# LR5 Graduated Filter



## Slug (Feb 6, 2014)

A number of "newbie" questions in relation to the intricacies of Graduated Filter ..

1/ I was under the impression that any slider changes effected the image inside the two parallel lines (albeit as a graduated effect), and I though I had read somewhere that the 'minimum/maximum' effect of slider changes was controlled by where the 'click & drag' commenced.

ie when working on a skyline of a landscape shot, (A)if I clicked right at the top of the image & dragged the GF to the horizon, the maximum effect would be at the top, and diminishing to the horizon. Conversely, (B) if I clicked at the horizon and dragged up to the top of the image, the maximum effect would be at the horizon, diminishing through the sky to the top of the image.

In case (A) above I get the expected result. In case (B) however, LR appears to commence the maximum effect at the very bottom of the image (which I would have thought was outside the scope of the GF) and diminishes it right through to the top (ie it now appears to be working in 3 separate grid boxes rather than2??)

2/. In LR5 there are about a dozen useable sliders in the GF tool. What then is the effect of the 'Effect' dropdown, which seems to duplicate the sliders. (In my LR5, the Effect seems to default to 'Iris Enhance'???  - however if I change it to exposure, contrast, etc  it automatically changes to 'Custom' once I start to use a slider??)

Thanks in advance :razz:


----------



## Tony Jay (Feb 6, 2014)

Hi Slug.

Your observations on the dynamics of the graduated filter are spot-on.
The way to get the 'B' scenario to sort of work is to still start at the top and go down to the horizon but then invert the effect that you want.
Unfortunately the maximum effect will still be toward the top.

The effect dropdown is a somewhat redundant, IMHO anyway, option.
Just use the sliders as appropriate.

Tony Jay


----------



## Jim Wilde (Feb 6, 2014)

Slug said:


> In case (B) however, LR appears to commence the maximum effect at the very bottom of the image (which I would have thought was outside the scope of the GF) and diminishes it right through to the top (ie it now appears to be working in 3 separate grid boxes rather than2??)



The GF always works in the direction that you drag it. Everything *behind *the point where you started gets the full 100% of the effect. From the first line to the centre line (where the pin is) the effect reduces gradually from 100% to 50%, and from the centre line to third line the effect reduces from 50% to 0%. So when you clicked at the horizon and dragged upwards, then the full 100% quite correctly is applied to everything behind that click-point, i.e. the bottom of the image up to the horizon. 

The point about "three separate grid boxes" is correct. You should understand that you don't have to start to drag from the edge of the image, you can start anywhere and then you get the 3 zones (100%, 100% down to 50%, 50% down to zero).


----------



## Slug (Feb 6, 2014)

Thanks Tony.

That's a shame - seems to me that an otherwise very useful tool loses some of it's 'potential' (I'd nearly call it as a 'bug').

Surely it doesn't act like that by design? If the effect of the filter is not going to remain within the constraints of the grid (or parallel lines), why show them to start with ??


----------



## Tony Jay (Feb 6, 2014)

I don't think this is a bug.
I confess that I have never wanted to used the graduated filter in the way that you describe and I have never heard of anyone else prior to you expressing a desire to do so.
However, I certainly don't have any sort of monopoly of thought on this issue and so maybe this question should be thrown open to the forum for feedback about whether your vision on how this tool should behave should be given traction or not.

Tony Jay


----------



## Slug (Feb 6, 2014)

Thanks Jim - that makes it a bit clearer. I guess I just need re-evaluate my understanding of what it's doing!!


----------



## Jim Wilde (Feb 6, 2014)

If you do actually want to start a gradient filter in the centre of an image, without having the effect applied *behind *your click-point, it can be done with a bit of a kludge by using a second filter to reverse the 100% effect on the part of the image you don't want to adjust. Hope that makes sense!


----------



## philmar (Feb 6, 2014)

Not knowing the intricacies of the GF tool I find using it rather cumbersome and I usually end up using the local adjustment tool. Are there any good online videos on  how to use the GF tool to it's fullest potential?


----------



## ernie (Feb 7, 2014)

Since we're talking about the GF tool, is there any way to change the proportions of the lines? Like if I wanted to have a slow, long gradient to zero from the midpoint, or a long area of 100% but a short area of fade to zero.


----------



## Jim Wilde (Feb 7, 2014)

Do you mean you'd like the centre line to not be mathematically centered between the two outer lines? If so, no I don't think so. You can adjust the gap between the outer lines to be as small or as large as you like, but the centre line will always be in the exact middle.


----------



## ernie (Feb 8, 2014)

OK thanks. Yeah, having it not centered was what I meant. But I just played with it and moving the outer lines in and out will help a lot.


----------

