Skip navigation
Currently Being Moderated

Matching Lightroom Develop Settings to In-Camera Picture Styles

Oct 6, 2013 10:43 AM

Tags: #presets #manufacturer_picture_styles

For certain shoots it would suit me to have my pictures import and look like the embedded jpegs which are created using Canon's standard picture styes. Is there an easy way to create LR develop settings to match the popular Canon styles such as Standard, Portrait and Landscape so that I get approx the same amount of sharpness, contrast, colour balance. Perhaps someone has already done that and they've shared the Lightroom Presets.

 
Replies
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Oct 6, 2013 10:50 AM   in reply to Amy2014

    The camera-matching profiles is a good starting point. Not a perfect match, but a lot closer:

     

    profiles.png

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Oct 6, 2013 11:28 AM   in reply to twenty_one

    In general, you would create your own preset and/or camera calibration to get an initial photo appearance that is close to YOUR liking. It is possible that other people also have a preset and or camera calibration this is close to YOUR liking, but I'm skeptical.

     

    As explained in the other thread, Lightroom gives you the opportunity to get something that is different from ... and much superior to ... the JPG preview, or associated JPG image, from each of your RAWs. So, in my mind, the idea of obtaining a preset of camera calibration that matches the JPG or JPG preview doesn't seem to be a direction I'd ever go in.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Oct 6, 2013 12:20 PM   in reply to Amy2014

    There are a variety of methods, some easier than others, for setting Lr adjustment defaults which depend on in-camera settings. If 21's suggestion doesn't get you close enough, do tell...

     

    PS - in addition to setting matching camera profile, another biggie is:

    * Applying some ISO-dependent (luminance) noise reduction (your camera does this, but Lightroom does not).

     

    If that's the only thing you want to do (and you have an acceptable way of setting the desired camera profile), then I recommend using Jeffrey Friedl's Bulk Develop plugin to do it. If you need something further reaching, but less straight forward, consider Collection Preseter (it can be used to set everything (camera profile, noise reduction, sharpening, intelligent contrast reduction, ... ), based on which smart collection(s) things are in following import). And if you want to go all out, Ottomanic Importer has a camera emulation mode that will take you as close as you can get - but beware: setup is not "easy" , and using such a feature requires you forego Lr's import dialog box...

     

    To find the plugins mentioned in this post, or any other post, use an internet search like:

     

    [plugin-author] {plugin-name} Lightroom plugin

     

    Examples:

    * Rob Cole's Collection Preseter Lightroom plugin

    * Rob Cole's Ottomanic Importer Lightroom plugin

    * Jeffrey Friedl's Bulk Develop Lightroom plugin

    * Rob Cole's ExifMeta Lightroom plugin -- for acquiring in-camera settings to be used in conjunction with Collection Preseter.

     

    Personally, I always shoot "neutral" in camera, then ignore in-camera settings when developing raws in Lightroom, but if you are still very attached to in-camera settings, you can mostly honor/preserve them in Lightroom, if you are willing to do the work.

     

    Rob

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Oct 7, 2013 9:43 AM   in reply to Amy2014

    Amy2014 wrote:

    I'm quite happy for those initial 200 photos to resemble the in-camera jpegs and have that as my starting point rather than a very flat image.

    Here's the simplest way to do this not already suggested here:

     

    1) Select all of the raw images (CTRL+A) in the Develop module and use the Arrow keys to highlight the one image you want to use for initial adjusting.

     

    2) Turn ON 'Auto Sync' at the bottom of the Develop control panel by clicking on the little switch next to 'Sync...'

     

    3) Apply the Camera Calibration Profile (Camera Standard/Landscape, etc.) that best matches the look you want for this specific set of pictures.

     

    4) In the Basic panel click on the 'Auto' button above 'Exposure.' This will apply adjustments to all of the images, which can be reviewed in the bottom filmstrip. Pull up the filmstrip to provide larger preview thumbnails.

     

    If using LR5.2 you may find this works well, but with previous versions not always so well. If the images were all shot at the same ISO and exposure (similar lighting) you can apply specific settings for Sharpening and NR based on the 1:1 view of the one Loupe image, which will also be applied to all images.

     

    You can continue to "tweak" the Develop settings in 'Auto Sync' mode dependent again if they were shot under very similar camera settings (ISO & Exposure) and lighting conditions. This at the very least should get you closer to "useable" raw images.

     

    I wouldn't suggest trying to actually "match" the in-camera JPEG, instead aim for something you find "looks best" for this specific set of images. Cameras can't think, but we can! You're a lot smarter than the camera's processor–Learn to use your eyes and LR's raw processing capability and you will never want to look at another in-camera JPEG.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • 99jon
    12,848 posts
    Jan 6, 2010
    Currently Being Moderated
    Oct 7, 2013 10:07 AM   in reply to Amy2014

    I'm quite happy for those initial 200 photos to resemble the in-camera jpegs and have that as my starting point rather than a very flat image.

     

    Simplest method is to set the camera to shoot Raw+Jpeg

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Oct 7, 2013 10:46 AM   in reply to Amy2014

    Amy2014 wrote:

     

    I know of wedding photographers and sports photographers who are happy to shoot only jpeg and are more than happy with the type of jpegs that Canon cameras produce (I'd always advocate shooting raw though)

    It looks like Amy has already considered the in-camera JPEG option, but is looking for a better raw image workflow.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Oct 7, 2013 2:04 PM   in reply to Amy2014

    Amy2014 wrote:

     

    I think Canon engineers probably spent quite some time tweaking the Digic processor and its algorithms to get the best from Canon sensors and have done a decent job of it.

    Indeed, and such tweaking is evidenced by:

    * Color assignment (nicely but not perfectly handled by Lr camera profiles).

    * ISO-dependent detail adjustments (can be handled natively in Lr *iff* you never shoot auto-iso, otherwise requires a plugin).

    * Intelligent exposure/contrast handling - you'll need to somehow adjust exposure and "contrast" in Lr - as you may have noticed even after you assign a matching profile, and learn to have similar detailing, there may still be an exposure/contrast differential. One can assign some -highlights and +shadows by default, for example (based on in-camera settings (with the help of a plugin or two), or not), or just do that part manually.

     

    PS - the DNG Profile Editor can be used if you develop profile preferences which are not satisfied by Adobe Standard nor the camera matching profiles (such profiles can be applied to non-DNG files too).

     

    Rob

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • 99jon
    12,848 posts
    Jan 6, 2010
    Currently Being Moderated
    Oct 7, 2013 1:37 PM   in reply to Amy2014

    If I get my import to look better from the start then I'm happy.

     

    Yeah I can fully understand.

     

    Canon DPP is the only converter that understands the manufacturers picture styles. However I still prefer Lightroom and over time I've found through trial and error a good compromise and have saved a preset which I apply to all my CR2 (converted to DNG) images on import.

     

    Good luck.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Oct 7, 2013 2:45 PM   in reply to Amy2014

    In addition to 99jon's suggestion of specifying a develop preset as part of an import preset.

     

    * Lr's develop adjustment defaults are set on a per-camera-model basis (and optionally made specific to ISO setting - just be aware such Lr preference is NOT range-smart, and is thus not recommended, unless you never shoot auto-iso and take the time to set up defaults for each ISO setting of your camera - path of least resistence: use a plugin since native handling falls so short). Hint: Alt-click the 'Reset' button in develop module. There is otherwise (other than model detection I mean) no automation going this route, but if you almost always shoot the same picture-style, this may suffice. Note: you can always compare to Adobe standard defaults by Shift-clicking the 'Reset' button.

     

    One difference between default settings vs. applying preset upon import, is that photos with default settings will be considered to have "No Adjustments" (it's a smart-collection item), whereas if you apply a develop preset upon import, they will all be considered "Adjusted" upon import. In case you care about such stuff (I don't, but some people do).

     

    Rob

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Oct 7, 2013 3:20 PM   in reply to Rob Cole

    I agree with Rob's advise with respect to the default setting can be made ISO specific. You should also be aware that Adobe's standard profile for your camera model is also applying noise reduction to your images and afaik this is ISO specific.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Oct 7, 2013 3:43 PM   in reply to DdeGannes

    DdeGannes wrote:

     

    You should also be aware that Adobe's standard profile for your camera model is also applying noise reduction to your images.

    To be clear: 'Adobe Standard' profile has nothing to do with noise reduction. Adobe's default settings do include color noise reduction, which is ISO-adaptive (the same default setting of 25 is often adequate for all ISOs), but no luminance noise reduction. And, luminance noise reduction isn't ISO-adaptive like color noise reduction is (higher ISO photos need more than lower ISO photos).

     

    PS - Jeffrey Friedl's Bulk Develop preset supports (as ISO increases):

    * Increased Lum. NR amount - check: this is essential.

    * Increased Color NR amount (not so necessary, but cheap insurance I guess - why not...).

    * Increased Sharpen Masking (I'm sure some people like this).

     

    I prefer (as ISO increases), instead of increased sharpen masking, along with increased Lum. NR amount:

    * Decreased Sharpening Detail.

    * Increased Sharpening Radius.

    * Increased Sharpening Amount.

    (default sharpen masking amount: zero at all ISOs - I have issues with Lr's sharpen masking technology, more so at higher ISOs - YMMV).

     

    Different strokes for different folks...

     

    Rob

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Oct 7, 2013 3:53 PM   in reply to Rob Cole

    Thanks for the additional info and lesson Rob.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Oct 7, 2013 4:04 PM   in reply to DdeGannes

    DdeGannes wrote:

     

    Thanks for the additional info and lesson Rob.

     

    You bet, and while settings for NR & Sharpening are very personal, let me explain my personal proclivities:

     

    * Sharpening Detail is a luxury appropriate only at the lower ISOs - there's just too much noise to sharpen detail at higher ISOs... If you really want to preserve detail at higher ISOs, crank up the detail slider of the Lum. NR tool instead. I even cheat sometimes and add grain at the highest ISOs .

    * Increased Sharpening Radius - again, low-radius sharpening is a luxury for lower-ISO photos, in my opinion - once you have ISO cranked up, it's better to forego some fine detail and rely more on radius to maintain a sharp look.

    * Increased Sharpening Amount - to make up for decreased sharpening detail...

     

    Rob

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Oct 7, 2013 4:17 PM   in reply to Rob Cole

    Rob Cole wrote:

    I prefer (as ISO increases), instead of increased sharpen masking, along with increased Lum. NR amount:

    * Decreased Sharpening Detail.

    * Increased Sharpening Radius.

    * Increased Sharpening Amount.

    (default sharpen masking amount: zero at all ISOs - I have issues with Lr's sharpen masking technology, more so at higher ISOs - YMMV).

     

    Different strokes for different folks...

     

    Rob

    Good tips Rob!

     

    Rather than use a preset I suggest doing Sharpening and NR on a per assignment basis using "groups of images" that are shot with relatively the same ISO, Exposure (i.e. Shutter speed), and lighting conditions. At the higher ISO settings it's going to vary significantly based on these variables, including ambient temperature (i.e. Hotter = Noisier). Underxeposed and high-dynamic range images also increases noise. Even at ISO 100 if you need to push LR's Exposure setting more than ~.5 to 1.0 EV and/or the Shadows setting more than 50–Noise will noticeably increase.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Oct 7, 2013 4:33 PM   in reply to trshaner

    Just as a clarification to my earlier post. When I refer to "Adobe's standard profile" with respect to my camera I am thinking of and refering to all the processes and adjustments Lightroom makes to the raw camera data to produce, the initial previews and the rendering in the develop module be it, white balance interpretation, color profile, tone curve, sharpening, noise reduction etc.

     

    i may not be technically correct but it is my understanding of what Adobe does when they indicate that they are providing support for a particular camera model.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Oct 7, 2013 5:01 PM   in reply to DdeGannes

    That is "technically" correct. The Camera Profile contains color correction and Tone Curve information, which are applied to the raw image data along with LR's default Develop settings for that specific camera model.

     

    To better understand raw images download RawDigger and look at a few of your raw files....it's not a pretty picture!

     

    http://www.rawdigger.com/

     

    Raw Image.jpg

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Oct 7, 2013 5:11 PM   in reply to trshaner

    Thanks, I have been shooting in raw mode since Nov, 2004 when I started using PS CS/ ACR 2.4. Abandoned with the release of CS2 /ACR 3.x and used other raw processing software and eventually started using LR from the initial release in Feb 2007. The softare I was using at the time was Rawshooter Premium (Pixmantec Corp) was purchased by Adobe and they incorporated some of their technology into Lightroom.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Oct 7, 2013 8:11 PM   in reply to DdeGannes

    DdeGannes wrote:

     

    understanding of what Adobe does when they indicate that they are providing support for a particular camera model.

    Camera support means: ability to read raw file (mainly: raw data and white balance settings, but also: common metadata), and come up with a (white-balanced) rendering of the raw data, which necessarily includes color interpretation  according to some profile, namely 'Adobe Standard' and (optionally) camera-matching profiles.

     

    However, all the rest is not model specific. I mean, you can set model-specific defaults, but there is no model-specific custom code for anything except the fore-mentioned, e.g. there is no model-specific noise reduction code, except maybe for setting a few "algorithm control parameters" based on model, which are used by the color noise reduction algorithm - I'm not exactly sure about that last part, so take with salt...

     

    Sharpening and luminance noise reduction are generic algorithms - I'm pretty sure there is no per-model tweaking by Adobe (e.g. they work the same on jpegs that have had all metadata stripped...).

     

    FWIW: The reason old versions of Lightroom can work with new camera models, as long as the files have been converted to DNG, is that the Adobe DNG Converter has all the per-model dependencies built in - once the data is converted, and interpreted according to some camera profile, Lightroom cares not what the camera model is (or was). And one of the reasons it's not so simple (and not trivial) for camera manufacturers to provide Lr/Acr support by supplying their raw files in DNG format, is they would have to do much of the model-specific work that Adobe is doing now - i.e. it's not just a different file envelope with all the same contents - some "raw conversion" prep work must go into it too, e.g. there must be a "tuned" (Lr/Acr-compatible) camera profile in there too, at least one.

     

    Disclaimer: I don't understand all the technical details either (e.g. I've never seen the code that implements all this), so my understanding may not be perfectly correct, technically, either . Still, I've picked up a little here and there over the years... .

     

    Cheers,

    Rob

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Oct 7, 2013 8:27 PM   in reply to trshaner

    trshaner wrote:

     

    The Camera Profile contains ... along with LR's default Develop settings for that specific camera model.

    I think the default develop settings for specific camera models are stored here:

     

    C:\Users\{user}\AppData\Roaming\Adobe\CameraRaw\Defaults

     

    on Windows, similar place on Mac.

     

    But perhaps I misunderstood what you meant.

     

    Rob

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Oct 7, 2013 8:38 PM   in reply to trshaner

    trshaner wrote:

     

    Good tips Rob!

     

    ...

    Thanks Todd, and you brought up some note-worthy points as well, namely: ideally, noise reduction settings depend also on exposure and such stuff. Dunno if you noticed, but Jeffrey Friedl's Bulk Develop plugin also supports increased noise reduction based on increased exposure setting. But of course, that assumes you apply bulk develop settings after adjusting exposure, and I typically do it the other way around (i.e. exposure adjustment after initial NR & sharpen settings), still...

     

    Rob

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Oct 8, 2013 7:42 AM   in reply to Rob Cole

    Rob Cole wrote:

    However, all the rest is not model specific. I mean, you can set model-specific defaults, but there is no model-specific custom code for anything except the fore-mentioned, e.g. there is no model-specific noise reduction code, except maybe for setting a few "algorithm control parameters" based on model, which are used by the color noise reduction algorithm - I'm not exactly sure about that last part, so take with salt...

    Rob, from my experience there is a difference in the Luminance and Color NR algorithms based on camera model. Noise Reduction and Sharpening of raw images takes place during the demosaic process using the raw data. The demosaic process is a proprietary process "unique" to each camera manufacturer and in some cases each camera model.

     

    Noise Reduction also becomes more aggressive as ISO increases, so the amount applied at setting 25 for ISO 100 images is less than that applied at setting 25 with ISO 1600 images. I would expect that this is a part of the manufacturers proprietary demosiac process and not something unique to Adobe LR coding.

     

    The bottom-line is that there are many variables affecting image noise, especially at higher ISO settings. The best strategy is to learn how your camera(s) behave at different ISOs (and underexposure) so you know what is required when applying NR and Sharpening. You can do this manually, with a preset, using Preferences "defaults specific to camera ISO settings," or a combination of the three. Perhaps sometime in the future Adobe will be able to better emulate each camera manufacturer's proprietary NR and Sharpening demosaic algorithms, but were not there yet!

     

    When I edit a Canon raw image file using their Digital Photo Professional (DPP) application there is something "magic" going on that I don't see in the LR edited image. It's very subtle, but clearly DPP is applying "smarter" demosaic processing of the image than LR's. That said LR is a much more complete DAM than DPP and it's processing is excellent with all of my Canon DSLRs. LR's Highlight recovery and user interface is also much better than DPP.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Oct 8, 2013 9:42 AM   in reply to trshaner

    Are you 100% sure the luminance noise reduction algorithm is tailored to each specific camera model, in Lightroom (and ACR)  I mean? It sure doesn't seem like it to me - how could I bear witness? You say Lr/ACR applies the sharpen settings during demosiac'ing? Does that mean Lr re-demosaic's whenever you change sharpen settings? - hmm.....

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Oct 8, 2013 10:12 AM   in reply to Rob Cole

    This is a quote from Jeff Schewe in a post see the link after the quote

     

    ""Although the answer is indeed yes, these are default capture sharpening settings, it's actually a bit more complicated...

     

    ACR/LR  does do a level of normalized default sharpening and color noise  reduction but these are not hard specific numbers, they are normalized  for the camera and ISO settings...the engineers try to arrive at a  useful starting point but that starting point will vary by camera model  and sensor. By default there is no luminance noise reduction–even though  a small amount of luminance noise reduction should prolly be applied.

     

    I'm  pretty sure DPP is also doing some default sharpening and noise  reduction (as well as lens corrections) under the hood but don't expose  what those settings are and it's a bit tough to actually turn off the  defaults in DPP.""

     

    http://forums.adobe.com/thread/1233186

     

    I am also pretty sure I have seen posts by Eric Chan refering to this same topic.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Oct 8, 2013 11:31 AM   in reply to DdeGannes

    DdeGannes wrote:

     

    "Although the answer is indeed yes, these are default capture sharpening settings, it's actually a bit more complicated..."

    The question he was answering "yes" to was: "would you say that these presets (meaning: default settings) are what Adobe is using as RAW 'caputure' sharpening?", NOT whether they're applied during demosaicing, or whether the algorithm is model-specific.

     

    DdeGannes wrote:

     

    "ACR/LR  does do a level of normalized default sharpening and color noise  reduction but these are not hard specific numbers, they are normalized  for the camera and ISO settings...the engineers try to arrive at a  useful starting point but that starting point will vary by camera model  and sensor."

    Although the "complication factor" seems to imply that there are some sharpening and color noise reduction aspects that are model-specific, it is worded sufficiently loosely to allow varied interpretation... I recommend proving to yourself rather than taking anyone's word for it.

     

    Rob

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Oct 8, 2013 12:23 PM   in reply to Rob Cole

    Rob Cole wrote:

     

    Are you 100% sure the luminance noise reduction algorithm is tailored to each specific camera model, in Lightroom (and ACR)  I mean?

    What I stated  is based on "visual" observations of raw files from three different Canon DSLR cameras inside LR and DPP. I am sure it varies from camera manufacturer and even camera model, with some models applying NR during demosaicing and others not. The Fuji X-Tran is a good example where Adobe initially had issues with the demosacing process, which affected image sharpness and noise levels. My guess is that this is done in two-steps:

     

    1) Initial demosaicing on Import into the Develop module where the 4-pixel cell  RG1BG2 raw data is converted into a "uniform" single pixel bit map with RGB values. This is the best possible place to analyze the image data for Color NR and demosaic interpolation to maximize sharpness and minimize "aliasing." How "well" this is done has a huge impact on the overall sharpness of the image. Hot pixel removal is done during demosaic processing for all camera models. Hot pixels can't be removed from JPEG and sRAW image files since they are already demosaic'd.

     

    2) Additional Color and Luminance NR and Capture Sharpening is performed inside the Develop module using the camera raw cache data. The Luminance NR "tailoring" I refer to is probably based on "reverse engineering" of the manufacturer's raw converter algorithms. The higher the ISO the larger the NR amount applied at any given setting. In order to provide somewhat "uniform" values it would have to be based on the ISO versus Noise performance of the specific camera model.  For example a 12Mp 1.6 crop sensor camera is not going to perform near as well as a 12 Mp full-frame camera of the same generation.

     

    Attached below is my best effort in LR and DPP using a Canon 5D MKII 21Mp raw image shot with a 24mm TS-E II lens–The sharpest lens I've ever owned. It's pretty clear (pun) DPP pulls out more detail, but falls down in the tonal definition (i.e. shadow detail). The only thing this can be due to are differences in Canon's DPP demosaicing and LRs.

     

    1:1 (100%) View

     

    DPP Sharpening = 3 out of 10, LR Sharpening = 40, .8, 40, 0

     

    (Click on image to see full-size.)

    DPP versus LR Shaprness.jpg

     

    Message was edited by: trshaner Added info on hot pixel removal

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Oct 8, 2013 12:59 PM   in reply to trshaner

    Fair enough Todd - enough said by me for now...

     

    Did we lose Amy?

     

    R

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Oct 8, 2013 1:29 PM   in reply to Rob Cole

    There are some good tips here and knowing more about raw image processing should help. I shot JPEGs with my first Canon DSLR (300D) and only switched to raw three years later when LR was introduced.  It wouldn't surprise me if Canon or Nikon come up with a newer models that produce in-camera JPEGs matching results achievable with raw files inside LR today. For right now I'll stick to shooting 100% raw format images.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Oct 8, 2013 1:59 PM   in reply to Amy2014

    To recap, and try to get back on the topic, which is: "how to have initial Lr rendering match in-camera jpeg":

     

    * Selecting the "correct" camera profile (somehow, even if not automated) get's you "more than half way" there.

    * Applying some luminance noise reduction and/or tweaking sharpening (somehow, preferrably automated and based on ISO, at least initially), gets you "most of the rest of the way" there.

    * Point of closest approach can then be had by following up the previously-mentioned things with a tweak to the basic settings (and/or tone curve, and/or ... ). This can also be automated, but value of doing so is questionable, in my mind anyway, unless you've really strived to perfect on site somehow...

    (of course, you'll never get 100% of the way there).

     

    And in case this hasn't become clear yet: most of us ignore the jpegs after some experience with Lr. Why? because we develop custom camera profiles we like better than Adobe Standard or any of the camera-matching profiles, and/or learn how to (efficiently) tweak settings for better color and tone (and detail) than what comes from camera, and wean ourselves from Canon's (or Nikon's...) preferences (which we were formerly quite attached to and fond of), opting more for our own...

     

    I compared my raw renderings in Lr to the in-camera jpegs (and to what I could do in NX2), off & on anyway, for years, before finally gaining sufficient confidence to stop doing it. Every now and then I'll get curious and check it out, but not so often anymore...

     

    So Amy, where are you at with all of this?

     

    Cheers,

    Rob

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Oct 8, 2013 3:50 PM   in reply to Amy2014

    Amy2014 wrote:

     

    It's great that I can very easily get a starting point that looks good enough to me

    How are you doing that?

     

    Amy2014 wrote:

     

    My favourite thing is the totally customisable export profiles, I have to produce several sizes of each of my images, sometimes with different watermarks, those export profiles are a total Godsend

    Correct terminology: export profiles presets .

     

    You might find ExportManager to be a Godsend too, at least until you discover publish services .

     

    Rob

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Oct 8, 2013 5:45 PM   in reply to Amy2014

    I am NOT pushing my plugins - regardless of how it may seem to you: I couldn't care less whether you or anybody else uses them .

     

    Notice: my posts in here which referenced plugins generally included:

    * How to do things manually without plugins, as well as how to use plugins to automate, if desired - it's informative. If you felt any pressure, then you misinterpreted the intent.

     

    Also notice: my top recomendation for plugin to automate ISO-based NR (albeit with certain provisos), was for somebody elses plugin, not mine. And no, I don't get any kick-back from Jeffrey .

     

    From your not-particularly-informative, but smart remark, I conclude you are:

    * Setting camera profile manually.

    And that's enough for you.

     

    To be clear: I know some people DO like being informed of ways to automate their workflow, and I am aware that some people prefer more manual methods, or in any case methods that don't involve plugins, whenever possible. I respect both natures, and try to be helpful to BOTH types of people! - even if YOU don't appreciate some of the information I've shared in this thread, you are not the ONLY person who will be reading it!!

     

    PS - I apologize to all for going off topic...

     

    Rob

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Oct 8, 2013 5:53 PM   in reply to Rob Cole

    Amy, Rob is one of the LR forum gurus...who also happens to develop LR plugins. He's helped me out a number of times and is probably one of the most knowledgeable members on this forum concerning using LR's PV2012 controls. I'm sure he would be happy to point you to some of his excellent PV2012 tutorials posted here in the LR forum.....if you're interested.

     

    Peace Guys & Gals.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Oct 9, 2013 1:17 AM   in reply to Amy2014

    Sorry Amy - it didn't seem like a joke. I've become testy in these forums due to being the target of abuse - please forgive.

     
    |
    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