Jump to content

Lightoom underexposing


Recommended Posts

13 hours ago, spacecadet said:

LR is not supposed to do what it's doing to OP's images. "Auto tone" commonly increases my exposures by up to 1.0. It depends on the subject- I use centre weighted AE. It rarely reduces, and never by anything like as much as 1.75.

I use centre weighted as well - unless I am shooting swans which need spot metering lol (one of my first lessons )

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Starsphinx said:

I use centre weighted as well - unless I am shooting swans which need spot metering lol (one of my first lessons )


Centre-weighted metering is an ancient hangover from the 70s or thereabouts and is way inferior to the metering systems in modern cameras. You should use matrix (Nikon) metering or whatever the equivalent is in whatever system you are using or preferably spot metering in general when you become adept at it. It's not just for swans and if it was you should not base your exposure on metering the swan itself. Pick an area of the image that is an approximate midtone and work off that - you will never be far wrong but make sure you are in manual exposure mode as well.
‚Ä®
As for your Lightroom problem, I have no idea what is happening - seems very strange. I agree more or less with Sally's advice. Do not use auto settings. Learn how to judge the settings yourself in conjunction with the histogram. It is not difficult once you get used to it. You can either work off a preset for those conditions or just import using a custom default setting. If processing a batch of images that are all similar, then process one initial image and synchronise across the rest of the images. You can choose which settings to synchronise. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I happen to find centre-weighting satisfactory and time-saving but I wasn't recommending it as such - just noting how it caused Auto Tone to behave.

I've been using auto tone quite successfully for quite a while and find that it saves a lot of time. We haven't got to the bottom of Sphinx's problem but it's not necessarily an argument for abandoning it- just figuring out what's gone wrong.

Having never encountered it before I tested matrix metering when I got my first DSLR but found that it didn't make a huge difference with my sort of subject. But two cameras later I might give it another try. Perhaps we just photograph different things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again I do change metering as needed - generally, centre weighted works for me.  And again I am not totally welded to auto I am well able to do stuff individually but when trying to work through 200 shots in under 3 hours it does help if auto works.    It isnt working - and things not working bug me whether I am using them or not - it is a tool I would like to have in the box if needed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I assume your Auto Tone used to work well- when did it stop working? Could you have done something- an update or some tickbox? I once actually failed QC because I'd accidentally ticked something on export that put a border and file number on everything. That took some hair-tearing to find.

You may need to do a forensic examination of what you might have done. Although I can't think of anything.

See what it does to some test images- say a grey card, or test chart.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Starsphinx said:

Again I do change metering as needed - generally, centre weighted works for me.  And again I am not totally welded to auto I am well able to do stuff individually but when trying to work through 200 shots in under 3 hours it does help if auto works.    It isnt working - and things not working bug me whether I am using them or not - it is a tool I would like to have in the box if needed.

 

To clarify, use auto settings by all means if it helps to get your first image right but once you get one image in the ballpark, then just synchronise across the rest of the images and then make minor tweaks - do not use auto settings for an entire batch of images. If you want to really speed up your workflow then you can't worry too much about something that you really don't need not working.

 

 

48 minutes ago, spacecadet said:

I happen to find centre-weighting satisfactory and time-saving but I wasn't recommending it as such - just noting how it caused Auto Tone to behave.

I've been using auto tone quite successfully for quite a while and find that it saves a lot of time. We haven't got to the bottom of Sphinx's problem but it's not necessarily an argument for abandoning it- just figuring out what's gone wrong.

Having never encountered it before I tested matrix metering when I got my first DSLR but found that it didn't make a huge difference with my sort of subject. But two cameras later I might give it another try. Perhaps we just photograph different things.

 

I think we are the old proverbial chalk and cheese in most respects photographically. I recall you saying that you use program mode for example which is handing over total control to the camera as far as exposure is concerned whereas I like to be in total control - manual exposure, spot metering and so on. The only time I don't use spot metering is when I am using TTL flash when matrix metering works best. Centre-weighted metering is very outdated really given what modern cameras are capable of but really I would advocate using spot metering for almost everything anyway. 

 

I find its interesting to try to figure out problems such as the OP's but I can't replicate it and have no idea what is happening. The bottom line really is that she would be better off to use a different system in any case in my opinion for batch processing large numbers of football images. I somehow don't think the pro football photographers hang about using auto settings on individual images in Lightroom and taking hours to process the pics. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, MDM said:

 using auto settings on individual images in Lightroom and taking hours to process the pics. 

I have "auto tone" in my import default develop settings. That's the timesaver for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, spacecadet said:

I assume your Auto Tone used to work well- when did it stop working? Could you have done something- an update or some tickbox? I once actually failed QC because I'd accidentally ticked something on export that put a border and file number on everything. That took some hair-tearing to find.

You may need to do a forensic examination of what you might have done. Although I can't think of anything.

See what it does to some test images- say a grey card, or test chart.

 

I am presuming I did do something - I was hoping it was something someone else had done and solved before and would say "that happened to me and it was blah blah"

I am going to have to go through it but am in one of those stupid rushes of work that happen occasionally and do not have time to take the software apart so was hoping for a simple fix (ridiculously optimistic given its adobe I will admit)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you have Photoshop, or just Lightroom?  If you have Photoshop, then you will also have Adobe Camera Raw, which is the same as Lightroom without the cataloging features.

 

If you have Bridge, it's even faster.  If you have Bridge, open your images in Bridge, select the number of images you want to open at a time, right click and click on Open In Camera Raw,  Then select all, hit the auto button, and click done. Do that for however many images you like to open at a time.

 

If you don't use Bridge, then open Photoshop, click File - open - select however many images you want - click open - and they will automatically open in Camera Raw.  Do same as above.  Be sure to click Done, not open images or they will all open in PS.  Once you have done that, you can open in Lightroom and they should open with the auto saved changes done in Camera Raw.  

 

It seems you are using the CC version of Lightroom, so you should be able to download Bridge for free and PS as well if you don't already have them on your computer.

 

Thought this might be a quick workaround until you figure out your problem.  You can do all the changes in Camera Raw, just like Lightroom, but you will need Lightroom to do your cataloging.

 

Jill

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, spacecadet said:

I have "auto tone" in my import default develop settings. That's the timesaver for me.

 

The thing with that is you will probably get different settings for images that should really use very similar settings. The auto settings (as it is called in the subscription version now) is like the auto exposure settings on a camera - it will be influenced by changes in the image itself - for example, a bright patch of sky may cause the exposure to darken etc. For batch processing images taken in similar conditions (like a football match as with the OP), then I would think it is best to get one in the ballpark and synchronise as I said above rather than use an auto setting for all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Starsphinx said:

I am presuming I did do something - I was hoping it was something someone else had done and solved before and would say "that happened to me and it was blah blah"

I am going to have to go through it but am in one of those stupid rushes of work that happen occasionally and do not have time to take the software apart so was hoping for a simple fix (ridiculously optimistic given its adobe I will admit)

Have you tried to Reset Lightroom Prefs  That could be your simple fix. However, I do think you should reconsider your workflow as you could save yourself a lot of time using the method I suggested above (synchonising across images having gotten one in the ballpark instead of using auto anything in LR).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, MDM said:

Have you tried to Reset Lightroom Prefs  That could be your simple fix. However, I do think you should reconsider your workflow as you could save yourself a lot of time using the method I suggested above (synchonising across images having gotten one in the ballpark instead of using auto anything in LR).

2

I will have a look at the reset prefs as suggested.

I get what you say about a ballpark, a problem I have found is that my shoots are rarely ballpark and can need considerable variation in settings and using the settings from one to do all usually results in more work.  I do appreciate I have a weird workflow - how weird people probably do not guess.  I am like this in most things and learned long ago to adapt tools to my workflow rather than trying to conform to others workflows.  When I first started with Lightroom the auto fitted in well with what I was doing - it is only the last couple of weeks it has started this underexposing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 25/07/2018 at 12:33, Jill Morgan said:

Do you have Photoshop, or just Lightroom?  If you have Photoshop, then you will also have Adobe Camera Raw, which is the same as Lightroom without the cataloging features.

 

If you have Bridge, it's even faster.  If you have Bridge, open your images in Bridge, select the number of images you want to open at a time, right click and click on Open In Camera Raw,  Then select all, hit the auto button, and click done. Do that for however many images you like to open at a time.

 

If you don't use Bridge, then open Photoshop, click File - open - select however many images you want - click open - and they will automatically open in Camera Raw.  Do same as above.  Be sure to click Done, not open images or they will all open in PS.  Once you have done that, you can open in Lightroom and they should open with the auto saved changes done in Camera Raw.  

 

It seems you are using the CC version of Lightroom, so you should be able to download Bridge for free and PS as well if you don't already have them on your computer.

 

Thought this might be a quick workaround until you figure out your problem.  You can do all the changes in Camera Raw, just like Lightroom, but you will need Lightroom to do your cataloging.

 

Jill

Missed this post yesterday Jill sorry - I do have photoshop as well but find Lightroom fits my work better - I also use Photo Mechanic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK I have managed to track the problem down and locate it - and yes its an Adobe thing.   (I actually tripped over it through making a mistake)

Basically if I have the profile as Adobe anything - standard/portrait/vivid or whatever the auto works fine.  It is OK in camera standard.  However for some reason, if you set the profile to camera vivid Adobe makes everything super dark regardless of the fact that it does not do the same thing if you use Adobe vivid.

Now whether this is a deliberate Adobe thing to force people to use its own settings I do not know - but if you hear of someone having the same problem see if they are using camera profiles rather than Adobe profiles

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So glad you figured it out. Frustrating isn't it when you know somewhere there is a setting that is wrecking your work and you can't find it.

 

In previous post, I wasn't suggesting using Photoshop but Camera Raw.  You just need PS or Bridge to access Camera Raw, I don't think you can run it on its own.  But it is exactly the same as Lightroom for developing, just can't catalog.  I do 90% of my work in Camera Raw, just use PS for things such as cloning, patching, merging, etc.

 

Jill

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Jill Morgan said:

So glad you figured it out. Frustrating isn't it when you know somewhere there is a setting that is wrecking your work and you can't find it.

 

In previous post, I wasn't suggesting using Photoshop but Camera Raw.  You just need PS or Bridge to access Camera Raw, I don't think you can run it on its own.  But it is exactly the same as Lightroom for developing, just can't catalog.  I do 90% of my work in Camera Raw, just use PS for things such as cloning, patching, merging, etc.

 

Jill

Yes frustrating it certainly is - Adobe stuff is great when it works but it is so great because there are so many settings upon settings and it is remarkably easy to accidentally mess things up in ways you have not the foggiest about.

I have used RAW with PS - I still find lightroom easier because unless I am doing out and out full on art editing I don't need the PS bit and kept tripping over using RAW.  Besides which I have Lightroom on my laptop where I can fast edit (and if necessary email)  from just about anywhere and keep PS on my desktop machine which has the much bigger monitor and greater mouse control.  I suspect putting RAW and PS on my laptop would munch through resources (which aren't good at the moment - I have to go through it at some point when I have time and locate exactly which bits of bloatware from Microsoft are slowing it down this time). 

Theoretically (lol we all know what theory did)  everything is now cushdy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Starsphinx said:

OK I have managed to track the problem down and locate it - and yes its an Adobe thing.   (I actually tripped over it through making a mistake)

Basically if I have the profile as Adobe anything - standard/portrait/vivid or whatever the auto works fine.  It is OK in camera standard.  However for some reason, if you set the profile to camera vivid Adobe makes everything super dark regardless of the fact that it does not do the same thing if you use Adobe vivid.

Now whether this is a deliberate Adobe thing to force people to use its own settings I do not know - but if you hear of someone having the same problem see if they are using camera profiles rather than Adobe profiles

 

Does this contradict your earlier finding? (see red highlight)

 

On 7/23/2018 at 16:49, Starsphinx said:

The camera vivid profile is new - but putting it back to camera standard does not change what Lightroom does even if I change it to standard before telling Lightroom to do anything.  Again if I use the previous preset, the default preset, or this preset (which is the same as the previous in everything except it uses vivid instead of standard).  I have tried the settings in all different ways and it still does it.

It has always done it with odd photos - which I understand is normal - and to be honest the odd photo does not bother me.  It is only the last week or so that it seems to be taking all the shots I got right in camera and making them dark as hell.

PS just occurred to me to check in- camera settings - don't know how long they have been vivid but changed them to standard and it made no difference lightroom still hugely over darkened.

 

 

Anyway, assuming it only applies to the Camera Vivid setting suggests a duff or corrupted camera matching profile. Re-installing may fix or, failing that, alert Adobe that the Camera Vivid profile for your make/model of camera is duff.

 

Out of curiosity, what camera what camera make/model are you using? Maybe someone else with the same camera can check if they see the same effect?

 

Mark

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Starsphinx said:



Basically if I have the profile as Adobe anything - standard/portrait/vivid or whatever the auto works fine.  It is OK in camera standard.  However for some reason, if you set the profile to camera vivid Adobe makes everything super dark regardless of the fact that it does not do the same thing if you use Adobe vivid.
 

I mentioned that because I saw it in your screenshot, but it didn't resonate with me because I only seem to have Adobe Standard profile (and it does work properly with auto tone, but I'm still on LR5). Minus 1.75 stops would make most things vivid, I guess.

Perhaps there's (or should be) a log file of changes one makes to preferences. It could be called haveIdoneanythingstupidlately.log. You can tear your hair out for hours on these things if you're in the slightest bit unsystematic. Even if you're not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, M.Chapman said:

 

Does this contradict your earlier finding? (see red highlight)

 

 

Anyway, assuming it only applies to the Camera Vivid setting suggests a duff or corrupted camera matching profile. Re-installing may fix or, failing that, alert Adobe that the Camera Vivid profile for your make/model of camera is duff.

 

Out of curiosity, what camera what camera make/model are you using? Maybe someone else with the same camera can check if they see the same effect?

 

Mark

Hhhmmmm yes, it does - scratches head - I had reset my preferences (thanks to the suggestion from MDM) also before altering the profile the second time so better change the advice to reset your preferences and then make sure it's on and adobe setting.

God knows - or maybe Adobe does - but mine at least is working now.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lightroom will automatically apply the settings you used during your last import.

Maybe just download the original camera profiles. It's really easy to save a totally wrong profile to the original one.

Another route: profiling your camera using a Munsell card aka ColorChecker.

Instructions on Adobe.

Instructions on Tutsplus.

Instructions on Youtube.

Download the DNG Profile Editor for Lightroom and Photoshop. Mac - Win

 

wim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, wiskerke said:

Lightroom will automatically apply the settings you used during your last import.

Maybe just download the original camera profiles. It's really easy to save a totally wrong profile to the original one.

Another route: profiling your camera using a Munsell card aka ColorChecker.

Instructions on Adobe.

Instructions on Tutsplus.

Instructions on Youtube.

Download the DNG Profile Editor for Lightroom and Photoshop. Mac - Win

 

wim

I will bear that in mind - at the moment it seems to be working OK on Alamy vivid

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

√ó
√ó
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.