The Adobe Lightroom Beta 3 has been released for download. I’ve been playing around with it for an hour or so, and my first impression is: no revolutionary changes, by a lot of minor improvements. Just to mention a few:

  • More intuitive import function
  • Publishing directly to Flickr – not with all the features of Jeffrey Friedl’s Export to Flickr plugin, but very well integrated into Lightroom itself
  • Improved noise reduction
  • New film-grain effect
  • More flexible layout of prints
  • Better performance in some areas, especially the adjustment brush

No revolutionary changes on the surface of Lightroom 3.
But lots of small improvements.

For a very enthusiastic video-presentation of every new feature, take a look at photoshopuser.com. But be prepared, that these guys seems to think that every little improvement is the greatest news since Niépce….

In the posting called “Lightroom blues” I whined about LR’s poor JPG-export capabilities.  In a comment Carsten Fredsted proposed at solution, which has proved to be very convincing.

First of all, you should install Mogrify. This is a program, which will convert from one picture file format to another, with a lot of user settings. However, the program is command line driven.

That’s why you should also install the LR/Mogrify plug-in for Lightroom. After doing so, you will have access to all the advanced functions of Mogrify via dialog boxes, directly from within LR’s export menu.

Basically, you will then ask Lightroom to export as a TIFF-file – which Mogrify will then pick up, and automagically transmogrify to a JPG-file, based on your settings for size, sharpening and compression.

This is the photo from the original post, but this time it is exported from Lightroom with the help of LR/Mogrify. The result is clearly much better than with LR’s own JPG-eksport:

LR/Mogrify version

You can of course do batch-export with LR/Mogrify. However, the base version is limited to 10 photos at a time. You will have to donate an amount of your own choice to the developer, to get access to the unlimited version.

It should also be noted, that LR/Mogrify can be integrated into other plug-ins, such as this one, which allows for direct export to your Flickr-account.

Verdict: Highly recommended!

Try taking a look at the two pictures below. They look the same. But click on them to enlarge and see the difference:

Lightroom version   Photoshop version
Lightroom version               Photoshop version

The original RAW-file was imported into Lightroom, cropped, converted to monochrome and exposure was adjusted. After that, the ways departed:

The version to the left was exported to JPG directly from Lightroom – without any sharpening applied (both “clarity” and “sharpening” set to zero). JPG quality was 100 – that is: no compression. The picture was downscaled from a width of a little more than 2000 pixels to 500 during export.

The version to the right was exported to Photoshop CS3 as a full size TIFF. In PS it has been downscaled to a width of 500 pixels and a suitable amount of “Smart sharpen” applied. Finally it was converted to JPG with “Save for web” with a quality setting of 70.

The funny thing is, that when you look at the version to the left, there is a distinct halo around the person in the picture. The better your screen is, the more visible is the halo. This is normally a sign of over-sharpening and/or too much compression. But this picture has neither been sharpened nor compressed.

The version to the right has no halo – even though it has been both sharpened and consequently has much better defined details. The effect is very obvious in this case; however I have seen it in various degrees in a number of JPG-conversions from Lightroom.

(Btw.: you can swap directly between the large images by clicking in the right / left edge of the picture)

It is well known, that unpredictable shift of hues can occur when exporting to JPG from Lightroom. It happens, because the program automatically converts from its internal colour-space, ProPhoto, to the more “narrow” sRGB colour-space. In itself, this is good – but the problem is, that as a user you have no possibility to predict the outcome of the process. You just have to cross your fingers and hope for the best…

But, as demonstrated, there seems to be other problems too. I’m not at all an expert, and I don’t know if this is another variant of the colour-space issue, if it’s a result of a poor downscaling algorithm – or something completely else.

Of course it might just be me, who doesn’t understand how to use Lightroom in the right way. But since the halos appear, even with sharpening and compression set to zero, I can’t see how they can be avoided? The only way to make absolutely sure, that your JPG’s are of maximum quality, seems to be the Photoshop way…

Adobe has recently released Lightroom 2 Beta. I have tried it – and established that JPG conversion is still just as shabby as in version 1.4.1. Am I the only one who thinks, that Adobe should be able to do a better job?

Some time ago I wrote, that Lightroom is a very nice program, but with some serious flaws that made me decide not to use. So now I’ve changed my mind, and decided to make Lightroom the hub of my digital workflow. How come?

Because Lightroom offers me 85% of what I need in one integrated package. First of all it’s a very capable photo-database with nice features for sorting, tagging, etc. Secondly it is an excellent RAW-converter. Furthermore it offers basic photo-editing, based on the idea of non-destructive editing. Finally it’s all wrapped up in a rather nice and functional user interface.

Apparently the developers at Adobe have done some serious case studies of the workflow of pro-photographers. The result is a program which – unlike Photoshop – is very “photocentric”.

How about the flaws then? Well of course they are still there. I hope that Adobe will include both the “save to web” as well as the “proof colors” that we know from Photoshop in the next version of Lightroom. And from some of the forums on the net, it seems like I’m not the only one with that hope…

Until this hope is fulfilled, there are basically two options when it comes to generate JPG’s for the web: Either learn to live with the limitations of Lightroom.  Or export to Photoshop and save as JPG from there. The last option is in fact made rather easy, since it is possible to make an export-preset in Lightroom that will scale your photo to preselected dimensions, save it as uncompressed JPG and automatically open it in Photoshop – all at one click. I like to see this as turning Photoshop into a save-to-web plug-in for Lightroom ;-)

Then there is the issue of speed. I’ve tweaked the preview options a bit – and then I decided to replace my aging AMD CPU with a never duo-core version. That helped. The time Lightroom takes to generate larger previews are still noticeable – but not more than I can live with it.

Lightroom is Adobes newest photo-handling software. It is based on at least two very good ideas: firstly, its meant to be a complete, integrated package for a digital workflow. It’s packing a RAW-converter, a picture-database, basic editing and several other functions into one program, with a very nice and functional user interface. Secondly, it’s based on the idea of non-destructive editing: no matter the amount of tweaking and editing you perform, Lightroom will not change one single pixel in your original image. Instead, it saves all your work in either an accompanying text-file or simply in the database. This also means that re-editing and creation of different versions is easy and flexible.

Lightroom

Lightrooms interface takes a little time to get used to. But in fact it works well – and looks good.

However, the program is let down by three serious problems: first of all it is painfully slow when it comes to scrolling in the library. Rendering thumbnails takes forever. It could be my machine – even though other similar programs are running at much higher speed on the same machine. It could also be that I have simply not found out how to best set up Lightroom for maximum speed.

The second problem has to do with the way Lightroom handles colours. Internally, it always uses the prophoto RGB colour-space and all editing is in 16bit. Not before a photo is send to its final destination, this is changed. If, for example, you export to JPG, it will be changed to 8 bit sRGB. This is not in itself a bad idea. However, contrary to the “Proof” function in Photoshop, there is no way to preview the result. You just have to hope that your colours won’t change too much.

The third problem also has to do with JPG export. Unlike other Adobe products, there is no preview of the effects of the compression you apply. You can only chose an amount and cross your fingers. Furthermore, since the photo can be downscaled in size only during the conversion to JPG, you can only apply sharpening on the full size version of the photo. Again, you just have to hold your breath and hope it will look all right, even if the final photo is much smaller.

The end result is that exporting to JPG becomes a tiresome process of trial and error, if youinsist on the best possible quality.

This is so much more annoying, since most of these problems could be easily solved with features such as “Proof” and “Save to web” which are already part of Photoshop. If Adobe will include these features in a later version of Lightroom, it will probably become my first choice for most of my photo-handling – even if it requires a hardware update. But for now I’ve decided to skip it in favour of other solutions.

Himlen over Søborg

For tiden eksperimenterer jeg lidt med en prøve-version af Adobe Lightroom. I modsætning til Photoshop er Lightroom fra starten tænkt som foto-organiserings og -redigeringsprogram. Efter umiddelbart at være afskrækket af en noget uoverskuelig brugergrænseflade, er jeg nu begyndt at kunne se ideerne bag Lightroom – og de tiltaler mig. Men det er pÃ¥ godt og ondt meget anderledes at arbejde med end Photoshop – og spørgsmÃ¥let er, om fordelene er større end besværet ved at skulle tilegne sig en helt ny arbejdsgang……

Billedet herover er i øvrigt en RAW-optagelse, konverteret til duotone i Lightroom.

Lars K. Christensen Credits