If you photograph on negative film and scan it, you may want to invert the image in Lightroom.  Or, perhaps you like the “film negative” look, and want to invert your positive digital images.  In either case, if you have looked for an “invert” button in Lightroom, you will have found out that there is none.

Martin Evening has a video out on how you can create a Lightroom preset to invert your images.  It involves inverting one raw file using Adobe Camera Raw, updating the file in Lightroom to reflect the ACR changes, and then saving these changes as a preset that you can apply to other images in Lightroom.  To see the video, click here.

I have gone ahead and created a preset using his method.  It works on both color and black and white images.  You can download the preset here.   After downloading, in the Lightroom Preset Panel within Develop, right-click on User Presets, choose Import, and navigate to the file. The import process will copy the preset to the Presets folder — you can delete the version you downloaded.   After the preset is imported, simply select an image, and click on the preset.

Note that adjustments in the Develop panels are still operating on the negative, so they are reversed.  For example, sliding the Exposure slider to the right will darken your image rather than brighten it.   The same is true with Tone Curve adjustments, and all others.

Thank you to Dan for suggesting this topic, using the “Submit a Proposed Topic” button above.

If you’re experimenting with the LR 3 Beta, you may find Adobe’s new LR3 Beta help content useful.  Click here to go to a listing of content on their Phosphors blog.

(Click on the post title to view the post in full-screen mode.)

You may be shooting in raw rather than jpeg because you know that raw files contain more information and because they are unprocessed, giving you more flexibility.  But how do they contain more information?  Among other things, raw files are captured at a higher bit depth — depending on the camera, 12, 14 or 16 bit, compared to 8 bit for jpegs.   Whether 12, 14 or 16, these higher bit-depth files potentially contain much more information than 8 bit files.

What’s the big deal?   For each pixel in your image, the tonal value or brightness of the scene you are photographing  is stored in the image file on your memory card, along with the color.   Computer files store information in zeros and ones.  Bit depth refers to how many digits  the tonal information for each pixel is stored in.   Imagine if your camera used a bit-depth of one:  you would have one digit to store how dark each piece of the scene was, the only possible values would be 0 and 1, and the only two tones that could be represented are black and white:

Image From File with Bit Depth of One

This image of course has very little detail, since it contains no shades of gray.

If the file had a bit depth of two, there would be two digits, and the four values of 00, 01, 10, and 11 would be possible, so the image could have black, dark gray, light gray, and white:

Image from File with Bit Depth of 2

Notice that we have gained some detail, but that the image is still very choppy.  In the histogram for this image, below, we see huge gaps between the tones, confirming the choppiness or posterization.  (The histogram is a graph of the tones in an image, going from pure black on the left side to pure white on the right side.)

Histogram for File with Bit Depth of 2

Let’s jump to a file with a bit depth of 5, which allows 2 to the 5th, or 32 possible values from 00000 to 11111:

Image from File with Bit Depth of 5

We gain alot of detail, but there is still obvious posterization in the sky (click on the image to see it larger).  The histogram supports this:

Histogram for Image with Bit Depth of 5

Now let’s jump to 8, which allows 2 to the 8th, or 256 values, and is what a jpeg supports:

Image with Bit Depth of 8

Histogram of Image with Bit Depth of 8

This image shows the full detail of the scene with no visible posterization, even when viewed at full size, and the histogram looks much better.  (If you see any posterization, it is not real, but rather just the result of my blog save process.)  So why not stop here, with 8 bits and 256 tones?

The problem is that as soon as you start enhancing your image, you start compressing and expanding the tonal range.  This creates choppiness in the histogram and potentially, visible posterization in your image.  To show this, I took this 8 bit image into Photoshop, and added contrast and darkened it:

Darkened and Added Contrast to 8 Bit Image

Notice how this pulled apart the histogram:

Result of Working 8 Bit Image

The more heavy-handed your adjustments, the more and wider gaps you will end up with in your histogram, and the greater possibility that you will see posterization in your image.  256 tones is often not enough for the fine detail in the image to hold together.

12 bit files have over 4,000 tones, and 14 bit files have over 16,000.  This is vastly better, and with almost any work you could do to an image, it would hold together.  Here is the histogram from the 12 bit version of the above image, with the darkening and increased contrast:

Histogram from 12 Bit Version with Darkening and Contrast Boost

To have this additional “editing headroom”, you have to capture a high bit-depth image, i.e. a raw file, and you have to enhance it as a high-bit depth file.  It does no good to convert a raw file into 8 bit as you move into Photoshop to work it.  While you are working in Lightroom or Camera Raw, your work on your raw file is in 16 bit (standardized to accomodate 12, 14 and 16).  When you move a file from Lightroom or ACR to Photoshop, you need to ensure that the Photoshop file stays in 16 bit.  In Lightroom, go to Edit or Lightroom>Preferences>External Editing, and set your PSD or TIFF preference to 16 bit.  In ACR, click on the workflow options at the bottom of the screen and do the same.

Higher bit depth files also potentially have a much larger number of colors:  an 8-bit  jpeg can represent around 16 million colors, whereas a high bit-depth file can represent over 28 billion.  Perhaps we could make do with 16 million, but if your photography is important to you, why not start out and work with the best quality image possible?

The downside to higher bit-depth is larger image files — all else equal, a 16 bit image file is twice as big as an 8 bit image file.  But large memory cards and hard drives are so much cheaper these days than they used to be.

If you are looking to save time as you work a shoot, before you start developing it think ahead about which images are shot under similar conditions and therefore need similar adjustments, or which images you  you want similar treatments for (e.g. black and white), and apply your changes to these groups of images all at once.

Lightroom is a relatively new program, but there are already multiple ways of accomplishing this,  each with a different twist.   You have three main choices:

1.  Make changes to your first image and then synchronize the settings:

• After making the changes to the first image, in the filmstrip select all of the images you want to apply the setting to, including the one you already did.
• Make sure the one you already did is “active”.  Do this by clicking inside the thumbnail for that image, so that the border is brighter than the other selected images.  (Clicking outside the thumbnail will break apart the selection!)
• Click on the Sync… button at the bottom of the right-hand panel strip. (If you don’t have multiple images selected, you won’t see it.)
• Choose which settings from the active image you want to apply to the rest of the images, and hit Synchronize.

2.  Make changes to all of the images at once:

• In the filmstrip, select all of the images you want to affect.   Decide which of these images you want to see as you work, and click inside its thumbnail to make it active.
• Hold down the Ctl/Cmd key, and click on the Sync… button to change it to Auto Sync.
• With Auto Sync on, make changes to the active image.  Notice how the same changes are applied to all of the selected images automatically.
• Remember to turn Auto Sync off, or you may end up making unintended changes to groups of images.  Hold down the Ctl/Cmd key and click on Auto Sync to change it back to Sync…

3.  Copy and Paste your settings:

This method works for applying settings to one additional image, not groups of images.  I find it completely unnecessary given the Sync functionality, but since the buttons are there (at the bottom of the left hand panel strip), I will mention it.

• Make changes to your first image.
• Hit Copy, and select which settings you want to copy to another image.
• Select another image you want to apply the settings to.
• Hit Paste.

Figure out which method(s) you prefer, get in the habit of using them, and really start to leverage the power of Lightroom to get you away from the computer in much less time.

I post this link particularly for RMSP students who took my compositing classes this summer.  Enjoy!

Here’s a link to a write up by Victoria Bampton on what’s new in the LR3 beta.  Keep in mind that this is a very early beta — some of the new features will disappear, others will be added, and you will encounter bugs (particularly known are render preview issues).   At the bottom of Victoria’s post are links to many other blogs with articles on LR3.

Lightroom 3 won’t officially be released until 2010, but tonight Adobe Labs announced the release of its first public beta.  If you want to try it out, kick the tires, and join in providing feedback to Adobe on LR3, click here to go to Adobe Labs and download the software.

Is it all we need in LR?  No (for one thing, we absolutely need soft proofing.)  Is it a step in the right direction?  Yes.  There are feature enhancements, but importantly, Adobe has focused on improving performance by rebuilding the LR architecture.  Adobe recognizes that we are building very large catalogs of images, and that we need LR to handle them quickly and efficiently.

Here are some of the feature enhancements Adobe Labs lists:

• State-of-the-art noise reduction to help you perfect your high ISO shots
• Watermarking tool that helps you customize and protect your images with ease
• Portable sharable slideshows with audio—designed to give you more flexibility and impact on how you choose to share your images, you can now save and export your slideshows as videos and include audio
• Flexible customizable print package creation so your print package layouts are all your own
• Film grain simulation tool for enhancing your images to look as gritty as you want
• New import handling designed to make importing streamlined and easy
• More flexible online publishing options so you can post your images online to certain online photo sharing sites directly from inside Lightroom 3 beta (may require third-party plug-ins)*

There are links on the Labs site to videos introducing the new beta features.

In addition, there are alot of little improvements throughout the program.  For example, when using the adjustment brush, you can double-click on the word “Effects” to reset all settings, and on the word Color to reset the color swatch to none.  Look for these improvements everywhere!

I’ll be curious to hear your experiences with performance… is it better?  Much better?

Once you try LR3, you can provide feedback to Adobe in the LR3 forum.   Remember, this is a beta release, so expect bugs and help Adobe out by reporting these bugs.

Enjoy!

Want to remove telephone lines, whole buildings, or other objects from your photos?  Adobe posted a video on Facebook today from Adobe Labs, demonstrating technology that they are working on for a future release of Photoshop.  CS5 perhaps?

Click here to go to video.  Be sure to watch all the examples — it just keeps getting better!

As you may have guessed, I love Lightroom.  Its design is efficient and elegant, and the library/catalog model really works.   However, in my humble opinion as an instructor who sees students struggle time after time, what doesn’t work is the language around this model.  Specifically, what doesn’t work is the idea that you “Import” images into Lightroom, and “Export” them when you are ready to share them.  As an experienced user, I realize that we are really importing image information into the LR catalog rather than importing images into LR, but this is not how many users interpret the process.

My Honda was made in Japan and imported into the U.S..  When this happened, it physically left Japan and entered the U.S..   Similarly, when we export Chrystlers to China (do we?), they physically leave the U.S.  and enter China.

However, when you import images into Lightroom, you are not moving your images into Lightroom.  (See my post The Library Analogy for how it actually does work.)  This trips up so many users — it is not uncommon for newer users to import their images into LR, and then delete them from their hard drives — and then they wonder why they have question marks all over their folders and images.   Users also often think that because they back up their LR catalog when prompted, and their images are in the catalog, that no further backup of their images is needed.  Of course when their hard drive containing their images fails, they realize otherwise. 

From what I have seen, users who are not very computer saavy really struggle with this, and plenty actually give up.  Does it matter?  It depends on how broad of a market Adobe wants to appeal to with Lightroom.  Certainly the fact that newbie users struggle creates teaching and income opportunities for me, but I would love to see more people be able to get further with LR on their own. 

The solution isn’t a revamp of LR — the solution in my opinion is a revamp of the language, or packaging.  We need another word for Import, that does not imply that the images are moved, but rather that an entry for the image is created in the central catalog.  What would that word be?  I’m not sure.  I think an “Add to Catalog” button would be less misleading  than an “Import” button.    Do you have any better ideas?

Could you keep working?  If the hard drive was fried, would you lose everything?

This happened to me yesterday morning.  I don’t know what the problem is yet — I dropped the tower  off today at a repair shop.  In the meantime, I’m not in too bad a shape — for the most part I work off an external hard drive (actually a drobo).  It has my images, and both professional and personal documents.  I also have another backup offsite. 

Unfortunately I had been meaning to transfer my latest working documents from my messy desktop to the external drive, but hadn’t gotten around to it.  They may not be lost, but that teaches me to keep that desktop clean, or specifically backed up.

Here’s the one thing that I really goofed on — a few months ago I went through all my CD’s and got rid of old software.  Because I had bought the Office 2007 upgrade, I got rid of Office 2003.   Now I need Office on my laptop, but I can’t install the 2007 upgrade, because I have to have 2003 installed first!  Ouch. 

So learn from my experiences, before it happens to you!  Backup completely and often, and don’t get rid of software that you have recently purchased the upgrades for!