That should be devised by Bruce Fraser - one of the Pixel Geniuses along
with Jeff Schewe - who is no longer with us.
Tina
On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 9:30 AM, Tina Manley <images@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 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
>
>
>
--
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/
|