# Don't want Lightroom to change Settings



## jcabbott (Nov 24, 2007)

I import DNG files into Lightroom that I have adjusted and saved the way I want using Bridge.  When I bring the DNG files in to Lightroom, it applies development settings and changes the colors.  I have not been able to figure out how to stop Lightroom from applying these settings.  Can anyone help me?


----------



## DonRicklin (Nov 24, 2007)

Well the first thing to check is that 'Auto Tone' is not set Preferences. Under the Preset tab, first item.

Don


----------



## jcabbott (Nov 24, 2007)

Thanks Don.  Just checked and I do not have the "Apply Auto Tones Adjustments" box checked under the presets.


----------



## Victoria Bampton (Nov 25, 2007)

Also check in the Import dialog, to make sure you're not applying a preset on import.


----------



## jcabbott (Nov 25, 2007)

That is possible, but is there no way to reset things to what the original file looks like once it is imported in LightRoom?


----------



## DonRicklin (Nov 25, 2007)

Unfortunately Reset zeros LR and ACR adjustments. However, if you have not since import, exported(written) metadata to XMP, then a read Metadata, from the File or Sidecar, should show the ACR (what you call Bridge) adjustments.

Library Menu/Metadata/Read Metadata from File

Don


----------



## jcabbott (Nov 25, 2007)

I'm talking about DNG files without xmp sidecar files though.  That is why it is so frustrating.  I get the image like I want it in Bridge, make a DNG in Bridge and then import it in Lightroom for cataloging purposes only.  All I want it is for Lightroom to look at the DNG file, the same way Bridge, Photoshop or any other program that reads that format would look at it.


----------



## Kiwigeoff (Nov 25, 2007)

jcabbott said:


> I'm talking about DNG files without xmp sidecar files though.  That is why it is so frustrating.  I get the image like I want it in Bridge, make a DNG in Bridge and then import it in Lightroom for cataloging purposes only.  All I want it is for Lightroom to look at the DNG file, the same way Bridge, Photoshop or any other program that reads that format would look at it.


DNG has the 'sidecar" inside. Now what Don is meaning about the import preset is that LR preset none is not no adjustments but the LR basic preset. Zeroed will import files with no adjustment.
Have you tried zeroed?


----------



## Victoria Bampton (Nov 25, 2007)

Kiwigeoff;363' said:
			
		

> DNG has the 'sidecar" inside. Now what Don is meaning about the import preset is that LR preset none is not no adjustments but the LR basic preset. Zeroed will import files with no adjustment.
> Have you tried zeroed?



Hang on a second.  When I import with the import dialog develop preset set to None




it imports with any existing settings, which is surely what jcabbott is looking for.  None doesn't use the LR basic preset for me.  Zero'd changes all of my settings to zero, which is NOT what I'd be looking for.
Is this different for DNG then?


----------



## cdifoto (Nov 25, 2007)

jcabbott said:


> I import DNG files into Lightroom that I have adjusted and saved the way I want using Bridge.  When I bring the DNG files in to Lightroom, it applies development settings and changes the colors.  I have not been able to figure out how to stop Lightroom from applying these settings.  Can anyone help me?



I think I know what you're talking about, but I don't know the solution either.  When I import my files and only look at the small thumbs, I usually like what I see for a quick instant, but then Lightroom does something to the files that changes their appearance and I don't like it.  It isn't my calibration settings, I know for a fact, because it would do it before I ever started using calibration.  Zeroing isn't the solution.


----------



## Victoria Bampton (Nov 25, 2007)

Don, I think jcabbott's referring to files that have already been adjusted in ACR in Bridge, and wants to keep those adjustments.

The issue you're talking about is seeing the embedded camera jpeg preview for a split second, and then LR reads the raw data and has to apply settings to it.  The camera manufacturers aren't kind enough to share their settings, so LR has to make up it's own previews.  Workarounds here.


----------



## cdifoto (Nov 25, 2007)

I thought maybe the changes he was seeing were based on the same process...



Thanks for the link, but it's not very helpful.  How can I adjust my LR settings to give me my JPEG preview style processing, when I can't see my JPEG preview for more than a split second?



That's a rhetorical question, by the way, since I'm already getting images I'm happy with.  It'd just be nice if the starting images were a bit nicer.  Since Adobe's the software engineer, I think it should be up to them to analyze the images Canon's (and other makers') processing produces and give us presets to match.  A lot of work, sure, but a lot of users want it and they're the ones getting the big money from selling the software.


----------



## Victoria Bampton (Nov 25, 2007)

cdifoto said:


> How can I adjust my LR settings to give me my JPEG preview style processing, when I can't see my JPEG preview for more than a split second?



You shoot some images Raw+Jpeg, so that you can see the in-camera Jpeg for longer than a split second.... and then try to adjust the raw file to match.  You'll find the same with ALL raw processing software, other than the manufacturer's own - each raw software gives it's own rendition of the scene.


----------



## Denis de Gannes (Nov 25, 2007)

There has been lobbying to have camera manufacturers adopt a standard raw format (DNG) or some other for  several years with very little success. The problem is that the firmware/software for processing the raw data to a viewable image is still rapidly improving. 

In this senario the camera manufacturers view their firmware/software as a key marketing ingredient in the sale of their equipment and are not about to share their secrets. 
You can search different LR forums to see if anyone has come up with a preset you are looking for or start the process your self. Lightroom-news.com is a good place to start. 

You never know Canon may update the firmware for your camera model and you may have to redo the process. That is the challenge in raw processing, one thing for sure is LR has provided a full range of tools neccessary for you to achieve the results you would be happy with or to be as creative as you wish. The most critical step in this process is to run a calibration of your camera using a color chart (e.g. greytag Macbeth) and fors script in PS or similar.    

Its like telling the wife to cook the baked beas just like her grandma did. Trouble is grandma never wrote down the recipe.


----------



## jcabbott (Nov 25, 2007)

cdifoto is correct about what it is happening.  I feel like there are a lot of peripheral topics being addressed here.  I don't understand why I can look at DNG file in Bridge (where it was originally created) and have it look like I want, but then when I import in Lightroom (without development settings), it changes.  The thumbnail looks great, but then the full size preview is usually way over exposed.  Doesn't there have to be a setting somewhere to say, don't do anything to the images?  I don't feel like this is anything particularly difficult or unexpected that I am asking for.


----------



## cdifoto (Nov 25, 2007)

jcabbott said:


> cdifoto is correct about what it is happening.  I feel like there are a lot of peripheral topics being addressed here.  I don't understand why I can look at DNG file in Bridge (where it was originally created) and have it look like I want, but then when I import in Lightroom (without development settings), it changes.  The thumbnail looks great, but then the full size preview is usually way over exposed.  Doesn't there have to be a setting somewhere to say, don't do anything to the images?  I don't feel like this is anything particularly difficult or unexpected that I am asking for.



I agree.  If LR can read the JPEG preview thumbnail properly for a split second, there doesn't seem to be any valid reason to my mind that LR cannot read the final thumb and preview/full size images the same way.  LR isn't unable to read the settings....it's _changing_ them at import.


----------



## cdifoto (Nov 25, 2007)

Denis de Gannes said:


> The most critical step in this process is to run a calibration of your camera using a color chart (e.g. greytag Macbeth) and fors script in PS or similar.



Already done. 



Denis de Gannes said:


> Its like telling the wife to cook the baked beas just like her grandma did. Trouble is grandma never wrote down the recipe.



Actually it's more like the wife tasting grandma's beans then adding more sugar, even when you said you didn't want more sugar.


----------



## Denis de Gannes (Nov 25, 2007)

cdifoto;366' said:
			
		

> I agree.  If LR can read the JPEG preview thumbnail properly for a split second, there doesn't seem to be any valid reason to my mind that LR cannot read the final thumb and preview/full size images the same way.  LR isn't unable to read the settings....it's _changing_ them at import.



The initial jpeg preview is what was created by the camera firmware and includes all the in camera settings you may have applied. When LR is creating its own preview it is only using the raw data. The only in camera settings that affect this rendetion are white balance, ISO and exposure any special settings you may have used saturation, contrast, sharpening or other special settings high key, low key, vivid, landscape, portrait etc are not applied. Only your camera software will read these special settings. LR does its rendition according to its default settings along with any other settings calibration or precepts to be applied on import. So there are lots of things that can contribute to the difference in the camera rendered jpeg and the LR rendition.


----------



## DonRicklin (Nov 25, 2007)

The only real remedy is lobbying the Camera Manufacturers to release their Proprietary Info used to produce the JPEGs.

Not likely to happen.

You can, however create your own preset that will, with care, closely mimic the in camera settings for most images.

There are some presets to start at Lightroom-Extras as well as other places mentioned in other threads, here.

Don


----------



## jcabbott (Nov 25, 2007)

I again think these comments are not relevant.  I'm don't shoot jpgs or CRW + jpgs with my camera, nor do I want to see what I originally shot with my camera.  I take my crw images into Bridge, adjust them they way I want them, then I create a DNG file in bridge.  I then import the DNG file to Lightroom and it changes the settings to what it thinks the image should look like.  I don't want that.  I want Lightroom to leave it alone.  If I reopen the DNG image in Bridge or Photoshop, they don't monkey with it, so why is Lightroom?  There has to be a way to turn off the autocorrections and have it simply read the settings that I have made in Bridge that are now embedded in the DNG file.


----------



## Victoria Bampton (Nov 25, 2007)

jcabbott (what's your name?), I agree, something's wrong somewhere.  LR should be able to read your changes that you've made in Bridge.  Can you post one of the DNG's somewhere that we can download?  Then we can see whether it's specific to the files themselves, or to your settings in LR somewhere.


----------



## Denis de Gannes (Nov 25, 2007)

Bridge is using ACR to apply the adjustments to the original raw file. What version of ACR? I believe compatability between ACR and LR began with v4.' when LR 1.' was introduced.


----------



## billg71 (Nov 27, 2007)

Victoria Bampton said:


> Hang on a second.  When I import with the import dialog develop preset set to None
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I just ran a quick test, opened a .nef file in ACR from Bridge, made adjustments and saved it as a .dng. Using the settings Victoria posted for import(Develop Settings: None), the DNG looks the same in LR and in Bridge. I did try using the General-Zeroed preset and it reset my file back to what the original .nef looked like.



Denis de Gannes said:


> Bridge is using ACR to apply the adjustments to the original raw file. What version of ACR? I believe compatability between ACR and LR began with v4.' when LR 1.' was introduced.



This could be your problem, if you're using the "None" develop setting and the imported DNG's are still getting a preset applied. You can download the latest version of ACR here, for Windows: http://www.adobe.com/support/downloads/product.jsp?product=1'6&platform=Windows
 or here, for Mac: http://www.adobe.com/support/downloads/product.jsp?product=1'6&platform=Macintosh

I'd suggest getting the DNG Converter/ACR update if your version of ACR is older than 4.' just for compatibility.

If this doesn't help, I'm at a loss.

P.S. posting your system and software versions in your signature can be a great help to those trying to help you. See this thread: http://www.lightroomqueen.com/community/showthread.php?t=29


----------



## Denis de Gannes (Nov 27, 2007)

This quote is taken from Martin Evenings update book on LR 1.1
" *Viewing Camera Raw Edits in Light Room *
If you want your Camera Raw edits to be visible in Lightroom then you also need to make sure the .xmp adjustments applied in Camera Raw are saved to the .xmp file space, to do this, launch Bridge, got to the Bridge CS3 menu and choose Camera Raw Preferences where you need to go to the Save Image Settings menu and select sidecar".xmp files". This will ensure that the Camera Raw Settings are always saved to the xmp space by default."


----------



## Kiwigeoff (Nov 27, 2007)

Yep, Victoria was right and I made an error!!!
None is the preset to use but make sure you have auto tone turned off as well.
Zeroed is all settings to zero,
Sorry for any confusion.........


----------



## jcabbott (Nov 24, 2007)

I import DNG files into Lightroom that I have adjusted and saved the way I want using Bridge.  When I bring the DNG files in to Lightroom, it applies development settings and changes the colors.  I have not been able to figure out how to stop Lightroom from applying these settings.  Can anyone help me?


----------



## EricBier (Nov 27, 2007)

*Why Use ACR Outside of Lightroom?*

As a Lightroom user, I am aware that I can use ACR from Bridge or Photoshop to edit photos.

Please tell me what the advantange is of using ACR outside of LR.

Thank you.


----------



## Kiwigeoff (Nov 27, 2007)

EricBier said:


> As a Lightroom user, I am aware that I can use ACR from Bridge or Photoshop to edit photos.
> 
> Please tell me what the advantange is of using ACR outside of LR.
> 
> Thank you.


Only if it fits a particular workflow I believe Eric, processing wise there is no difference AFAIK, I believe they use the same "engine".


----------



## melissa (Nov 27, 2007)

cdiphoto - what you are seeing is not what jcabbot is seeing. What you are seeing is the jpeg thumb created by the camera for a couple seconds before LR regenerates a thumbnail based on ACR. The camera (no matter what camera you use), does some processing in-camera before saving a jpeg out. It usually has a high contrast/high saturation when compared to the default ACR rendering.

jcabbot - what you are doing should work, and I'm going to have to do some digging to figure out why it isn't. I do have a question for you - are your ACR's in sync? If you are using LR 1.3, do you have ACR 4.3 installed?


----------



## cdifoto (Nov 28, 2007)

melissa said:


> cdiphoto - what you are seeing is not what jcabbot is seeing. What you are seeing is the jpeg thumb created by the camera for a couple seconds before LR regenerates a thumbnail based on ACR. The camera (no matter what camera you use), does some processing in-camera before saving a jpeg out. It usually has a high contrast/high saturation when compared to the default ACR rendering.



I know the difference but I still believe they're both due to the same or similar behind-the-scenes processing going on.  I'm not a post-processing or JPG vs RAW moron.


----------



## Kiwigeoff (Nov 28, 2007)

cdifoto said:


> I know the difference but I still believe they're both due to the same or similar behind-the-scenes processing going on.  I'm not a post-processing or JPG vs RAW moron.


Please take care with your words, Melissa is a highly knowledgeable and talented member of the Lightroom team at Adobe and there was no implication actual or intended in her response.
Keep it civil in future.


----------



## cdifoto (Nov 28, 2007)

Kiwigeoff said:


> Please take care with your words, Melissa is a highly knowledgeable and talented member of the Lightroom team at Adobe and there was no implication actual or intended in her response.
> Keep it civil in future.



There was nothing in my words.  Nice tact though - make an assumption & then a public chastisement.


----------



## Victoria Bampton (Nov 28, 2007)

Ok, enough, let's get this back on track, otherwise this thread will be closed.  Things can be taken the wrong way on ALL fronts.  So, enough said.

cdifoto, I can see the similarity between the issue you've noted and jcabbott's problem.  In both cases, the image that you're seeing initially is an embedded preview, whether that's in the DNG (preview created by Bridge) or a raw file (preview created by camera).

In jcabbott's case, it appears the Lightroom is not applying the adjustments that have been set in ACR.  So again, it would be useful to access one of these files to narrow down whether the problem lies with the ACR settings or image, or with Lightroom's settings.  jcabbott, you're welcome to drop one on my FTP server if that would help.  http://www.photoshopservices.co.uk/ftpupload/techeasyftp.htm


----------



## cdifoto (Nov 28, 2007)

Yeah it seems to be one of those things that cannot be changed though, if that makes sense.  Because unless I tell LR to do something else via an import preset, it does what it wants to do...ie what the LR developers programmed it to do.

Unless I'm mistaken and you CAN set up your own defaults without having to select a preset in the import dialog.

At any rate, I hope OP gets his sorted out.  My gripe isn't really an issue per se...just an inconvenience.  I'm using AdobeRGB now anyway for more accurate histograms in-camera, so the previews are no longer being showed as "nice" right off the bat.  They're ugly from the get-go. :lol:


----------



## Victoria Bampton (Nov 28, 2007)

You certainly can set your own defaults cdifoto, and you can set them for camera serial / iso rating combinations, which is really useful if your high iso shots need different treatment from low iso.

If you don't change the defaults, yes, it does exactly what the LR developers designed it to do, which is exactly the same as ACR does to.

I'm glad to hear you've found a solution which works for you.  I just avoid looking at the in camera previews!


----------



## cdifoto (Nov 28, 2007)

I did figure out how to apply calibration by camera automagically.  Didn't think to try anything else.  Can't really think of anything I'd do anyway off hand...noise reduction isn't LR's strongpoint at the moment...and compared to the aRGB previews, the auto settings are actually pleasant.


----------



## Kiwigeoff (Nov 28, 2007)

Thank you for toning down your responses cdi, maybe you could also take the time to fill in your signature so as questions can be answered in a more focussed manner on occasions.


----------



## melissa (Nov 28, 2007)

I have a thick skin 

Further explanations as to why I think (and I could be wrong) different issues:

cdi, When you first import, we need to show you _something_. Grey boxes are unnerving - believe me, I know. That's all early builds would show. Part of the reason for that is there is a belief that if you see the JPEG file your camera generates you can get very attached to the rendering, and find it very difficult to match it in LR/ACR. (And, we've validated that belief in real-life use as well).

The first thing you will see in the grid, though, is the thumbnail jpeg that is part of the raw file so you see something while we're reading the raw data and creating previews based on the raw data and the ACR rendering of such. When the look switches, you get the ACR rendering, and the starting point for Raw work.

I think jcabott's issue is different as he gets a different rendering after the preview is built that the one he set up in ACR - when they should be the same.

In essence, the way I understand the issues, cdi's point is as designed, and jcabott's is a bug.


----------



## Brad Snyder (Nov 28, 2007)

melissa said:


> I have a thick skin



Like water off a rubber ducky's back .......:cheesy:


.....brad


----------



## melissa (Nov 28, 2007)

HA! Love it...


----------



## danpass (Jan 23, 2008)

I'll admit right off the bat (and just to resurrect the thread) that I am posting to address just this issue.

Quite a sore spot for me.



I have a sense of what the OP is talking about but will use another example.

I have both Nikon RAW and Canon RAW files in LR and have observed that when first doing a full view of the pic it is what I shot.  

But this is only for a brief moment.  Then BAM, LR flattens, neutralizes and otherwise 'deadens' the pic.


To take an extreme example:

I shoot a B&W RAW with my Canon 3'D.  In Canon's Digital Photo Pro this RAW file will be just as shot.  With the other picture styles I can make it color again (it is a RAW file after all).

Now we all know that LR does not apply picture styles, ok no prob.

But for the briefest moment the RAW files shows in LR as B&W then BAMMMMM .... flat, dull color pic :roll:.


How do I stop LR from applying changes?  As it obviously read it fine for a brief moment ..............


Is "Zero'd" my only option?

(I just found out about this today ... I'm not home yet to try it out)

I never apply any presets, other than copyright info, when importing


thanks,
Dan




.


----------



## Victoria Bampton (Jan 23, 2008)

Zero'd won't help you on this one Dan.

The image you see initially is the inbuilt preview that the camera recorded, with all of the settings that it would have applied had you been shooting jpeg.  The manufacturer knows what settings would have been applied, and can use their own software to apply those same settings to the raw file, which is why DPP can give you the same result.

The camera manufacturer's, however, are not friendly enough to share that information with other companies, so each raw converter takes the raw data and applies its own defaults to that data, and you tweak from there.

If you are concerned about matching the original jpeg as closely as you can, you need to figure out which LR settings to change to get that.  Easiest way is to shoot a variety of images raw+jpeg, and adjust the raw files to match the camera jpegs.  Then save those settings, either as a preset to apply on import, or just change the default settings to your own taste.


----------



## danpass (Jan 24, 2008)

Victoria Bampton said:


> Zero'd won't help you on this one Dan.
> 
> The image you see initially is the inbuilt preview that the camera recorded, with all of the settings that it would have applied had you been shooting jpeg. The manufacturer knows what settings would have been applied, and can use their own software to apply those same settings to the raw file, which is why DPP can give you the same result.
> 
> ...


 

But why won't it simply keep the initial settings?

Why show me my B&W pic and THEN change it to a flat, ugly, desaturated, color pic? :|


----------



## Mark Sirota (Jan 24, 2008)

Dan, what you're seeing at first isn't "what you shot".  It is a conversion of the raw file made by the raw converter that is built into the camera.  The camera's rendering isn't better or worse, nor is it any "more correct" or "less correct".  It's just a different way if interpreting the same data.

Like the built-in raw converter, Lightroom's Develop module has a variety of controls and settings that affect how it renders the raw file.  If you like the rendering of one better than the other, then you should either use the one that you prefer, or tune the other to give similar results.

Once you find settings in Lightroom that give results that you like, you can either save those as a preset and apply that preset at import time, or you can save them as Lightroom's default.


----------



## danpass (Jan 24, 2008)

Mark Sirota said:


> Dan, what you're seeing at first isn't "what you shot". It is a conversion of the raw file made by the raw converter that is built into the camera. The camera's rendering isn't better or worse, nor is it any "more correct" or "less correct". It's just a different way if interpreting the same data.
> .........


 

Just to avoid confusion: I'm talking about AFTER having imported the pic into LR then viewing in LR in the develop module --- first B&W (only for a moment) then BAM .... color (flat, desaturated color)




.


----------



## Kiwigeoff (Jan 24, 2008)

danpass said:


> Just to avoid confusion: I'm talking about AFTER having imported the pic into LR then viewing in LR in the develop module --- first B&W (only for a moment) then BAM .... color (flat, desaturated color)



It works the way Mark described. 
LR initially uses the jpeg preview from the camera file and then renders a preview from the actual raw data.
It sounds as if you didn't have "render standard previews" checked on import. If not then the preview will only be generated once you go to develop.
You can render standard previews at any time by selecting the images you want or selecting all in the library module and with the drop down library menu - previews/render standard-sized previews.
Keep in mind that the b+w you see is only a setting not the RAW data.


----------



## Mark Sirota (Jan 24, 2008)

Seconding what Geoff said: If you are initially seeing a grayscale image, then you must have had the in-camera raw converter set to grayscale, and you must not have rendered standard (or 1:1) previews on import.

You're seeing the JPEG generated by the in-camera raw converter, which is embedded in the raw file (that JPEG is also what is displayed on the back of your camera).


----------



## cdifoto (Jan 30, 2008)

Lightroom is definitely making changes to files when you import.  I can shoot ISO32'' on my 1'D that are exposed for the shadows but when I import to Lightroom, the levels are brought down for the highlights.  I do NOT have any presets applied at import and it's completely negating my intentional exposure compensation in-camera. Lightroom makes my exposure choices moot at high ISO because it's bringing levels down to where it _thinks_ it should be, not where I put it.

Don't try to tell me it's not doing anything but "interpreting" the RAW file because I know better.


----------



## Victoria Bampton (Jan 30, 2008)

Can you show us an example image then - processed in the camera's software or an in-camera jpeg, and a raw file - and also a screenshot of the settings?


----------



## Kiwigeoff (Jan 30, 2008)

cdifoto;7'21 said:
			
		

> Lightroom is definitely making changes to files when you import.  I can shoot ISO32'' on my 1'D that are exposed for the shadows but when I import to Lightroom, the levels are brought down for the highlights.  I do NOT have any presets applied at import and it's completely negating my intentional exposure compensation in-camera. Lightroom makes my exposure choices moot at high ISO because it's bringing levels down to where it _thinks_ it should be, not where I put it.
> 
> Don't try to tell me it's not doing anything but "interpreting" the RAW file because I know better.



And your point is??
Are your import settings "none" or "zeroed" ??


----------



## Mark Sirota (Jan 30, 2008)

cdifoto;7'21 said:
			
		

> Lightroom is definitely making changes to files when you import.  ...
> 
> Don't try to tell me it's not doing anything but "interpreting" the RAW file because I know better.



Your phrasing indicates that you don't have a solid understanding of what's happening here.

Lightroom isn't "making changes" to anything.  There's nothing to change.  You gave it a raw file, which is a meaningless set of data until it is interpreted into a visual format.  The JPEG you see at first, and the one on the back of the camera, is a different interpretation of the same underlying raw data.

Lightroom isn't _changing_ the original interpretation.  It is _ignoring_ it and making its own interpretation.


----------



## jcabbott (Nov 24, 2007)

I import DNG files into Lightroom that I have adjusted and saved the way I want using Bridge.  When I bring the DNG files in to Lightroom, it applies development settings and changes the colors.  I have not been able to figure out how to stop Lightroom from applying these settings.  Can anyone help me?


----------



## cdifoto (Jan 31, 2008)

Mark Sirota;7'55 said:
			
		

> Your phrasing indicates that you don't have a solid understanding of what's happening here.
> 
> Lightroom isn't "making changes" to anything.  There's nothing to change.  You gave it a raw file, which is a meaningless set of data until it is interpreted into a visual format.  The JPEG you see at first, and the one on the back of the camera, is a different interpretation of the same underlying raw data.
> 
> Lightroom isn't _changing_ the original interpretation.  It is _ignoring_ it and making its own interpretation.



Semantics. Read my entire post instead of quoting me out of context.


----------



## cdifoto (Jan 31, 2008)

Victoria Bampton;7'25 said:
			
		

> Can you show us an example image then - processed in the camera's software or an in-camera jpeg, and a raw file - and also a screenshot of the settings?



I'll have to do some re-creating of images when I get a chance.  I don't make it a point to shoot ISO32'' on the 1'D and was only fiddling last time.  Those images have since been deleted.  I actually don't have a problem with LR's interpretation of other "everyday" files, but when I did those tests I was surprised and annoyed.


----------



## Mark Sirota (Jan 31, 2008)

Calm down, I didn't quote you out of context.  You made two separate points in one message, I commented on one of them.

If you want me to comment on this:


			
				cdifoto;7'21 said:
			
		

> ... when I import to Lightroom, the levels are brought down for the highlights.  I do NOT have any presets applied at import ...



Are you saying that after you import and look at the image in the Develop module, the Exposure or Brightness slider shows a negative value, or perhaps that the Recovery slider shows a positive value?

If so, then perhaps you have the "Apply auto tone adjustments" preference set (in the Presets tab), or perhaps you applied a preset on import that includes Auto Tone or includes those slider values?


----------



## cdifoto (Jan 31, 2008)

Victoria, here's an example.  Ignoring the mess is essential! 

I have nothing checked in the import preferences box.  On import I have my defaults set for calibration adjustments only.  I import with only metadata and filename changes made.  Nothing is being done on my end that would change anything about the exposure or levels or any such thing.

These are a simple import then export at 5'/1'' quality 5''px for web.  No changes, no sliders moved (other than the ACR calibration),  no nothing.

DPP:






LR:






I'm not posting this for help because there is nothing that you or I can do.  I'm only posting this to prove to those who only see LR through rose colored glasses that LR does in fact make _changes_ at import.  And yes, I know it doesnt change the file itself, yada yada yada.  That's semantics.  The point is it ADJUSTS something behind the scenes that cannot be changed by the end user.


----------



## Mick Seymour (Jan 31, 2008)

cdifoto;7'88 said:
			
		

> On import I have my defaults set for calibration adjustments only.



I'm not saying your calibration is wrong but your post of photos is no longer a true test if you are applying a preset. What you have posted is not the default Lightroom rendering of a photo.



> The point is it ADJUSTS something behind the scenes that cannot be changed by the end user.


And so does EVERY RAW converter. You either like the end results and use it or you move onto something else.


----------



## cdifoto (Jan 31, 2008)

Color calibration has _nothing_ to do with brightness levels.  When photobucket comes back online, I'll prove that to you.


----------



## Victoria Bampton (Jan 31, 2008)

Ok, chill guys.  

Donald, have you considered the fact that, as raw data has no 'correct' interpretation, each raw converter applies, not only colour settings, but also its own tone curve, which could explain the difference you're seeing?  I'm not certain of the technicalities behind it, but I'd be inclined to assume that you're setting the exposure based on what the camera/DPP would do with the file, and ACR's rendering is just very slightly different.  Just a thought!


----------



## wblink (Jan 31, 2008)

Kiwigeoff said:


> It works the way Mark described.
> LR initially uses the jpeg preview from the camera file and then renders a preview from the actual raw data.
> It sounds as if you didn't have "render standard previews" checked on import.


 

Hi,

I would like to shoot NEF only and let LR do the conversion to jpeg, BUT using the rules, presets, program (whatever) same as my camera does. I'm quite happy with that results. 
Is that possible, or can't LR "read" from my camera firmware?


----------



## Denis de Gannes (Jan 31, 2008)

wblink;71'2 said:
			
		

> Hi,
> 
> I would like to shoot NEF only and let LR do the conversion to jpeg, BUT using the rules, presets, program (whatever) same as my camera does. I'm quite happy with that results.
> Is that possible, or can't LR "read" from my camera firmware?



No its not possible for LR to read the processes your camera firmware uses. That is propritory to Nikon and its own software. Its the same with all other third party software.
If you go to this site you will find links to lots of info on the use of LR and even free video tutorials for you to become proficient in the use of LR advanced features.
http://lightroom-news.com/
You should also be able to find presepts developed by other users for your camera model.


----------



## Victoria Bampton (Jan 31, 2008)

The camera manufacturers don't share that information with third parties like Adobe, so LR can't read any settings you set in camera.  You can use LR to adjust the raw file, and you can make your own presets, but if you want a raw>jpeg conversion exactly the same as the camera would have done, you'll have to use the manufacturer's own software.

ETA - Denis beat me!


----------



## cdifoto (Jan 31, 2008)

Victoria Bampton;71'1 said:
			
		

> Ok, chill guys.
> 
> Donald, have you considered the fact that, as raw data has no 'correct' interpretation, each raw converter applies, not only colour settings, but also its own tone curve, which could explain the difference you're seeing?  I'm not certain of the technicalities behind it, but *I'd be inclined to assume that you're setting the exposure based on what the camera/DPP would do with the file, and ACR's rendering is just very slightly different.*  Just a thought!



I'm not sure what you mean by this (bold part). I'm setting exposure based on what I want to see in my histogram. Even the histograms are different. The shadows are blocked up completely in LR with the highlights trailing off and barely reaching the edge but in DPP and on my camera's histogram, the shadows are not blocked up at all because I intentionally exposed for them and the highlights are hitting the right side as they should be. I do acknowledge that interpretations can be different, but the entire idea of exposing for shadows is so that they aren't blocked up. If my in-camera efforts are rendered moot, I might as well just shoot Av and leave the stick in the middle 1''% of the time and then futz my exposure in LR....since I'd have to do that anyway.

Granted, it hasn't been a problem with lower ISO images, but the way LR treats the ISO32'' files, it makes the "shooting to the right" technique impossible. I might be totally overlooking something, but since it doesn't seem to do this with low ISO files, and I don't have any presets applied, I can't see that I'm missing anything.


----------



## Victoria Bampton (Jan 31, 2008)

I'm just tossing ideas around here!   I've never looked into these technicalities in this much detail, and I haven't compared against DPP in a fair while either.



			
				cdifoto;71'7 said:
			
		

> I'm setting exposure based on what I want to see in my histogram. Even the histograms are different.



I think that's the point I was trying to make actually.  The camera histogram is based on what the CAMERA would do with the file - so LR's histogram may be slightly different.  Apply a different tone curve to the same file and you'll see different results in the histogram - and that's why I'm wondering if that's the difference you're seeing.

As it hasn't been a problem with lower ISO files, maybe it's worth checking a few files and working out how much additional exposure you need to add over and above the camera's histogram for when you're using 32''.  Or adjust the raw file to match the jpeg, and set those settings as your default for 32'' files.


----------



## Mark Sirota (Jan 31, 2008)

cdifoto;71'7 said:
			
		

> I'm setting exposure based on what I want to see in my histogram. Even the histograms are different.


The histogram you see on your camera is the histogram of the JPEG created by the in-camera raw converter.
The histogram you see in Lightroom is the histogram of the JPEG created by Lightroom's raw converter.

They will, inevitably, be different.  You might be interested in this writeup by Andrew Rodney about why the in-camera histogram isn't completely trustworthy.



> When I set my 5D Picture Style from the default to -4 contrast, the clipping of highlights on the LCD didn’t appear until I had &#822';overexposed” 2&#826';3 of a stop. This is better than the original default settings, yet in actuality, I was able to overexpose 1½ stops beyond what my meter suggested while fully retaining highlight data in my RAW file. The clipping indicators are still far from correctly describing what’s happening to the RAW data.



You also didn't clarify whether, once you look at the image in Develop, whether all the relevant sliders are zero'd.


----------



## cdifoto (Feb 1, 2008)

Victoria Bampton;71'8 said:
			
		

> I'm just tossing ideas around here!   I've never looked into these technicalities in this much detail, and I haven't compared against DPP in a fair while either.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Just to hopefully make things clear, it's not just a DPP or in-camera vs LR thing.  Even Pixmantec RawShooter Premium doesn't adjust the files like LR does.  Those are also light as they should be and the histogram is a more close match to the DPP and in-camera histo.

Either way it still means LR is misinterpreting/adjusting the high ISO files at some point along the line, otherwise it wouldn't be such a drastic difference.  I'm not going to stop using LR but I'm not going to pretend it's perfect either.  There's a big difference between different interpretations of RAW files, and misinterpretation and/or mis-adjustment of levels with no user input.


----------



## Victoria Bampton (Feb 1, 2008)

Fair enough Donald.  I think we've beaten this subject to death now, and no doubt learned a few things along the way (great link Mark!), so I think it's probably time to close this thread.

Why not submit it direct to Adobe, along with examples showing the differences you're seeing.  There's a bug report/feature request page here: http://www.adobe.com/cfusion/mmform/index.cfm?name=wishform


----------



## flash (Feb 5, 2008)

*I have an answer to why Canon 5D ISO 3200 files are off.*

The other thred was closed so I can't reply there but the answer is actually pretty simple. The Canon 5D does not have a real ISO 32'' to begin with. It is an expanded ISO (as is ISO 5') which gives the original Canon software instructions to push the image 1 stop (or pull with ISO5'). As Lightroom does not get these instructions it opens the file as if it were shot at ISO16'', the highest real ISO the 5D can shoot at. You will need to add a stop of exposure compensation to the file in Lightroom. This is done automatically in DPP (or in camera if you shoot jpeg). So photos shot at ISO32'' will look like the shadows are all blocked up.

Simple really.

Gordon


----------



## Victoria Bampton (Feb 5, 2008)

That sounds like a very sensible answer Gordon, so I'll shift it to join the old thread.  I don't think we need to reopen the thread to discuss further, but thank you for 'shedding some light' on the subject!


----------

