This content has been marked as final. Show 13 replies
For both those issues, you MUST view the ACR preview at 100% (or more).
SOLVED IT !!!
it only appears on zooming to 100% or more.
Hope it helps someone else that encounters the problem.
Did you read the message at the bottom of the detail panel?
"Zoom preview to 100% or larger to see the effects of the controls in this panel."
If not, what could we have done instead that would have got your attention?
Dancing red letters and trumpets blaring, maybe? :D
> If not, what could we have done instead that would have got your attention?
Mmmm - Make sharpening visible at all zooms? :)
I really think you are fighting a losing battle there, Thomas. This is a WYSIWYG world and that is what people expect. You could put a big red "X" over the image at less than 100% zoom but people would ask what the X was for. Maybe you could overlay red text on the image that says "This effect is visible only at zooms 100% or greater" that only showed up at less than 100%.
I know the standard responses:
- Sharpening at less than 100% is not accurate. Why do you want a non-accurate view?
- Sharpening at all zooms would incur a performance penalty.
Regarding the first response:
- Photoshop already does it and it has arguably improved somewhat with OpenGL.
- Even if it is somewhat inaccurate some people are able to get a "feel" for the sharpness
- It is inaccurate if you are printing but not so bad if your output is for web or monitor use.
- It's not like every other operation in ACR and Photoshop proper is 100% guaranteed accurate - take viewing ProPhotoRGB on an average monitor, for example.
Regarding the second response:
- You know better than anyone the extent to which that is true . . .
- . . . but geez, I can do gradients and local adjustments now built on-the-fly from stored commands. Aren't you getting close to being able to do that for sharpening?
I would bet you that we will see all-zoom sharpening by CS6 (and your marketing folks will make sure it is highlighted as a great, new feature when that happens :) ), but it wouldn't be fair because you can influence the outcome. :)
Well, Thomas, Actually, that is what I did at the end - read the message, but but it took me some time to find it.
I know you were joking but things that could have helped are:
1. bigger letters would help. (a lot)
2. different color maybe (I am not kidding).
3. different choice of words, e.g. you COULD NOT see the effect of this tool under 100% zoom.
I did not pay attention to the fact that there was a massage, and actually, after I read it, i was still skeptical about zooming as a solution, I really thought it was not working. that is (very much) due to the fact that I can see the sharpening effect in photoshop under 20% zoom.
You know common sense alone tells me that I need to be viewing the image at 100% to see a true representation of what's there but, that's just me. (And not just in Camera Raw, either. At less than 100% you're discarding information, pixels.)
Well, with a 4000X2600 pixel pictures, viewing an image at 100% means you get to see only a tiny fraction of the picture - you end up sharpening one point and getting lots pf noise on most of the picture.
Have you ever heard of using the hand tool to move your image around? That's what I do, with even bigger files than what you describe.
OK, You win :-)
>Mmmm - Make sharpening visible at all zooms?
That's impossible. That implies that you can step back from a painting and keep the detail, no matter how far you go back.
Dani made the right suggestion for the next version:
"I did not pay attention to the fact that there was a massage, ".
It may not work for you Dani but most users would actually notice the new ACR user interface^^. I want this every time I set sharpening, especially after long time sitting in front of the screen :-)
(Dani I hope you are not offended by my sense of humor. I normally do not feed on typos, but this let me rofl.)