parts in the photo by increasing only red or green or blue, or even highlight and shadow, but I can't do that like Aperture in Mac. Or I do miss any feature control panel in the LR?
Seem like the LR would not give flexibility when working in Brush Mode, is this correct?

mrkavin wrote:
...but sometime it's frustrated when stuck with the LR limitation along the way while the other can do.
I understand.
When I first tried Lightroom (1.4), I was a bit disappointed with the scope of the develop tools available (and did not buy it). When Lightroom 2 included Clarity and Locals it was a big improvement (and I bought it and started using it along with Nx2 & DxO & Photoshop), but it still seemed lean compared to some raw converters (Nx2 as example). I mean, what Lightroom does it does well, for the most part, but full-featured develop tools can not really be touted...
Lr3 is known as the release when Lightroom became a true professional-grade development tool in my opinion: image quality + lens corrections. I applaud Adobe's decision to do just that. No more front-ending with DxO or Nx2 or DPP or CaptureOnePro, or Photoshop + Noise Ninja... I love Lr3 .
Still, I'm hoping Lr4 is known as the release when Lightroom comes of age, develop-module-wise... (distraction removal, more locals, signature auto-masking technology, better color adjustment including rgb curves, ..., and of course fixing of highlight recovery). No more doing without or frequently processing with a pixel editor after basic adjustments in Lightroom... If they do this, I will really-really love Lr4 .
Then in Lr5, Faces & Places & GPS & Collages & HDR & Layers & DLNA Servers & Networked Catalogs, or whatever... - I wont care... (yeah right .
R

DNG Profile Editor Tone Curve

I was trying to see how useful PE might be in modifying the tone curve at the 255,255 end to fix some nearly overexposed areas but it was not all that successful.
It seemed to me that this was because the tone curve is expressed in 8 bit data and it purposely does not allow control points above 251 which makes it more or less useless for that purpose.
Some kind of expanded scale in the neighbourhood of 255,255 would be useful. The object is to modify the slope and curvature in that range without greatly effecting the major part of the curve.
Yes one can put a control point at (251, 140) for example but there is nearly no control of the curvature or anything else for that matter.
The kind of thing I was thinking of was an almost straight line from 0,0 to 220, 160 (for example) then some fine control between that and 255,255.
(for a tone curve based on camera raw default)
John

You should really be using negative exposure compensation to handle this, instead of the tone curve.

LR4.1 - Tone Curve - how to adjust individual RGB channels?

Hi,
I am having trouble figuring out how to adjust the curve of individual RGB channels. I am assuming the LR4 Tone Curve works like the PS Curves dialog with the channel dropdown.
The LR4.1 Help says:
To make adjustments to individual points on the tone curve, choose an option from the Point Curve menu, click the Edit Point Curve button , and do any of the following:
Choose an option from the Channel pop-up menu. You can edit all three channels at once, or choose to edit the Red, Green, or Blue channel individually.
When I click the little icon in the lower right corner of the Tone Curve panel, the panel shrinks so that I don't see the Regions sliders. If I click again, they are visible again. I can't find where to select one of the three indvidual channels.
The Help refers to "the Point Curve menu." Where is the Point Curve menu? Is the Point Curve different from the Tone Curve?
If I right-click (Windows) in the curve dialog, the context menu has a Show Info option. I click it on/off and don't see any change or any info. Where should I be looking for info?
Thanks for any help here.
John

Good morning John,
The point curve is the one without the sliders. The adjustments for the individual channels are only available with
PV2012. You must be editing a file with PV2010 or 2003. When in PV2012 you will see " Channels: RGB" below the curve window. Click on the doule triangles following the RGB
to pick the individual channel.
HTH
Rich

How do I set a preset in LR to import all files from my computer with a Medium Tone Curve?

I edit a file in PS, and LR informs me that the "metadata for the file has been changed." I opt for import settings from disk (my changes), but in doing so the file is always rendered with a linear tone curve. What I am seeking is to have the file that I've been working on PS, be with the same rendering in LR.
Thank you,
S

I just followed your workflow. In other words I used the "edit in" option to send an image to Photoshop where I made a significant change in the tone curve. Then I saved that image, which returned to Lightroom. The Lightroom tone curve still displayed as a linear curve. In other words it didn't reflect the changes that I made in Photoshop. However the image itself displayed the changes that were made. So apparently saving your PSD in Photoshop will not force Lightroom to display the Photoshop changes. As far as Lightroom is concerned, that is the new linear curve. The only curve adjustments you will see in Lightroom are the ones made using Lightroom.
To summarize what I'm trying to say, whatever you change the curve to in Photoshop becomes the linear curve in Lightroom. Sorry that I am so poor with words sometimes.

Where are the Tone Curve presets in the Lightroom Presets folder?

Hi
I have recenty had to reinstall all my software, and manged to find most of my old Lightroom settings in the Lightroom Presets folder (inside the Appdata folder on a PC) but I seem to have lost my custom tone curves.
Do you know which folder they should be in (indise the Lightroom Presets folder)
Thanks in advance
PS: I STILL don't understand why there are TWO comminty forums for Lightroom; it just doesn't make sense to me?!
Edward

Edward Allen wrote:
PS: I STILL don't understand why there are TWO comminty forums for Lightroom; it just doesn't make sense to me?!
You aren't the only one, and neither is going away any time soon.

I am working in the Develop module of Lightroom 5 and have accidentally bumped a setting and lost the Basic menu and the option to retrieve it. "Tone curve" is directly under the tool bar now. How can I retrieve the "Basic" menu?

How can I retrieve the "Basic" menu on Lightroom 5? I accidentally bumped something while working in the Develop module of Lightroom 5, and now the Tone Curve menu is directly under the Tool Bar, with no option to click on "Basic."

Right-click on Tone Curve and choose basic again or press Ctrl+1 in Develop.
On Mac (Control-Click or Cmd+1)

New RGB tone curve is absent in my LR4 upgrade. How do I get it to emerge?

help please

Click on the little curve icon at the bottom right-hand corner of teh Tone Curve panel. See screenshot:

Tone curve RGB

I am trying to alter individual RGB channels within the tone curve box, but I don't get a pop up dialoge box. I saw a mention of PV 2010 and PV 2003, but I don't know what these are, or if one can convert to them.

Look in the camera calibration panel and it will tell you. Alternatively, if you're seeing the current set of sliders in the basic panel (e.g. highlights, shadows, etc.) then that would confirm you're using PV2012.
Go to tone curve, click on the little curves button at the bottom, and you'll be in point curve mode. Click on the RGB button to choose a colour channel.
As you're on the web, I recommend searching for "process version Lightroom" to find out more about that side of things.
M

Feature Request: RGB Histograms / Tone Curves

Hi team,
It would be really helpful to be able to view the RGB Histograms separately in addition to a composite (rather than the "compact" mode we have now).
It would also be really helpful to be able to adjust the Tone Curve applied to an individual RGB channel in Develop.
Finally, it would be most helpful to be able to see the RGB values as well as or instead of the RGB percentages when moving the cursor over an image area. This would be particularly helpful for fine-tuning skin tones.
Thanks, and keep up the great work.
We're delighted you're evolving Lightroom!
Cheers,
Matthew

Your post seems to assume that Lightroom is a tool for travel/landscape photography, and other types of photography (e.g., portrait/fashion) should be supported by a "specialized add-on module". I have to disagree with you on that point. Considering many of the examples on the Lightroom marketing are fashion shoots, I would think that they considers portrait/fashion photographers to be an important part of their target audience. They are not a fringe group of specialists.
I'm sure that portrait/fashion photographers would feel the same way about a Lightroom capability that primarily benefits the workflow of a travel/landscape photographer, i.e., when I do do some landscape work, I just edit in Photoshop. But you wouldn't agree to that, would you?
Skin tone measurement can be an incredibly easy tool to implement. It can be something as simple as showing the CMY values alongside the RGB values during a mouseover. Keep in mind, I'm talking about CMY not CMYK, so there should be no need to worry about what ICC profile to use. RGB to CMY is a straightforward transformation. It's embarassingly simple.
There are other ways Adobe can implement skin tone management that would be more powerful but a little more complicated. Those would be great too.
Anyway, thanks for the link to the Adobe feature request page! I will use it.
Regards,
Mike

Camera Raw - Enable RGB Tone Curves

In Camera Raw, the Tone Curve Channel selection is disabled. How can I enable it to allow me to adjust specific colors in Camera Raw?
I’m using Photoshop CS5, Camera Raw version 6.7.0.339 on a Windows Vista 64 bit system, and my camera is a Nikon D90.
Thanks,
Jack

I don't think you can...ACR 6.7 was a crossover version tho have compatibility with LR 4 when it was released, as a result it was set to allow processing of certain features that were in LR 4 (and ACR 7). While the RGB curves show up dimmed, I don't think ACR 6.7 allows actually adjusting the RGB curves. I think the only way to get them is update to CS6 and ACR 7.x.

Which do you prefer: Increasing exposure or adjusting the tone curve?

I'd like to know how people here handle their images.
I use a Nikon D7100 in camera RAW. In camera my images are always in balance. In LR, if I select Auto Tone in Basics invariably it will adjust the exposure. I tend to adjust exposure near last in my workflow because I assume my camera had the exposure setting right. When I feel I need to adjust the exposure my first stop is the Tone Curve. I'm wondering a couple of things:
1) I know we edit by the specifics of each photo, but generally do you make adjustments to Exposure or the Tone Curve first?
2) Is there a reason or a time to prefer one over the other?
Thanks,

My recommendation:
(note: I am interpreting "exposure", in your question, to mean "dynamic range at right wall of histogram", i.e. white point)
Adjust basics exposure first (before tone/point curve), but note: you may not be able to go all the way using the exposure slider. Next stop (if necessary): +whites, but note: it may not be optimal to go all the way using whites. Final stop (if necessary): cinch in the the exposure by dragging white point to the left via the point curve.
Rationale: basics have some intelligence and magic that tone curve does not. If you do tone curve first, you've missed some opportunities..
Still a begging question: how much exposure vs. whites vs. tone curve (point curve).
Note: go easy on the contrast at first, and assure blacks are sufficiently seated using blacks slider (and maybe tone/point curve).
Likewise, cranking whites up will increase global contrast, so if you take a shot at blacks and whites before contrast, then you may avoid a common mistake: radically wrong contrast due to adjusting before establishing ballpark black & white slider values.
Anyway, be aware that increased PV2012 exposure (and/or whites) is designed to be used with -highlights (note: there is no "brightness" slider), and to avoid making things too washed out (or over-jamming the highlights) it may be desirable to substitute +whites and/or +shadows for some +exposure.
Note: tones may gang up (on the right side of the histogram) in a non-optimal way when using +exposure and/or +whites, in which case it may be better to use point curve for white point adjustment (e.g. leftward drag). For example, sometimes the whites will be overly compressed if you don't bring white point in on the curve instead.
Rules of thumb:
Most of my normal photos end up with:
+exposure (to fully brighten)
+whites (for full dynamic range without excessive exposure setting)
-highlights (for dialing back +exposure and/or +whites)
+shadows (so -blacks and doesn't leave image with overly dark shadows)
-blacks (for full dynamic range without needing as much contrast)
*contrast: depends - if overly contrasty to begin with (or a lot of -blacks and/or +whites are employed), this usually gets dialed back; if underly contrasty to begin with (or +blacks and/or -whites have been employed), this usually gets bumped up.
(for abnormal photos or when desiring abnormal results - anything goes..).
Other common mistakes (in addition to wrong contrast and/or non-optimal balance between exposure & whites..):
trying to recover highlights via -whites. try -highlights (and maybe +whites) before -whites.
Warning signs:
if you have very high values for +shadows and -highlights, you may have contrast set too high.
if you have a positive value for highlights, you may have contrast/exposure/whites too low.
if you have a negative value for shadows, you may have contrast too low, or blacks/exposure too high.
Miscellaneous:
Try +clarity and +saturation (and/or +vibrance) to pump it up, if reduced contrast and/or increased exposure has left it looking a little washed out.. (likewise, -saturation if +contrast has left it looking a little too "rich"..).
You already know this, but for the sake of completeness (and other readers): you can learn by clicking 'Auto Tone' "button". You may need to dial back the exposure afterward etc. but it can be very educational none-the-less..
Of course, you can always fine-tune tone using tone curve (e.g. if image is just way overbright, like some snow shots, try tugging the midpoint downward..).
Don't forget the locals for final spot toning.
In case you haven't gleaned yet, adjusting via PV2012 is not the same as you might think at first - you don't just set exposure/black/white points and leave them, and then adjust everything else. e.g. -highlights pulls white point down more than -whites does (but +whites brings white point back up, which means you usually need to adjust in tandem..), so be prepared for a lot of back n' forth, to lessen with experience..
PS - There are tutorial videos galore, but at the risk of opposing Adobe and their sycophants, be forewarned: some are geared to how they wished PV2012 was (simple), and not to how it really is (interdependent image-dependent settings..) - examples:
top-down is touted, but that ignores black/white point issues which can lead to radically wrong contrast (and/or exposure) setting.
often, adjustment of blacks is considered optional/fine-tuning, but blacks sometimes need large value adjustment, and dramatically impacts contrast & shadow brightness..
often, adjustment of whites is considered optional/fine-tuning, but sometimes optimal toning can only be had by using a large whites value adjustment, which dramatically impacts contrast, and exposure..
cteavin wrote:
I tend to adjust exposure near last in my workflow because I assume my camera had the exposure setting right.
In case not clear yet, adjusting exposure and/or whites (and/or white point on curve) and all the rest is often done to turn an image "with potential" into a very nice image, not just to compensate for in-camera exposure imperfection. I have lots of under-exposed images that end with -exposure (granted, usually +whites), and vice-versas.. That said, if you don't know whether to crank it up or down, there is something to be said for passing until you do..
Lastly, for emphasis: exposure slider is an intelligent slider. It behaves more like normal exposure adjusters at lower values, and more like brightness adjusters at higher values (has clipping protection and highlight roll-off logic which kicks in as you crank it up..). So, it's a mistake to think of adjusting it just to make up for non-optimal camera exposure setting.
Sorry for verbose answer, but there is really no short answer which doesn't run the risk of being bad advice: best way to adjust "exposure" depends...
Cheers,
Rob

Tone Curve Channel Histograms

Just a small piece of feedback - the new tone curve individual channels are great, but the histogram in the background of the curve is very difficult to see. Any chance you would consider increasing the opacity of the red, green and blue? The RGB is more visable.
Many thanks.

This is a very valid point and would make a great feature request. You should consider submitting it through the official channels (no pun intended) http://feedback.photoshop.com/photoshop_family/products/photoshop_family_photoshop_lightro om put your idea here and I will vote for it.

Tone curve fix

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for