Jump to content



Sign up for a free account to remove the pop-up ads

Signing up for an account is fast and free. As a member you can join in the conversation, enter contests and remove the pop-up ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.

Photo
- - - - -

The Lightroom 3 beta 1 was meh but beta 2 is AWESOME SAUCE


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
44 replies to this topic

#1 of 45 ONLINE   Sam Posten

Sam Posten

    Executive Producer



  • 17,093 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 30 1997
  • Real Name:Sam Posten
  • LocationAberdeen, MD & Navesink, NJ

Posted March 23 2010 - 01:54 AM

Check out these changes:
http://www.computer-darkroom.com/lr3_beta_2_preview/lr3-beta2-1.htm
http://www.scottkelby.com/blog/2010/archives/9165
http://lightroomers.com/my-take-on-lightroom-3-beta-2-2/924/

Wow look at that noise reduction.  If you take a lot of low light shots (and I do, which is why I want a D3s =) hehe) this is a pretty incredible bump and reduces or removes the need for a dedicated noise tool almost completely.  Sharpening likewise gets a nice bump.  Add in perspective lens correction and they will have this trifecta locked up.

Adding in an initial cut on video handling is more a annoucement that 'this is in our future big time' rather than a comprehensive suite of video tools in this cut, but it's a bold statement!

Sam

I lost my signature and all I got was this Nutter t-shirt


#2 of 45 OFFLINE   Scott Merryfield

Scott Merryfield

    Executive Producer



  • 10,662 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 16 1998
  • LocationMichigan

Posted March 23 2010 - 05:28 AM

Do all the different Adobe products (Photoshop, Lightroom, Elements) use the same Adobe Camera Raw processing engine? I only have Elements, and find that I use Canon's own Digital Photo Professional application instead for the vast majority of my post processing, preferring the results I get in Raw conversion with it over Elements. It also offers lens correction for most Canon lenses. The one area DPP lacks in, though, is noise reduction.


#3 of 45 ONLINE   Sam Posten

Sam Posten

    Executive Producer



  • 17,093 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 30 1997
  • Real Name:Sam Posten
  • LocationAberdeen, MD & Navesink, NJ

Posted March 23 2010 - 07:37 AM

Essentially yes, but there were major improvements to the rendering engine over the last few updates and big big changes today.

I have tried DPP.  It is a UI disaster, regardless of the results =)  Nikon's in house app is even worse tho.

I lost my signature and all I got was this Nutter t-shirt


#4 of 45 OFFLINE   Scott Merryfield

Scott Merryfield

    Executive Producer



  • 10,662 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 16 1998
  • LocationMichigan

Posted March 23 2010 - 10:23 AM

I have the latest version of Elements (version 8), so I should have a pretty recent version of ACR. While the user interface for DPP may not be stellar, it works fine for the basics required to post process raw files, and that is all I need most of the time.


#5 of 45 ONLINE   Sam Posten

Sam Posten

    Executive Producer



  • 17,093 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 30 1997
  • Real Name:Sam Posten
  • LocationAberdeen, MD & Navesink, NJ

Posted March 23 2010 - 02:55 PM

OK, now that CS5 is official, watch this and tell me you are still satisfied:
http://blogs.adobe.com/jnack/2010/03/caf_in_ps.html

And then these
http://cs5launch.adobe.com/

=)

Also, this video partly explains how ACR has evolved from 2003 to 2010:
http://blogs.adobe.com/jnack/2010/03/video_whats_new_in_lr3_beta_2.html

More details on that to come.

More on Lr3:
http://terrywhite.com/techblog/archives/4906#more-4906


I lost my signature and all I got was this Nutter t-shirt


#6 of 45 ONLINE   Sam Posten

Sam Posten

    Executive Producer



  • 17,093 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 30 1997
  • Real Name:Sam Posten
  • LocationAberdeen, MD & Navesink, NJ

Posted March 23 2010 - 04:43 PM

A quick before and after test with the new Lr 3 Beta 2 noise reduction:
http://bit.ly/ahja43

Yeah, I can work with this!

I lost my signature and all I got was this Nutter t-shirt


#7 of 45 ONLINE   Sam Posten

Sam Posten

    Executive Producer



  • 17,093 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 30 1997
  • Real Name:Sam Posten
  • LocationAberdeen, MD & Navesink, NJ

Posted March 24 2010 - 08:32 AM

Much better example than mine:
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/880945/0#8275966

Woah!

I lost my signature and all I got was this Nutter t-shirt


#8 of 45 OFFLINE   Jon_Are

Jon_Are

    Screenwriter



  • 2,038 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 25 2001

Posted March 27 2010 - 12:02 AM

Sam and Scott -

When I heard CS5 was looming, I said, naw, I'm totally happy with CS4.

Then I ran across that same video demonstrating Content-Aware fill.

Damn! I gotta get me some of that!

(still not sold that I need LR3, though)



#9 of 45 ONLINE   Sam Posten

Sam Posten

    Executive Producer



  • 17,093 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 30 1997
  • Real Name:Sam Posten
  • LocationAberdeen, MD & Navesink, NJ

Posted March 27 2010 - 02:22 AM

If you are happy with bridge and CS stick with it. I love that LR let's me do all of what I want to do with my photos quickly and elegantly tho, it's a matter of mindset more than capability now...

I lost my signature and all I got was this Nutter t-shirt


#10 of 45 OFFLINE   DavidJ

DavidJ

    Screenwriter



  • 2,612 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 23 2001
  • Real Name:David

Posted March 27 2010 - 06:29 PM

Jon, are you currently using Lightroom?  I wasn't sure what to think about it, but kept hearing good things about it and decided to give it a try.  I love it and am looking forward to the improvements in version 3.  I believe you can download a trial version.  I'd suggest giving it a try.  And the content-aware fill in PS CS5 is amazing.



#11 of 45 OFFLINE   Scott Merryfield

Scott Merryfield

    Executive Producer



  • 10,662 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 16 1998
  • LocationMichigan

Posted March 29 2010 - 02:09 AM

The content-aware fill and noise reduction do look impressive.  Not being a person who does a lot of image manipulation, though, I'm wondering if it's worth the cost?

A tool I could really use would be something for easily creating HDR images.  How is Lightroom for this? Elements was very tedious the couple of times I tried the technique. Would getting a tool dedicated to this function be a better way to go?


#12 of 45 ONLINE   Sam Posten

Sam Posten

    Executive Producer



  • 17,093 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 30 1997
  • Real Name:Sam Posten
  • LocationAberdeen, MD & Navesink, NJ

Posted March 29 2010 - 06:36 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott Merryfield 

A tool I could really use would be something for easily creating HDR images.  How is Lightroom for this? Elements was very tedious the couple of times I tried the technique. Would getting a tool dedicated to this function be a better way to go?
There are no real specific tools for HDR or Panos built into Lr, you are expected to round trip to Photoshop for those.  Wouldn't surprise me to see Panos, HDR and lens correction being the big features for LR4.  After those (and maybe softproofing) are in I have no idea what they will focus on, it will have to be the esoteric techy stuff because they simply have outdone themselves so far at the core idea of what Lr is all about.  How can they continue to add more real functionality without it looking like bloat?

Look at Kelby's wish list:
http://www.scottkelb...08/archives/932

How much of that hasn't been accomplished?  Not much I'd say.


I lost my signature and all I got was this Nutter t-shirt


#13 of 45 OFFLINE   DavidJ

DavidJ

    Screenwriter



  • 2,612 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 23 2001
  • Real Name:David

Posted March 29 2010 - 07:09 AM



Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott Merryfield 

The content-aware fill and noise reduction do look impressive.  Not being a person who does a lot of image manipulation, though, I'm wondering if it's worth the cost?

A tool I could really use would be something for easily creating HDR images.  How is Lightroom for this? Elements was very tedious the couple of times I tried the technique. Would getting a tool dedicated to this function be a better way to go?
For HDR, you'll find a lot of recommendations for Photomatix Pro from HDRsoft (http://www.hdrsoft.com/).  It is easy to use and works well--- much better than Photoshop's Merge to HDR.



#14 of 45 OFFLINE   Scott Merryfield

Scott Merryfield

    Executive Producer



  • 10,662 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 16 1998
  • LocationMichigan

Posted March 29 2010 - 07:50 AM



Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidJ 




For HDR, you'll find a lot of recommendations for Photomatix Pro from HDRsoft (http://www.hdrsoft.com/).  It is easy to use and works well--- much better than Photoshop's Merge to HDR.
 
David,

I have heard good things about Photomatix elsewhere, too. When I have some time, I need to download a trial version of the program and check it out.



#15 of 45 ONLINE   Sam Posten

Sam Posten

    Executive Producer



  • 17,093 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 30 1997
  • Real Name:Sam Posten
  • LocationAberdeen, MD & Navesink, NJ

Posted March 29 2010 - 10:43 AM

I dislike all but the most subtle of HDR so not much help there other than I've heard good things about photomatix too

I lost my signature and all I got was this Nutter t-shirt


#16 of 45 OFFLINE   DavidJ

DavidJ

    Screenwriter



  • 2,612 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 23 2001
  • Real Name:David

Posted March 29 2010 - 11:57 AM



Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Posten 

I dislike all but the most subtle of HDR so not much help there other than I've heard good things about photomatix too
I'm not a big fan of the surrealistic style either.  Well, I do appreciate the art behind them, but it is not my type of photography.  I do like HDR for the fact that it allows you to do a better job of capturing and representing the range that the eye can see. 


#17 of 45 OFFLINE   Scott Merryfield

Scott Merryfield

    Executive Producer



  • 10,662 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 16 1998
  • LocationMichigan

Posted March 29 2010 - 11:37 PM



Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidJ 




I'm not a big fan of the surrealistic style either.  Well, I do appreciate the art behind them, but it is not my type of photography.  I do like HDR for the fact that it allows you to do a better job of capturing and representing the range that the eye can see. 
That's all I am looking for in HDR -- for those shots where the dynamic range is just too great to capture with a single exposure.  I've started experimenting with split ND filters, too, but those only work where you have a fairly straight line transitioning light to dark.


#18 of 45 ONLINE   Sam Posten

Sam Posten

    Executive Producer



  • 17,093 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 30 1997
  • Real Name:Sam Posten
  • LocationAberdeen, MD & Navesink, NJ

Posted March 30 2010 - 02:08 AM

I'm all for that.  I think the Trey Ratcliffe stuff is a bit too much tho.  He's an excellent communicator but I just don't dig his style.
http://www.stuckincustoms.com/

If you are into HDR he's got some tutorials on it, linked top right on that page.

I lost my signature and all I got was this Nutter t-shirt


#19 of 45 ONLINE   Sam Posten

Sam Posten

    Executive Producer



  • 17,093 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 30 1997
  • Real Name:Sam Posten
  • LocationAberdeen, MD & Navesink, NJ

Posted April 29 2010 - 05:03 PM

CS5 just shipped, you can go get a FULLY FUNCTIONAL 30 day trial, no more half assed trials of Premiere!, at www.adobe.com

I'm currently downloading all 9GB of CS5 Production Premium =)

I lost my signature and all I got was this Nutter t-shirt


#20 of 45 OFFLINE   TonyD

TonyD

    Executive Producer



  • 16,240 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 01 1999
  • Real Name:Tony D.
  • LocationDisney World and Universal Florida

Posted May 14 2010 - 11:18 AM

Well I seem to have won a copy of Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 2 from a contest I barely remember entering.

Got an email a few weeks ago asking for my shipping address.

Seemed a little shady but gave it to them anyway, and today the package came in the  mail.

Hmm.


Anyone remember a contest anytime in the last few months for this, I have a vague memory of something....


Btw, I'm not really sure what I'd use it for since I'm not much of a photog.


facebook.com/whotony