When editing raw...

[SilverUser]

It's a bad habit to do too much, or all editing in ACR. ACR applies your tweeks big bang, meaning it applies them to the ENTIRE composition.........

As has been pointed out, this statement is not correct, if you know how to use all the tools ACR has to offer.

Can ACR allow one to select by color range? Blend? Selective and/or smart sharpening? As far as I know it cannot, and until someone says otherwise, you are the one that is incorrect.

 

[Gaerek]

It's a bad habit to do too much, or all editing in ACR. ACR applies your tweeks big bang, meaning it applies them to the ENTIRE composition.........

As has been pointed out, this statement is not correct, if you know how to use all the tools ACR has to offer.

Can ACR allow one to select by color range? Blend? Selective and/or smart sharpening? As far as I know it cannot, and until someone says otherwise, you are the one that is incorrect.

You make the incorrect assumption that you should only do one sharpening pass and that only small, localized changes should ever be made. ACR allows you to set up a foundation that can be further worked on by photoshop. I rarely see the need to go much beyond the general changes, and guess what, my shots turn out fantastic. As has been said, ACR is a tool, and part of using a tool is knowing it's limitations. You telling me what it can't do isn't very useful, because all I care about is what it can do.

Here, let me try something.

Can Photoshop allow one to edit non-destructively? Work exclusively with a RAW image? Have two stops of play in either direction in the dynamic range of the shot or give the ability to edit a 12/14 bit image as opposed to only 8 bit? As far as I know it cannot, and until someone says otherwise, you are the one that is incorrect.

See what I did there? I picked out photoshops flaws to show you why ACR is always the best! This comment was made tongue in cheek in order to show how well hyperbole works. Trouble is, just because something has a flaw, or a missing feature, doesn't mean it isn't useful. I prefer to do most of my editing in a non-destructive way. My images do not suffer from being edited in ACR. You have a different preference, and I would imagine that your images don't suffer either. Calling someone incorrect because it's not your preference, or because of some perceived lack of tools in their chosen workflow is just plain wrong.

 

[Garbz]

It's a bad habit to do too much,

The only bad habit is assuming some entirely subjective art form being worked on by someone else is in any way wrong.

One can never do too much in the pursuit of their perfect image. NEVER. If it bankrupts you, turns you into a social recluse, tweak to your hearts content. It's the artists art afterall.

I wonder if Ansel Adams would have dedicated as much time to a single picture in his darkroom if online forums existed back in his day. He may have been talked out of masterpieces.


Oh and for your latter comment. Does every image NEED select by colour range? This for instance is a feature I use .... never. The only time I play with a colour range is when I reduce saturation, and that can be done in Lightroom on individual colours.

Just because a program doesn't suit your editing style doesn't mean it is the be all and end all for someone else. Case in point is the guy who drew the Mona Lisa in MS Paint.

 

[FrankLamont]

Case in point is the guy who drew the Mona Lisa in MS Paint.

And here I thought Da Vinci used Photoshop. Cheapo.

 

[Hamtastic]

Can ACR allow one to select by color range?

No.

Blend?

No.

Selective and/or smart sharpening?

Yes. There is a local adjustment brush. ACR sharpening is based on Smart Sharpening.

Can Photoshop allow one to edit non-destructively?

Yes.

Work exclusively with a RAW image?

ACR comes with CS? Also you could open the raw file as a smart object, which basically accomplishes the same thing.

Have two stops of play in either direction in the dynamic range of the shot?

I would rather adjust 2 stops from raw than jpeg, but I disagree that raw allows a 4 stop exposure latitude. At least it's nothing like neg film's exposure latitude, which is commonly said to be 4 stops (2 in either direction from "n").

give the ability to edit a 12/14 bit image as opposed to only 8 bit?

Yes. Well, 16 bit.


I try to do as much in ACR as possible. Admitedly ACR is more limited than PS as far as local adjustments go, but it still offers more control than I ever had in my darkroom, so I'm usually pretty happy. If I need more control then I just go to Photoshop. I also use a more complicated sharpening procedure than ACR allows for, so I do all my final sharpening in PS. I do use ACR sharpening for 1st stage/capture sharpening*.

*Before lecturing me on how I'm only supposed to sharpen once at the end please take the time to read up what the experts in sharpening digital images say. They rarely use a single step sharpening process, and that's been common knowledge for years. "Only sharpen once" is what folks tell noobs because they don't want to bother explaining how it's really done.

 

[NateS]

I do all of my editing on the raw file. Sharpening, contrast, colors, even color efex pro 3.0 filters....I crop, use color control points, selection control points, blur/sharpening, etc....all to the RAW file then save and output a copy to jpeg. Of course I use Capture NX2 which allows you to do all of your editing, even selective editing, to the raw file itself.

 

[pbelarge]

I have yet to perform any real kind of PP work to my photographs yet.
I have been reading up on the process and all of the myriad ways things seem to be able to be performed.

This post sort of confirms what I have been studying for at least 5 months. Different artists have different methods/opinions.

I was/am mostly interested now in workflow, but even that is not a science, it is a preference.


I like when opposing 'forces' discuss the topic, believe it or not I am getting some insight as to what can be expected.

So now I believe I have enough information to get started...maybe even come up with my own workflow. :mrgreen:

 

[Gaerek]

Can Photoshop allow one to edit non-destructively?

Yes.

Work exclusively with a RAW image?

ACR comes with CS? Also you could open the raw file as a smart object, which basically accomplishes the same thing.

Have two stops of play in either direction in the dynamic range of the shot?

I would rather adjust 2 stops from raw than jpeg, but I disagree that raw allows a 4 stop exposure latitude. At least it's nothing like neg film's exposure latitude, which is commonly said to be 4 stops (2 in either direction from "n").

give the ability to edit a 12/14 bit image as opposed to only 8 bit?

Yes. Well, 16 bit.

My comment was meant to be tongue-in-cheek. I already knew the answers to my questions, but I also knew the answers to Silver's. She took her misunderstandings of ACR and made a list of things it 'can't' do, and added a couple of things that are of little to no use.

And the whole 2 stops thing. I see it quoted all the time that you can get 4 stops of latitude out of a RAW image, but I've never seen that in practice. Usually about 2, 3 if you're lucky.

 

[Garbz]

*Before lecturing me on how I'm only supposed to sharpen once at the end please take the time to read up what the experts in sharpening digital images say. They rarely use a single step sharpening process, and that's been common knowledge for years. "Only sharpen once" is what folks tell noobs because they don't want to bother explaining how it's really done.

An expert in this field is someone who's work you like who has done it longer than you. Just because a "expert" does something in the art world doesn't make it right. This isn't engineering and everything is entirely subjective.

Also funny your experts are telling you to sharpen multiple times all over the place. It was experts and google where I learned the reason for sharpening only once if possible in the first place.

I say we dress our respective experts in short shorts, and race them to decide this argument . Or we could simply keep this up and not get anywhere.

 

[Gaerek]

*Before lecturing me on how I'm only supposed to sharpen once at the end please take the time to read up what the experts in sharpening digital images say. They rarely use a single step sharpening process, and that's been common knowledge for years. "Only sharpen once" is what folks tell noobs because they don't want to bother explaining how it's really done.

An expert in this field is someone who's work you like who has done it longer than you. Just because a "expert" does something in the art world doesn't make it right. This isn't engineering and everything is entirely subjective.

Also funny your experts are telling you to sharpen multiple times all over the place. It was experts and google where I learned the reason for sharpening only once if possible in the first place.

I say we dress our respective experts in short shorts, and race them to decide this argument . Or we could simply keep this up and not get anywhere.

I typically sharpen twice. I'll first start with an oiled whetstone, then use a butcher's steel to finish.

 

[flygirl]

Hello to all. I am new to this forum and thought I would jump in on this thread, especially since no mentioned NX2. If you use Nikon, as I do, I have found NX2 to be a terrific RAW converter. All of my camera settings show up in NX2 and with the RAW files I can choose to use them or not. I usually then save as a 16-bit Tiff out of NX2 and do any further work on them in CS3 with some Nik software plug ins. As far as sharpening, I do a slight global sharpening in NX2 with the RAW file, then when cropped and such I use high pass sharpening, selectively, in NX2, on just the subject, ie eyes, feather or fur detail, etc. So there is my 2 cents.

 

[Dominantly]

NX2 was mentioned in post 21.

 

[Hamtastic]

Also funny your experts are telling you to sharpen multiple times all over the place. It was experts and google where I learned the reason for sharpening only once if possible in the first place.

We've debated this before, Garbz.

It's easy enough to go to the Adobe website and see who they are consulting on sharpening with their software. The main guy these days is Jeff Schewe. Google his name.

 

[Garbz]

Really we have? Care to link me to the thread where I say using widely different sharpening settings for an overall effect ala Jeff Schewe is bad? How about an example of my usual post on sharpening: http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/beyond-basics/134614-sharpening-raw.html where I say sharpening twice is bad, except when you do exactly what Jeff Schewe does in his online PDFs which explain all about sharpening.

The only time I say don't sharpen twice is when the point is to use the exact same settings twice, which in nearly all cases will result in unwanted halos.

I don't understand why some people insist on reading one line of a post and then arguing whereas we agree on the topic anyway.