Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Slightly OT Questions about PhotoShop

Expand Messages
  • Roger D. Williams
    I use DXO to develop my RAW files, and PhotoShop to prepare them for printing and to do the final resizing and sharpening, etc. I note that when I open RAW
    Message 1 of 9 , Dec 13, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      I use DXO to develop my RAW files, and PhotoShop to prepare them for
      printing
      and to do the final resizing and sharpening, etc.

      I note that when I open RAW files via Adobe Bridge, I can choose to develop
      the RAW files there (I DON'T choose to, because of the overwhelming
      superiority
      of DXO with camera/lens combinations for which it has modules).

      First question.

      Are the RAW developing functions that come with Bridge the same as those
      provided by ACR? I see references to camera-specific parameters, and hear
      that these can be prepared and shared among users, but I cannot find how to
      access them, and wonder if this is limited to ACR, i.e., that Bridge has
      only
      a limited subset of RAW development tools. Am I right?

      Second question.

      I am INCREDIBLY frustrated by the fact that Bridge insists on opening the
      TIFF
      and JPEG files that I have prepared using DXO AS IF THEY WERE RAW. Not only
      that, but they reflect only some of the changes I have carefully made in
      DXO.
      For instance, cropping and perspective changes are ignored, and the
      brightness
      and contrast settings are ruined. This has destroyed my workflow!!

      DXO claim that their RAW development has now been integrated with that of
      ACR
      and Light Room, but the integration is buggy--to say the least--with the
      RAW
      capabilities of Bridge.

      So the question is "How can I prevent Bridge from messing with TIFF and
      JPEG
      files AS IF THEY WERE RAW?"

      Argh!

      Roger W.


      --
      Business: www.adex-japan.com
      Pleasure: www.usefilm.com/member/roger
    • Fernando Chaves
      Hi Roger, 1) Bridge doesn t develop anything, it just calls ACR, 2) Check ACR preferences and disable jpg and tiff support. Best regards, Fernando ... De :
      Message 2 of 9 , Dec 13, 2010
      • 0 Attachment
        Hi Roger,
        1) Bridge doesn't develop anything, it just calls ACR,
        2) Check ACR preferences and disable jpg and tiff support.
        Best regards,
        Fernando

        -----Message d'origine-----
        De : PanoToolsNGoyahoogroups.com [mailto:PanoToolsNGoyahoogroups.com] De la
        part de Roger D. Williams
        Envoyé : 13 décembre 2010 21:20
        À : PanoToolsNGoyahoogroups.com
        Objet : [PanoToolsNG] Slightly OT Questions about PhotoShop
        ...
        First question.

        Are the RAW developing functions that come with Bridge the same as those
        provided by ACR? I see references to camera-specific parameters, and hear
        that these can be prepared and shared among users, but I cannot find how to
        access them, and wonder if this is limited to ACR, i.e., that Bridge has
        only
        a limited subset of RAW development tools. Am I right?

        Second question.

        So the question is "How can I prevent Bridge from messing with TIFF and
        JPEG
        files AS IF THEY WERE RAW?"

        Argh!

        Roger W.
      • Philipp B. Koch
        Hey Roger, I am not at a computer with Photoshop now, so I ll have to do it out of my memory (?!)... Plus, I am using the German version of the program, so
        Message 3 of 9 , Dec 14, 2010
        • 0 Attachment
          Hey Roger,

          I am not at a computer with Photoshop now, so I'll have to do it "out of my memory" (?!)... Plus, I am using the German version of the program, so the actual menu items will most likely be named a little differently than my translation.


          ----- Original Message -----
          From: roger@...
          To: PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com
          Date: 14.12.2010 03:20:19
          Subject: [PanoToolsNG] Slightly OT Questions about PhotoShop


          > Second question.
          >
          > (...) Bridge insists on opening the  TIFF
          > and JPEG files that I have prepared using DXO AS IF THEY WERE RAW.

          You did not say which Photoshop version you use. But if I remember correctly, starting with CS2, there's an option you can uncheck to stop this from happening:

          Edit » Preferences » File handling » Camera RAW preferences
          There you can uncheck "automatically open all supported JPEGs", and the same goes for TIFF files.

          This should do the trick :-)

          Best regards from snowy Berlin, Ph.
        • Roger D. Williams
          Thanks, Fernando! On Tue, 14 Dec 2010 12:22:54 +0900, Fernando Chaves ... Aha! So Bridge s RAW functions are actually ACR s? News to me. Thanks! ... That
          Message 4 of 9 , Dec 14, 2010
          • 0 Attachment
            Thanks, Fernando!

            On Tue, 14 Dec 2010 12:22:54 +0900, Fernando Chaves
            <fc@...> wrote:

            > Hi Roger,
            > 1) Bridge doesn't develop anything, it just calls ACR,

            Aha! So Bridge's RAW functions are actually ACR's? News to me. Thanks!

            > 2) Check ACR preferences and disable jpg and tiff support.

            That immediately solved ONE problem. JPEG and TIFF files are no
            longer opened as RAW files. Hurray!

            But does this stop PS/Bridge/ACR from appending XCM data to image
            files that it simply OPENs? You don't have to actually perform
            any operations on it. If DXO sees such a file it appends XCM data
            to the JPEGs and TIFFs it produces.

            Thanks again!

            Roger W.

            --
            Business: www.adex-japan.com
            Pleasure: www.usefilm.com/member/roger
          • Michel Thoby
            ... Hi Roger, Adobe Camera Raw (ACR) plug-in is a common resource of the Creative Suite (CS) that consequently shall be called e.g. by Bridge or Photoshop for
            Message 5 of 9 , Dec 14, 2010
            • 0 Attachment
              Le 14 déc. 2010 à 03:20, Roger D. Williams a écrit :

              > ...

              > I note that when I open RAW files via Adobe Bridge, I can choose to develop the RAW files there (I DON'T choose to, because of the overwhelming superiority of DXO with camera/lens combinations for which it has modules).

              > First question.
              >
              > Are the RAW developing functions that come with Bridge the same as those provided by ACR? I see references to camera-specific parameters, and hear that these can be prepared and shared among users, but I cannot find how to access them, and wonder if this is limited to ACR, i.e., that Bridge has only a limited subset of RAW development tools. Am I right?

              > ...
              Hi Roger,

              Adobe Camera Raw (ACR) plug-in is a common resource of the Creative Suite (CS) that consequently shall be called e.g. by Bridge or Photoshop for processing and correcting the RAW camera-saved image files. With ACR, you can build (and save for later appropriate re-use) personal sets for your own camera-lens combo specific parameters settings.
              The parametric settings sets that were build and saved are then automatically stored by ACR as text files with .xmp file extension in an adequate folder that depends on the computer OS.

              Reading your message introduction and especially your DXO Vs Adobe judgment, it seems that you are possibly confusing three different (but rather similar or related) Adobe facilities/functionalities:
              - Camera support for RAW file processing basic functionality that is the raison d'être for ACR,
              - user made and saved personal predetermined sets of parameters with the ACR plug-in (read above),
              - Adobe Lens Profile file sets that are created with the recently introduced Adobe Lens Profile Creator (LPC) either by Adobe Systems Inc. or by the User himself.

              There are some parameters that are of course comparable when determined with either ACR or LPC but with the latter the user can download/use (or alternatively determine/use by himself) camera/lenses performances that aren't accessible with ACR. While they could be considered as complementary to each other, these two tools have however notable different purpose.
              LPC is obviously directly competing with DXO: predetermined parameters settings can be downloaded with the help a new (i.e. very recently introduced) supplementary tool called the Adobe Lens Profile Downloader http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/lensprofile_creator/
              But Adobe has adopted a different approach from DXO as the LPC users can contribute their own data with the same Adobe Lens Profile Downloader to upload lens profiles data sets for contribution to the user's community benefit.
              Unlike DXO Pro, LPC/LPD are free and useable by anyone in order to contributively build, upload or alternatively download dozens of sets of lens profiles but these data can be in-fine and ultimately used for image correction only by the CS5+ users. I still have CS4:-(

              BTW I have been lately studying in depth the means for accurate measurement of lens-camera characteristics that were developed and are implemented by DXO (Analyzer), Adobe (LPC), Imatest, SMIA (1.0 part 5), etc. and I was sad to discover they are producing wrong -or at the least misleading- values for some but important parameters. As a striking example, geometric distortion is by far the worst of all and this is illustrated by a comparative chart of wide angle lenses for DSLR:
              http://michel.thoby.free.fr/Fisheye_history_short/List_of_lenses_with_distortion.html
              This may in part explain the frustration felt by the user when he doesn't get the proper image correction that he has expected especially when he had paid for it...

              Regards,

              Michel

              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • Roger D. Williams
              Yes, that did it, Philipp. Thanks! Roger On Tue, 14 Dec 2010 17:29:21 +0900, Philipp B. Koch ... -- Business: www.adex-japan.com Pleasure:
              Message 6 of 9 , Dec 14, 2010
              • 0 Attachment
                Yes, that did it, Philipp. Thanks!

                Roger

                On Tue, 14 Dec 2010 17:29:21 +0900, Philipp B. Koch <pk@...>
                wrote:

                > Hey Roger,
                >
                > I am not at a computer with Photoshop now, so I'll have to do it "out of
                > my memory" (?!)... Plus, I am using the German version of the program,
                > so the actual menu items will most likely be named a little differently
                > than my translation.
                >
                >
                > ----- Original Message -----
                > From: roger@...
                > To: PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com
                > Date: 14.12.2010 03:20:19
                > Subject: [PanoToolsNG] Slightly OT Questions about PhotoShop
                >
                >
                >> Second question.
                >>
                >> (...) Bridge insists on opening the TIFF
                >> and JPEG files that I have prepared using DXO AS IF THEY WERE RAW.
                >
                > You did not say which Photoshop version you use. But if I remember
                > correctly, starting with CS2, there's an option you can uncheck to stop
                > this from happening:
                >
                > Edit » Preferences » File handling » Camera RAW preferences
                > There you can uncheck "automatically open all supported JPEGs", and the
                > same goes for TIFF files.
                >
                > This should do the trick :-)
                >
                > Best regards from snowy Berlin, Ph.
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                > ------------------------------------
                >


                --
                Business: www.adex-japan.com
                Pleasure: www.usefilm.com/member/roger
              • Roger D. Williams
                Thank you, Michel, for this very helpful post. On Tue, 14 Dec 2010 20:06:27 +0900, Michel Thoby ... Yes, I see the relationship
                Message 7 of 9 , Dec 14, 2010
                • 0 Attachment
                  Thank you, Michel, for this very helpful post.

                  On Tue, 14 Dec 2010 20:06:27 +0900, Michel Thoby <thobymichel@...>
                  wrote:

                  >
                  > Le 14 déc. 2010 à 03:20, Roger D. Williams a écrit :
                  >
                  >> ...
                  >
                  >> I note that when I open RAW files via Adobe Bridge, I can choose to
                  >> develop the RAW files there (I DON'T choose to, because of the
                  >> overwhelming superiority of DXO with camera/lens combinations for which
                  >> it has modules).
                  >
                  >> First question.
                  >>
                  >> Are the RAW developing functions that come with Bridge the same as
                  >> those provided by ACR? I see references to camera-specific parameters,
                  >> and hear that these can be prepared and shared among users, but I
                  >> cannot find how to access them, and wonder if this is limited to ACR,
                  >> i.e., that Bridge has only a limited subset of RAW development tools.
                  >> Am I right?
                  >
                  >> ...
                  > Hi Roger,
                  >
                  > Adobe Camera Raw (ACR) plug-in is a common resource of the Creative
                  > Suite (CS) that consequently shall be called e.g. by Bridge or Photoshop
                  > for processing and correcting the RAW camera-saved image files. With
                  > ACR, you can build (and save for later appropriate re-use) personal sets
                  > for your own camera-lens combo specific parameters settings.
                  > The parametric settings sets that were build and saved are then
                  > automatically stored by ACR as text files with .xmp file extension in an
                  > adequate folder that depends on the computer OS.
                  >
                  > Reading your message introduction and especially your DXO Vs Adobe
                  > judgment, it seems that you are possibly confusing three different (but
                  > rather similar or related) Adobe facilities/functionalities:
                  > - Camera support for RAW file processing basic functionality that is the
                  > raison d'être for ACR,
                  > - user made and saved personal predetermined sets of parameters with the
                  > ACR plug-in (read above),
                  > - Adobe Lens Profile file sets that are created with the recently
                  > introduced Adobe Lens Profile Creator (LPC) either by Adobe Systems Inc.
                  > or by the User himself.

                  Yes, I see the relationship between these functions more clearly now. My
                  main problem with Bridge opening up already-developed JPEG and TIFF files
                  as if they were RAW has now been solved thanks to the list members who
                  pointed me to where this default setting can be over-ridden.

                  > There are some parameters that are of course comparable when determined
                  > with either ACR or LPC but with the latter the user can download/use (or
                  > alternatively determine/use by himself) camera/lenses performances that
                  > aren't accessible with ACR. While they could be considered as
                  > complementary to each other, these two tools have however notable
                  > different purpose.
                  > LPC is obviously directly competing with DXO: predetermined parameters
                  > settings can be downloaded with the help a new (i.e. very recently
                  > introduced) supplementary tool called the Adobe Lens Profile Downloader
                  > http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/lensprofile_creator/

                  I will download this and start playing with it. DXO were pretty dismissive
                  about this, but then I suppose they would be, as it directly undermines
                  their main raison d'etre!

                  > But Adobe has adopted a different approach from DXO as the LPC users can
                  > contribute their own data with the same Adobe Lens Profile Downloader to
                  > upload lens profiles data sets for contribution to the user's community
                  > benefit.
                  > Unlike DXO Pro, LPC/LPD are free and useable by anyone in order to
                  > contributively build, upload or alternatively download dozens of sets of
                  > lens profiles but these data can be in-fine and ultimately used for
                  > image correction only by the CS5+ users. I still have CS4:-(

                  I do have CS5. I am perfectly happy with DX0, and would use it exclusively
                  IF it provided the camera/lens modules I need. Unfortunately, DX0 is very
                  restricted when it comes to fisheye lenses. One problem may be that they
                  regard fisheye images as SEVERELY DISTORTED and attempt--in the default
                  mode--to "correct" this distortion to true rectilinear projections. The
                  only fisheye I own that is supported by DXO is the Nikon 10.5mm, and I had
                  to set up my own defaults to get rid of this silly behavior. Despite
                  requests at irregular intervals over the last 3 or 4 years, they still
                  do not support the Sigma 8mm fisheye! (And although they do support the
                  Tokina/Pentax 10-17mm zoom fisheye for numerous camera bodies, they still
                  don't provide it for my Pentax KX!)

                  This makes me interested in the Adobe alternative, where hopefully I could
                  make my own module for my mainstay 8mm Sigma/D300 combination. I would
                  still miss the flexibility and sophistication of the DXO RAW developer...

                  > BTW I have been lately studying in depth the means for accurate
                  > measurement of lens-camera characteristics that were developed and are
                  > implemented by DXO (Analyzer), Adobe (LPC), Imatest, SMIA (1.0 part 5),
                  > etc. and I was sad to discover they are producing wrong -or at the
                  > least misleading- values for some but important parameters. As a
                  > striking example, geometric distortion is by far the worst of all and
                  > this is illustrated by a comparative chart of wide angle lenses for DSLR:
                  > http://michel.thoby.free.fr/Fisheye_history_short/List_of_lenses_with_distortion.html
                  > This may in part explain the frustration felt by the user when he
                  > doesn't get the proper image correction that he has expected especially
                  > when he had paid for it...

                  I am perfectly satisfied with DXO corrections applied to my main WA lenses,
                  the Tamron 11-17mm and the Pentax 12-24. The barrel and pin-cushion
                  distortions of both lenses seem, by eye at least, to be perfectly
                  compensated. The lens-specific correction for image softness (which I
                  suppose is some fancy application of sharpening) also seems to work very
                  well. The difference it makes with the Tamron is most welcome, as this
                  is not the world's sharpest lens in the corners.

                  Incidentally, DXO is quite outstandingly superior in handling the wider
                  dynamic range images of the Fujifilm S5 Pro.

                  Thanks again, Michel.

                  Roger W.

                  --
                  Business: www.adex-japan.com
                  Pleasure: www.usefilm.com/member/roger
                • Roger Howard
                  ... Do you mean XMP metadata? No Adobe products will modify your files (such as by inserting metadata) simply by opening the files; you must save them. But
                  Message 8 of 9 , Dec 15, 2010
                  • 0 Attachment
                    On Dec 14, 2010, at 2:04 AM, Roger D. Williams wrote:

                    > Thanks, Fernando!
                    >
                    > On Tue, 14 Dec 2010 12:22:54 +0900, Fernando Chaves
                    > <fc@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > > Hi Roger,
                    > > 1) Bridge doesn't develop anything, it just calls ACR,
                    >
                    > Aha! So Bridge's RAW functions are actually ACR's? News to me. Thanks!
                    >
                    > > 2) Check ACR preferences and disable jpg and tiff support.
                    >
                    > That immediately solved ONE problem. JPEG and TIFF files are no
                    > longer opened as RAW files. Hurray!
                    >
                    > But does this stop PS/Bridge/ACR from appending XCM data to image
                    > files that it simply OPENs? You don't have to actually perform
                    > any operations on it. If DXO sees such a file it appends XCM data
                    > to the JPEGs and TIFFs it produces.
                    >

                    Do you mean XMP metadata?

                    No Adobe products will modify your files (such as by inserting metadata) simply by opening the files; you must save them. But yes, opening an image (of any type) and then saving it to a format that supports XMP (such as TIF, JPG, PSD, PSB) from an Adobe product will almost always result in XMP being inserted into the file - generally Adobe products will create an XMP packet that mirrors whatever metadata is already in the file in other formats (such as EXIF). The major exception is when using Save For Web, which allows the user to explicitly not save metadata in the file.

                    The only time I can see this is a problem is when creating very small images (say, under 200KB); in that case, the XMP overhead will be enough to bloat the file by a not-insignificant size - sometimes as much as 50KB just in the XMP packet! Obviously, 50KB of metadata in a thumbnail is a problem; 50KB in a 10MB source file is not.

                    Hope this helps,

                    Roger

                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  • Roger D. Williams
                    On Thu, 16 Dec 2010 07:25:40 +0900, Roger Howard ... Er, yes. I did. Sorry for the confusion. ... I m sure you are right, but this
                    Message 9 of 9 , Dec 15, 2010
                    • 0 Attachment
                      On Thu, 16 Dec 2010 07:25:40 +0900, Roger Howard <rogerhoward@...>
                      wrote:

                      >
                      > On Dec 14, 2010, at 2:04 AM, Roger D. Williams wrote:
                      >
                      >> Thanks, Fernando!
                      >>
                      >> On Tue, 14 Dec 2010 12:22:54 +0900, Fernando Chaves
                      >> <fc@...> wrote:
                      >>
                      >> > Hi Roger,
                      >> > 1) Bridge doesn't develop anything, it just calls ACR,
                      >>
                      >> Aha! So Bridge's RAW functions are actually ACR's? News to me. Thanks!
                      >>
                      >> > 2) Check ACR preferences and disable jpg and tiff support.
                      >>
                      >> That immediately solved ONE problem. JPEG and TIFF files are no
                      >> longer opened as RAW files. Hurray!
                      >>
                      >> But does this stop PS/Bridge/ACR from appending XCM data to image
                      >> files that it simply OPENs? You don't have to actually perform
                      >> any operations on it. If DXO sees such a file it appends XCM data
                      >> to the JPEGs and TIFFs it produces.
                      >>
                      >
                      > Do you mean XMP metadata?

                      Er, yes. I did. Sorry for the confusion.

                      > No Adobe products will modify your files (such as by inserting metadata)
                      > simply by opening the files; you must save them. But yes, opening an
                      > image (of any type) and then saving it to a format that supports XMP
                      > (such as TIF, JPG, PSD, PSB) from an Adobe product will almost always
                      > result in XMP being inserted into the file - generally Adobe products
                      > will create an XMP packet that mirrors whatever metadata is already in
                      > the file in other formats (such as EXIF). The major exception is when
                      > using Save For Web, which allows the user to explicitly not save
                      > metadata in the file.

                      I'm sure you are right, but this directly contradicts a mail I got from
                      DX0 saying that you only have to OPEN a file for Adobe to add the XMP
                      packet. It looked odd to me when I read it... However it gets there, the
                      default mode of DXO now writes that XMP packet--with any modifications
                      it makes--back to the file it exports, whether JPEG or TIFF. So Adobe
                      does it, and DXO perpetuates it.

                      My problem was that inconsistencies between Adobe and DXO meant that
                      my developed TIFFs were treated as RAW files and the changes made in
                      DXO were not correctly interpreted. This was a killer problem! The
                      contrast and brightness changes were all wrong, and perspective
                      corrections ignored. Argh!!

                      What I have done in self defence is to over-ride the DXO default
                      behaviour so that XMP data is NOT added, and over-ride the Adobe
                      reading of XMP data in JPEGs and TIFFs. This enables me to develop
                      RAW images in DXO and do the final resizing, de-noising and sharpening
                      in PS. Phew!

                      Now all I am left with is the unwanted, unused "overhead" of XMP in any
                      files I've saved using PS. I would "save for web" if it didn't take
                      other liberties I don't want taken with my images!

                      > The only time I can see this is a problem is when creating very small
                      > images (say, under 200KB); in that case, the XMP overhead will be enough
                      > to bloat the file by a not-insignificant size - sometimes as much as
                      > 50KB just in the XMP packet! Obviously, 50KB of metadata in a thumbnail
                      > is a problem; 50KB in a 10MB source file is not.
                      >
                      > Hope this helps,

                      It certainly did. But you can now see why it was a problem in my
                      particular case. What surprised me most was that many users of DXO had
                      specifically requested this behaviour, which is now advertised by DXO
                      as "integrating DXO with ACR/Lightroom." Integrating MY FOOT!
                      Disintegrating is more like it.

                      Roger W.

                      --
                      Business: www.adex-japan.com
                      Pleasure: www.usefilm.com/member/roger
                      Panoramas: photosynth.net (Rogerama)
                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.