Skip navigation
Currently Being Moderated

“Image Adaptive” Controls

Mar 6, 2012 8:08 PM

Since the LR4 beta forums are closed, I’m starting a new thread here, and asking about this statement that Eric Chan wrote on a LR4 beta thread (http://forums.adobe.com/thread/946966?tstart=0):

 

MadManChan: “For the record, all six central Basic controls in PV 2012 (Exposure thru Blacks) are image adaptive.  But then again, Recovery, Fill Light, and Clarity in earlier versions of Lr (and in PV 2003/2010 in Lr 4 Beta) were also image adaptive.  They auto-adjusted their behavior internally based on image content.  In PV 2012 we've simply extended that idea to the rest of the Basic controls.  Don't let that scare you, and don't get hung up on the terminology. Remember: the goal is better images.  I think in PV 2012 we've provided a better and faster way to do that.”

 

So I’d like to understand what this means. How do the Basic controls adapt to different images? The more specific the answer, the better - I’d like to know how the behavior of each of the controls changes, and what triggers the changes. And do the tools “adapt” upon import, or only when you actually start to move one of the sliders?

 

Thanks!

 

Michael Frye

 
Replies
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 6, 2012 8:18 PM   in reply to Check-raise Charley

    See this post on Lightroom Jounal for more info on the limage adaptive controls. Magic or Local Lapacian Filters.

     

    Note, the full PDF is not for the faint at heart...

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 7, 2012 11:54 AM   in reply to Check-raise Charley

    There is auto highlight recover and auto calculation of black point.

     

    However, if you are converting and the old PV has image adjustments, they are mapped in an imprecise way to the new features.  Making it more precise is a very difficult problem and they did their best.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 7, 2012 2:29 PM   in reply to Check-raise Charley

    Well, I suspect all they're going to release is in that paper.  The relevant sliders are spacially adaptive the way recovery and fill light were, but using an entirely different approach.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 7, 2012 6:12 PM   in reply to Check-raise Charley

    Check-raise Charley wrote:

     

    How do the Basic controls adapt to different images?

     

    Very well, sometimes. Other times - not so much...

     

    (image-adaptive is somewhat of a buzz-word, often used very "loosely"...)

     

    e.g. Lr4/PV12 tries to figure out what are the highlights in your image, and what are shadows.

     

    I'm working on an image now which has scant but important and bright highlights, scant but important midtones, a substantial lump of blacks, and a lump of dark shadows that need fluffing.

     

    Unfortunately, L4 is interpreting the dark shadows as highlights and the blacks as shadows, so when I adjust highlights the shadows change, but when I adjust shadows the blacks change.

     

    I may not have perfectly interpreted why it behaves as it does, but how it behaves is clear, and not good...

     

    My effort to create a camera calibration profile to "fool" the basic sliders into doing the right thing is ongoing, and so far has been only marginally successful - the basic problem remains the same...

     

    PV2010 handles this image well - behavior is predictable and same as for any other photo...

     

    Note: It's a Tony.S dancer photo I obtained from the forum during the earliest phase of beta testing - dunno which thread.

     

    Rob

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 8, 2012 1:50 AM   in reply to Rob Cole

    Unfortunately, L4 is interpreting the dark shadows as highlights and the blacks as shadows, so when I adjust highlights the shadows change, but when I adjust shadows the blacks change.

     

    Intereseting. Maybe it's the same problem I've been complaining here and here? Does it happen even when the Whites, Blacks and Exposure are set to 0?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated

    I really can't tell to what extent these problems are related.

     

    In my present case, it's hardly influenced by the other sliders at all - the shadows slider just leaves a pile of shadow tones relatively unaffected as you crank it back and forth - it affects the adjacent black tones as if they were shadows (in a fairly smooth and familiar way reminiscent of PV2010 fill), but only pushes the true shadow tones around minimally to the extent that it has to...

     

    I don't know if the shadows are interpreted as highlights or its a side-effect of adjusting highlight slider that it pushes and pulls the shadows around too, but clearly the highlights slider has way more effect on the shadows than the shadows slider does. Again - no matter what the other sliders are set at.

     

    R

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 8, 2012 4:33 AM   in reply to Rob Cole

    What's Exposure set to? 

     

    It seems to me that the zones (i.e. what is considered highlights and what shadows) are calculated before any other adjustments. That is, if you crank the Exposure way down, Highlights would become shadows, but still be controlled by the Highlights slider.

     

    Can you share the file? A low-res DNG would do.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated

    The behavior is independent of exposure - high or low, it's the same.

     

    My experience/interpretation has always been (wrongly perhaps?) that (unlike the contrast slider which has a fixed cross-over point), PV2012 will always interpret the the same relative set of tones as highlights regardless of exposure setting, within limits, more or less. No?

     

    It gets complicated because PV2012 has the uncanny ability to maintain high tones high sometimes even when lowering exposure and/or whites way down...

     

    I don't have permission to share the raw, yet.

     

    Another interesting thing to note is that clarity does not work well on this image, if cranked to 100 it will darken almost the entire image - even many of the brighter highlights - she looks like she's been spray painted with brown paint. Yet, the hump of shadows I'd so love to be able to fluff out remains relatively unaffected - kinda like the back of a hippopatamus in a river...

     

    Rob

     
    |
    Mark as:

More Like This

  • Retrieving data ...

Bookmarked By (0)

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