Camera Bag

[Khokhonutt]

When the camera saves a RAW file it also embeds a thumbnail preview into the RAW file of what the image would look like if you had shot it in jpg mode using the in-camera settings. Lightroom shows the preview embedded into the RAW file for a second until Lightroom replaces it with its own baseline preview of the RAW file.

so is there a way to adjust that baseline?

 

[GrillMouster]

I don't now about your Sony camera, but with Canon & Nikon cameras there are different profiles for different cameras, getting LR a little closer to how your camera would natively interpret the RAW data. In the develop module, toward the bottom of the right-hand panel, you'll see a section called Camera Calibration. There's a drop-down menu with profiles you can select and you can move the sliders to do your own adjustments. You can tweak the existing profiles or create your own profiles and save them as presets that you can apply on import. Check Google for tutorials if you're interested. Most people don't bother.

The general thinking is that if you want the images to look like jpgs out of the camera, then just shoot jpg. If you want to develop the images yourself (presumably the reaon for shooting RAW), and give it your own look, then it shouldn't matter that the LR preview looks different than the out-of-camera preview.

 

[Khokhonutt]

I don't now about your Sony camera, but with Canon & Nikon cameras there are different profiles for different cameras, getting LR a little closer to how your camera would natively interpret the RAW data. In the develop module, toward the bottom of the right-hand panel, you'll see a section called Camera Calibration. There's a drop-down menu with profiles you can select and you can move the sliders to do your own adjustments. You can tweak the existing profiles or create your own profiles and save them as presets that you can apply on import. Check Google for tutorials if you're interested. Most people don't bother.

The general thinking is that if you want the images to look like jpgs out of the camera, then just shoot jpg. If you want to develop the images yourself (presumably the reaon for shooting RAW), and give it your own look, then it shouldn't matter that the LR preview looks different than the out-of-camera preview.

I've already added the profiles for my camera, but they don't come into play until you get into develop mode. At least from what I've seen.

I can't say I agree with the idea that just because Lightroom is applying a different view for the raw files than it does for the jpg preview that i should abandon raw shooting. I still want the ability to manipulate the raw files.

I'm guessing I need to do one of the following:

- find a way to adjust the exposure on import.
- try LR3 beta, as I've heard it has better support for Sony raw files.

I was just hoping someone had run into this and found an easy setting to tweak.

 

[GrillMouster]

To apply the profiles as presets you'll need to first open an image, don't apply any settings other than the profile from the Camera Calibration menu. Next, create a preset on the left-screen menu. If it asks you what develop settings you want to be part of this pre-set, only select camera calibration. Those presets will be availble in the import menu.

I created a pre-set for each of the camera profiles (landscape, portrait, neutral, vivid, standard, etc.). Additionally, becaues the profiles may be different for different cameras, I created a pre-set of each profile for each camera. I included the camera model in the pre-set name (for example "D300 - Portrait" and "D700 - Portrait"). Then you can apply the presets to all of the images on import.

I agree with you about not abandoning RAW shooting just because you want the LR previews to resemble the in-camera jpg files. I think that a LR preview that more closely resembles the in-camera jpg would be a good starting point for processing the RAW file.

Also, the camera profiles have gotten better with each update to LR and the LR betas.

 

[Khokhonutt]

To apply the profiles as presets you'll need to first open an image, don't apply any settings other than the profile from the Camera Calibration menu. Next, create a preset on the left-screen menu. If it asks you what develop settings you want to be part of this pre-set, only select camera calibration. Those presets will be availble in the import menu.

I created a pre-set for each of the camera profiles (landscape, portrait, neutral, vivid, standard, etc.). Additionally, becaues the profiles may be different for different cameras, I created a pre-set of each profile for each camera. I included the camera model in the pre-set name (for example "D300 - Portrait" and "D700 - Portrait"). Then you can apply the presets to all of the images on import.

I agree with you about not abandoning RAW shooting just because you want the LR previews to resemble the in-camera jpg files. I think that a LR preview that more closely resembles the in-camera jpg would be a good starting point for processing the RAW file.

Also, the camera profiles have gotten better with each update to LR and the LR betas.

Cool. I play around with that.

 

[Code]

Jeff,

You can just turn up the default brightness. In the develop module, reset a pic to default settings (button in bottom right), adjust the brightness to where you want it, then Develop > Set Default Settings. Anything imported after that will have the new default.

 

[VVFF]

Jeff,

You can just turn up the default brightness. In the develop module, reset a pic to default settings (button in bottom right), adjust the brightness to where you want it, then Develop > Set Default Settings. Anything imported after that will have the new default.

Not sure I would do that. Brightness shifts mid to brights unevenly in a attempt to save the brightest parts of a picture. While doing this to some pictures may help, it could hurt others.

Ideally, you should get exposure right in camera. The in camera histogram should roughly match that of lightroom(turn aggressive picture styles off).

 

[Khokhonutt]

Thanks everyone. With the info GrillMouster provided I found steps in the Lightroom help that got me what I wanted. Here's what I did.

- Go into the Develop module.
- Under Camera Calibration, I selected the 'Standard' A700 profile (that I had downloaded along with other more modified profiles). I left the rest of the settings unchanged.
- On the Edit Menu, I selected "Preferences." On the Presets tab, I checked the box that says, "Make defaults specific to camera serial number."
- On the Develop Menu, I selected "Set Default Settings." It showed my camera model there and I clicked "Update to Current Settings."

I imported some pictures and while I still see a very slight adjustment between the JPG preview and the RAW view, the starting point is very acceptable.

I appreciate everyone's input.

 

[WDWFigment]

Found it earlier this morning; updates the earlier Beta version of LR 3 that was previously released. My first foray into the LR universe. Seems pretty cool thus far.

https://www.adobe.com/cfusion/entitlement/index.cfm?pid=1225267&e=labs_lightroom3&trackingid=FDJWU

 

[VVFF]

Been using beta 2 for a couple days...it's now mature enough that I switched over from LR2. I always liked LR3 more, but some of the missing features made it a pain to work in over LR2.

 

[Master Mason]

Guess I'll upgrade to 3 when it is released, I'm still using 1

 

[disneyboy2003]

I'm really looking forward to Lightroom 3, although I must admit that I haven't downloaded or tried the public beta versions.

Apparently, the noise reduction is really really good. Importing photos is faster. Processing RAW files is supposed to be better. Now you can watermark photos. And tethered shooting (hooking your camera directly to your laptop) is a great new feature!

There are tons more new things in Lightroom 3, but these are the ones I'm most excited about.

 

[ssanders79]

I'm looking forward to the overall performance enhancement that I've been reading about. As much as I like to upgrade I am not that big on playing around with Beta software.

Not to change subjects, but I am really excited about Content-aware fill in Photoshop CS5. see the preview on youtube

 

[NateNLogansDad]

Thanks for the link! Downloading it now. There's so many different programs to choose from when you're still trying to find yourself in the world of RAW files.

 

[GoofyontheHiSeas]

Thanks Tom!

Somehow I missed this and downloaded it this morning. Still looking through it for advantages to Beta-1 and what I have seen I like. I have been using LR 3 beta 1 since last October and have liked the features. I started perusing the internet this afternoon to see the full list of new features of Beta 2 when I saw the word TETHERING. Yes the new beta now has tethering with no 3rd party software and works very nicely. This will be great for shooting portraits and food shots. Here a list of current cameras that it supports.

Canon
EOS 1Ds Mark II*
EOS 1D Mark III
EOS 1Ds Mark III
EOS 1D Mark IV
EOS 5D*
EOS 5D Mark II
EOS 40D
EOS 450D (Digital Rebel XSi/EOS Kiss X2)
EOS 500D (Digital Rebel T1i/EOS Kiss X3 Digital)
EOS 7D
EOS 1000D (Digital Rebel XS/EOS Kiss F)

Nikon
D3
D3X
D3s
D300
D300s
D5000
D700
D90
*Tethered support is not available on Windows 64-bit Systems for these cameras.

My LCD is great for looking at shots, but to be able to see them almost instantaneously on my laptop is even better. You can even apply develop settings immediately.

 

[Groucho]

Been using beta 2 for a couple days...it's now mature enough that I switched over from LR2. I always liked LR3 more, but some of the missing features made it a pain to work in over LR2.

Have you read anything about upgradability? I really like what I've read and watched about beta 2, but concerned about getting "stuck" when the final comes out. I doubt it'll be a problem, but they make a big point that it's just for testing and to not use it for "production" work. I know you can't import your LR2 catalogs, but I would be willing to use it for new stuff as long as I was confident that I could eventually upgrade those to LR3 final and merge with my LR2 catalogs.

 

[VVFF]

Have you read anything about upgradability? I really like what I've read and watched about beta 2, but concerned about getting "stuck" when the final comes out. I doubt it'll be a problem, but they make a big point that it's just for testing and to not use it for "production" work. I know you can't import your LR2 catalogs, but I would be willing to use it for new stuff as long as I was confident that I could eventually upgrade those to LR3 final and merge with my LR2 catalogs.

Well it upgraded from beta 1...old images I edited just had a note pop up asking if I wanted to reprocess them with the "new" technology. I agreed and on it went. I would imagine upgrading to the full version will be much the same.

 

[MarkBarbieri]

Has any loaded Lightroom on an SSD? How much did that improve your performance?

 

[boBQuincy]

I haven't tried it yet but my guess is that there would be no increase in performance. Once a program is loaded it should run from RAM as long as it is not being swapped in and out. Where I think we might see a performance boost is running the OS, virtual memory drive, and Photoshop Scratch drive from SSDs (maybe a SSD for each), and putting nothing else on those drives.

I will let you know how it works when I do it (the plan is to do it soon).

 

[Bstanley]

I have not loaded Lightroom onto an SSD so I can't answer your question directly.

However just brainstorming I wouldn't think loading any software onto an SSD would speed it up other than when you first invoke the program. From that point on any routine that gets executed will be executed out of RAM (and once executed will be in Processor Cache memory). If Lightroom is constantly loading new routines it might speed up those first executions a bit, but that would be it.

It will be interesting to hear 'real' answers.

You could run an experiment if you have a PC with a memory card reader. Put a Memory card in the machine and install the software to the card and try it. It won't be a perfect test - an SSD is organized better and has a faster interface, but it would be maybe 50% of what an SSD could do.

PS: Bob types faster than I do Deja vu answers