![]() ![]() That’s the process I use, although I’m a Capture One user rather than a LR user. Sorry, but this definition is really confusing! Let me try if I can find a better explanation. Why would you ever cull on the basis of a histogram? The RAW histogram only shows if you have editing leeway - and even that may be misleading because there are many good and excellent photos where areas are beyond salvation and would by your logic been culled… Now, I'm getting confused whether to use RAW-histogram to cull or not ! Lr shows histogram based on embedded-jpeg.įalse, it shows the histogram that your current development would have if the current default export settings were used to export the image. It can also show jpeg histogram (from embedded-jpeg). So how do you handle this when lightroom histogram is trying to fool ? If I do not have to do further edits, it is fine but it is not going to be the case. When I see clipping on this histogram where on the raw histogram they are absent, and I need those areas unclipped, I apply global and local edits to bring those areas back. ![]() What you see in Lightroom is the histogram of the converted image, not of JPEG changing conversion parameters will change the histogram. Now, what I see on lightroom histogram is jpeg histogram. FRV shows RAW histogram, very goood! Now, after selecting the photo (often based on focus and composition rather histogram), I load the photo into lightroom (for already loaded, I just reload the xmp or relaunch lightroom). Now, I'm getting confused whether to use RAW-histogram to cull or not !ġ. Lr shows histogram based on embedded-jpeg. ![]() LR shows the correct histogram for the exported image under the export constraints (bit depth, color space, white balance, etc.), thus the real life result you'd get when not editing further. It's FRV that shows the wrong histogram - it's the one that shows the editing potential. ![]() I have a huge catalogue in lightroom that I wish to reduce by using FRV.ġ. Let's see if it fits in my work-flow or not. I'm currently using trial version of FRV. Thank you all for sharing your experiences. I still haven't settled on a final workflow. I wish I could merge the two into one package. In a nutshell, FastRawViewer is better at quickly identifying problem images - missed focus, excessive noise, and blown highlights - and Photo Mechanic is better at dealing with metadata. I have been tinkering with FastRawViewer and Photo Mechanic Plus a lot recently as I rethink my workflow after having used LR almost exclusively for years. I understand it is a personal method but would be helpful to know if you benefitted from this software and how easily you integrated in your lightroom work-flow. I really struggle with lightroom to cull RAW images (1:1 takes a lot of time and disk space), and often I lose interest in looking at the pictures. I would like to know your opinion on this work-flow. I downloaded the trial version and so far look okay. I could not find enough material on youtube. I recently came to know (from dpreview forum) about fastrawviewer for culling RAW images and to emulate the RAW-editor's outcome. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |