Bearbeitung von RAW in PL

[photoken]

As you probably know there are several options in the preferences how to handle RAWs. For example you can choose an Action you wan't to assign to your RAW images. So there could simply be an other option to choose an RAW-Adjustmentlayer instead of an Action or none. There is no complication at all.

Of course it would be a complication -- as I said, it would needlessly duplicate the adjustments that are already available for any image.

I don't want an editing window to open but an Adjustment Layer that contains main RAW-Adjustments just like color temperature, input curves, exposure correction and so on.

That's the old-fashioned, complicated, and wasteful duplication that should never be used again. It makes no sense to have a foolish, dedicated RAW editing window (or adjustment) that merely applies the same adjustments that are already available in the main editing window. Keep it simple -- any and every image is opened in the main editing window and adjusted there,.

For most people the PL approach is a huge hurdle. Instead they like to develop ther images in a stupid little editing window.

They are fools for wanting to do so. The popular image editing software in PL's price range (PhotoshopElements and PaintShopPro) are forced to use that stupid little editing window because those programs do not have all the adjustments that PL does, and those programs do not support using the features that they do have on images of 8-bit, 16-bit, or 32-bit depth.

[JulianZI]

when importing a RAW this happens:
...
- It creates a histogram on top of that which is not part of the previous Group. That is *not* consistent since without that layer the image is black. That histogram should be part of the RAW group and always be adjusted automatically.

I don't understand what you're seeing.

This is what I have for a D800 NEF

layers.jpg

I would simply suggest to put the histogram #2 into the layer #1, right to the channel mixer (it does not have to be called histogram, in bibble it was simply a setting to select the clipping percentage, it was a value of 0.1% if I recall.).

Because touching either of those changes the image too dramatically.

I would put another, deactivated histogram into layer #2.

The first histogram should simply make the image "visible" - I would not expect the regular user to touch it.

[JulianZI]

I don't want an editing window to open but an Adjustment Layer that contains main RAW-Adjustments just like color temperature, input curves, exposure correction and so on.

That's the old-fashioned, complicated, and wasteful duplication that should never be used again. It makes no sense to have a foolish, dedicated RAW editing window (or adjustment) that merely applies the same adjustments that are already available in the main editing window. Keep it simple -- any and every image is opened in the main editing window and adjusted there,.

Well, a window was not what Martin was suggesting. All RAW developers I know have this basis correction tools, so it is hardly old fashioned. In fact PL32 implementation is really almost there. I personally just miss the separation between the changes which are part of the pre-development (such as clipping, mixer and demosaicing) and the adjustment parts (lights, color enhancement, gradation). Both should be individually saved and it should be possible to have presets for both of them. The first is more of the type "calibration".

[photoken]

This is what I have for a D800 NEF

It looks like somehow you're getting an old implementation of the RAW image layer stack. See my screenshots for what the layers, and adjustment layers should be.

Just a note: before I install a new beta, I first uninstall the old beta (using the uninstallation executable in the beta's directory), then check to make sure its directory is completely gone, then reboot my computer. During the installation, I specify that the beta will be installed into a directory named "PhotoLineBeta". I never mix the betas and the release versions....

[JulianZI]

This is what I have for a D800 NEF

It looks like somehow you're getting an old implementation of the RAW image layer stack. See my screenshots for what the layers, and adjustment layers should be.

It appears that at the bottom you do not have a group but just an image. This may depend on the camera. The working layers look the same in my case - you also have that clipping "histogram" there.

[photoken]

Well, a window was not what Martin was suggesting. All RAW developers I know have this basis correction tools, so it is hardly old fashioned. In fact PL32 implementation is really almost there. I personally just miss the separation between the changes which are part of the pre-development (such as clipping, mixer and demosaicing) and the adjustment parts (lights, color enhancement, gradation). Both should be individually saved and it should be possible to have presets for both of them. The first is more of the type "calibration".

Whether one is talking about a window or a "special adjustment layer" containing a limited set of PL's adjustments is irrelevant, IMO. PL has 47 potential adjustment layers, and they are all available for any image, RAW or not. That's the way it should be.

As I said before, other image editing programs using a separate RAW processing window are doing so out of necessity (and/or habit) because for several years their adjustments were not available for 16-bit and 32-bit images, and some are still not available for those images.

You can see from my screenshots that the current PL implementation already gives a basic set of adjustment layers for RAW images. Demosaicing is handled separately by that "Background" layer in my screenshot, all the other parts are controlled in the "holding layer". That set can be customized and saved as a preset for one's camera. What's the problem with that?

[photoken]

It appears that at the bottom you do not have a group but just an image.

Correct. It's that "image" layer that has the control for the demosaicing method.

This may depend on the camera.

Nope. When I open a NEF image from the Nikon D800, the layers are the same as I showed.

you also have that clipping "histogram" there.

Sure. The only Histogram adjustment is in the "package" of adjustments and it's the adjustment that makes the dark demosaiced image visible (as you described). One can add another Histogram adjustment to the "package" for additional corrections. Simple.

[bkh]

This is what I have for a D800 NEF

It looks like somehow you're getting an old implementation of the RAW image layer stack. See my screenshots for what the layers, and adjustment layers should be.

It appears that at the bottom you do not have a group but just an image. This may depend on the camera. The working layers look the same in my case - you also have that clipping "histogram" there.

The difference is that photoken must have specified a camera profile under Preferences -> Colour Management -> Devices, while JulianZI hasn't. If there is no colour profile, PL will use the conversion matrix supplied by DCRaw and attach that (and the Highlight Correction adjustment) to the image as a child layer.

As far as I can tell, PL does produce an appealing image immediately upon opening a RAW file. The "appealing" quality is dependent on DCRAW, which has defined the corrections it uses for the cameras it supports. Of course, one should add and tweak the adjustments according to taste, and afterward the whole customized adjustment stack can be saved as a preset and quickly applied to subsequent images.

If you have a custom camera profile, you'll probably have tone curves and colour enhancements take place through that profile. In that case, dcraw isn't involved in the colour conversion process at all. (For some cameras, dcraw does a nice job, while for others like my old D80, the results are next to useless. The problem is that dcraw uses the conversion matrices from DNG profiles but omits the subsequent colour enhancement steps.)

Just out of curiosity, try one of your images with the camera profile set to "none" in PL.

(And, no, I don't think a raw image without adequate denoising and a bit of sharpening applied can be called "appealing".)

Cheers

Burkhard.

[maxwell]

Hi,

ich nutze den Raw Import von PL sehr oft. Meiner Meinung nach muss sich der Raw-Import nicht gegenüber anderen "Raw Programmen" verstecken. In den meisten Konvertern hat man im Vergleich zu PL nur wenig Einflussnahme auf die tatsächliche Entwicklung. Allerdings sind die mit dem PL Raw Import ohne Korrektur erhaltenen Bilder meist den Resultaten, die mit anderen Raw Konvertern ohne Korrektur erzielt werden, unterlegen.

Um vergleichbare Resultate zu erzielen sollte die Histogrammkorrektur ohne Automatik auf einen Gammawert von 2.2 eingestellt werden und anschliessend ein Kameraprofil mit Hilfe der Gradationskurve ermittelt werden. Alle anderen Korrekturen sind zuerst nicht nötig. Um eine "Kamerakurve" zu erhalten, passe man die Gradationskurve im Summenkanal mit Hilfe des Live-Histogramms an. Das Histogramm sollte sich nach der Korrektur über den gesamten Bereich erstrecken (wie der üblichen Histogrammkorrektur).

Das vorgeschlagene Verfahren ist analog zu Canon DPP (Basiskorrekturen). Bei den Basiskorrekturen in DPP kann die "Kamerakurve" noch angepasst werden. Die Basiskorrekturen von DPP sind nur für das Einlesen von Raw Dateien zuständig. Korrekturen der "Kamerakurve" sind z.B. bei Lightroom nicht mehr möglich, man erhält direkt ein fertig entwickeltes Bild. Die Korrekturen, die bei Lightroom vorgenommen werden können, können auf "Raw" wie auf andere fertig entwickelte Bilder (z.B. JPEG) angewandt werden.

Die von mir gefundene "Kamerakurve" liefert unabhängig vom Raw Format bereits relativ gut korregierte Bilder, die weitgehend den in den Raw Dateien eingebetteten Vorschaubildern (vgl. IrfanView, XnView usw.) entsprechen. Am Konzept der Raw Entwicklung von PL würde ich nichts ändern. Im Vergleich zu anderen Raw-Konvertern find ich die Integration in die Bildbearbeitung von PL als sehr gelungen. Sie bildet gegenüber den bei PS üblichen, wie zusätzliche Programme wirkenden Integrationen von Werkzeugen keinen "Fremdkörper".

Grüße

Josef

PS: Leider ist es mir nicht möglich eine plgd Datei anzuhängen.

[gmhofmann]

Doofe Frage: Wie bearbeite ich eine RAW-Datei?
Über den normalen Öffnen-Dialog einlesen? Da habe ich halt ein komisches Bild...
Wo sind die speziellen Optionen für RAW?

[Martin Stricker]

Wir sind hier im Betatester Forum und wie man sieht wissen selbst die meisten Betatester nicht wie mit RAW-Dateien in PL gearbeitet werden kann. Wie sieht das dann erst bei normalen Anwendern aus?

Martin

[gmhofmann]

Da gab es mal einen speziellen Dialog, wo unten die Vorschauen standen. Aber den finde ich nicht mehr...

[Martin Stricker]

Da gab es mal einen speziellen Dialog, wo unten die Vorschauen standen. Aber den finde ich nicht mehr...

Vermutlich meinst du den RAW-Import, den gibt es nicht mehr.

[photoken]

The difference is that photoken must have specified a camera profile under Preferences -> Colour Management -> Devices,

Good catch! I'm using the "ProPhoto RGB" profile.

Just out of curiosity, try one of your images with the camera profile set to "none" in PL.

Right again! The images look very washed out, and I get the layer stack JulianZI showed.

I would suggest trying the ProPhoto RGB profile to get the layer stack that I showed. I think that layer stack might address most of the concerns mentioned about the separate Histogram layer, etc.

(And, no, I don't think a raw image without adequate denoising and a bit of sharpening applied can be called "appealing".)

Well, "appealing" is a subjective term. One would certainly want to create a custom preset for one's camera, but by default (with the ProPhoto RGB profile), the images aren't bad -- certainly as good or better than the defaults I've seen from other image editors. In fact, the images look as good as the embedded JPG preview displayed by XnView.

[bkh]

I would suggest trying the ProPhoto RGB profile to get the layer stack that I showed.

ProPhotoRGB isn't the general solution, though – in principle, you need a camera specific profile (e.g., one generated from a photo of a ColorChecker card or similar) here. I'm a bit surprised that ProPhoto works for you – it's completely off when I try it with my Nikon NEF files. But of course, this depends on the particular Bayer filter used in the camera.

In any case, PL's default is with the camera profile set to "none" and colour conversion done by dcraw. For some cameras (apparently including yours) the results with these default settings aren't convincing.

Cheers

Burkhard.