Lightroom/Camera Raw: Disable built-in lens profile

  • 35
  • Idea
  • Updated 4 weeks ago
  • (Edited)
I own Micro43 and compact cameras, where lens profiles are integrated in RAW files. With software like Capture One Pro, I can easily enable or disable theses built-in profiles. Actually, there is even a slider allowing to enable 0% or 100% of the built-in profile, and whatever percentage in between.

In LR (CC, Classic or LR6), the checkox for enabling or disabling profiles does not work with built-in profiles, which always stay enabled. This seriously limits the possibilities of several cameras which possibilities get unleashed by actual RAW developpers like Capture One Pro.

I'm actually a COP user (after switching from LR) but DAM sucks with COP and this built-in lens profile thing is the only deal breaker for me to come back. So please let users disable built-in lens profiles, or at least offer workarounds.

As a workaround, a dumb "zero" profile that would replace the built-in one (not coming on top of it) could do the job.
Photo of Tokumeino

Tokumeino

  • 13 Posts
  • 8 Reply Likes

Posted 2 years ago

  • 35
Photo of Todd Shaner

Todd Shaner, Champion

  • 1394 Posts
  • 463 Reply Likes
Great idea! Allow the "built-in lens profile" to use the same controls as the Adobe provided lens profiles. I usually change the Lens Profile Default Settings to Distortion = 0 and Vignetting = 50 to 100 dependent on the lens. With shorter focal length lenses this reduces the stretching, noise, and aberrations in the image corners and sides.

Also many of the "compact" camera lenses have a high amount of barrel distortion (almost fisheye) at the extreme wide end. I discovered it was possible to recover a considerable amount of raw image data area  being cropped by the built-in lens profile using PS Adaptive Wide Angle Filter in 'Fisheye' mode. I use RawDigger export to TIFF to recover the full image data and then process in PS, but the results would be better using LR's raw converter. This works especially well with images that need transform corrections.
Photo of Tokumeino

Tokumeino

  • 13 Posts
  • 8 Reply Likes
You exactly get the point. For people who are not obsessed by straight lines but rather prefer unstreched (thus more natural looking) objects on the borders, it is necessary to be able to control distortion correction for built-in profiles the same way as it works with external profiles. Besides, it should be VERY easy to perform : just let the existing checkbox play its role. It shouldn't require more than a very few lines of code.

With Capture One Pro, my Canon G7XII is completely transformed. For instance, the wide angle is actually more like 21mm or 22mm when you use the full sensor, and not 24mm as croped by Canon+LR. I'd like to switch to LR but as it, I just can't since it would dramatically restraint my gear.

I understand that for such cams, SW correction is somehow "part of the system". So I can get that by default, the built-in profile is enabled. But a sowftare which claims beeing a RAW converter should let the user choose to actually using all the RAW data.
Photo of Todd Shaner

Todd Shaner, Champion

  • 1352 Posts
  • 441 Reply Likes
I made the same discovery after opening a similar Canon G9XII camera raw file in RawDigger to check for highlight clipping. On the widest 10.2mm lens setting the lens has a 28mm equivalent 35mm focal length, but the raw image has considerably more angle of view approximating about 24mm focal length. There is a high amount of rectilinear distortion (think fisheye), but a landscape image with no defined horizontal or vertical elements (trees, sky, etc.) probably could be used without correction. I process the RawDigger Export TIFF file using PS Adaptive Wide Angle Filter set for fisheye correction and horizontal and vertical constraint lines to remove all rectilinear distortion with good results.

I tried another experiment today with a Canon G9XII RawDigger TIFF Export file using only LR's Transform panel and Lens Profile manual Distortion control. The results are virtually identical in rectilinear correction and over-all sharpness. So if Adobe adds the requested capability to dial-back the 'Built-In Lens Profile' Distortion correction you could get the same results without having to go outside of LR. Sweet!

Below LR Survey view shows:
Original Raw File w/o any transforms (Top-Left)
RawDigger TIFF Export File with no 'Built-In Filter' applied (Bottom-Left)
RawDigger TIFF Export File with PS Adaptive Wide Angle Filter applied (Bottom-Right)
RawDigger TIFF Export File with LR manual Transform and Distortion controls applied (Top-Right)

It's probably only helpful for raw files shot at the widest lens settings when you need a slightly wider angle of view. It works very well for that purpose as shown below.

(click on image to see full-size)
(Edited)
Photo of Tokumeino

Tokumeino

  • 13 Posts
  • 8 Reply Likes
With december's new autotone (it was unuseable before), it is more and more tempting for me to switch back from Capture One (DAM is so poor...) to LR again.

But this built-in lens profiles thing is just a complete dealbreaker given my gear.

Could an Adobe insider tell me if this change is on a ToDo list ? 
Photo of Victoria Bampton - Lightroom Queen

Victoria Bampton - Lightroom Queen, Champion

  • 4864 Posts
  • 1887 Reply Likes
I haven't heard the slightest hint along those lines. If you could post a bunch of examples that are a lot better without the built in lens profiles applied, it might gain a little more traction.
Photo of Tokumeino

Tokumeino

  • 13 Posts
  • 8 Reply Likes
Samples

Let me consider a Canon G7X. I could have done the same with other compacts or mirrorless cameras with heavilly distorted lenses, and built-in profiles. I'll take a G7XII sample from dpreview.

This is what you get OOC or developed by LR (soft corners due to heavy stretching)


This is the actual full sensor data (as you can get with C1P, DXO or any RAW convertor I could test, except LR) : there is vignetting but the angle of view is actually (much) wider than 24mm (FFeqvt), and 
 

This is what you get with a manual crop : by comparison with the Lightroom version, the angle of view is actually larger but LR prevents you to take advantage of your gear and hides large areas of your sensor.


What's wrong ?

In LR interface, we have this dialog :


But when the profile is built-in (as usual with compacts and mirrorless), the "Enable Profile Corrections" has no effect. Checked or unchecked, the profile is always enabled.

So, LR prevents to disable built-in profiles, and prevent users to take full advantage of their gear.

How to solve ?

Let the checkbox work as it should.

Other use cases (mostly wide angle with compact lenses)

Some people love shooting with fisheyes when they prefer to preserve natural and unstreched shapes rather than straight lines. It is often not the case for architecture but in situations such as
  • wide angle portraits
  • wide angle group shots with streched people on the border
  • wide angle landscapes where straight lines are not mandatory
  • wide angle with a priority to sharp corners above straight lines
rectilinerar projection are not always suitable, and people (like me) prefer keeping "distortion"μ.

Only LR forces users to perform rectilinear projections. I have no problem with enbling this by default, but the checkbox should work and the built-in profiles should be possibly disabled.

Note that sometimes, people complain about tiny details. This problem is visible even at very low resolutions. It affects the global geometry of an image. Adobe should let the users some creative possibilies.
(Edited)
Photo of Eric Webb

Eric Webb

  • 8 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
I'm late to this party but I hazard the suggestion that the 'built-in' profile issue isn't just about distortion. Unless I am very much mistaken the profile for a Sony E-mount standard zoom (E16-70 f/4 ZA)  purchased last year also adds a certain amount of sharpening. I can find no other explanation for the edge artifacts I periodically see when I process images taken with this lens in Lightroom. It's certainly not a camera issue as images taken with an older (and slightly softer) lens attached to the same A6000 back are entirely free of this problem.
Photo of Todd Shaner

Todd Shaner, Champion

  • 1352 Posts
  • 441 Reply Likes
It's my understanding that the Adobe LR and ACR built-in lens profiles apply, only distortion, vignetting, and chromatic aberration correction and not necessarily all of them for specific camera models. Take a look at this post, which may be what you're seeing:

https://forums.adobe.com/message/10144570#10144570
Photo of Bryan Hansel

Bryan Hansel

  • 4 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Those built-in profiles can change the sharpening and noise reduction settings. Here's an example from the Nikon Z7. This is a SOC RAW file. It looks to me that Nikon is instructing Lightroom to modify the sharpening and noise reduction settings.

Photo of John R. Ellis

John R. Ellis, Champion

  • 4205 Posts
  • 1112 Reply Likes
"Those built-in profiles can change the sharpening and noise reduction settings. Here's an example from the Nikon Z7. ... t looks to me that Nikon is instructing Lightroom to modify the sharpening and noise reduction settings."

The Z6 and Z7 embed LR develop settings in the XMP metadata of their raw files.  See this thread: https://forums.adobe.com/message/10862123.  

These embedded develop settings are different, and have different capabilities, from the built-in lens profiles that the cameras also embed in the photos.  The embedded develop settings can be easily disabled using an Import develop preset.  But the embedded built-in lens profile can't be disabled (at least from within LR).
Photo of Jao van de Lagemaat

Jao van de Lagemaat

  • 197 Posts
  • 65 Reply Likes
John was quicker than me but he is absolutely right. The sharpening settings for Z6 and Z7 files have nothing to do with the lens profiles that are also built in to the nef files. The sharpening settings are dependent on the in-camera sharpening settings and are done by simply writing xmp camera raw default metadata into the nef file that Lightroom and camera raw pick up. I really wish there was a way to disable the built-in lens profile. 
Photo of Tokumeino

Tokumeino

  • 13 Posts
  • 8 Reply Likes
In capture one, you can see how the profile crops the sensor area. Even by keeping things rectilinear, a lot is lost by LR, and unrecoverable.



Other use case :
  • even rectilinear, recover small framing mistakes
Photo of Victoria Bampton - Lightroom Queen

Victoria Bampton - Lightroom Queen, Champion

  • 4864 Posts
  • 1887 Reply Likes
Maybe Olympus/Panasonic didn't want us to see how much we're losing due to lens distortion! ;-) Gets my vote anyway.
Photo of Tokumeino

Tokumeino

  • 13 Posts
  • 8 Reply Likes
Thanks.

But again : only LR behaves like this. C1P has even a slider from 0% to 100% to adjust CA correction, distortion correction and light falloff, 100% beeing the selected profile.



DXO is even more advanced with a dedicated module in Viewpoint. It is really not an issue with manufacturers.

LR really lags behind and all that has to be done is just to let the checkbox work as with an "external" profile : "enable checkbox -> enable profile" and "disable checkbox -> disable profile" while here, we have "disable checkbox -> enable profile"

And again, it is not a small detail for pixel peepers. Pros with bulky and perfect lenses won't care, but with the mobile stuff and everything, I throught that Adobe would take care of hobbyists as well.
Photo of Todd Shaner

Todd Shaner, Champion

  • 1389 Posts
  • 462 Reply Likes
IMHO applying 100% Distortion and 100% Vignetting correction is rarely necessary and can cause image degradation (cropping, elongation, softening, and amplification of lens aberrations such as astigmatism). These "defects" are even more pronounced in images that use a built-in lens profile due to the larger amount of distortion and vignetting correction required at wide-angle focal lengths.

For most of my DSLR lenses I set the Lens Profile "default settings" to 0 Distortion and 50 Vignetting correction. These settings are only adjusted when an image exhibits "visible" rectilinear distortion or vignetting. The ability to selectively change built-in lens profile corrections (0-100) can improve over-all image quality in many cases.
Photo of Tokumeino

Tokumeino

  • 13 Posts
  • 8 Reply Likes
Another example (not a landscape)

This is what you get with the standard profile : people on the side look fat because of the strong streching induced by a rectilinear projection.


This is what you can get when you disable the lens profile : people look much more natural and the image is wider than 24mm (like having a better lens). I cannot see an obvious drawback not having lines totally straight in situations like this one.


A software should permit the user to have more control. LR forces the user to use a profile, while using a profile should be a possibility offered by the program. Profiles can be enabled by default, but we would like to disable them at will.
Photo of Tokumeino

Tokumeino

  • 13 Posts
  • 8 Reply Likes
I would add that :
  • It is not a huge work : no new algorithm, no new dialog
  • It really ruins compact gear when used with LR
  • It does not change anything to the existent : nobody will complain because it doesn't change anything for existing pictures and default behaviour of LR
(Edited)
Photo of PAUL WILMORE

PAUL WILMORE

  • 2 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Hi there
I too have been miffed about Auto lens profiles being applied in both Lightrooom and Photoshop; with absolutely no way of disabling it.
I shoot extensively with an Olympus 8mm lens so very often I am wanting distortion.
At last I discovered Olympus Viewer 3, you can TURN OFF lens information on Olympus raw files.
In RAW2 edit section / Distortion Correction / Manual -uncheck the "Use Lens Information" and adjust manually the distortion on a plus or minus scale.
What a brilliant way to dial in your preference as you intended, I rather think it may only be for Olympus users?
Photo of Louis Sherwin

Louis Sherwin

  • 146 Posts
  • 32 Reply Likes
This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled Lightroom: Unable to disable "Built-in Lens Profile applied" for raw files.

I recently purchased a Sony A7R2 and rented several Sony FE lenses to evaluate which ones I want to make part of my kit. While comparing some shots in Lightroom 6.7 I noticed a little notice in the "Lens Correction" tab of the Develop Module.

This is a little surprising as I had already turned off all three "Lens Comp." options in the A7R2 menu even though I only shoot raw. Additionally because I am shooting raw I was fully expecting that no lens compensation corrections would be made unless I enabled them in the Lens Correction tab.

Now I find that sometimes Adobe apparently is using lens correction profiles imbedded in the raw files by some camera companies, Sony, Fuji and Olympus to automatically apply some. corrections. 

In the case of the three FE lenses I have tried so far they always seem to be corrected for chromatic aberrations. This is always applied even though I turned this off in camera and have not checked it in the Lens Correction tab.  For some other camera/lens combinations distortion and/or vignette corrections are unilaterally applied by Adobe.

It has been pointed out to me that some of these corrections are an integral part of the camera system, that some lenses were in fact designed to rely on such software corrections. While this makes a good case to make these corrections the default action I don't think that they should be mandatory. 

-louie
Photo of Chris Castleberry

Chris Castleberry, Camera Raw Engineer

  • 376 Posts
  • 114 Reply Likes
This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled Lightroom: Unable to disable "Built-in Lens Profile applied" for raw files (#2).

Hi Louie,

Per request from Sony, Lightroom will enable the external lens profile automatically for raw files if the lens comp settings are enabled in the camera and an external profile is available in the version of the application you are running. The external profile corrects for geometric distortion and vignetting only. The chromatic aberration correction is baked into the raw file using opcodes that cannot be disabled in Lightroom.

If you wish to disable the external profile by default, you can set a new lens profile default (with it disabled) for each lens/camera combination.

Regards,

- Chris

Note: This conversation was created from a reply on: Lightroom: Unable to disable "Built-in Lens Profile applied" for raw files.
Photo of Louis Sherwin

Louis Sherwin

  • 146 Posts
  • 32 Reply Likes
It is a little annoying that when this topic got merged my original response was dropped. 

So here it is again:

Thank you Chris for the explanation.

The interesting thing is that I could see the CAs in the in-camera preview while taking my test shots the other day, However, as you noted the CAs in the raw file gets corrected regardless. It seems that Sony will allow you create in-camera JPG images without the CAs being corrected yet always correcting them for raw files. This appears to have been confirmed by testing shown here https://joerghaag.com/2015/03/29/in-camera-lens-compensation/

I think that this is bug in Sony's firmware. I am using the latest ver 3.30. Maybe you can also bring this to Sony's attention. 

-louie
Photo of Louis Sherwin

Louis Sherwin

  • 146 Posts
  • 32 Reply Likes
Here is an update:

I have since updated to 4.00 firmware and no change in behavior.

It is inconsistent that my camera offers the option to disable chromatic aberration , distortion and vignetting  and that the resulting "opcodes" in the raw file cannot be overridden in Lightroom. 

When you say "baked in" do you mean that raw file is already modified? How can that be if the in-camera setting is turned off. I would like to hear a better explanation of what is going on here. 

-louie
Photo of Chris Castleberry

Chris Castleberry, Camera Raw Engineer

  • 376 Posts
  • 114 Reply Likes
Updating the lens or camera firmware will have no effect on whether a lens aberration opcode is applied. Lightroom and ACR always apply them if they are present. There is no way currently to disable this in either application.
Photo of Bryan Hansel

Bryan Hansel

  • 4 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
> If you wish to disable the external profile by default, you can set a new lens profile default (with it disabled) for each lens/camera combination.

How does one go about doing this?
Photo of Pierre Gérard

Pierre Gérard

  • 10 Posts
  • 3 Reply Likes
It's not relevant because we are talking about built-in profiles, not external ones. Actually, we would like that the built-in profiles work just as external ones, meaning that you can enable or disable them, at will. This is not possible with built-in, and there is no way to override a built-in profile. If you apply an external profile, it comes on top of the built-in one, thus croping the picture even more.
Photo of Martin Fülöp

Martin Fülöp

  • 8 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
@Chris Castleberry:
>Updating the lens or camera firmware will have no effect on
>whether a lens aberration opcode is applied.
>Lightroom and ACR always apply them if they are present.
>There is no way currently to disable this in either application.

This is exactly what we are requesting for: being able to disable the embedded lens profile.

Photo of Bryan Hansel

Bryan Hansel

  • 4 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Some lenses have unique characteristics that make the lens shine and by "correcting" those characteristics automatically takes away from the picture. The only way to get around this now is by leaving the Adobe ecosystem and developing the RAW file in a competing program. We need the option to turn off built-in profiles to avoid this.
Photo of PAUL WILMORE

PAUL WILMORE

  • 2 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled Disable Automatic Lens Information- Profile.

Hi there
I too have been miffed about Auto lens profiles being applied in both Lightrooom and Photoshop; with absolutely no way of disabling it.
I shoot extensively with an Olympus 8mm lens so very often I am wanting distortion.
At last I discovered Olympus Viewer 3, you can TURN OFF lens information on Olympus raw files.
In RAW2 edit section / Distortion Correction / Manual -uncheck the "Use Lens Information" and adjust manually the distortion on a plus or minus scale.
What a brilliant way to dial in your preference as you intended, I rather think it may only be for Olympus users?
Photo of Tokumeino

Tokumeino

  • 13 Posts
  • 8 Reply Likes
I don't understand these merge things. But before I write this topic, I used to read the mentioned ones, but the answers didn't seem (as far as I understand) adress my problem. My problem is
  1. beyond Olympus only, and requires a reneral solution
  2. has nothing to do with Sony external profiles
What I'm talking about is simply about built-in profiles, whatever the brand. If LR knows how to apply them, it should be able not to aply them.

Now I'm quite confused with all these messages. Nobody has a single chance to understand anyhing, and the bug will never be solved. Anyway, I've already switched to DXO Photo Labs just because this issue. At least, DXO let people use their raw files.
Photo of Victoria Bampton - Lightroom Queen

Victoria Bampton - Lightroom Queen, Champion

  • 4798 Posts
  • 1853 Reply Likes
Don't worry Pierre, the request's quite clear. Other people's threads requesting the same feature are being merged in so that all the votes are combined - the more votes, the better chance it has of being implemented. So it's a good thing, honestly.
Photo of Martin Fülöp

Martin Fülöp

  • 8 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like

Hi there, I'm having some trouble processing DJI X5R DNGs with Adobe Camera Raw. All DNGs I take with the Olympus Zuiko 25/1.8 show heavy apochromatic refraction AFTER Adobe Camera Raw applies the integrated lens profile.

The proxy-files produced by the X5R do not show any problems, it's the same when I process the files with DJI Cinelight, even when I place the DNG-files in Premiere Pro CC and do the color correction with the Lumetri engine, there is no apchromatic refraction.
So the lens itself should not be the problem

As a test I have used DNG Cleaner for Apple to erase the integrated profile and when doing that, Adobe Camera Raw imports the DNGs without integrated profile and without any apchromatic refraction.

The downside of DNG Cleaner is that it is one more step in processing the RAWs, and Premiere Pro will not accept the files as a sequence.

So it would be great to have the possibility to deactivate the integrated lens profile directly in Adobe Camera Raw!

Here are links to the DNGs:
Original file
(will be accepted by premiere pro cc's media browser, actual version)
File with erased integrated lens profile
(will not be accepted by premiere pro)
Photo of Todd Shaner

Todd Shaner, Champion

  • 1394 Posts
  • 463 Reply Likes
I believe you are referring to chromatic aberration. It appears LR is incorrectly applying the chromatic aberration correction data embedded in the file. Disabling the built-in lens profile prevents applying the correction data, but that doesn't address the actual problem. I suggest posting this as a separate Problem Report here:

https://feedback.photoshop.com/photoshop_family/topics/new

Photo of jason

jason

  • 6 Posts
  • 2 Reply Likes
New Nikon Z7 user here...I'm seeing the "Built-in Lens Profile applied" notification in LR for the first time.  I'm assuming that the Z7 RAW NEF files must include lens profile information that my previous Nikon DSLRs did not.

I can't believe that there's no way to disable the built-in profile in LR.  The whole point of shooting RAW is to be able to make these sorts editing decisions after pressing the shutter.

The Z7 has in-camera options for "Vignette control" and "Auto distortion control" separately.  If both options are turned ON in-camera, Lightroom displays a message that distortion and vignetting have both been automatically corrected.  I'd hoped that by turning these options OFF in-camera that the profile data would not be applied automatically in Lightroom.  The interesting thing is that if I turn both off, the vignetting correction goes away but the distortion correction does not.  Is this a bug?

I confirmed that when creating a Z7 NEF where both distortion and vignetting control were OFF in-camera and opening that RAW file in Nikon's Capture NX-D converter with Lens Corrections set to "Recorded Settings" that neither distortion nor vignetting were corrected.  It seems that the RAW file is being written correctly by the camera.  Why is Lightroom not respecting the camera settings and applying an automatic distortion correction?

Photo of Pierre Gérard

Pierre Gérard

  • 11 Posts
  • 3 Reply Likes
Interresting though. On forums, I've been often opposed that LR forces built-in profile so as to respect the develop settings in the RAW files. That's obviously not the case.

That beeing said, not every camera lets the user disable profiles (very nice Nikon in-camera feature BTW, making composition much easier). So I would be happier if Adobe just let people deactivate the built-in profiles, whatever the body settings. After all, LR ignores B&W, color, brightness information in the RAW files. Why would LR take this particular one into account ? The whole purpose of RAW files is precisely to develop differently as the in-body JPEG, not to constraint the user the get the same picture as in-body.
(Edited)
Photo of Michael Kaplan

Michael Kaplan

  • 4 Posts
  • 3 Reply Likes
I agree, it should definitely be an option to turn off built-in profiles. Also, Lightroom defaults should also not be changed automatically.Should be an option for things like sharpening, NR etc.
Photo of Martin Fülöp

Martin Fülöp

  • 8 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled LR Classic CC/Camera Raw CC: Disable embedded lens profile.

I need to disable the embedded lens profile for the DJI Zenmuse X5R camera in Camera Raw CC.
Some other users have requested this feature more than a year ago, but it seems that it still was not recognized by Adobe.
Photo of Todd Shaner

Todd Shaner, Champion

  • 1394 Posts
  • 463 Reply Likes
I've copied this reply over from a 2013 Lightroom forum post with a similar discussion.

Vignetting and rectilinear distortion correction to make your digital camera images "100% perfect" is generally unnecessary and can even degrade the image quality. This is essentially what the "built-in" lens profile is doing! Adding the ability to use the 0-100% Distortion and Vignetting slider controls with "built-in" lens profiles will allow users to manually "dial-in" in a more appropriate correction amount. I personally have all of my lens profile default settings changed to 0% Distortion and 75% Vignetting and only change them when there is "visible" distortion or vignetting in the image. YMMV with these built-in lens profiles, but you hopefully get the idea...and I hope Adobe Engineering does as well!

Distortion Correction Cons

-Crops the image to maintain straight image borders–You lose the image peripheral area that is corrected. Wide and ultra-wide zoom lenses generally have significant barrel distortion. Applying 100% correction "effectively" increase the focal length, which means that expensive 12-24mm zoom lens may provide something closer to a 14-26mm lens. It also reduces the image resolution in those “stretched” areas due to upscaling interpolation of the image data.

-Wide angle lenses generally exhibit barrel type distortion, which actually helps to reduce corner and edge "stretching." By correcting this distortion to make it 100% "geometrically correct" the elongation will become more noticeable. In fact there is software available that can apply "non-rectilinear correction" (volume anamorphosis) to wide angle images to remove some of the elongation. This "added distortion" can actually improve certain images (i.e. people pictures). Good information here: http://forums.adobe.com/message/4516863#4516863

As Eric outlined at the above post you can simply use the 'Manual' Lens Corrections Distortion slider to add barrel distortion: http://feedback.photoshop.com/photoshop_family/topics/correct_stretching_effect_from_an_ul tra_wide_angle_lens

Vignetting Correction Cons

-Most people are accustomed to seeing some vignetting in photographs and in fact vignetting is sometimes "added" to images to focus attention on the central subject.

-Wide and ultra-wide angle lenses usually exhibit significant vignetting especially at wide apertures, which can be as much as -3EV. You will need to apply +3EV of exposure compensation in the extreme corners to achieve 100% vignetting correction. This will significantly raise shadow noise and can also reduce image quality due to lens defects such as astigmatism, and coma.
(Edited)
Photo of Martin Fülöp

Martin Fülöp

  • 8 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
Todd Shaner, so this is an issue that is unsolved since 2013?
I've been working with DSLRs since 2003 and have never had this problem of the baked in correction, but since 2016 I'm filming with the DJI X5R and that was the moment when I got into this problem.

It's not very confidence inspiring that Adobe did not implement the option to disable the embedded lens-profile for so long time...
Photo of Todd Shaner

Todd Shaner, Champion

  • 1389 Posts
  • 462 Reply Likes
I think part of the problem may be due to the fact that each camera manufacturer's embedded lens profile data my be proprietary and protected by patents. This makes it difficult to implement properly functioning 0-100% Distortion and Vignetting controls, but it should be easy to simply provide the ability to "disable" applying the lens profile. You can then use the Lens Corrections 'Manual' panel Distortion and Vignetting controls and Transform panel "Scale control to fill the corrected image in the original frame. With certain lens focal lengths and subjects you may only need to apply manual Vignetting. However, enabling the Distortion and Vignetting 0-100% manual controls is the best option.
Photo of Louis Sherwin

Louis Sherwin

  • 146 Posts
  • 32 Reply Likes
This is exactly what I was asking for in the initial question. Chris's initial assertion that certain "opcodes" cannot be disabled is not true as other raw processor application do precisely that.  I simply want the same option in Lightroom. 

-louie
Photo of Chris Castleberry

Chris Castleberry, Camera Raw Engineer

  • 376 Posts
  • 114 Reply Likes
It is true that lens correction opcodes cannot be disabled in Adobe software. We have considered doing so, but it currently isn't planned. However, I will provide this feedback to the team. 

There are also 3rd party tools such as exiftool that can be used to strip opcodes from raw files. They should be used at your own risk, and as far as I know you cannot add the opcodes back once they have been removed.

Regards,

- Chris
Photo of Louis Sherwin

Louis Sherwin

  • 146 Posts
  • 32 Reply Likes
Thanks for the update Chris.

I suspect that many of the camera manufactures are reluctant to have this happen for many of the current production  lenses. They seem to have gone in the direction of making less expensive optics by making them look good enough with software. 

I believe that it is a heavy handed on the part of the manufactures to "enforce" lens correction. Truthfully for 98% of users they will never even think about this and won't matter. They are all very happy shooting JPG in camera and happy with the results. Its only raw shooters that might care and most of us have already invested in better or best quality lenses. I just want the option to choose what is going to make the best rendition from a particular capture.

tks, louie
Photo of Bryan Hansel

Bryan Hansel

  • 4 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
@Chris, I hope Adobe takes this seriously. I have a multi-year project that depends on the look of a lens and now I can't use Adobe software to process the images. The only way to get around this now is by leaving the Adobe ecosystem and developing the RAW file in a competing program. We need the option to turn off built-in profiles to avoid this. I had to plunk down $100 on a competitor just to get the feature to turn off the built-in profiles. That's annoying.
Photo of Todd Shaner

Todd Shaner, Champion

  • 1389 Posts
  • 462 Reply Likes
"I suspect that many of the camera manufactures are reluctant to have this happen for many of the current production  lenses. They seem to have gone in the direction of making less expensive optics by making them look good enough with software."

Camera manufacturers are also doing this with more expensive lenses to increase performance. By allowing a zoom lens design to have more distortion and vignetting the focal length range and/or maximum aperture can be increased. A good example of this is the Sony FE 12-24mm F/4 G ultrawide zoom lens. What's interesting is that the built-in lens profile does NOT apply 100% Distortion and Vignetting correction. Given the extreme angle of view at the 12mm setting doing so would definitely reduce corner image quality due to stretching. There's still considerable corner stretching, which with some image types could be improved by reducing the correction even further (i.e. 0-100% manual controls).
http://www.opticallimits.com/sonyalphaff/1017-sony1224f4g?start=1
To see what your images would look like without the built-in lens profile applied turn off the Distortion and Vignetting correction in your camera's settings menu and shoot raw + JPEG. Use LR's Compare mode to see them side-by-side.
Photo of richardplondon

richardplondon

  • 24 Posts
  • 8 Reply Likes
This narrative that the user is being short-changed somehow when software correction stands in for / supplements purely optical correction, doesn't really stand up IMO - these are no more than alternative engineering solutions. The user can indeed benefit if a lens becomes cheaper to make, but also if it's lighter and smaller, with fewer internal glass surfaces, and fewer and less massy moving parts... for the equivalent end result.


That said, to opt to disable built-in 'compulsory' correction and then live with the consequences (applying whatever external lens profile or manual correction one likes) seems completely reasonable as a request. Alternatively, if the "scale" transform could bring edge data into view which built-in lens correction is otherwise trimming off, this might address the particular complaint that Raw picture content is being lost by that.
(Edited)
Photo of DP HOME

DP HOME

  • 85 Posts
  • 14 Reply Likes
"... By allowing a zoom lens design to have more distortion and vignetting the focal length range and/or maximum aperture can be increased..." and the expense of decreasing resolution when pincushion is corrected (so you stretch vs compress), thank you... not to mention crude noise handling ( Eric Chan @ https://forums.adobe.com/message/3512039#3512039 )
Photo of John R. Ellis

John R. Ellis, Champion

  • 4310 Posts
  • 1142 Reply Likes
See this post for a clear recipe about how to use ExifTool to remove the embedded lens correction: 
https://forums.adobe.com/thread/2431111
Photo of Martin Fülöp

Martin Fülöp

  • 8 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
I am working with Exiftool at the moment, but if you use it for CinemaDNGs/Filming, it's a pain to process 50.000 files two times (1x with exiftool, 1x ACR). It would be much faster and easier to disable the embedded lens-profile and enable my custom settings in one step directly in ACR.
Photo of Todd Shaner

Todd Shaner, Champion

  • 1394 Posts
  • 462 Reply Likes
I tried using it with Canon G9X MKII CR2 files and DNG converted files without any success. This is a fixed lens point-and-shoot camera that uses a built-in lens profile. Any ideas?

exiftool -r -overwrite_original -IFD0:OpcodeList3= PATH-TO-FILE-OR-FOLDER
Photo of Pierre Gérard

Pierre Gérard

  • 11 Posts
  • 3 Reply Likes
The problem is that I would like to keep the information about the profile (I use it for most of my pictures). All I want is to get able to disable it at will. So erasing the data is not an option for me. I also would like to keep the data for CA correction and vignetting.

I've been told that the new Canon mirrorless also embed lens profiles in the RAW files, but that you can nevertheless turn on/off this built-in profile. That's only for the new Canon, not for the new Nikon Z, which suffer from the same issue as avery other ML. Could EXIFtool be used to switch some flag (in Canon's way) "allowing" LR to disable the lens profile ?  
(Edited)
Photo of richardplondon

richardplondon

  • 24 Posts
  • 8 Reply Likes
Pierre: in theory a lens profile could be generated from some exposures where the built-in lens correction had been deliberately "broken", and then this profile could be applied manually onto other photos where the built-in lens correction had been similarly "broken". You would then have separate sliders for turning up and down, or off, the strength of geometric correction, and of vignette correction... assuming you applied this custom lens profile, otherwise you could apply no lens profile at all and rely on manually set corrections instead, or else no correction whatever.

Adobe external profiles no longer characterise CA correction as far as I know, but rather (in response to the CA checkbox) Lightroom can analyse the photo content directly, and then apply whatever lateral CA correction it concludes is most optimal. To be clear, this method does not rely on any pre-existing profiling info at all.
Photo of Guy Tal

Guy Tal

  • 16 Posts
  • 2 Reply Likes
Adding my vote for this feature. Other possible solutions:

- Add an "Apply" button to the manual settings that would allow zeroing all values. The initial values are zeroes, but they can't actually be applied by default (i.e., override the built-in profile).

- Create a checkbox or configuration option that would give users the choice to not apply profile corrections by default.

- As suggested, add a selectable "Zero" profile to the list of manufacturer/other profiles.

And of course, allow these settings to be saved as default so they don't need to be applied manually each time.

Thank you.
Photo of Jao van de Lagemaat

Jao van de Lagemaat

  • 198 Posts
  • 65 Reply Likes
Adding my vote too. Recently got a Nikon Z7 and this has the built-in lens profile issue. I often want to disable this as I might want the more natural look of vignetting caused by the lens as well as natural distortion instead of having to fake it with the vignette and distortion controls.
Photo of Henrik Helmers

Henrik Helmers

  • 10 Posts
  • 5 Reply Likes
I voted for this too. What I read somewhere a long time ago is that Adobe made a deal with vendors to auto-apply profiles, as it makes cameras look better. I switched from Canon to Fujifilm and many of my Fujinon lenses have heavy distortion and vignetting that I sometimes would like to keep.

Especially vignetting can be desirable many times, removing it and adding it back is just throwing image quality out the window.

I also feel that Adobe is removing an important learning opportunity here, as automatic corrections can mask the differences between high and low-quality glass.
Photo of Oliver Dietze

Oliver Dietze

  • 1 Post
  • 0 Reply Likes
After getting a Nikon Z6 I am too for the first time effected by ACR applying a built-in lens profile. Since I disabled this inside the camera and Nikon itself is not applying in NX-D I really wish Adobe would stop patronizing me. It's an absolute nogo, Adobe!
Photo of jason

jason

  • 6 Posts
  • 2 Reply Likes
This is what I believe should be addressed and is probably a bug in ACR.  I turned off "Auto distortion control" in my Z7.  When I load a NEF in NX-D distortion correction is not automatically applied but it is in ACR.  The information to apply correction or not is properly written to the file.  Adobe is either not reading it correctly or ignoring it.

Interestingly, if I turn off vignetting control in camera it's not automatically applied in ACR (nor in NX-D) as expected.  There is at least some logic in ACR to turn on/off corrections based on what's written to the file...

At the end of the day, these are RAW files and users should be given the option to turn on/off any correction like this during processing.  If I wanted settings baked in straight out of the camera I'd shoot JPEG.  There's no reason this can't be done in ACR if it can be done in other RAW processors.