The PV2012 controls are image-adaptive.
What that means is their behavior can vary from image to image, and vary even as you adjust the same image (especially when you adjust exposure).
Although this characteristic makes PV2012 more tricky, it also makes it more capable.
Shadows is different than fill.
Fill/brightness are accomplished now using:
+shadows (+blacks may also be necessary)
+exposure (often the missing link when people are in transition)
(-highlights may also be necessary due to +exposure)
And of course consider -contrast if the histogram is shaped like a 2-hump camel back...
Note: In PV2010, exposure is often set for the highlights, and brightness defines the midtone level. In PV2012, exposure defines the midtone level more, and highlights sets the highlights.
In PV2012, exposure setting is key. Usually, if you can't get the contrast & highlight/shadows right, it's because exposure is not right yet.
George in Seattle wrote:
The contrast does not work evenly, or something. When I try to fix a hazy overcast horizon, the contrast just makes it worse --it appears to only work on the dark areas. Also, the shadows (I assume the renamed fill) appears to work unevenly as well.
In this particular case, my hunch is that you need to increase exposure.
I finally gave up and used the graduated filters in burn mode (two on the sky and one in the foreground) to accomplish what I wanted. In general every RAW file I've so far uploaded appears "washed out", especially in the shadows. The V3 auto tone setting used to get it close at least around half the time, now I can't envision it working ever. I cant get anything to "pop".
The only good thing I can say at this point is that it renders good depth in low light shots, but that is not worth the overall dullness. I can see this working for portraiture but not for outdoor action. In fact it reminds me of what you get by selecting the "Camera Portrait" D3 profile. I guess I wasn't paying enough attention, what did the beta testers say about this? Are there any write-ups or cross reference tables showing what V4 controls make up the functional equivalent of an a V3 control?
If it appears washed out in the shadows, you probably need -blacks.
if it appears washed out in the highlights, you probably need +whites
if it appears washed out in the midtones, you probably need +contrast (-highlights/+shadows to "modulate").
+clarity to give a little histogram-wide anti-washing...
Jeff Schewe wrote:
Washed out in the highlights? I would suggest -whites, not +.
I think it depends on the photo, and on what "washed out" means.
If it's "washed out" due to overbright highlights (and assuming additional -highlights is not desired, nor -exposure), then -whites.
If it's "washed out" meaning "dull looking", then +whites can be just what the doctor ordered (with some -exposure and/or -highlights if need be).
My motto: +whites if possible, -whites if necessary. YMMV...
From my POV, it is all a matter of individual taste. We all see what we see individually. There is no cut and dried formula. If you have a good color managed system, just move the sliders until you see what you are looking for.
From my POV, I often radically move slides extreme right and extreme left and then find a sweet spot. I doesn't matter which slider to me. I just play with them until I find the image I pre-visualized when taking the shot.
There is not right or wrong to any of this. It is just a matter of what you, the individual artist, want to present in your image.
I feel fortunate that my color management is truly nearly spot-on. So generally what I see on my screen is what I get when I print. So when I do processing in the Develop module, it is almost exactly WYSIWYG.
Bear in mind, I worked hard to color manage my system and it did not come overnight. But in the end, color management is critical to process images the way you want to see them in final output -- beit for the internet or for print.
...It is like trying to hit a moving target.
Some people get by just twisting the sliders around with (what seems to me like) semi-reckless abandon until they get what they want. That's not how I work. I know what I want, and I want to be able to go to the sliders, make the adjustments I need, and have it do what was intended.
*Very* hard to do that sometimes in PV2012, indeed.
So, I sympathize, PV2012 is a bit squirrelly, in my book too.
I'm glad I went through what was for me an arduous learning process, since the results are almost always substantially better. But, I've been where you're at and feel your pain...