Latest LR update includes a new upright tool. What do you guys think of it? Finding it a little quirky.
Jun 09, 2016 12:48 | #8176 Latest LR update includes a new upright tool. What do you guys think of it? Finding it a little quirky.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Jun 09, 2016 13:54 | #8177 I'll have to look for that. I usually start with "auto" but frequently have to make additional manual corrections. Canon 7d MkII, Canon 50D, Pentax 67, Canon 30D, Baker Custom 4x5, Canon EF 24-104mm f4, Canon EF 100mm f2.8 Macro, Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5, 70-300mm f/4-5.6 Di VC
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Jun 09, 2016 14:16 | #8178 tytlyf wrote in post #18034205 ![]() Latest LR update includes a new upright tool. What do you guys think of it? Finding it a little quirky. Sometimes it's spot on, but I wouldn't rely on it when it counts. For quick RE shoots, I'll use that and go with it if it's close, but for anything that needs to be 100% straight, I'm still doing it in PS.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
I only use LR for image selection, lens and white balance correction, and export/renaming only. Any other perspective/skew correction is much more accurate when manually done in PS.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Jun 09, 2016 15:42 | #8180 mltn wrote in post #18034292 ![]() Sometimes it's spot on, but I wouldn't rely on it when it counts. For quick RE shoots, I'll use that and go with it if it's close, but for anything that needs to be 100% straight, I'm still doing it in PS. Instead of stuff like that in LR which sort of, sometimes works, I would rather have the ability to place guides for the manual corrections. The reason I stopped using the LR corrections is that it can be very aggravating to do the fine adjusting. PS correction is very easy, but if I want to re-edit a corrected file, I have to re-straighten it after any change I make. If only you could save transformations in PS, then I could apply that to any updated versions. In LR, I do color correction and apply profile corrections, then load a stack of brackets in PS. I make a flattened copy of the layers, and do the final straightening to this layer. How do you guys do handle this? I stay in LR as long as possible but do not hesitate to go to PS when needed. When you do manual perspective control in LR, you get a grid on the screen that helps with alignment - at least I do. I don't remember if I told it to do that or not, but that function is available. Canon 7d MkII, Canon 50D, Pentax 67, Canon 30D, Baker Custom 4x5, Canon EF 24-104mm f4, Canon EF 100mm f2.8 Macro, Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5, 70-300mm f/4-5.6 Di VC
LOG IN TO REPLY |
navydoc Cream of the Crop ![]() More info | Jun 09, 2016 16:25 | #8181 Many of you have probably already seen this but for those that haven't, here's Julieanna Kost demonstrating how the new Guided Upright feature in Adobe Camera Raw works. Gene - My Photo Gallery ||
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Jun 10, 2016 12:44 | #8182 mltn wrote in post #18034292 ![]() Sometimes it's spot on, but I wouldn't rely on it when it counts. For quick RE shoots, I'll use that and go with it if it's close, but for anything that needs to be 100% straight, I'm still doing it in PS. Instead of stuff like that in LR which sort of, sometimes works, I would rather have the ability to place guides for the manual corrections. The reason I stopped using the LR corrections is that it can be very aggravating to do the fine adjusting. PS correction is very easy, but if I want to re-edit a corrected file, I have to re-straighten it after any change I make. If only you could save transformations in PS, then I could apply that to any updated versions. In LR, I do color correction and apply profile corrections, then load a stack of brackets in PS. I make a flattened copy of the layers, and do the final straightening to this layer. How do you guys do handle this? I personally only use PS if I need to take 2 images and mask in a window view. Everything else is done in LR. I haven't learned to do any upright corrections in PS yet either. Not sure if people know this little trick in LR about moving sliders, but if you hold the 'shift' key the movement adjustments on the slider is slowed down greatly for more precise movements.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Jun 10, 2016 19:23 | #8183 So I finally finished editing this place, and what a pad this was, probably only about 1000ft away from the santa monica pier. CC welcome.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Jun 10, 2016 19:33 | #8184 I need to work on nailing better views.. CC welcome.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Scott Spellman Member More info Post edited over 4 years ago by Scott Spellman. | For real estate or advertising photography, a sunny blue sky is simply a fundamental requirement. If you are not lucky enough to shoot on a sunny day, then you will have to replace the sky and boot saturation in PS to make it appear that you did. A blah view simply destroys the value of the location and positive impact of the photo.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Jun 12, 2016 03:27 | #8187 Scott Spellman wrote in post #18036706 ![]() For real estate or advertising photography, a sunny blue sky is simply a fundamental requirement. If you are not lucky enough to shoot on a sunny day, then you will have to replace the sky and boot saturation in PS to make it appear that you did. A blah view simply destroys the value of the location and positive impact of the photo. Okay, here i have 2 different shots from this shoot, the walls obviously still needs some work but currently I'm working on the views, the first picture is a tonemapped image of the actual outside and 2nd one is well.. replacement. It looks a unnatural to me, how can I make this better? CC welcome.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
I think you did a very good job with the sky replacement here. I think that a normal person would not feel it is unnatural at all. You and I notice a few tell tale editing signs at the horizon, but the vast majority would not.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
StudioAbe BAAAAAAN!!! ![]() More info | 2nd one is a very good attempt. I'd work on making the interior look the part by tweaking white balance (just a tad cooler) and working with tone sliders to make the white walls and ceiling appear crisper and brighter. For the majority, as Scott noted previously, it would be a very convincing shot.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Jun 13, 2016 13:48 | #8190 joooowan wrote in post #18036724 ![]() Okay, here i have 2 different shots from this shoot, the walls obviously still needs some work but currently I'm working on the views, the first picture is a tonemapped image of the actual outside and 2nd one is well.. replacement. It looks a unnatural to me, how can I make this better? Hosted photo: posted by joooowan in ./showthread.php?p=18036724&i=i213961626 forum: Architecture, Real-Estate & Buildings Hosted photo: posted by joooowan in ./showthread.php?p=18036724&i=i206453623 forum: Architecture, Real-Estate & Buildings Sky looks great in the second one. There's a halo in the window frame where you masked in the sky, which can be tough to deal with. Feathering the selection in those areas might help.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
![]() | x 1600 |
y 1600 |
Log in Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting! |
| ||
Latest registered member was a spammer, and banned as such! 847 guests, 292 members online Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018 |