# Make browns more golden



## Phomich (May 24, 2017)

Hi all
I am new to Lightroom, coming from C1 (captureone).

I am rebuilding my presets and I'm looking for a way to make browns (esp. brown eyes and hair) more golden.

Can anyone tell me how please?
Thanks
P


----------



## clee01l (May 24, 2017)

Just guessing.  In the HSL panel, use the target adjustment tool to choose a "Brown" area and click to drag upward to increase the luminance of the red/orange/yellow values.


----------



## Phomich (May 25, 2017)

Thanks! That sounds good. I'll give it a go.
Appreciate your help for a newbie!
P


----------



## Hoggy (May 25, 2017)

I'd also try out the hues in the HSL panel.

For local adjustments, since LR lacks an HSL/color-editor for them (disgruntingly), you could try out moving the temp slider to the right - towards the yellows.  When you find something in the local adjustment area that works reliably to your tastes, be sure to save it as a preset by clicking to the right of the word "Effect:" (where it should be displaying "Custom") - and in the pop-up menu, choose 'Save current settings as new preset'.


...  And welcome to LR!  One thing from C1 that you're sure not likely to miss: the abysmal catalog performance.


----------



## oleleclos (May 25, 2017)

I’d also use the HSL panel, but differently. I’d shift the orange and yellow Hue sliders to the LEFT, towards red, to the extent that suits your image:












and then make a new Preset:









But of course it depends on what you mean by "brown". If it's deep brown, like this chocolate icing, you're probably best off using local adjustment only, i.e. a brush using temperature and tint, so as not to affect lighter tones:











BTW, I'm curious; what made you move from C1 to Lr? I know people who have done the opposite for various reasons. I suspect your question in fact reveals one of the reasons they give, i.e. that C1 has more sophisticated hue adjustments and allows all adjustments to be used with brushes and grads.


----------



## Phomich (May 25, 2017)

Thanks to you all for your feedback and suggestions. I will try each of them.

I'm moving from C1 solely due to the catalog, it's too slow. I have 150k photos and it takes minutes to open. Also it doesn't let you view all images in multiple folders. Doesn't let you select multiple folders, albums, or projects to delete. Takes minutes to delete an empty album. Also support is not as readily accessible as Lightroom.

But the image quality is so god damn beautiful. It makes me want to cry. 

So I am trying to get the same results in Lightroom. The problem is the opposite to C1 in that there is so much information, presets, tutorials etc. it's hard to know where to start. But *here* seems to have been a good choice 

Originally I was in Aperture for many years, which explains the size of my catalog!

Thanks for helping!
P


----------



## oleleclos (May 25, 2017)

Thanks Phomich, that’s similar to what I have heard othes say. C1 is a super editor but a crap DRM. The problem, apparently, is that it is designed for a session based workflow, i.e. working with relatively few pictures at a time, and their catalogue solution is a bolt-on that doesn't work very well.

FWIW, I attach a Lr preset that I made which simulates the C1 standard processing quite closely (at least in my setup, working with DNG files from a D800, using the Adobe Standard calibration profile). You can use it as a place to start for your own presets if you like.

I made this preset when I decided to look into what all the hullabaloo about C1's picture quality was about, so I downloaded the C1 trial version. I concluded that there's no magic involved. It's just Lr applying slightly less processing by default than C1, and to be frank, although I then replicated C1's "juicier" look, I quickly tired of it.

But of course, you don't HAVE to use that juicy look. At least one of C1's own seminars advocates starting editing from a completely flat, unprocessed RAW file. So their standard "look" is just for show, and apparently it's working


----------



## Hoggy (May 25, 2017)

OY!  150,000!  I would hate to see that.  My trials of C1 since ~v7/8 consistently choke on a measly ~3000 image catalog.  For instance, I would create two smart albums (in LR-speak)..  And even though I would change the sort order to 'date' in one, and let it finish it's reorganizing on that - then switch to the other, set it to 'date', and let it do its thing on _that_ album (thinking that it might just need time to do an initial ordering) -- then switch back to the other, that I JUST came from, only to have it do its 'thing' yet again. ...  Ad nauseum.  It remembers which sort order was chosen (IIRC), but it seems to always want to do a full reordering on each change.

The other thing I don't care for is that it seems to make images look posterized pretty dam quickly, in my [albeit, limited] experience..  Especially as when using the 2 'hdr' sliders.  Not only that, but in my view, they just don't have as much range or intelligence as the *near*-equivalent LR highlights and shadows sliders - although I still wish LR had much more, especially on the negative highlight slider (and even _more_ so when using the built-in LR HDR-merging option - they're both woefully inadequate in those situations IMO)).  I also haven't been quite able to wrap my head around having both an exposure and a brightness slider..  I think LR had that back in LR3, but I came into learning LR at LR v4, so it was a bit before my time.   .....  Another show stopper is the way spot/object removing works -- just WAY behind LR IMNSHO.   And yet another for me is they keep thumbing their nose at [non-native] DNG and don't seem to want them to ever fully work properly (at least that's _my_ take on that situation).

I do see see the DAM facilities slowly getting better upon each iteration, but that catalog performance needs some VERY serious looking into - like, yesterday!  I understand they come from a sessions orientation, so they're playing some rather heavy catch-up here.  I also gather that they're not as big a company as Adobe, so I can understand why much of my Pentax gear is not supported in lens corrections.

Don't get me wrong..  I _do_ hope they get better with these things.  IMO, there's some sorely needed competition to LR.  I'd also hope it finally gets Adobe into gear on adding more useful things like the color-editor of C1 (but with greater ranges), and allowing all the adjustments in local adjustments, and including the nice variety of clarity options that C1 has (especially that "Structure" bit is very nice), and being able to create masks from color selections, luma curves, high-mid-shadow color balancing....  And most importantly, *away from all this stupid mobile *.  
I also wouldn't mind that levels tool.  As some of the other things above, it can be accomplished in other ways in LR -- but it's still just kinda neat to play with, regardless. 


Sorry..  I guess I went on a wee bit of a rant there...


----------



## oleleclos (May 25, 2017)

Thanks for the rant Hoggy; useful background information. I love Lr and don't want to change, but sadly feel I need a cat flap for the day Adobe dumps us stand-alone users.


----------



## PhilBurton (May 25, 2017)

oleleclos said:


> Thanks for the rant Hoggy; useful background information. I love Lr and don't want to change, but sadly feel I need a cat flap for the day Adobe dumps us stand-alone users.


I was talking a few days ago to someone, who I think has some Adobe experience in his background, and he said something to the effect that, "You may not have noticed, but Adobe has changed from a standalone tools company to a web- and mobile-based company."  IF he is right (and if I'm paraphrasing correctly from memory), then all our desired improvements may find a home only in that future cloud-based version of LR that I think they are working on.  So bye-bye desktop software, hello browser (and subscription pricing).  Pure surmise here.  

I am not trying to hijack this thread. Maybe we need a "rants about Adobe thread."  Who wants to start it?

Phil


----------



## oleleclos (May 25, 2017)

Thanks Phil. I'm getting that whiff of change as well. Dunno if it does any good to start a thread on it; I'm just trying to prepare for the eventuality


----------



## Jim Wilde (May 25, 2017)

PhilBurton said:


> Maybe we need a "rants about Adobe thread."  Who wants to start it?



No we don't, that's not what this forum is for. If you want to rant about Adobe, do it at one of the Adobe forums.


----------

