# Order of highlights/shadows and whites/blacks



## tjevans (Aug 28, 2015)

One of my books on lightroom states that it is better to adjust highlights/shadows and then to set your white point/black point than the other way around. But the book doesn't state if there's a valid reason for this or if it's just the author's opinion?  If there is a good reason for this, could someone explain it?


----------



## Johan Elzenga (Aug 28, 2015)

You could argue that if you set the black/white point first, and then you make a fairly strong adjustment to the shadows/highlights, that this adjustment may 'drag along' the black/white point, so you may have to adjust that again. Other than that, I see no compelling reason why it would be 'better' to do it in that order. Remember that these are all non-destructive adjustments and that the order in which you use the sliders doesn't change the way or the order in which Lightroom applies them.


----------



## Jimmsp (Aug 28, 2015)

tjevans said:


> One of my books on lightroom states that it is better to adjust highlights/shadows and then to set your white point/black point than the other way around. But the book doesn't state if there's a valid reason for this or if it's just the author's opinion?  If there is a good reason for this, could someone explain it?



I can't give you a good reason, and the main one I have heard is "that's the way Adobe designed it". As for me, most of the time I tend to follow the way they are laid out . But I also find myself frequently going back and readjusting  highlights/shadows after setting the white point/black points. And since I now tend to use "auto tone" a lot, it does a pretty good job of setting the initial white/black points and I play with highlights/shadows first.
In the end, as Johan said, it doesn't really matter, as LR applies them it its processing order.


----------



## Tony Jay (Aug 28, 2015)

Adobe's rationale is simple: make the biggest tonal adjustments first followed by smaller fine-tuning.
Whether this is the best approach or not actually depends on the image.
Try George Jardine's video tutorial series for a different approach.

Tony Jay


----------



## Ian.B (Aug 29, 2015)

best part about LR is it doesn't really matter how or when we use any sliders. 

for what's worth; this is how the my sliders end up while importing
contrast + 25
H-lights  -67
shadows  +29
white  0
blacks +10
clarity + 30

I find that gives me a good starting point for most nature type of files when using a Lumix fz200 or Oly em1. Forgotten what I did with the 5D11 :blush:.

the tone curve is for the finer adjustment ........ took me awhile to appreciate how good the tone curve really is.

I usually watch the LR histogram, plus the blue and red indicators on the photo to get things as right as possible ...... blacks might get clipped but not the whites; however we need to remember not _every photo_ will have true black or true white.


----------



## Pollok Shields (Aug 29, 2015)

Tony Jay said:


> Try George Jardine's video tutorial series for a different approach.



What's the different approach?


----------



## Tony Jay (Aug 29, 2015)

Pollok Shields said:


> What's the different approach?


George Jardine distinguishes between global contrast and local contrast.
Most people understand how to manipulate images to alter global contrast.
Also, most people have much less idea how to manipulate local contrast.
Since changing local contrast can make a massive difference - often making or breaking an image - it is important.

Which images require global contrast manipulation and which local contrast manipulation is a matter of judgment.
Also how vigorous one is in these alterations also requires judgement.
Sometimes reducing contrast is the way to go, so it is not invariably a case of trying to increase contrast.

The reason I did not initially attempt much of an explanation is the fact that this much better 'caught than taught'.
George's videos tutorials take images from start to finish so one can see exactly what is going on, and even more importantly, why.
From there one can apply newfound knowledge to one's own images.

This is not just a free advertisement for George Jardine - the bottom line is he does explain and demonstrate this sort of stuff really well and one could do worse than learn from him.

Tony Jay


----------



## davidedric (Aug 29, 2015)

May be a little off topic, but I also learned a lot from George Jardine's videos, and the key for me is, as Tony says, you get the why as well as the how.  I learn much better that way.

Back to the original question, there has been a recent similar thread in another forum.  One member took an image and apples a set of changes.  He then applied the same changes in reverse order, just to demonstrate the identical result.

Personally, I am a bit unstructured - I tend to start with what seems to need most fixing, though I am finding that a touch of dehaze usually helps in a way that would take much longer with other controls, and means I then need to be less aggressive with some of those other controls.

Dave


----------



## Victoria Bampton (Aug 29, 2015)

tjevans said:


> If there is a good reason for this, could someone explain it?



It's very tough to explain and illustrate, but the slider ranges adapt based on the earlier settings.  That's why they say to do those last, but every rule is made to be broken.


----------



## Ian.B (Aug 30, 2015)

^^ and I find it will depend on the file itself to how edits are done. To be honest I have not taken a lot of notice to how or what I do first



Since typing the above I have fiddled around with re-editing a couple files from raw and no preset used

The Olympus em1 does a good job with exposure, and as I see any exposure compensation adjustment in the viewfinder means most files are exposed rather accurately

First adjustment was fiddle with exposure

Then I adjusted the white  and black sliders :nod:

finally it was to the finer adjustments with tone curve sliders with the white to right to brighten the file and the highlight slider to the left to knock off a few blown h/lights. Now the embarrassing thing is I ended up with a better file than I have already added to flickr

With another file I ended up very similar to the original edit; however very few of the sliders were the same

So I feel the order of adjustments doesn't make a lot difference.  Something else I have found is it always pays to put the edited file away for a day or so; or longer and look again at it to do fine adjustments. It's amazing what we do miss. Another thing I have never been able to get my head around is _"what is perfect?"  _What is enough editing or too much or not enough? 

There you go tjevans; great question, however I feel it doesn't make any difference at all and that is the good thing about LR. We can do most things any way we like 

EDIT: actually the very first adjustment was the auto upright lens correction. Now why is lens correction near the bottom of the list? [I love that auto upright button ]


----------



## Jimmsp (Aug 30, 2015)

Ian.B said:


> .......  Something else I have found is it always pays to put the edited file away for a day or so; or longer and look again at it to do fine adjustments. It's amazing what we do miss. .......



I find the same thing. It happens a lot if I have a shoot in the few hundreds of photos, and try to adjust a few 10s of them at the same sitting.
I try to force myself to come back the next day and look again at the best 1 or 2. I almost always make changes.


----------



## Ian.B (Aug 30, 2015)

Peter Eastway has said he will sit, watch, adjust his comp images for up to 3 months. He also  hangs prints in the office so he sees them often away from the screen 

With _ALL_ those names and letters after his name I'm not going to disagree with him  

Another one: it's far easier to delete files a few weeks/months after taking the photos because the emotions have subsided


----------



## Tony Jay (Aug 30, 2015)

Peter Eastway is not alone here.
Almost every really good image has had a lot of time spent on it - just as described above.
It took me five years to figure out how to bring one of my very best images to life.
Part of the issue was me learning how to use the Develop module better and part of it was the change to Process2012.

BTW I really do agree with culling images but only only delete the real rubbish initially - like those images when you accidentally shot with the lens cap on - as for the rest give it time, the cream will eventually rise to the top, and the others, well... they sink.
Months to years later it is likely that your judgement on what is a good image from a shoot will be better than initially.
I only identified some of my portfolio level shots a year after they were initially shot.

Tony Jay


----------



## Ian.B (Aug 30, 2015)

"the cream will eventually rise to the top, and the others, well... they sink"
I like that one :nod: 

Reminds me of the days I hand milked a couple of house cows; there was always dirt and stuff at the bottom of the bucket :disgusted: LOL. And yes; the cream came to the top.


----------



## JDGriff (Aug 31, 2015)

The order I use most of the time is to make a virtual copy, crop, adjust white balance, set black point/white point followed by shadow/highlight adjustment, then go back and modify the previous settings if I think I need to.

The more experience I get, the better satisfied I am with my results.

On occasion I go back and rework some images.


There is no Lightroom police force to arrest me for doing things in the wrong order or choosing the wrong settings.

I have several Lightroom books in my reference library and the one by Victoria is the one I open up first.


----------



## davidedric (Aug 31, 2015)

Sometimes you may want to do things iteratively.  For example, setting the black point and then adding Clarity: if you've set the blacks to just avoid clipping, Clarity will (almost?) always cause the blacks to clip.

Dave


----------



## Johan Elzenga (Aug 31, 2015)

True, but remember that any particular order is for convenience sake only. If you edit an image in Photoshop, each edit will change the pixels (we are not talking about adjustment layers and smart objects now). So if you do something that clips the blacks, the detail in that area is gone. Nothing you do later can bring back that detail. You can't 'unclip' the blacks, except by using 'undo'. That is why the order of the edits is important.

Although it may seem that Lightroom works the same, it does not. Lightroom doesn't change pixels, but builds a 'list of things to do' in XML. It will update the preview with each change you make, but it will do that by re-rendering the image with the updated list. That is why you can simply 'unclip' the blacks after applying Clarity. The order in which Lightroom goes through the list when you render an image to send it to the printer, or export it as tiff, is fixed by Adobe. You don't change that order by changing the order of the sliders you move.


----------



## davidedric (Aug 31, 2015)

Thanks, Johann.

Yes I appreciate that - it's one of the reasons that I am such a big fan of Lightroom.


----------

