Am I Using Lightroom for Conversions?
Yes. In fact, I barely see the file in color. The 40D is set to show b&w on the screen.
I’m using Lightroom for my conversions. I’ve developed a “snapshot” in Lightroom for the 40D - I call it 40D B&W General. When I import files, this snapshot is automatically applied to the raw images.
I browse through images, usually I find a bunch of things that go together in terms of lighting / contrast. I go into DEVELOP MODE and I develop a Lightroom Snapshot for the first one, and then apply it to the other files in that group. This is done in a non-destructive way, and a history of snapshots etc. is kept for each file. I can not only revert to the original image, but I can go back at any time (so long as the database stays intact) to any stage in the files history.
So I can tweak to my heart’s delight.
I may not be able to do it all in Lightroom, i.e. if a mask is needed. Then it goes into Photoshop as a 16-bit RGB file, where I do masking as needed; and eventually for printing or for the web, I apply sharpening in Photoshop with Pixel Genius (also non-destructive).
As you can see - Lightroom allows me to easily control different tonal areas separately - and it is great for keeping a set of development snapshots that you can apply to other raw images.
It’s also good at the usual keyword stuff. Lightroom has allowed me to quickly apply standard settings, and also to fine-tune files.
The database and files that are created are backed up every day with SyncToy from MS which only backs up stuff that has changed.
I’m in the process of printing 12 x 18’s from the 40D.
Briefly, the file is saved in its non-interpolated size: 10.8 x 7.2 @ 360dpi. Whatever is going to be done is done. Then the file is blown up to 12 x 18 inches with PhotoZoom Pro 2. (I don’t apply sharpening during that step). And then I do a sharpening layer for printing with Pixel Genius - which is nice because I can put a layer mask over the sharpening layers and paint out anything that’s too severe.
The results have been great. The thing to keep in mind though, is that you can do a 12 x 18 inch scan at 300 dpi from a 35mm negative. However, comparing the digital file and the film file - apples and oranges.
The film file shot at 400 ASA or higher will show pronounced film grain at that size - but film grain is usually pleasing.
The 40D shot at 400 will show very little - possibly no noise to be seen with the naked eye. But, at this size you can just about pickup the start of artifacts if you don’t do your sharpening workflow carefully. I don’t know. My guess is that side by side, the average viewer - hello average Joe - would prefer the 40D look. I’ll skip which I prefer until a few months have gone by.
P.S. - Before you run out and buy Lightroom - I know at least one caveat - which is that it won’t play nicely with large files. Don’t remember what the file size limit is - but you should always download a trial version and fool around with that first. That’s how I usually end up getting either hooked - or annoyed.
Comments
Comment from dave
Time: February 13, 2008, 7:32 pm
From a comment in this blog:
“I have not used Lightroom - it will not handle my big digital files from scanned 4×5…”
But also I remember reading about a file size limitation… though I don’t remember where I read it.
And I did have an issue trying to load a very large file, it was (is) over 1 GB; and LR complained that the file was too large.
Comment from simon
Time: February 13, 2008, 7:50 pm
Are you using your new printer much?
Comment from dave
Time: February 13, 2008, 8:11 pm
Actually yeah - I’ve sold enough so that it’s already paid for itself - however I already had some of those orders before I bought it.
But at least once a week, I sell one or several of the larger prints.
And sometimes I do two prints side by side on it which is faster than running it through the 4800 twice.
Comment from Colin Griffiths
Time: February 13, 2008, 9:33 pm
Do you use Lightroom adjustments to mimic contrast control filters? If so, how do you determine what you want to use if you only view in B&W?
Comment from Dave W.
Time: February 14, 2008, 12:45 am
Great info, Dave. Thanks. Does the 40D do the initial conversion to b&w in the camera, or is that just a screen view? If so, could you clarify what technique you use for that initial conversion b4 you start the Lightroom Develop tweeking? I also tested the Lightroom demo, but decided to go w/Nikon Capture NX, since I shoot w/Nikon’s and felt Capture NX’s raw processing for the Nikon NEF format is excellent.
Comment from dave
Time: February 14, 2008, 1:14 am
I think I need to write this up more coherently - but the camera just produces a RAW file. The conversion to b&w is essentially a bunch of parameters that Lightroom remembers for how to show each particular file, without actually doing anything to the file.
So actually, the original RAW FILE which is a color file, isn’t touched, and isn’t converted to b&w. The filters that are applied through Lightroom tell how the data from the RAW file should be rendered for printing - or if you are going to turn it into a TIFF file or a PSD file.
As far as emulating contrast filters in Lightroom - yes - sometimes. Again - I’ll try to write up this stuff in one place but it certainly can be done.
Comment from John
Time: February 14, 2008, 5:54 pm
Lightroom’s limits are pixel related - it can’t be more than 10000 pixels on any edge. So even for mcananeya’s 2400dpi scans, that’s probably only 7000×6000 odd pixels.
It’s bitten me (and many others) with stiched panoramas. I’ve tried pointing out on the Lightroom forum that this is dumb, as Photoshop doesn’t have a problem with it, but I got a kind of proverbial “So whadya want me to do about it” shrug, and the not very helpful suggestion that I use a “placeholder” in Lightroom and keep my nice full size image elsewhere, thus defeating the purpose.
Comment from Mike
Time: February 14, 2008, 10:16 pm
Thanks for the explanation Dave.
Comment from mcananeya
Time: February 13, 2008, 7:05 pm
I didn’t realize there was a file size limit to Lightroom. I have been using it with 2400 dpi scans of 6×7 film without any problems. My computer is over three years old, and wasn’t necessarily anything special to start with, so I’m surprised that large files are an issue. What size were the files you tried?
Best regards,
Adam