Skip navigation
gp7024
Currently Being Moderated

Are highlight and whites confused

Feb 7, 2012 2:28 AM

Tags: #bug #develop #lightroom_4_beta

Looking at the marking of the regions of the histogram changed by hightlight and whites and the effect of moving the sliders it appears to me these are reversed.

The regions and areas of change do not appear to match.

 

Not withstanding this I like this new way of editing and think its easier to use.

 
Replies
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 7, 2012 9:44 AM   in reply to gp7024

    The reason they are ordered that way in the histogram is that Whites is mostly intended to control the white clip point (the extreme right end of the image histogram), whereas Highlights is about adjusting everything above the midtones. 

     

    Keep in mind the mapping of sliders to histogram regions is a very rough approximation.  (For example, Exposure actually affects the entire histogram, even though a casual inspection of the histogram overlay may lead you to think it only affects the central portion.)

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 7, 2012 9:55 AM   in reply to MadManChan2000

    If your explaination above is true then I think you have your terminology is incorrect. "Highlights" are at the top of the spectrum being the whitest whites in an image, usually containing no details, where as "Whites" would come under that being the first whites with details. Those are pretty standard definitions for as long as I have been a photographer, which is over 30 years. You might consider re-lableing those as I found it confusing also.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 7, 2012 10:06 AM   in reply to wmp_slc

    Well, photographers often describe images broadly in three areas -- shadows, midtones, and highlights.  Those are the primary controls and are placed near the top of the Basic panel.  They allow you establish overall brightness & contrast relationships.  They do the heavy lifting in terms of establishing tonal relationships.

     

    The Whites and Blacks sliders are about determining how much of your image you want to be mapped to pure "white" or pure "black" while preserving tonal relationships.

     

    In any case, I appreciate your feedback about the terminology, but we have decided to stay with the current names and order.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 7, 2012 10:21 AM   in reply to MadManChan2000

    MadManChan2000,

    How about renaming the "Whites" to "White Point" and the "Blacks" to "Black Point" to avoid confusion and for being in sync with photographers terminology?

    WW

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 7, 2012 10:30 AM   in reply to MadManChan2000

    Wow - I thought this forum was about input and making LR4 better. You made a lightning fast decision on that one ("but we have decided to stay with the current names and order"), but I am sure you gave it lots of consideration. You can label things however you want but changing definitions of things that have existed for a long time will not win much approval from your users. If you look up  "Highlights" you may run into this -

    Highlight may refer to:

    • In photography, any of the brightest parts of a subject.

     

    Now to me "brightest part" means brighter than a word like "Whites"

     

    Just trying to help you make your program more intuitive. Take what you want from it.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 7, 2012 10:34 AM   in reply to wmp_slc

    wmp_slc wrote:

     

    "Highlights" are at the top of the spectrum being the whitest whites in an image, usually containing no details.

    Highlights do contain details. Specular, clipped or blown highlights don't.

     

    That's my understanding anyway.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 7, 2012 10:38 AM   in reply to wmp_slc

    I disagree. From all my experience with digital photography terms, white represents one "color": 255, 255, 255. Similarly black is 0, 0, 0. So the current naming scheme of the basic controls is the natural one. Highlight and shadow refer to a more diffuse area of the tonal range, whereas white and black represent the edges. Thus, no reason to change the control names.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 7, 2012 10:41 AM   in reply to wmp_slc

    wmp_slc wrote:

     

    Now to me "brightest part" means brighter than a word like "Whites"

     

    Really?  To me, "white" is all channels at saturation.  When you go into Photoshop and click on the right-most eyedropper in the "Levels" tool, the tooltip says "Set White Point".  The "Whites" slider in LR is very much like the right-most slider (the "White point" slider) in PS.  So the term "Whites" seems to be consitent with the terminology in PS.  Also, the "Shadows" and "Highlights" sliders seem to control similar areas of the image to the "Shadows" and "Highlights" sliders in the parametric tone curve panel inside Lightroom, whereas I'd call "Whites" the top-right point in the point-curve version of that same panel, and "Blacks" the lower-left point.  Seems intuitive and consistent to me.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 7, 2012 10:54 AM   in reply to wmp_slc

    wmp_slc wrote:

     

    Highlight may refer to:

    • In photography, any of the brightest parts of a subject.

     

    Now to me "brightest part" means brighter than a word like "Whites"

     

    Just trying to help you make your program more intuitive. Take what you want from it.

    There is nothing brighter than white in digital photography.  Nothing is darker than black.

     

    Now if you are a Mantis Shrimp.... all bets are off.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 7, 2012 11:25 AM   in reply to Lee Jay

    So for some reason it sounds like there is no consensus. In my mind there is no way I would consider a highlight to be duller than a white, which is what you are saying. I do stand corected on the "Specular Highlight" comment and bow to that, but that only strengthens my view that the tonal range would move from midtones to whites to hightlights to specular highlights if defined with words. Seems odd if it was - midtones, highlights, whites, specular highlights?? I think the confusion is in using the terms whites and highlights together which I don't think has been done before. There is common use of "white point" and "black point" since the intro of PS put that is not white in general, that is one particular value, 255,255,255 or 0,0,0 and not a range of tones.

     

    If you look at LR 3 it seems you are replacing the recovery slider, which occupies the same far right portion of the histogram, with "whites" whereas I would define the recovery slider as a way to recover lost highlight detail moving from specular to a toned highlight. So it seems more natural, to me, that that last area of the histogram is highlights.

     

    I guess to each his or her own but I am surprised there is not consensus on this.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 7, 2012 11:32 AM   in reply to Rikk Flohr

    But you are using a different term. You are saying white and the term in question is whites. One is a single point and one is a range of tones. Where do you place highlights in the range of white tones? At the dark side or the light side?

    Rikk Flohr wrote:

     

    wmp_slc wrote:

     

    Highlight may refer to:

    • In photography, any of the brightest parts of a subject.

     

    Now to me "brightest part" means brighter than a word like "Whites"

     

    Just trying to help you make your program more intuitive. Take what you want from it.

    There is nothing brighter than white in digital photography.  Nothing is darker than black.

     

    Now if you are a Mantis Shrimp.... all bets are off.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 7, 2012 11:36 AM   in reply to gp7024

    +1 for white point / black point

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 7, 2012 11:42 AM   in reply to VeloDramatic

    Perhaps you shouldn't think of Whites as a tonal range. It is a control for selectively moving tones into or recovering out of White after Exposure and Highlights have been adjusted.  Those tones being moved into and out of white tend to to be but are not limited to the brightest tones of the Highlights.

     

    @Velo, it is likely that interface space would prevent the use of White Point and Black Point - especially in non-english languages.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 7, 2012 11:57 AM   in reply to Rikk Flohr

    Rikk Flohr wrote:

     

    Perhaps you shouldn't think of Whites as a tonal range. It is a control for selectively moving tones into or recovering out of White after Exposure and Highlights have been adjusted.  Those tones being moved into and out of white tend to to be but are not limited to the brightest tones of the Highlights.

     

    @Velo, it is likely that interface space would prevent the use of White Point and Black Point - especially in non-english languages.

    When you put an "s" on the end of a word it then makes it plural, which in this case refers to multiple tones of white, which is a range. It's all semantics, I understand what you are saying and I could totally be wrong but I, like the original poster, instictively went to the highlight slider to adjust the clipping point of the the brightest point. Just seem correct - "to me"

     

    If you go back to my referance of the recovery slider in LR3 controling the same range as what is now whites in LR4, I found this definition in the LR3 help section

    Recovery

     

    Reduces the tones of extreme highlights and attempts to recover highlight detail lost because of camera overexposure.

    That sure sound like the area being controlled on the far right of the histogram is "highlights" not "whites"

    How about White Pt. and Black Pt. - that should fit.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 7, 2012 12:01 PM   in reply to Rikk Flohr

    Rikk I'm with you on the string length problem, but I agree with the OP that the terminology is not intuitive.

     

    For less technical users (those who are not developers.. and you've got to admit there are a lot of developers in here) that little bit of cognitive dissonance will never go away.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 7, 2012 12:15 PM   in reply to VeloDramatic

    Sure it will. It'll take longer for some than for others, though.

     

    Hal

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 7, 2012 12:19 PM   in reply to Hal P Anderson

    I resemble that remark Hal.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 7, 2012 12:20 PM   in reply to VeloDramatic

    Perhaps we could call them Plugged and Blown instead of Blacks and Whites?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 7, 2012 12:25 PM   in reply to gp7024

    Perhaps we should stop splitting hairs? I think everybody can quickly get used to the control names at present.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 7, 2012 12:38 PM   in reply to tgutgu

    I don't think this is splitting hairs. Terminology is critical to usability, and this terminology while "learnable" is not intuitive. This is the feedback that Adobe needs to receive during a beta.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 7, 2012 12:39 PM   in reply to wmp_slc

    wmp_slc wrote:

     

    If you look at LR 3 it seems you are replacing the recovery slider, which occupies the same far right portion of the histogram, with "whites" whereas I would define the recovery slider as a way to recover lost highlight detail moving from specular to a toned highlight. So it seems more natural, to me, that that last area of the histogram is highlights.

     

    Highlights is much more like Recovery than Whites is, and Whites and Blacks are much like the left and right arrows on the Levels tool (Set White Point and Set Black Point).

     

    So:

     

    Whites = Set White Point

    Blacks = Set Black Point

     

    Which is why the names make sense to me.

     

    Something darker than "highlights" I'd call "gray" or "midtones", never "White".

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 7, 2012 12:41 PM   in reply to wmp_slc

    wmp_slc wrote:

     

    But you are using a different term. You are saying white and the term in question is whites. One is a single point and one is a range of tones. Where do you place highlights in the range of white tones? At the dark side or the light side?

     

    Oh, I see, it's the plural that's confusing to you.  Yeah, I could see that (never thought of it myself, though).  Just think of them as White and Black, I would say.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 7, 2012 12:50 PM   in reply to VeloDramatic

    Lightroom could have a pop-up window when you hover over "Whites" and "Blacks" that says: "Set white point" and "Set black point" – similar to what they have in photoshop.

     

    Picture 1.png

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 7, 2012 2:28 PM   in reply to Lee Jay

    Lee Jay wrote:

     

    wmp_slc wrote:

     

    But you are using a different term. You are saying white and the term in question is whites. One is a single point and one is a range of tones. Where do you place highlights in the range of white tones? At the dark side or the light side?

     

    Oh, I see, it's the plural that's confusing to you.  Yeah, I could see that (never thought of it myself, though).  Just think of them as White and Black, I would say.

    I am not confused I just think their terminology is flawed. Maybe they should just name it White and Black then and not Whites and Blacks as we kind of suggested with the addition of the word point. I just think there is an inconsistency in the transition form the LR1,2,3 controls to the new method in the LR4 in the labeling and trying to point out what may be something to reconsider before the final version comes out, which is supposedly what this forum is all about. I will learn to use it without a problem, but it will probably always bug me. How I see it, blacks are the dark end of shadow tones and Highlights are the light end of white tones. But I guess there are a number of you who don't agree which really surprizes me. Consider this. The warning for over exposure shown by blinking black on your camera is called a highlight warning. If whites were brighter than highlights then wouldn't they call this a white warning?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 7, 2012 2:35 PM   in reply to wmp_slc

    We used "Blacks" in ACR and LR for many years and to be honest it just wasn't an issue.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 7, 2012 2:45 PM   in reply to MadManChan2000

    MadManChan2000 wrote:

     

    We used "Blacks" in ACR and LR for many years and to be honest it just wasn't an issue.

    But white or whites was never used simultaneously with the term highlights. I think that is the core problem (if it is a problem). It may go all the way back to my zone system days but I think whether analog or digital the tonal scale should be represented accurately with uniform descrptions and it seems like you are moving descriptions of tones from one area of the histogram to another. I think we have hashed this apart and you have my input and I appreciate you listening, now it is in your court to do as you feel right.

     

    Thanks for your ear.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 7, 2012 3:06 PM   in reply to wmp_slc

    Fair enough.  Again, I respect your views and appreciate your feedback. 

     

    Eric

     
    |
    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