Skip navigation
Currently Being Moderated

Automatic highlight recovery - a double-edged sword.

Feb 5, 2012 2:32 PM

The more I use Lr4b1, the more I love the automatic highlight recovery, and the more I hate it.

 

It's really not feasible to undo it using the tone curve, and local correction is also *very* challenging.

 

It's single-handedly responsible for some marked improvements to some of my photos, and just rubbing all the highlight pizazz out of others - no way to win it back using the whites slider.

 

I really wish I had the option to control it.

 

Rob

 
Replies 1 2 3 Previous Next
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 5, 2012 7:59 PM   in reply to Rob Cole

    WIthout a specific example from you, it is difficult to understand exactly what your problem is.

     

    SO....answering generically...

     

    ALl the sliders a global adjustments....and you will always get trade offs....i.e. the good with the bad.  The rel question we need to answer for ourselves is....is this new thing generally better than the old.  I think most answers, including yours, would be a resounding yes. 

     

    NOthing is perfect, nor will do perfect things with our imperfect images.

     

    TOne curves and local adjustments are difficult....even in photoshop, though somewhat easier there....but the tools are available to you in LR if you really need them. We could complain the LR does not give us layers and luminosity masks....therefore we should reject it, but....

     

    JOhn

     

    PS...I think automatic highlight recovery as implemented....even without the minor tweaks that maybe done....is the single greatest improvement in LR 4.  Not only does it handle the recovery beautifully, but you know immediately ( in develop mode) if parts of the image have been blown. 

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 6, 2012 5:49 AM   in reply to Rob Cole

    Words do not describe the problem you state....nor help understand why the other controls do not help you

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 6, 2012 6:48 AM   in reply to jrsforums

    Rob, it would be really helpful if you posted examples (i.e., original files) demonstrating the problem.

     

    (Although I read nearly every thread, I don't take any action unless I have files ...)

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 6, 2012 8:10 AM   in reply to MadManChan2000

    I can personally attest to the fact that he does take our input seriously and does take action when he has files that clearly demonstrate the behavior being described.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 6, 2012 10:57 AM   in reply to Rob Cole

    Rob, again, why do you NEVER back your findings with image examples, so it is worth to discuss the issue with you. Your posts are pointless, if you fail to do so.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 6, 2012 11:36 AM   in reply to Rob Cole

    "I really wish I had the option to control it."

     

    Rob

     

    rob,,,   void the input data for the 'auto' recovery algorithm via exposure in the camera,,,

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Andrew Rodney
    1,387 posts
    Apr 16, 2009
    Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 6, 2012 11:43 AM   in reply to Lee Jay

    Lee Jay wrote:

     

    I can personally attest to the fact that he does take our input seriously and does take action when he has files that clearly demonstrate the behavior being described.

    Damn straight. I can too. In fact, if not for Eric’s hard work on the new highlight recovery, we’d still be seeing the problems trying to recover data with an ugly cast and banding that is now fixed.  Eric took interest in this issue after some of us sent him problematic files. PV2012 is a major big deal in my book and the recovery is now excellent.

     

    Here is an example that Eric has seen. I didn’t even put PV2003 in which was even worse in terms of Highlight recovery. The image was shot ETTR so recovery was necessary as seen in the bottom image. The middle needed -26 Highlight recovery using PV2010. There is some color shifting magenta and an ugly loss of smoothness. The top is what I get simply by clicking on the convert to PV2012! That is before I move any sliders. Significantly better and more realistic. Amazing in my bookPV2010_2012HighlightRecovery.jpg

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Rusty Sterling
    81 posts
    Feb 21, 2007
    Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 6, 2012 3:18 PM   in reply to Rob Cole

    I do not understand what auto recovery (either shadows or highlights) is at all. I do not see anything called auto recovery in the develop module anywhere. Will someone please explain this to me.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 6, 2012 4:06 PM   in reply to Andrew Rodney

    Damn straight. I can too. In fact, if not for Eric’s hard work on the new highlight recovery, we’d still be seeing the problems trying to recover data with an ugly cast and banding that is now fixed.

    Indeed. Eric has recived quite some files from me over the years too and every single problem they exhibited got fixed over time. Here is an example. I find it astonishing how well the new automatic highlight recovery works (Rusty, you don't have to do anything for this it just happens) and I haven't been able to find any negatives with it. That is not to say that there couldn't be any problems with certain files, so if there are issues, the best way to fix them is get such problem files to Eric.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Rusty Sterling
    81 posts
    Feb 21, 2007
    Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 6, 2012 4:20 PM   in reply to Jao vdL

    @Jao: Thanks. I am not having a problem with it. I just did not have a clue what it was. Frankly, it should not affect me one way or the other since I have a specific workflow and process with a certain output in mind. Also, about 98% of my work is black & white. So again, I have an output in mind so if the recovery happens, I am likely to change it anyway with my regular workflow. I just wanted to know what it was. Thanks.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 6, 2012 5:03 PM   in reply to Rob Cole

    Good grief, Rob!  Why not make some of the problem files available instead of endlessly talking about them?  Illustrate the problem.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 6, 2012 5:10 PM   in reply to Rob Cole

    Your not going to let this go....nor will you provide an example to show the "problem" which would prove your point or allow Eric to see if he could solve YOUR problem.

     

    I was disappointed when you twice said you were going o stop posting, as I think you have the POTENTIAL to add quite a lot to his forum.  However, this constant whining over a (so far) mystical problem is getting to be straining.

     

    PLEASE....put up or let it go. :-). You are only embarrassing yourself.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 6, 2012 6:24 PM   in reply to Rob Cole

    Considering the incredible simplicity of making it optional, perhaps even slightly hidden for the normal user, I really don't understand why there is so much fuss about it.

    Just add it and everyone will be happy and get the sort of control over the photograph that you expect from a professional grade program.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 6, 2012 6:56 PM   in reply to slarti3

    So...you have peeked at the underlying code and have determined its incredibly simple to make optional...???

     

    There air others of us that have no idea what the fuss was in the first place.

     

    If Eric gets the images and recognizes it as a real problem he will work on it.  We mortals should not guess at what is simple and what is not.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 6, 2012 7:00 PM   in reply to jrsforums

    Oh, it's simple alright.  Everything is simple when it's someone else's job to do it.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 6, 2012 7:33 PM   in reply to Rob Cole

    Rob Cole wrote:

     

    They are available to Eric Chan.

    So you have emailed or linked to them at the address that Mr Chan has provided here Rob??

     

    If not put up or shut up.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Andrew Rodney
    1,387 posts
    Apr 16, 2009
    Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 7, 2012 2:59 PM   in reply to Rob Cole

    Rob Cole wrote:

    As a community professional, you should treat forum participants with more respect.

    Respect has to be earned. And it can be lost due too, depending on how one conducts themselves.


     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 7, 2012 3:29 PM   in reply to Rob Cole

    Interesting that you haven't answered the question Rob. Have you provided the file/s to Mr Chan?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 7, 2012 3:44 PM   in reply to Rob Cole

    I'm not sure what almost identical histograms has to do with anything.

     

    However, I do agree that there are lots of ways to get to pleasing images.

     

    I have recently Been playing with some college basketball pix.  I, similarly, found that lower exposure (than base or auto or both) was a little bit better starting point.  Then raising the white point to just below clipping and opening up the shadows gave me a better starting point for these images.

     

    I still need to work up the learning curve with LR 4 and will feel a bit better when it finally goes inal to zero into an approach for different types of images/looks.  Until the I plan to ot be constrained by using oly one approach, but to experiment with different approaches and combinations of sliders.  After all....reset gets one back to "GO".

     

    John

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 7, 2012 3:50 PM   in reply to Rob Cole

    "...Mr Chan knows the answer to that question - I really don't care if you or anybody else, who's mission seems to be to give me a bad time, knows the answer..."

     

    One reaps what one sows....

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 7, 2012 5:15 PM   in reply to Rob Cole

    Rob Cole wrote

     

    Note to self: Whites slider has a deep reach into the histogram - never save it for last (or be prepared to readjust everything again after using it).

     

    R

     

    I agree with never save it for last, as you will not in my BB pix, I adjust the whites sliders to peak the white uniforms early in the steps.

     

    IT is similar to first setting exposure in pv2010.

     

    John

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 7, 2012 5:52 PM   in reply to Rob Cole

    There is a now well documented bug in LR 4 b that makes the white slider

    affect the entire tonal range:

    http://forums.adobe.com/message/4183508#4183508

    You SHOULD be able to use the white slider as a final adjustment.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 7, 2012 5:57 PM   in reply to Rob Cole


    Unfortunately, that goofed up my whole deal, all the way down to the shadows (and yes, in case you were wondering, I am very picky...).

    R

     

    hey rob.... ? why,, after essentially calling the 'basic' sliders a kludge would you think that one could wash the pinstripes off the wedding dress with a firehose and not effect the vail...:)) ain't gonna happen

    either the parametric curve with the split sliders compressed to increase contrast or yes,,, the ever lov'n point curve > lock it down and reap the highlights....i know you know,,,,so why? be insistent on using the kludge...open the toolbox !!

     

    den

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 7, 2012 6:19 PM   in reply to Jao vdL

    Jao vdL wrote:

     

    There is a now well documented bug in LR 4 b that makes the white slider

    affect the entire tonal range:

    http://forums.adobe.com/message/4183508#4183508

    You SHOULD be able to use the white slider as a final adjustment.

    I thought this was specific to going from 0 to -1.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 7, 2012 7:50 PM   in reply to Rob Cole

    You know the drill Rob,

     

    For guys like me who have to process a thousand images on deadline there's just no time to start playing with curves. The basic controls have to work efficiently, and ballpark allow us to achieve 95% of the potential quality for 95+% of our images.

     

    I look forward to the next beta iteration but it may require the final LR4 release running at production speed before I can decide the quality/productivity balance is right for me. LR3.6 sets a high bar when speed and quality count equally. I'm rooting for the team to surpass both metrics.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 7, 2012 10:18 PM   in reply to VeloDramatic

    With you VeloD.

    processing of large volumes has to be done quickly. I'm waiting for relative development presets, so that I can Auto an image and then add/remove a little highlight, shadow, contrast etc

    Then we are getting places.

    Rob is a great protaganist of the details and technical aspects, but for me, like you, I want to get to a good place with an image or a series of images very very quickly. The client can then fiddle to get what they want for the magazine, website, brochure, paper they are printing on etc, I want to give them an image that is great but not where they cant manipulate it to where they need it.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 7, 2012 10:22 PM   in reply to Rob Cole

    Rob Cole wrote:

     

    Mr Chan knows the answer to that question...

     

    Uh...so the question stands, have you indeed actually sent any example images where PV 2012 is less good than PV 2010 to Eric (and consider your what you say before answering cause I already know the answer).

     

    As far as I know, you've not actually sent any example images to Eric...correct?

     

    Eric has been very responsive to people who send example images...those people who do not contribute any examples tend to not get any response...and sending PM's don't count as example images.

     

    If you have any examples, show them (even if only to the engineers), otherwise it would be useful to learn how to use the exisiting controls (and maybe quit the harping).

     

    Just saying...

     
    |
    Mark as:
1 2 3 Previous Next
Actions

More Like This

  • Retrieving data ...

Bookmarked By (2)

Answers + Points = Status

  • 10 points awarded for Correct Answers
  • 5 points awarded for Helpful Answers
  • 10,000+ points
  • 1,001-10,000 points
  • 501-1,000 points
  • 5-500 points