Lightroom: Relative Develop Presets would save the day!

  • 189
  • Idea
  • Updated 4 months ago
  • Under Consideration
  • (Edited)
Lightroom--I would love to see relative presets as opposed to only absolute presets. For example, I may want to add +10 of yellow in Temperature to what ever setting exists and not a static number.

This would be great for white balancing where pleasing color is preferable over accurate color. I may want to white balance a set of pictures and add +10 of yellow to warm things up.

I find a lot of presets aren’t useful in my workflow, but a relative color temp/tint would be.

Thanks,

Reid
Photo of Reid

Reid

  • 5 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
  • excited

Posted 9 years ago

  • 189
Photo of Rob Cole

Rob Cole

  • 4831 Posts
  • 388 Reply Likes
I implemented DevAdjust to support relative presets. Its modal (plugin) nature is somewhat alleviated by having preset keystroke menu shortcuts (Windows only) and "hot metadata" preset selection (all platforms). I'm not saying its as good as a native solution would be, but it may tide you over...
Photo of richardplondon

richardplondon

  • 25 Posts
  • 8 Reply Likes
I wonder whether once people start to think of applying a relative adjustment, they may want to apply these not only with a special kind of a preset, but also with (for example) AutoSync across multiple images that are selected. So a separate kind of Autosync might put you into a new mode where when you move the tint +2 from where it was before, all the other images get +2 tint compared to where each individually was before.

However, as I see it there are many commands where the "proportionality" may need some attention - or in some cases may not even make any practical sense - regardless whether we are working directly or by preset.

For example: a relative adjustment may be recorded from one image, which happens to take the Blacks from 3 down to 2. Then this is applied to another image which currently has a Blacks value of 9. In order to feel we are making the SAME relative adjustment to that, is it better to apply the same numerical change; the same percentage change; a nonlinear change of some kind that has been designed to have a similarly strong perceptual effect; or something else?

RP
Photo of richardplondon

richardplondon

  • 25 Posts
  • 8 Reply Likes
I think one central difficulty is that "basic settings" and "tweak adjustments" might have to be regarded separately - a question that does not apply with Autosync at present, if auto-sync is used with images that are quite similar in the first place.

Using auto-sync across one image that is underexposed and another that is overexposed does not really work very well since however we have individually worked around these differences, will be steamrollered by the applied corrections. The perceptual meaning of a +5 change in fill light is not only different when you are going from 0 to 5, than it is when going from 5 to 10. It can also be very different even going from 0 to 5, in the context of one image with a +1 stop Exposure correction and a 0 blacks, as against another with a 0 stop Exposure and a 5 blacks. I doubt that this can be programmed around except as some kind of "compensated Auto" that would eliminate prior individual adjustments.

One can easily imagine the "shaping adjustments" such as fine WB, tint, brightness, vibrance, clarity, (parametric) tonecurve shaping, overall sharpening strength being applied successfully as a relative adjustment and in these cases, a simple numerical method would probably be fine. I am assuming these are subjective tweaks made after the basic image settings are in place, and that they would be small in magnitude - though if we want to make a rash and crude change instead, I suppose we might as well be left that option! However the greater the magnitude of the change the less it will produce the same subjective effect since we will soon exceed the comfortable envelope on certain images and soon get into clipping, noise and threshold problems that may not be apparent on our primary image.

If we stipulate that relative adjustments are specifically ABOUT being able to work across groups of more dissimilar images, then we must expect such problems more often than with our present Autosync practice.

My real point was aimed at the other adjustments such as coarse WB, Exposure, Blacks, NR, sharpening radius and threshold, and some others which IMHO are better considered as both "basic" and "individual". We set these things in order to have a "proper" image that will usefully underly the "shaping" adjustments - to the point where we are happy with the image on an objective level, and want to start making some VCs and exploring the subjective treatments that it will support. Whitepoint and blackpoint are rather technical necessities which I would not expect to manipulate as a group "beautification", nor do I think they are really amenable in their nature to that kind of approach.

So I guess a new relative-sync function needs to focus on a subset of tools only, and restrict itself to a quite low-magnitude and rolled-off power of alteration. Analogous to the gentle "relative" massaging that the parametric tonecurve applies, as distinct from the potentially huge and untrammelled and highly image-specific "absolute" things the points tonecurve is capable of.

RP
Photo of Rob Cole

Rob Cole

  • 4831 Posts
  • 386 Reply Likes
Thanks Richard,

Yeah, its really hard to come up with generic formulas for mass relative manipulation of settings with any meaningful intelligence. I do like the idea of intelligent auto-presets though, where one could say: "I want this kinda dark with lots of black clipping", then click a "do it" button and have it. Or, "I want this bright and low contrast, highlight-clipping OK", and do it, or say "I want this highly contrasty but with no blown highlights", and get that... I submitted an Idea a while ago for it: http://feedback.photoshop.com/photosh...

- the idea being to set a *smaller* set of sliders that are aimed at setting things more qualitatively, then have the analyzer compute the actual values and adjust things accordingly. DxO has something like this.

Anyway, I'm not sure why Adobe decided to go with absolute for auto-sync, since if selected photos are all starting from the same starting point, relative *is* absolute, and if they aren't starting from the same starting point, then I *never* want absolute adjustments - maybe some people do. Maybe they had relative already taken by quick-develop, so absolute seemed to be available still for auto-sync. Really dunno...

Personally, I think the best solution would be integration of library and develop modules, and integration of quick-develop with auto-sync, plus unified/simplified targeting, such that one could set things to same absolute or relative, without blinking, then slap a couple keywords on 'em without thinking too much about it...

Cheers,
Rob
Photo of aed abit

aed abit

  • 1 Post
  • 0 Reply Likes
niceeee; love this ideaaaaa
Photo of Dan Berdal

Dan Berdal

  • 34 Posts
  • 3 Reply Likes
There is a need for both types of adjustments - relative and absolute. Take white balance adjustments for example. I.E. I'll adjust a group of wedding photos to have the same "look" Depending on lighting and camera settings there are times when dialing in a white balance of 5000k on one photo will look the same as a white balance of 4500k on a different photo. Obviously sometimes it's nice to quickly dial in a white balance of the same nominal value, say 5500k for a group of photos. Other times, I just want to warm up a group of photos. Some of these photos might be at 3500K, 5500K and 6500K but I want them all to look "warmer" being able to bump each one up by 500K would save TONS of time.

Also, having the ability to take a group of photos that I've previously edited with exposure adjustments (some are +.5, -.3, +1.0 etc)... to take that group of photos and relatively brighten them up from where they currently are... brighten all photos by 1/2 stop, would be a huge time saver.
Photo of Dan Berdal

Dan Berdal

  • 34 Posts
  • 3 Reply Likes
All that I would need would be a little tickbox next to the autosync button to choose relative or absolute.