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. 

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

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.

"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,,,

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.

@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.

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

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.

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.

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

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

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

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.

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...