Micro Four Thirds RAW Processing Mistakes in Lightroom
Вставка
- Опубліковано 9 лис 2021
- When processing Micro Four Thirds RAW files, it’s easy to make some simple mistakes. These processing mistakes definitely reduce the quality of your images, but most photographers don’t realise they are making them.
In this video, I share these big RAW processing mistakes you need to avoid when working in Lightroom. But I also explain how to avoid them to produce the best quality photography.
Link to my Micro 43 Landscape Photography video: • Micro Four Thirds Came...
LANDSCAPE PHOTOGRAPHY BOOKS
Learn to photograph landscapes like a professional: geni.us/Choice-LandscapePhoto
FREE BOOK
Don't forget to join my free monthly newsletter to get your free copy of my book "6 Steps to Shooting Brilliant Landscape Photography". bit.ly/3GbtmE9
PHOTOGRAPHY & PHOTO EDITING BOOKS
Make learning easy with my collection of books: lenscraft.co.uk/books-by-robi...
Buy me a coffee: geni.us/buy-robin-a-coffee
#robinwhalley #lenscraft #lenscraftphotography - Навчання та стиль
Thanks Robin. I absolutely agree. It took me a while to wake up to this problem so appreciate the movie. I had noticed this, particularly with images from Panasonic GM1 that I had taken in the New Zealand bush when compared with those from newer EM1 Mk2. I also discovered that processing with DxO improved issues markedly.
Thank you and I'm glad that it appears to have helped you. You can achieve amazing results with Micro 43 cameras.
Great video Robin! I’ve just switched from Canon full frame to OM Systems 4/3 (OM-1 mk II) and your video will has clarified so many processing issues for me. Cheers!
Glad it was helpful. Micro 43 can produce superb results when captured and exposed correctly. Some things just aren't obvious.
Hi Robin, just discovered your channel and so happy i did. I’ve learned more in the 3 videos I’ve watched than I in the hundreds I’ve watched on other channels. Im a long time photographer (since about 1972) but i still like to learn whenever possible. First off I like your straight forward, informative approach, unlike so many of the other hosts which seem to be intent on creating a “character” of some sort to keep me entertained. Also a big plus for me is your specific lessons on M43 which I use. Example: the tip regarding exposing for shadows, not highlights, withM43. I’ve never heard that mentioned before. Brilliant. Keep up the the good work and more pointers for M43, please. I’ve subscribed.
It's great tp hear that you like my videos and that they have helped you. Thanks for subscribing and I hope I can continue to help you.
Many thanks indeed I have been using olympus for several years now and had not realised these slightly different ways of operating could make such a big difference, Your books and style video are so very helpful and informative. I too will be watching this again!!
Glad it was helpful! Thank you.
Fascinating Robin. I'll be watching this several times as you've crammed a lot of detailed information into the vlog. This is going to be very helpful so thank you again for taking the time to post.
You're very welcome and it's good to know the information is appreciated.
Hi Robin - I agree with Tim - a mass of useful information in a very short time. Dare I suggest you talk a little bit slower so that we mere mortals can take in all the invaluable information - your enthusiasm got the better of you, which is a bit of a shame. I too will need to watch this a few times to fully absorb the key information you have shared with us all. Great information - keep them coming. Take care and stay safe.
@@rogman27 Thanks. I'm not sure why the talking in the video came out so quick. It seems to have been speeded up slightly somewhere in editing. I think it was my error. That said, I'm trying to fit in a lot of information and keep the videos short/concise.
Excellent tips and very helpful. Thank you.
Glad it was helpful! Thank you
Awesome overview. Especially enjoyed the tips on masking the sky and processing it separately. 👍🏻
Thanks. Glad you enjoyed it!
Very insightful. Thank you. I am deciding to add m43 to my gear and your video helps educate me on IQ etc.
Glad it was helpful! Thank you.
Thanks for this video.
You're welcome
amazing! Thanks for sharing those tips.. just started photography made all those mistakes haha!
Happy to help! Hopefully they will save you some learning time.
Best video for editing mft with lightroom, please make more!
Thanks. I have it on my list of future videos.
I would disagree with the "overexpose" tip - because it heavily depends on the camera and sensor used. Especially lesser models (including my Olympus Pen F) have a problem with overexposure, which can't be recovered properly. That said, I know that the top-end models are better in highlight retention and might work as described. I'll stay with "proper" exposure for the mid-tones (and sometimes for the highlights, depending on subject). Your tip how to handle sharpening and noise reduction is great! Never thought about it that way and always wondered why skies look to noisy in my images, even at ISO 200 …
I take your point on the overexposing tip that it will depend on the camera but I still recommend it. The design of the M43 sensors is to favouir highlight recovery over shadow recovery. Many Full Frame cameras do the opposite which is why so many people like to underexpose by a stop. When I talk about overexposing I'm talking about using +2/3 stop or 1 stop at most. I've used this technique with all the M43 cameras I've owned and it's consistently improved the shadow detail over a straight exposure. The exception these days is perhaps where I also use DxO PureRAW to preprocess the RAW file. That makes some shadow recovery easier and so I'm less inclined to push the exposure. At the end of the say, I always encourage people to experiment and find what works best with a particular camera.
Quite. It also depends what you hate most. For me any blown highlights, particularly white clouds are anathema. I'll take slightly noisy or muddy shadows any day. "I'll stay with "proper" exposure for the mid-tones (and sometimes for the highlights, depending on subject)" So will I.
Thanks for the tips. I use Camera Raw and Photoshop but it's somewhat similar 📷👍
Thanks. Yes, you shold be able to use the same approach with Camera RAW as they are very similar in how they work.
Thank you so much for this video! Im a photographer using APS-C and Mediumformat for photography and i've got to use the OM-D E M1X and was so sad of how bad the quality of pictures was and when i ededit them it looked like shit and i tought "M43 is the worst" so i returned the camera. But since then i have been more curios to why and how to use the m43 system and why people could get good images but mine looked like shit and your video explained it perfectly! Im used of edit picture for medium format or APS-C and tried to edit the M43 picture the same way...
I hope that you try again with your old files if you still have them. Another good tool to use is DxO PureRAW. If you use that to process the RAW files to produce a DNG file you can then work with that in Lightroom in the same way as other files. It will produce good results.
Thanks. I use a GX9 and process exclusively in LR mobile, I will test out these settings on LR mobile and see if they act in a similar way..
You're welcome. Let me know if it works the same way - I think it will.
Interesting video. What about APSC? Expose for the highlights or shadows?
That would depend on the camera. Some use sensors that are better at highlight recovery whilst others favour shadow recovery. It's best to test.
Really like your videos, came across the one where you explained selecting things in Lightroom with a brush. I think this video might be helpful when I edit drone photos with the Mavic 1. It’s a terribly noisy little sensor.
Oh, and dehaze is a terrible tool. I was looking forward to it, the previews Adobe showed of it made it look great. I think it’s an utterly horrible effect either way you slide it.
Thank you. Yes, I suspect the suggestions for processing in this video will be useful for editing drone photos.
Hi Robin , excellent points. Do you have any thoughts on changing the default detail setting from 1 , downward more around.8 ? Thanks
By detail setting, do you mean the Radius? I'm assuming you do give the numbers you mention and yes, reducing the Radius to around 0.8 can be very useful and give great results depending on the subject matter. It's great with landscapes but might not be good for portrait work where it could emphasise skin texture.
I've had a GX85 for a bit over a year now and was just about to sell it because of the frustration with exactly what you describe in this video.
I just went back into LR and attempted to re-edit a few of my disappointing result (fortunately I bracketed quite a few shot while experimenting) and was pleasantly surprised at the differences based on your suggestions.
Thanks very much!
If I've helped to prevent you making a mistake then the video was well worth the effort in making. I've mistakenly sold too many cameras over the years because I didn't realise how to get the best from them. I really hope you get the best from the GX85 now.
Brilliant Robin. Would you make a video of highlight recovery in Photolab too? I use DXO and Affinity Photo 2, so covering their idiosyncrasies would help me, for one. In particular, I like to export corrected dng files from Photolab 6 to Affinity Photo 2 but they open very dark in Affinity. What is the best way to restore M43 images in Develop Persona?
Thanks Mark and thanks for the suggestion. I will add it to my list of possibile future videos.
An excellent video, Robin. I would like to see how to do this using Affinity Photo. Actually, I develop my RAW files in OM Workspace, so I'm not sure how any of this would apply.
I don't use the OM Workspace, so I can't say if there are any similar pitfalls to avoid. Also, with Affinity, I have found the tools more forgiving, and I haven't spotted anything to avoid.
@@RobinWhalley Hi Robin,
I tried DXO PureRAW 4 yesterday and it is much better for developing raw files than OM Workspace. The output from PureRAW has lower noise and sharper details. It's almost like I got better lenses. My images always looked a little soft, now I know why.
Can you make a video regarding linear profiles from Tony Kuyper and edit using lightroom? For getting red color and skin tones ok
Whilst I've used Tony's (and other) linear profiles, I'm not sure that it's my area of expertise. I'm also not particularly good at getting skin tones correct as I don't do any portrait photography. It's a real skill that takes time to master.
Hello and nice video! I am using SonyA6600 and I assume this apply to my camera as well ? Have you compared the mentioned RAW editor at the end agaings I.E. Acdsee and Adobe C. raw ? Best regards.
Thanks. It probably doesn't apply to the Sony sensor as I think that tends to favour exposing for the highlights but you need to test that. The ideas of applying processing selectively for sharpening and noise reduction will probably help. As for the RAW editor, don;t think about the age of the software so much as companies do tweak them. What you are more likely to find is that one editor will favour some RAW file types over others. Lightroom for example was great with Canon and Nikon files but not so much with Sony (although this may have now changed). When I was shooting with Sony (full frame, APSC and 1" sensors) I found DxO PhotoLab produced much better results. I even posted this video showing the difference (ua-cam.com/video/bIiVf5647SQ/v-deo.html).
@@RobinWhalley Thanks for your feedback! Normally I underexpose the pictures. And for me it look like its work very good. But I do not have a very trained eye. For my flow I am using ACDsee U 2021 and are actually pretty happy. Thought I cant get all, especially masks seem to be weak. As you know ACDSee have an RAW option and I would be very happy to learn more about the quality. If you need idea for new video. This would been very nice. I could provide you with some Sony 6600 files and show you some strange behavior in the convert from ARW process.
Ho Robin ..do you use the new OM Workspace also ? Any improvements instead of using lightroom ?
No, sorry. I don’t use the OM Workspace and whilst I still have a couple of Olympus cameras they aren’t ones I use much. I tend to use Lightroom to manage my image library and DxO PhotoLab to do initial editing of the RAW files.
I may use Adobe for processing images, but I never use the noise reduction or sharpening in either Lightroom or Camera Raw. I leave those two task to either DXO, Nik, or Topaz. I start with either DXO for processing the raw file or use a linear profile in Adobe. Adobe will destroy your file if you are not aware of how to prevent it. Thanks for sharing
You’re welcome. There are better solutions than Adobe but Lightroom does make some things easier.
Okay so just about the first example about exposing for shadows and not highlights; How can you recover blown out highlights? There are literally no information when It's overexposed / blown out. Or did you bracket the photos?
The answer is don't blow the highlights. That said, most micro 43 camera's I've used allow for a lot of latitude in the highlights. Most of the time I use an 2 stop ND Grad on the sky with these cameras when shooting landscapes. That's enough to hold the highlights and allow me to expose for the shadows (taking care not to overexpose).
I had no idea about this difference. I shoot full frame so it doesn't apply to me but I have friends that shot Micro 4/3 and I doubt they know about this.
Yes, a lot of people don't realise that you need to be a little more careful when processing but if you are, the results can be great. It's worjth sharing.
All you have to do is dump Adobe and go with Photolab 5 Prime or ON1 and one click and you have perfection without the work and artifacts Adobe is responsible for. I can't believe people are still stuck in Adobe. The profiles in DXO are FAR superior. Noise is banished as well.
Yes, but I do have some sympathy for Lightroom users. I need to use Lightroom to manage my photo library because the alternatives (currently) aren't up to the task.