Adobe RAW image processing (LR & ACR)

[BackdoorArts]

I've been using Adobe tools for almost 5 years now, since I got into DSLR photography. I've been mostly happy with the products I've bought/rented and didn't really bother to question what I was seeing in them until I bought the D750 and was forced to do a work around using a beta version of their DNG creator until they adapted solutions for ACR and Lightroom. During that time I read a couple articles talking about how folks were, instead, using ViewNX2 because the Adobe software was not rendering an accurate image, particularly at higher ISO's. I documented this somewhat when I initially attempted to compare the D750 to the D610 at various ISO levels and found I was getting different results using Adobe and Nikon products.

My assumption was that this was all straightened out when the next full version of Lightroom & ACR were released, but to be honest I never went back and did a complete test. Then yesterday I read this article by Nasim Mansurov, Adobe's Poor Handling Of RAW Files, and now I'm not sure if it was, and if so how well?

In it he links to another piece of software called RawDigger, written by the same folks who built FastRawViewer, that seems to expose some serious inconsistencies in the way that Adobe renders RAW images taken by different cameras under identical conditions. To some here this may sound familiar as they've gotten a new camera and wondered just how in the world the image they took with their new D750 exposed differently than their D7100 (or whatever) using the same lens in the same environment with the exact same settings. Until now I've tried to puzzle it out, assuming the software was right, but now I'm not so sure.

With that said, I've ponied up the $35 it costs for the two tools. I need to spend some time with the documentation to get to know what exactly it is I'm looking for, but I can tell you this, I'm almost immediately convinced that FastRawViewer will become the defacto first step in my workflow from now on, before importing into Lightroom (they even have keyboard shortcuts that allow you to invoke the LR Import dialogue on the folder you're working with, or open the image directly into Photoshop.

I don't think this spells the end of LR/PS for me as these other tools do not have any editing capabilities, but they've opened my eyes to a former blindspot.

 

[Blacktop]

@BackdoorHippie. Thanks for the article. I have read through it twice. I have seen this as well when opening a RAW file in ViewNX2 as opposed to LR.
Normally when I have a lot of shots to go through, I use NX2 to eliminate the shots that are clearly unusable before importing to LR. I find doing this in NX2 much faster than in LR.

I have seen the difference in these shots after exporting them into LR, but never really thought about it much, since they are RAW files and I would be processing them anyway.
I can see how this would be a huge problem when comparing different cameras.

How big of a problem is this doing post processing? Is the exposure the only difference here, or are there other things to consider?

 

[Blacktop]

Digging more into this! (Thanks, like I have time for this)
It seems now that I have not been looking at my RAW files correctly to begin with.
I shoot in RGB color space and only convert to sRGB at last step of my PP when exporting the final edit in Jpeg for uploading to various sites.

It seems that I should be viewing the image in sRGB while doing post processing.

Unfortunately I'm off to work in a little while and have no time to look into it further. I will be all over this on the weekend however.

 

[BackdoorArts]

I have seen the difference in these shots after exporting them into LR, but never really thought about it much, since they are RAW files and I would be processing them anyway. I can see how this would be a huge problem when comparing different cameras.

How big of a problem is this doing post processing? Is the exposure the only difference here, or are there other things to consider?

First thing, unless you consider the camera profile you're shooting with and make sure you apply it on import to Lightroom you're always going to see a difference between LR and ViewNX2 because by default LR applies the Adobe Standard profile while ViewNX2 applies the one set in the camera. I only ever change my setting if I need to shoot JPEG, otherwise it's set to Standard and I have Lightroom set up to apply that by default on import, so they should look the same.

The problem with post processing is that if you're getting an inaccurate look at what you just shot you may be tossing photos you shouldn't during your first cut. Otherwise it's simply a starting point and you can likely correct your way back to normal with a simple levels adjustment more times than not. Still, when I hear that Adobe has gone years without correcting known problems in the ACR engine, that's troublesome.

If I get bored at my in-laws this weekend I plan on spending some time looking at SOOC shots in all 3 tools (LR, ViewNX2 and FastRawViewer/RawDigger) and see what I can see in terms of differences. Could be interesting.

 

[Don Kuykendall_RIP]

I am following this carefully. Not at home right now to dish deeper but I think I will once I get back to a computer.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Don Kuykendall_RIP]

Ok, I am home now and able to look at this better. Is it the import that is the problem or using LR at all? I really like LR for cataloging and editing. So what do I do?
I would hate to throw out LR and back up to a lesser editor.

 

[Marcel]

One thing I almost never think of is using the camera's basic conversion. It is always possible to convert a raw file with the camera's settings and to save a jpeg file right on the memory card. You can even try different edits and save multiple versions. Of course this would only be used on rare occasions, but it could also be part of any software raw conversion comparison.

 

[Marcel]

Thanks for posting this Jake. I'm going to have a serious look at this since I don't really like how LR handles my Fuji X-10 raw files.

 

[Don Kuykendall_RIP]

Been resetting all of Lightroom since Adobe finally reverted back to the old import screen. A couple of things to check on to see how other do it. I already have a custom import develope setting that as given to me by a pro that was given to him by another pro. Those settings are simple but they really do help. The ones I played with tonight are in the "Camera Calibration" box. I am using Process: 2012 (Current) and see no reason to go to one of the others since they are just older. But the one below is more interesting. Profile: I have had it on Adobe Standard all this time but this thread is making me look at everything again. The setting other than Adobe Standard are all Camera specific. Camera Standard, Camera Neutral, Camera Portrait, Camera vivid etc. Clicking on these really changes the photo. In playing with it on several different kinds of photos it seems that Camera Standard really looks a little better. For the time being I have added that setting to my import settings. I can always change it on a separate photo if need be.

What is everyone else setting these setting on?

 

[J-see]

I would hate to throw out LR and back up to a lesser editor.

In many RAW editor comparisons, LR scores pretty average so switching to another could be an improvement.

 

[Don Kuykendall_RIP]

In many RAW editor comparisons, LR scores pretty average so switching to another could be an improvement.

I plan on staying with Lightroom. Just seeing how to improve it and my workflow. This thread just gives me reason to look and learn

 

[J-see]

I plan on staying with Lightroom. Just seeing how to improve it and my workflow. This thread just gives me reason to look and learn

To each their own but I'd suggest to first try and edit the RAW in Nikon's soft and eventually save as TiFF to PS to do the specials and compare those to LR's results.

I compared several edits early this year and LR delivered the worst results compared to NX-D TiFF or RT.

 

[Don Kuykendall_RIP]

To each their own but I'd suggest to first try and edit the RAW in Nikon's soft and eventually save as TiFF to PS to do the specials and compare those to LR's results.

I compared several edits early this year and LR delivered the worst results compared to NX-D TiFF or RT.

I made one change tonight in LR that made a big difference. In camera Calibration I changed from Adobe Standard to Camera Standard. There are several other choices there under Camera also. I had earlier tried View NX D and they were better than the way I was doing it in LR but the shift away from Adobe Standard brought it a lot closer right out of the box. If I had to describe it I would say the colors are brighter with a little more contrast but different than just using the sliders to move it up so I am sure it is a combination of several adjustments.

I will be interested in hearing from @BackdoorHippie on this to see what his take is on this.

I want the best results I can get but I really don't want to add another step to my workflow. I am just getting this workflow down to a manageable level.

 

[J-see]

As far as I know the cam options (I use cam-flat) only apply a specific curve to the data. The real difference is in the translation of the RAW data and most editors differ in how they do that. Nikon's always best at the actual translation since they are the only ones knowing the NEF data and don't need to reverse engineer everything.

LR also differs in the highlights which might explain why my LR edit lacks a load of data compared to a similar RT edit. One highlight level is half the data.

I'm having the same workflow since some time now but will change the moment any step can be improved.

 

[BackdoorArts]

I'm finishing up a bunch of work in prep for a couple weeks off over Thanksgiving, so I've not had a moment to play with this - but I hope to soon.

Here's what I gather from my reading so far. The issue is with the ACR/LR engine and how it interprets the RAW file. For some cameras and makes the issues seem to be minor while for others, and for Fuji in particular @Marcel, they seem to be systemic. Regardless, ACR/LR does nothing to the RAW file (it's not an import issue), it just does not give you a "clean and proper' starting point for your edit. This could happen with any RAW editor and they all likely have their issues as it seems most have to figure out the RAW format post-release and adapt to it because Nikon doesn't share, which is why we all go to ViewNX2 first when we get a newly released body.

Tip for ACR/LR users - if you only shoot RAW then choose Camera Standard or Neutral and then change your LR import to apply that profile post import since Adobe Standard is the default (this is likely the biggest reason folks say their RAW files look different after import). Also turn off every jpeg modifying option (sharpening, High ISO NR, distortion correction, vignette control, Active D-Lighting, etc.) in the shooting menu. This way you're starting with something that should more closely resemble what you see on the back of your camera.

How do you know if this is happening with your camera? Two ways. First, if you've done everything above, shoot RAW+JPEG and import them both and compare . If they're way off then there's likely something going on in the RAW interpretation. Second, compare what you see in ACR/LR with what you see opening in ViewNX2. It's best if you shoot a set of photos all of the same subject in the same conditions and vary ISO as it seems some issues only show themselves at extremes. If there are differences then there's something different going on in the LR/ACR interpretation.

I'm not saying that's a "problem", just that there's a difference. The RAW file is just a starting point and provided that it doesn't look "off" you're fine because your adjustments will "fix" whatever there was to begin with. The problem exists only if there's work you need to do just to get a "normal" looking starting point. In those cases there are a few things you can do. One, just keep dealing with it as you have - it's a pain, but nothing new for you. Two, change your RAW file editor to something more native to your file type - an easy solution but one that can piss you off if you're heavily invested in Adobe stuff (like me). Three, use tools like the ones linked above to discover what the differences are and attempt to build a custom profile that will correct for it using Adobe DNG Profile Editor.

This third option is something I'm going to explore if I can identify an issue with my D750 files. I've already used the profile editor in a very simplistic way to fix the White Balance issues Nikon cameras have with Infrared conversions, but with the information I'm seeing available in the RawDigger software I suspect that I can use the information gleaned from that to create a custom profile for the camera.

BTW, if you've never used it, the profile editor a great tool for getting WB spot on in specific lighting using a ColorChecker Passport or similar product.

 

[BackdoorArts]

I made one change tonight in LR that made a big difference. In camera Calibration I changed from Adobe Standard to Camera Standard. There are several other choices there under Camera also. I had earlier tried View NX D and they were better than the way I was doing it in LR but the shift away from Adobe Standard brought it a lot closer right out of the box. If I had to describe it I would say the colors are brighter with a little more contrast but different than just using the sliders to move it up so I am sure it is a combination of several adjustments.

I will be interested in hearing from @BackdoorHippie on this to see what his take is on this.

I want the best results I can get but I really don't want to add another step to my workflow. I am just getting this workflow down to a manageable level.

Don, as I mentioned already, camera profile can make a huge difference in workflow. There are two schools of thought here.

One, not to give a rat's ass about what the JPEG preview looks like and always start with one profile because you'll always get a similar look and feel as a starting point. Adobe Standard, Camera Standard and Camera Neutral seem to be the most common. Or if you have a specific style of shooting that lends itself to a look you like to start with, pick that one.

Two, always keep your camera set to one profile and then match that profile on import. This is the method I use.

Even though LR defaults to Adobe Standard, it's very easy to change the defaults for a camera. In the LR Develop module, go to an unedited image from the camera that you're using and make the changes that you would like to see applied to every image imported by that camera (I check boxes for Chromatic Aberation and Lens Profile Correction, set my default for input sharpening and set the Camera Profile to Camera Standard. Once done, go to the Develop menu and choose Set Default Settings... and click the Update To Current Settings button. This will now apply all these as a part of your import process, but know that the more you do here the more work Adobe has to do during the preview phase of the import. These changes are specific to a body type, so if you shoot multiple bodies you will need to do it for each type (D750, D610, D7100, etc.). You can also click a box in the Presets tab of the Preferences dialogue to make the settings specific to a camera serial number in case you have multiples of the same body and have done some specific sensor profiling (the same body can have minor differences in what the sensor gives you).

It may add a bit of time to your import, but it won't add another step to your workflow.

 

[Don Kuykendall_RIP]

This is what I did last night. It should be set already Now to look at using view NXd to import and save as tiff or DNG? And then import into LR? Is that what you are talking about in the original post?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[BackdoorArts]

This is what I did last night. It should be set already Now to look at using view NXd to import and save as tiff or DNG? And then import into LR? Is that what you are talking about in the original post?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

For comparing stuff? You can generate JPG's from both LR and ViewNX and just look at 'em side by side in LR or any other tool that lets you put two images side by side. LR shouldn't alter the appearance of jpegs.

 

[Blacktop]

Been resetting all of Lightroom since Adobe finally reverted back to the old import screen. A couple of things to check on to see how other do it. I already have a custom import develope setting that as given to me by a pro that was given to him by another pro. Those settings are simple but they really do help. The ones I played with tonight are in the "Camera Calibration" box. I am using Process: 2012 (Current) and see no reason to go to one of the others since they are just older. But the one below is more interesting. Profile: I have had it on Adobe Standard all this time but this thread is making me look at everything again. The setting other than Adobe Standard are all Camera specific. Camera Standard, Camera Neutral, Camera Portrait, Camera vivid etc. Clicking on these really changes the photo. In playing with it on several different kinds of photos it seems that Camera Standard really looks a little better. For the time being I have added that setting to my import settings. I can always change it on a separate photo if need be.

What is everyone else setting these setting on?

For the past year or so I've been doing it the way Jake does it. In camera I have "Camera Standard" and in LR I have the same profile set at import as well.

I wish I had more time to dig into this but work seems to be interfering with my personal life.

 

[Danno_RIP]

Forgive me for the question if this is redundant, but this type of discussion is difficult for me and I want to make sure I am understanding the direct impact. I can get rapped around the axle very quickly these days and this is the kind of discussions that will do it very quickly... dian bramage is annoying...

I read the article and the posts a couple times and I see how the bug could impact looking at two different cameras, and I do see, based on the discussion, that you could cull some pictures you shouldn't in the initial review, and I have already set my import defaults to match my camera and added some of the other lens correction items etc... (I learned about them in a course I took).

My struggle in reading this is does is understanding the impact. Is it that I should be careful what I delete initially because I could be missing something good... or is it that LR is messing things up so much it increases my post processing effort and there are better conversion tools that will make me faster and more accurate.

I just love this stuff, but I really struggle with this kind of in depth discussions. And to think I used to be an engineer that worked on configuration tools... oh well..

I hope this does not come off as flippant... I really just am trying to understand it better.