• site home
  • blog home
  • galleries
  • contact
  • underwater
  • the bleeding edge

the last word

Photography meets digital computer technology. Photography wins -- most of the time.

You are here: Home / The Last Word / Lightroom and Photoshop Exposure controls, Part 6

Lightroom and Photoshop Exposure controls, Part 6

April 23, 2013 JimK Leave a Comment

Eric Chan has informed me that there are two image-processing pipelines in Lightroom: output-referred, and scene-referred. Raw files get the scene-referred pipeline. Integer TIFFs get the output-referred pipeline. Therefore, all my TIFF test images were getting a different set of processing than LR applies to raw files.

I’ve done some testing with real raw files, and determined that Lightroom Exposure adjustments have mean errors of around 1 Delta-E when photographing the same test pattern off the monitor, and worst-case errors of about 4 Delta-E. However, there’s a lot of noise in the real camera testing, and the actual situation is probably better than that.

All of the work I’ve done with real raw images has taught me to appreciate working with synthetic images. No lens flare. No need to align the images (aligning has the really unpleasant side effect of making the pixels in the aligned image not in the same place as pixels in the camera, so dust spots on the sensor look like inter-exposure differences). No photon noise. Faster.

On the other hand, like looking for your keys under lamp-post, it doesn’t do much good to have a nice, tight testing regimen if if doesn’t say anything about how real raw processing takes place. Eric says floating-point TIFFs get the same scene-referred pipeline as raw images, so I thought I’d try to use 32-bit floating-point synthetic TIFFs for testing. It took me a while to learn enough about TIFF tags to have Matlab write floating point files that Photoshop and Lightroom like, but I’m there as of this morning.

Everything looks great in Photoshop. However, when the files are brought into Lightroom, they are much more chromatic and brighter than they are in Photoshop. When exported from LR as 16-bit integer TIFFs, they are still too bright and too chromatic. In addition, when analyzed in Matlab, the exported images have greatly distorted CIELab scatter plots, possibly because of gamut mapping, and possible because of something else.

I went back to LR, created a set of virtual copies, and cranked the Exposure adjustment back one stop on each. When I exported them and read them into Photoshop, the L* values were about right, but they were too chromatic.

In 3d:

And in just the chrominance plane:

It looks like LR is looking at the fact that the files I’m feeding it are floating point and is invoking some default processing that it considers appropriate for HDR images. If that’s the case, I need to find out where that processing is, and figure out how to turn it off.

I suppose I could call the above the new reference image and see what Lightroom does with exposure compensation of one stop for each stop of underexposure. I may yet do that. But I’m a little worried that I can’t import an Image into LR, do nothing to it, export it, and have it be pretty much the same.

The Last Word

← Lightroom and Photoshop Exposure controls, Part 5 Lightroom and Photoshop Exposure controls, Part 7 →

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

May 2025
S M T W T F S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031
« Apr    

Articles

  • About
    • Patents and papers about color
    • Who am I?
  • How to…
    • Backing up photographic images
    • How to change email providers
    • How to shoot slanted edge images for me
  • Lens screening testing
    • Equipment and Software
    • Examples
      • Bad and OK 200-600 at 600
      • Excellent 180-400 zoom
      • Fair 14-30mm zoom
      • Good 100-200 mm MF zoom
      • Good 100-400 zoom
      • Good 100mm lens on P1 P45+
      • Good 120mm MF lens
      • Good 18mm FF lens
      • Good 24-105 mm FF lens
      • Good 24-70 FF zoom
      • Good 35 mm FF lens
      • Good 35-70 MF lens
      • Good 60 mm lens on IQ3-100
      • Good 63 mm MF lens
      • Good 65 mm FF lens
      • Good 85 mm FF lens
      • Good and bad 25mm FF lenses
      • Good zoom at 24 mm
      • Marginal 18mm lens
      • Marginal 35mm FF lens
      • Mildly problematic 55 mm FF lens
      • OK 16-35mm zoom
      • OK 60mm lens on P1 P45+
      • OK Sony 600mm f/4
      • Pretty good 16-35 FF zoom
      • Pretty good 90mm FF lens
      • Problematic 400 mm FF lens
      • Tilted 20 mm f/1.8 FF lens
      • Tilted 30 mm MF lens
      • Tilted 50 mm FF lens
      • Two 15mm FF lenses
    • Found a problem – now what?
    • Goals for this test
    • Minimum target distances
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Printable Siemens Star targets
    • Target size on sensor
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Test instructions — postproduction
    • Test instructions — reading the images
    • Test instructions – capture
    • Theory of the test
    • What’s wrong with conventional lens screening?
  • Previsualization heresy
  • Privacy Policy
  • Recommended photographic web sites
  • Using in-camera histograms for ETTR
    • Acknowledgments
    • Why ETTR?
    • Normal in-camera histograms
    • Image processing for in-camera histograms
    • Making the in-camera histogram closely represent the raw histogram
    • Shortcuts to UniWB
    • Preparing for monitor-based UniWB
    • A one-step UniWB procedure
    • The math behind the one-step method
    • Iteration using Newton’s Method

Category List

Recent Comments

  • JimK on How Sensor Noise Scales with Exposure Time
  • Štěpán Kaňa on Calculating reach for wildlife photography
  • Štěpán Kaňa on How Sensor Noise Scales with Exposure Time
  • JimK on Calculating reach for wildlife photography
  • Geofrey on Calculating reach for wildlife photography
  • JimK on Calculating reach for wildlife photography
  • Geofrey on Calculating reach for wildlife photography
  • Javier Sanchez on The 16-Bit Fallacy: Why More Isn’t Always Better in Medium Format Cameras
  • Mike MacDonald on Your photograph looks like a painting?
  • Mike MacDonald on Your photograph looks like a painting?

Archives

Copyright © 2025 · Daily Dish Pro On Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in

Unless otherwise noted, all images copyright Jim Kasson.