|
Sometimes when I'm in Lightroom and I have a stack of a few photos, say a raw file and a jpeg of the same image, it doesn't expand the stack automatically, or even when I tell it to. I want to select the jpeg, but it's hidden under the raw file and I can't get at it! Usually they're displayed side by side so I can choose either. This happens randomly and I want to know if it's something I'm doing wrong or just LR screwing up.
|
#
¿
Jun 30, 2011 04:59
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 09:50 |
|
|
scottch posted:How are you telling it? Should be a simple click of the "1 of X" badge in the top left. Yeah, I tried that, but didn't work. It appears to only happen when I have just imported photos, or use "previous import" in the library. If I go to the actual full folder, everything works fine. I assume because the duplicate photos are not actually located in the previous import catalog.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 30, 2011 21:01
|
|
|
I'm trying to process some pictures I took on my camping holiday with my family, and I'd like some feedback before I continue with the whole batch. I'm trying to go for a softer, warmer look, and I'm pretty happy with what I've got so far, but I'd like some objective opinions on the processing before I continue. Does this style work? IMG_0035 by bernsai, on Flickr  IMG_0033-2 by bernsai, on Flickr  IMG_0028-3 by bernsai, on Flickr
|
|
#
¿
Aug 6, 2011 04:17
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:I really love that type of look. The first one looks great, the second kind of gives me an "incorrect white balance out of camera" feel for some reason though. The third one also kind of leans in that direction. I see what you mean about the second and third. They seem almost too magenta to me now, but the white balance settings are the same as the first one, so I'm not sure why that is. I did some split toning with a purple/magenta cast to the shadows, so maybe those pictures have more shadow areas and that's why it seems off? The guys in the off-looking ones also have way more of a tan than the girl in the first one, so it could be that they do have more red in their skin. I'll fiddle with them a bit more. Thanks for taking a look at them.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 6, 2011 21:07
|
|
|
Haggins posted:Everything feels kinda flat, which I find happens in most raw images straight out of the camera. I'd pull up the exposure up a tad and add a little bit more saturation. You could also desaturate if that's your thing, I just don't like where it is right now. Also, I think your photos could benefit from a vignette to smooth out the corners and define the frame a little bit more. Thanks for the feedback. I actually prefer them with a bit more exposure, but I wasn't sure if I was going too far, so I'll up that a bit. I'll see what happens when I saturate them a bit more, and try them with a bit of vignetting as well. Thanks guys!
|
|
#
¿
Aug 7, 2011 05:30
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:You've got plenty of room to go before you hit 255 white on any of those highlights so you should be able to crank it up another stop or so.. Sweet, thanks. I made a pre-set that I applied to a bunch of photos, and even with some tweaking on individual photos, I'm not entirely happy with the outcome on a lot of them. I don't like how it works so well on some photos, but looks like poo poo on other ones. It's quite frustrating.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 8, 2011 06:56
|
|
|
teethgrinder posted:And hitting "J" is a shortcut to show you both. Yeah, I usually check to see if I've got any blown out/black areas, but I didn't want to rely on that. To me, some images appear to bright even without blown out areas, though the ones I posted could have used an exposure boost. My monitor is not properly calibrated though, so I guess that's a pretty poor way of evaluating things then. Do you guys typically just bump your exposure until you're right under blowing out highlights?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 8, 2011 16:46
|
|
|
teethgrinder posted:Depends. Sometimes it just looks completely wrong. An outdoorsy daylight scene though, yes, I would probably push until I just blow-out. And sometimes if more detail is required, I blow it out anyway and then use the recovery slider a bit. I see. I will continue to play around then! Thanks 
|
|
#
¿
Aug 8, 2011 17:55
|
|
|
I'm really terrible at photoshop. I figured with practice I'd get better, but I'm still awful at cloning/healing, and I'd really like to get better at it. Just from searching for tutorials, all I can find are really basic ones that show you how to use it in really generic situations. Anyone know of more detailed ones that have some tips/tricks and are more advanced for cloning out a major object with a busy background? I feel like there is a whole world of awesome available to me that I can't quite get at.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 19, 2011 04:48
|
|
|
Pompous Rhombus posted:Get a graphics tablet if you don't have one already. Problem is I'm currently just into photography as a hobby and to be honest, I'm working off an old laptop with a 17" screen, so if I had money to burn, I'd probably invest in a much nicer workstation. I was hoping there'd be a solution that just requires me to learn/practice more, rather than buy new stuff. Something to add to the Christmas list though. Any one in particular you would recommend?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 19, 2011 04:59
|
|
|
David Pratt posted:You Suck At Photoshop Awesome, thanks! And regarding the tablet...everyone says there are ones for $40, but I don't know if the prices are just different where I am, but I can't find a Wacom bamboo for less than $100, unless you count the touch pad without the pen, which I don't think would be very useful. I know it's not a lot in comparison to actual photography dollars, but I have to draw the line somewhere, especially considering I don't make a cent off my photography. Like I said, some day I hope to own one, but it's not feasible for me at the moment, and I know there are ways to improve without one.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 19, 2011 17:13
|
|
|
Paragon8 posted:ebay! If I remember right you're in Canada - just had a look and you can buy it new for around 75 of your Canadian moon dollars. Yeah, I should get over my irrational fear of ebay and cough up some moon bucks for one. I searched and I found one that's fairly cheap. Costs less than a new kindle anyway... Thanks!
|
|
#
¿
Sep 20, 2011 03:55
|
|
|
What's the difference between the Intuos and the Bamboo? The price difference is rather significant.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 20, 2011 20:14
|
|
|
Okay magic ps experts. I need to get rid of the dog stuff in the picture below. Hindsight...should have taken them out when I took the picture. I figure this is good practice for me too, but everytime I try, I make a sloppy, really obvious mess. I am using content aware fill, patch, clone stamp and the healing brush, and I am just making a godawful mess. Is there something else I should be using? IMG_0237 by bernsai, on Flickr
|
|
#
¿
Sep 21, 2011 02:38
|
|
|
poopinmymouth posted:helpful stuff Thanks, pimm! You're the best. I'll give it a go this weekend.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 22, 2011 04:16
|
|
|
aliencowboy posted:I like it with the bag in. It adds a nice secondary focal point and some balance. If anything, just move it over a little to the right to keep it away from the edge of frame. I agree. I think it's better with the bag in the shot, but maybe not so close to the edge.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 3, 2011 19:56
|
|
|
Paragon8 posted:Yeah, I ran through one and ended up going on a tangent and really improving the image I was testing out. This would be so extremely helpful. I especially love following a tutorial for an image and then yours comes out looking like complete poo because the overall colour balance/contrast/brightness etc of your original image was totally different. I guess that's where I kind of need to make my own decisions, but it's hard when I have no idea!
|
|
#
¿
Nov 16, 2011 17:48
|
|
|
Paragon8 posted:The linked tutorials are sort of okay for that - just at every level where she just tells you the colour balance or curves adjustments just tweak them for yourselves too. That's pretty sweet...tbh I didn't even look at them :P But I should probably get some work done today at my actual job, so I will take a look tonight!
|
|
#
¿
Nov 16, 2011 17:59
|
|
|
I'm still really terrible with how much functionality I can get out of Photoshop, and I'm struggling with this: How do I get multiple layers with masks to show up properly? I find that if I make a duplicate background layer, then mask something off and make some changes to certain areas, I can't figure out how to mask off another section to make different kinds of changes. It always just fucks up the mask of the second one if I duplicate the 2nd background layer, or fucks up the first mask if I duplicate the first background layer. I end up having to merge or flatten the image and then start from scratch. herp derp.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 19, 2011 21:05
|
|
|
scottch posted:What sort of changes are you making? If you're doing adjustments like levels, curves, saturation, etc., use adjustment layers. Just use a soft brush to mask out the areas you do not want affected by your adjustments. All very non-destructible and easy to modify later. Yeah, mostly just adjustments like that. I think I'm using adjustment layers, because they're non-destructive, but I dont think I was using them quite properly. I didn't know you could mask stuff off in the actual adjustment layer itself....duh. Seems quite obvious now! Thanks!
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2011 17:54
|
|
|
Danoss posted:US Only? That's not cool. Everything's US only...I was all excited that I could get Adorama lighting stuff for really cheap and then I factored in shipping and that alone pushed the cost to more than local stuff. Not to mention I'd probably have to pay customs/import fees. It also drives me nuts whenever someone points me to the Canon loyalty program...I want to make use of it so bad, but it's not available to us Northern folk. I feel like I should go out and buy a 5dmk2 just to say I got the deal for once...haha.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 24, 2011 04:41
|
|
|
InternetJunky posted:I was masking a very complex object (bird with tons of stray feathers everywhere) with the intention of doing severe noise reduction on the background but not the bird. When I applied the NR I noticed I had botched my mask in a couple of spots and I need to go back and unmask certain areas. How can I do this? I have a layer with the bird shape completely masked out. Paint over the masked area that you want unmasked (on the mask layer) with a white brush? I'm not super familiar with PS, but that's how I "erase" masked areas.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2011 18:50
|
|
|
Tyorik posted:So I'm having an issue with an image I'm working on. There's a lot of yellow dust in South Korea and it creates this artificial fog that reflects sunlight really badly, so it tends to overexpose shots. Well, I thought that the shot was ok but when I got back and opened it up the sky blew a bunch of things out. I'm not super good at PS, but I'm hoping there's a way to save some of it You can try masking out the sky and reducing the exposure on the parts that are blown out. Or if you have Lightroom, use the adjustment brush to reduce the exposure of those as well. Depending on how badly it's blown out, you may not be able to recover any information from there, but you can try.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 16, 2011 17:44
|
|
|
Is Photoshop available at a student price? I can only find it for Lightroom. I swore I saw PS for like $200 for students. Oh, I just stumbled on CS5 extended. CarrotFlowers fucked around with this message at 03:49 on Feb 14, 2012 |
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2012 03:47
|
|
|
Is there a way to take existing layers and automatically make an action out of them? Like I have a file I worked on and I ended up liking the results, and I want to apply it to a bunch from the same series. I don't want to go through and dissect exactly what settings I used for each adjustment layer.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 16, 2012 02:19
|
|
|
triplexpac posted:Are there any good guides online to processing portraits done in RAW? I have a couple professionally shot photos I need to retouch, but I've never dealt with RAW before. If basic corrections like that is all you're doing, just play around with the exposure slider and white balance corrections. If you want to get into more detailed corrections with touching up skin, eyes, etc you'll probably want Photoshop and I recommend "Light it, shoot it, retouch it" or "professional retouching techniques for Photographers using Photoshop" both by Scott Kelby. They go into a lot more detail but it might be way more than what you're looking for. Adjusting exposure and wb are probably the 2 most basic things you can do in lightroom, so just play around with them until it looks right. You may want to apply some noise reduction after boosting your exposure, depending on how noisy your shadows were.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2012 17:10
|
|
|
triplexpac posted:Thanks for this. This is what I was doing basically anyway, it seemed to get some good results. Just wanted to make sure I was on the right track, there are so many tabs and sliders when I open it up in Photoshop I wasn't sure if I was missing something. Yeah, I find the best way to learn it is to just start somewhere and figure out what you like and what slider does what. It will take a while to learn it all, but IMO it's the best way to learn.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2012 17:58
|
|
|
Aeka 2.0 posted:I used to be able to smack the export button and browse the internet while waiting for the export. Now the whole thing pauses while typing and mouse movement locks up every second. This is with an i7 sandybridge overclocked and 16 gigs of ram with a SSD. WTF?!!? I have what I assume is the same setup and lr4 actually runs better than lr3 did on my old computer. I was nervous to upgrade after everyone mentioned these issues and I'm happy to say I haven't had a single issue with lr4.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2012 17:41
|
|
|
I keep seeing the VSCO presets applied really nicely to a lot of photos...just what I need, somewhere else to spend all my money.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 5, 2012 02:11
|
|
|
Is there a way to save a preset for export? I frequently use 2 types of settings when I export, and rather than changing all the settings each time, it'd be nice to just click a checkbox or something.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 18, 2012 03:43
|
|
|
Haha doh. Thanks guys!
|
|
#
¿
Oct 18, 2012 14:19
|
|
|
Am I losing my mind or did the latest update for LR4 change the way the tone sliders are? They used to be labeled: shadows, whites, blacks and highlights, right? Now it's back to recovery, fill light blacks and brightness like in LR3??
|
|
#
¿
Jan 27, 2013 23:59
|
|
|
Yup, that explains it
|
|
#
¿
Jan 28, 2013 00:40
|
|
|
voodoorootbeer posted:Can anybody point me toward a trusted primer or tutorial on color correction in Lightroom? For that matter - is there any free software that does a decent job of monitor color calibration? I feel clueless with regards to correction and also either colorblind or untrained (not sure which) when it comes to knowing what needs color correcting. 41?? poo poo son.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 17, 2013 01:28
|
|
|
Sometimes it's quicker to just turn one dial though than switch from Av/Tv to manual. At least on my cameras, switching to manual defaults the settings to what I last had them on in manual so when I switch from aperture or shutter priority I have to gently caress with aperture and shutter instead of just clicking a dial up 2 stops and then back 2 stops when I'm out of that weird lighting.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 18, 2013 07:20
|
|
|
It's such a personal preference thing - I have both color fx and silver fx and I've used each of them maybe once. I really dislike using them.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2013 22:26
|
|
|
Claw Massage posted:There will be, in LR5. That dude talks way too much. Coulda been a 5 minute video. The radial tool and the ability to heal not just spots anymore is the most intriguing to me. Kinda wish I had stayed with LR3 so I could justify upgrading to 5.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 16, 2013 05:06
|
|
|
mclifford82 posted:Okay, this has been bothering me since I first started using Lightroom 4, but now I'm taking enough photos that I want to process and keep that it's becoming cumbersome. When I'm going through images that I've just imported, often when I first double-click em to biggie-size them, it takes a second or two for the image to load the full rez. At this point, even though the image is fuzzy I can see the exposure levels and saturation are what I'm (mostly) after. If you like what the in-camera processing gives you, why shoot RAW? Why not just shoot jpeg?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2013 00:19
|
|
|
triplexpac posted:Hmmm interesting, maybe I'll try this out. I could use some good Lightroom presets anyway, I haven't bought any. I just mess around on my own. You can google free lightroom presets and tons will come up. Most of them are way overdone and crappy, but it might give you a starting point
|
|
#
¿
May 24, 2013 19:03
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 09:50 |
|
|
triplexpac posted:Yeah I have used some free ones, and like you say most of them are garbage. I found a few I like, but I'm fine with paying if it means I can get a bunch of good ones that I can re-use. I've found the ones that are paid aren't much better to be honest. I prefer to make my own, you might find that suits you better too.
|
|
#
¿
May 24, 2013 20:17
|
|