Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Armstrong

Chromatic Aberration

Recommended Posts

I've got a series of photos where I am struggling to remove the CA using LR 5. It's Axial CA. It's on Stained Glass so there are many black high contrast edges. 

 

The lens used doesn't have a LR Lens Profile. I've tried using a combination of the eye dropper and de-fringe CA tool but can't shift all of it.

 

Does LR6 significantly improve CA removal. Enough to warrant an upgrade?

 

Are there any other programs or techniques that work well?

 

I'm sure there used to be an Adobe site where there were user submitted profiles. I've not been able to find it.

 

All help gratefully received!

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't use Lightroom, just ACR in Photoshop where I just tend to tick Remove Chromatic Aberration in the Color tab of Lens Correction. You don't need a profile for the lens to correct CA. 

 

Alternatively, go to Hue/Saturation and select the colour you're struggling with. Sometimes you can sort the problem by desaturating the colour that causes the problem or, depending on the background, by making it darker.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another option:

In photoshop,

Duplicate the background;

Change blend mode to colour;

Add gaussian blur between 3 and 6 usually does the trick. You will see the offending colour fade away.

Then add a mask to the layer, fill with black and brush in white over the offending area.

 

Works on the most stubborn cases  ;)  :D

 

Phil

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If your lens is not supported by LR 5 then an upgrade to LR 6 might help to solve the problem.

Check on the Adobe site if your lens is supported by LR 6

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are there any other programs or techniques that work well?

 

All help gratefully received!

 

You could try PTLens plugin. It's manual, but does a good job on CA.

Edited by M.Chapman
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for all of your suggestions.

 

I'll give both techniques a try and see how I get on. I've also downloaded the PTLens plugin too. From Googling I don't think LR6 will support the lens. (Nikon 45mm Tilt Shift).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PT Lens might do the job. Watch out for green lines appearing along the edges of the frame, though. You may have to crop the image slightly after correcting.

Edited by John Mitchell
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A T&S lens (Nikon and Canon) is not supported by LR, because there would be no way to know from the photo whether the tilt/shift adjustments has been used and whether the profile would be accurate.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A T&S lens (Nikon and Canon) is not supported by LR, because there would be no way to know from the photo whether the tilt/shift adjustments has been used and whether the profile would be accurate.

 

Adobe provides a profile builder, so you could build your own.

Btw, I do have two or three profiles for my Canon TSE 24 mk1, but none for my 17mm.

 

wim

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

A T&S lens (Nikon and Canon) is not supported by LR, because there would be no way to know from the photo whether the tilt/shift adjustments has been used and whether the profile would be accurate.

 

Adobe provides a profile builder, so you could build your own.

Btw, I do have two or three profiles for my Canon TSE 24 mk1, but none for my 17mm.

 

wim

 

 

I was never really satisfied with that profile builder.

Beside, my 24mm mk2 is so good that i don't see it as a real problem not having a profile for that lens.

 

Henk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

 

 

A T&S lens (Nikon and Canon) is not supported by LR, because there would be no way to know from the photo whether the tilt/shift adjustments has been used and whether the profile would be accurate.

 

Adobe provides a profile builder, so you could build your own.

Btw, I do have two or three profiles for my Canon TSE 24 mk1, but none for my 17mm.

 

wim

 

 

I was never really satisfied with that profile builder.

Beside, my 24mm mk2 is so good that i don't see it as a real problem not having a profile for that lens.

 

Henk

 

 

Yes, the Mark 2 is so much better that I really don't think about CA with it, can't remember ever having to do any work on images form it and it's used for a few hundred most weeks. Worth the upgrade.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

A T&S lens (Nikon and Canon) is not supported by LR, because there would be no way to know from the photo whether the tilt/shift adjustments has been used and whether the profile would be accurate.

 

Adobe provides a profile builder, so you could build your own.

Btw, I do have two or three profiles for my Canon TSE 24 mk1, but none for my 17mm.

 

wim

 

 

I was never really satisfied with that profile builder.

Beside, my 24mm mk2 is so good that i don't see it as a real problem not having a profile for that lens.

 

Henk

 

 

Yes the mk1 is not very good. The 17mm is quite good. The 24mm mk2 is really good.

However the final verdict on these lenses will be on the new 42/50 mp bodies.

Until now only extremely few Canon lenses are in the DXO top 100.

The best one is the Canon EF 100mm f/2 USM, which I have, at #30.

There is not one excellent Canon lens according to DXO.

The 100mm (not the macro) is a good lens, though it's not even an L. It's one of the cheapest lenses Canon has, dating back to the early 90-ies.

I bought mine new in 2005. I have not used it in ages because it's so full with loose flock hairs on the inside, that it shows in smaller aperture images.

(Canon, when asked, denied that flock is being used in that lens. However, when you look into it with a small led light, it's immediately clear the whole inside barrel is coated with it. Maybe that makes it so good.)

 

wim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

A T&S lens (Nikon and Canon) is not supported by LR, because there would be no way to know from the photo whether the tilt/shift adjustments has been used and whether the profile would be accurate.

 

Adobe provides a profile builder, so you could build your own.

Btw, I do have two or three profiles for my Canon TSE 24 mk1, but none for my 17mm.

 

wim

 

 

I was never really satisfied with that profile builder.

Beside, my 24mm mk2 is so good that i don't see it as a real problem not having a profile for that lens.

 

Henk

 

 

There is not one excellent Canon lens according to DXO.

 

 

 

I'm on Nikon but I always thought that the consensus was 'Canon do better lenses and Nikon do better bodies'.

 

There's certainly a few gaps (or were) in the Nikon line up of lenses that Canon had filled.

Edited by Armstrong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

A T&S lens (Nikon and Canon) is not supported by LR, because there would be no way to know from the photo whether the tilt/shift adjustments has been used and whether the profile would be accurate.

 

Adobe provides a profile builder, so you could build your own.

Btw, I do have two or three profiles for my Canon TSE 24 mk1, but none for my 17mm.

 

wim

 

 

I was never really satisfied with that profile builder.

Beside, my 24mm mk2 is so good that i don't see it as a real problem not having a profile for that lens.

 

Henk

 

 

Yes the mk1 is not very good. The 17mm is quite good. The 24mm mk2 is really good.

However the final verdict on these lenses will be on the new 42/50 mp bodies.

Until now only extremely few Canon lenses are in the DXO top 100.

The best one is the Canon EF 100mm f/2 USM, which I have, at #30.

There is not one excellent Canon lens according to DXO.

The 100mm (not the macro) is a good lens, though it's not even an L. It's one of the cheapest lenses Canon has, dating back to the early 90-ies.

I bought mine new in 2005. I have not used it in ages because it's so full with loose flock hairs on the inside, that it shows in smaller aperture images.

(Canon, when asked, denied that flock is being used in that lens. However, when you look into it with a small led light, it's immediately clear the whole inside barrel is coated with it. Maybe that makes it so good.)

 

wim

 

 

Wim,

 

That whole DXO thing is one big joke!

Of course, a Zeiss Otus is a complete different league but when i see my images taken with the 70-200mm 2.8L mk2 the new 16-35mm f4.0 or the 24-70mm mk2 and i see the results in 2 meter prints for commercial work taken with my over 7 year old 1Ds mk3 then this whole DXO is complete BS and only good for pixelpeepers. It's all testing in the lab, high quality printing is something complete different. Every lens has it flaws, but presenting a top 100 and making your choice from that is not how i look at photography at all.

 

Happy shooting ;-)

 

Henk

Edited by Floydian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another option:

In photoshop,

Duplicate the background;

Change blend mode to colour;

Add gaussian blur between 3 and 6 usually does the trick. You will see the offending colour fade away.

Then add a mask to the layer, fill with black and brush in white over the offending area.

 

Works on the most stubborn cases  ;)  :D

 

Phil

Thanks Phil - this method worked really well for me  :)

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Another option:

In photoshop,

Duplicate the background;

Change blend mode to colour;

Add gaussian blur between 3 and 6 usually does the trick. You will see the offending colour fade away.

Then add a mask to the layer, fill with black and brush in white over the offending area.

 

Works on the most stubborn cases  ;)  :D

 

Phil

Thanks Phil - this method worked really well for me  :)

 

De nada  :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • 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.