no one is asking for DP preview, just the same preview we already have at 75% to also work at lower zoom levels
2 Likes
this is the key point
some really pedantic responses in this thread but the bottom line is we have a good enough image preview at 75% and we just want the exact same thing for lower zoom levels
processors these days are orders of magnitude more powerful than 10 years ago and raw files sizes haven’t increased anywhere near as much
1 Like
What they want. They choose their target users.
Which one ? photolab existing one ?
I often can’t see a whole eye of a character in it …
I can only see about 1/1500 of the surface of my images in it.
This maybe suit with “lowres” sensors, but when about to 50 Mpixels sensors it is no more suitable.
This will be a great change for PL8. I can’t imagine them not putting it in photolab.
Lets hope we’ll can choose the size of the preview (resisable zone in the main window).
1 Like
Yeah, it would be logical its in the next release of PhotoLab. PhotoLab should be their flagship product where they put all the other technology plus more unique stuff to PhotoLab.
The next DeepPrime XD2 engine and full screen preview of everything, are two feature that seems most logical to be in new PhotoLab since they already have proof of concept released. Also I think, if I recall they mentioned that will be making Fuji RAW files supported with the new Pure RAW 4, but I’m not sure if its still out. They said coming soon, but still nothing. I wonder if the resources have been diverted to finish up PhotoLab 8 or is it something else. Just speculation on my part.
That too would be nice to have, yes.
AS I’ve said already, it won’t be that they can’t do it, it will be that they don’t have the time to do it because of the financial straightjacket the company is in.
Could it be that at least 75% zoom of the image is required to display all corrections on the monitor in the required quality and in a reliable manner?
(added zoom)
The image will probably always be rendered completely on a 6K monitor for the image of an APS-C sensor, as it is displayed larger than 75% by default.
This is what I meant.
LUT Grading and Create Profile was not all that interesting for me - just as an example. I can think of a lot of other functions that ought to have been added or fixed. I have never used them and never will.
How many are using Photolab in studio taking for example product pictures? Aren´t they using Capture One instead since 10-15 years?
In the two years before It was implemented, the addition of LUTs was one of the most requested enhancements on this site. I rarely use them, but apparently a lot of other people do.
Mark
Isn´t this just a performance issue?
What did they do in Lightroom?
Well Scott Kelby strongly advised us in his books about Lightroom not to use previews of high resolution of performance reasons. Would you prefer a solution like that instead?
A special problem for Photolab (which is also a great advantage by the way) is that PL is always reading and rendering the files directly from the file directories and folders. Lightroom is not. Both Lightroom and Capture One have to “import” the files before they can be used.
The advantage that have made wonders for me and others integration Photolab with PhotoMechanic is that because Photolab works this way reading the folders directly we easy can select a bunch of pictures in PM Plus and open them ready in seconds for editing in Photolab. That is not possible either with LR or C1 - at least what I have seen. In that case you get stuck in an import process that has to be carried out before these files can be used and processed.
For me this integration and communication between and PhotoMechanic is absolutely a dealbreaker if it shouldn´t work exactly as it works today and it is definitely one of Photolabs strongest selling points for people who use it and the thing that makes it work is the fact that Photolab unlike LR and C1 works straight on the folders and files without any import-processes.
And isn’t de-noising in Lr a separate action that creates yet another layer?
I don’t know but saw a demo.
I don´t know how it is now but at least earlier Lightroom didn´t have a real proper layer interface. It creates layers in tha backgrund as soon as you open Local Adjustments and select and use one of the “brushes” awailable. In that respect it is even worse than Photolab.
There are severe limitations both in Lightroom and Photolab in “local mode”. In Lightroom even with the new AI-tools since there is limitations when it comes to the tools that are available in “local mode”. It is only Capture One that is all layers and layers where all the tools available globally are available even “locally”. This is why I am not a big fan of “local modes” at all. A problem with that approach is that you end up with a solution with different user dialogs/interfaces for these different modes and that is both limiting and often confusing.
I have also seen some biased demos that “forget” to even mention these facts. From what I know there is no “refinement” tools for “masks” in Lightroom either which is a really crusial tool when dealing with edge precision when masking and there are limitations when it comes to color grading too. So when comparing making tools it is not just about the masking. It is equally important what you can do on that masked area and that might differ a lot between different software solutions.
1 Like
New to the forum and PL but reading thru this is really interesting - especially to someone new to PL that’s trying to decide how to move forward with a new camera that no longer is supported by my old copy of Lr 6.
Anyway, a couple observations: I see what is being discussed at levels below 75%. But I am not seeing any color shift when changing magnifications. This is only about the sharpening effect being displayed correct?
Managing and applying sharpness to my understanding is always supposed to be done at 1:1. The effect is applied at the pixel level (on either side of the pixels) so it makes sense to be viewing at the pixel level.
Also, there are some sharpening tasks that are only applied in Lr 6 at export, and I think printing. Its not possible to even view the effect before the file export or the print is sent to the printer. (Maybe that has changed in later versions of Lr?) Its probably possible with some of the very hi resolution monitors to actually see the effect at lower magnifications but is that a good ROI for DXO - to accommodate a very small segment of users?
I have a dumb question - is DXO PL related to the DXO lens and camera testing site? I thought it was but thinking that maybe I read something that says its not.
It depends on corrections applied, the subject, and lens chromatic aberrations. Significant color shifts between 70% and 75% happened very rarely to me, but they did happen. If you use high ClearVision Plus with lens requiring strong CA corrections, this may happen more often. Maybe using Unsharp Mask can exhibit the problem more often, but I’ve never used it with PhotoLab, except for “special effects” editing. Otherwise you should mostly be safe.
1 Like
A special problem for Photolab (which is also a great advantage by the way) is that PL is always reading and rendering the files directly from the file directories and folders.
I agree with you. For most of us, simple interoperability between applications from different manufacturers is certainly important. This is where the local file system has its advantages. However, I am no longer sure whether a high-performance file system on a local computer will still be the goal of the major operating system manufacturers.
One of the questions that I have (coming from Lr 6, is:
what is the difference between operating in the Catalog vs Non-catalog environments of Lr vs PL?? I have PL set up now to receive my new images with a hard cut off date but I am not really understanding what the differences will be over time. It seems strange not to “import” my images now. I also played around with making changes to the folders and it seems that you can move and rename folders and files in PL as long as you do it from the PL program itself and it will track the moves and changes? Very much like Lr.
Am I missing anything? Is there an article that goes over this that I can read?
Are you sure import is mandatory for lightroom and C1 ?
Don’t know if PM integration works with them the way you like to use it. But import is not mandatory.
lightroom FAQ :
Do I need to import photos to Lightroom to access them in the Local tab ?
No, you don’t need to import or sync locally stored photos to Lightroom. The Local tab lets you edit locally stored photos without importing them into Lightroom.
And C1 can work on images in directories where they are without importing them in its directory structure.
They let user choice.