The sharpening in LR is Pixel Genius, devised by Jeff Schewe. I've done
experiments with the PhotoKit (Pixel Genius) sharpening in PSCC and the
sharpening in LR, both under Detail and with the brushes and cannot tell a
difference. The sharpener that I do use sometimes in PSCC that looks
really different is Dan Margulis' Picture Postcard Workflow Sharpen 2013.
It gives a really different look that works with some photos. Usually, I
just use LR, though.
"For resizing in LR, you don't have a choice of interpolation methods like
in PS, but LR uses an intelligent adaptive bicubic algorithm which will
automatically adjust for the increase or decrease in size when you export
the photo. In theory, because LR is working with the raw data and isn't
limited to one specific resizing algorithm, it should give the best
results." Victoria Bampton - The Missing FAQ
I'm using LR more and more and PS less and less.
Tina
Tina
Tina
On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 8:58 AM, Bob Whitmire <bwhitmire@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>wrote:
>
> On Dec 10, 2013, at 6:33 PM, Moose wrote:
>
> > I think you may be selling PS short. Yes, it's about layers for many of
> us, but it's also about more, and more capable,
> > tools for adjusting the things you say you are concerned about.
> >
> > Then again, Bob uses mostly LR for his even larger, and absolutely
> beautiful prints. He says LR has the best proofing
> > and printing capability he's seen. He may weigh in here?
> >
> > There are way too many factors to be complete, and few folks who will
> know all the details thoroughly, but this is what
> > I know and surmise.
> >
> > My opinion? You shoulda jumped at the Photographer's CC offer of $120/yr
> for both LR and PS. There will probably be
> > another one.
>
> Okay. Other Bob's questions are complex, but not unmanageable. I agree
> with what Moose said, except, as he notes, I tend to do a lot in LR
> exclusively. And I have the PSCC and LR package. I frequently port over to
> PSCC for refined selections, precise sharpening (I use Pixel Genius) and
> re-rezzing, if I need to do that. Unlike Moose, I use the Clarity slider
> almost exclusively for LCE, unless I'm applying LCE to only a part of the
> image. If it's a simple area, I just mask in LR and use the brush panel's
> sliders to bring out what I want. If it's complex, I do it in Photoshop
> with old-fashioned LCE using USM.
>
> Moose is correct that the Shadow/HIghlight in PS is different from Shadow
> in LR. For the most part, I use LR's Shadow, and if it goes a little too
> milky on me, I refine with Clarity or Contrast. It's possible with a little
> back and forth to negate the negative effects of too much Shadow. I haven't
> done this in a while, but in PSCC, you can use Shadow/Highlight radically,
> then place a copy of the original on top, and erase where you want the S/H
> effect and leave the rest of the image alone. But that's effectively
> working in layers.
>
> Even though LR has refined it's healing capability to now do area and
> non-circular work, it's still a very clunky tool for getting shed of
> anything more than small objects in the image, or dust on the sensor spots.
> For real cloning and healing work, it's necessary to go to PSCC.
>
> I prostrate myself to the LR gods mainly because of its print engine. You
> have an image ready to print in LR. You click on PRINT. Templates, LR's and
> your own, come up. Say I have a need for a 13.2x19.2 print, to show in a
> 13x19 mat opening. I just create the template, click on it, and LR does all
> the resizing, and it does it quite well. Never failed, in fact. But my
> printers only handle 17" wide paper, so I've never put it to the test on a
> really large image. A 16x24 is the largest I've done out of LR. But it was
> very nice.
>
> One disadvantage is that LR does not have a resize capability, at least
> not one I've found. The PRINT module does it, but nowhere else can you do
> it. And you can't save the print file, as far as I've been able to
> determine. So for resizing, I have to go to PSCC.
>
> I also use some plug-ins, specifically, Silver Effex Pro 2.0, and onOne.
> They are easy to access from either LR or PSCC or as stand-alones. I
> believe this is true with elements, too. Not all images need a plug-in, but
> they can create some nice effects much more simply (for you) than doing all
> the work in PSCC with lots and lots of layers. I use onOne, for example, to
> add different kinds of glows to images. A subtle glow can add an effect
> that is not readily identifiable to the viewer, but adds a little something
> that makes a difference. Silver Effex is what I use for b&w, but onOne has
> beefed up its b&w conversions, so I'll be exploring that avenue as well.
> Again, you can do it in LR or PSCC, but the plug-ins make it faster and
> simpler and in most cases, more easily refined.
>
>
> --Bob Whitmire
> Certified Neanderthal
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> _________________________________________________________________
> Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
> Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
> Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
>
>
>
--
Tina Manley
http:// <http://tina-manley.artistwebsites.com/>www.tinamanley.com
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|