WB = Calibration issues.

C

cbay

Senior Member
Horoscope Fish said:
Here's my take:.

I corrected the WB with the WB Tool in ACR. Then took out the green color cast with a Levels Adjustment layer by dropping the (green) midtones, and bringing in both the Shadows and Highlights sliders (still on the green channel) both about 10 points.

....
Click to expand...

Looks good on my screen. All i have is what came with the camera at this point (View NX-2), and find it is very demanding on my laptop. Enough so that i can't get instant results with the slider on WB and many others. The lag time made it tough to get similar results. Thought i had a decent machine but maybe not.
Is LR as demanding or more?
 
J

J-see

Senior Member
Eyelight said:
Not so bad if you have the right equipment.
Click to expand...

Open a task-manager or something and then open LR and just jump around in the modules. There's no need for editing. Then check the resources it starts draining. I had no problems using it on either system but it's a hog at every level and the moment I started using brushes, my fan on the other got ready for take-off.

It's not alone these days in being a resource monster. I'm using Safari on the Mac which makes Chrome feel like surfing with a tank.
 
Last edited:
Horoscope Fish

Horoscope Fish

Senior Member
cbay said:
Looks good on my screen. All i have is what came with the camera at this point (View NX-2), and find it is very demanding on my laptop. Enough so that i can't get instant results with the slider on WB and many others. The lag time made it tough to get similar results. Thought i had a decent machine but maybe not.
Is LR as demanding or more?
Click to expand...
Lightroom and Photoshop both will crush a computer's processor, given the opportunity. I'm going to guess View NX2 is much the same. These days a very fast dual-core CPU is a minimum for getting anything done while an equally fast (or faster) quad-core will give you a much more satisfying experience -- all other things being equal. It used to be all about the RAM but these days I rarely see LR or Photoshop using more than a few GB's of system RAM.
 
J

J-see

Senior Member
Horoscope Fish said:
Lightroom and Photoshop both will crush a computer's processor, given the opportunity. I'm going to guess View NX2 is much the same.
Click to expand...

I didn't check ViewNX but after using Capture NX-D I usually dump around 1.5Gb at the minimum and I don't even edit much in it. It likes memory too.

I just checked: I opened a folder in NX-D, looked at a couple of shots at 100% and I was at 1.3Gb mem use. Half a minute of use.
 
Last edited:
Horoscope Fish

Horoscope Fish

Senior Member
J-see said:
I didn't check ViewNX but after using Capture NX-D I usually dump around 1.5Gb at the minimum and I don't even edit much in it. It likes memory too.
Click to expand...
I have Photoshop (with a RAW file open), Lightroom (nothing open), Bridge, MS Outlook and Firefox all open on my PC right now and showing less than 3GB of RAM used. If that's enough to "stress" your system, you should be looking at upgrading, IMO.

....
 
J

J-see

Senior Member
Horoscope Fish said:
I have Photoshop (with a RAW file open), Lightroom (nothing open), Bridge, MS Outlook and Firefox all open on my PC right now and showing less than 3GB of RAM used. If that's enough to "stress" your system, you should be looking at upgrading, IMO.

....
Click to expand...

It's not stressing my system since I have always been running them all, even on the older PC which is a quad but even so, it can't be said they're very economic in their use of resources; memory and drive requirements.

Btw, I just did the same in ViewNX-2; open the same folder, browsed, looked at some shots at 100%. Memory use: 0.5Gb.
 
E

Eyelight

Senior Member
Oh. Thought we were talking about something else.:eek:

Talking computers, I don't notice any significant drag once the programs are running. PS CC does take a little time to load, but I generally get instant results when sliding around.
 
J

J-see

Senior Member
Eyelight said:
Oh. Thought we were talking about something else.:eek:

Talking computers, I don't notice any significant drag once the programs are running. PS CC does take a little time to load, but I generally get instant results when sliding around.
Click to expand...

The RAW files you have in a folder when using the editors also has a lot to do with it since many start caching all those shots, or temp previews of them.

I just loaded a shot in RT, processed, sharpened and converted; 0.5Gb but I have a working folder that only contains the shots I'm actually working at.
 
Top