Pink Areas on Over Exposed

[d_acqua]

When i over expose my pictures, the pure white areas appear in pink. Why is this happening? It happens only with ASP. When i use DPP it´s all good. Thanks.



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

[dFlyer]

Bibble5 has the same flaw since it was released over 2 years ago. Hopefully when ASP releases an update to ASP it will be fixed.

[Gerard2]

the whole picture is overexposed. Turn the overall exposure down, and try to use highlight recovery in monochromatic (checkbox and slider on the tone tab). If that fails, wait until the update indeed like dflyer said... the beta testers do say that it has been improved. Although no time is given, it is expected to arrive in " several weeks" whatever that may mean.

[d_acqua]

Thanks guys. Unfortunetly bringing the exposure down makes it worst! Lets wait some "several weeks".

[KeithR]

Just for a laugh, try converting the same file In Lightroom 4, and use the highlight recovery in there.

That quality of highlight recovery is what ASP is up against...

[Jeff Stephens]

This is a known issue that we've been working on for quite a while. Good news: we've made major improvements in the highlight recovery processing, and this will be included in our soon-to-be-released update.

Cheers, Jeff

[tomsi42]

Just for a laugh, try converting the same file In Lightroom 4, and use the highlight recovery in there.

That quality of highlight recovery is what ASP is up against...

Yes, the Highlight recovery in LR is very good, but that's the only good thing I will say about LR.

This is a known issue that we've been working on for quite a while. Good news: we've made major improvements in the highlight recovery processing, and this will be included in our soon-to-be-released update.

Cheers, Jeff

Thanks for the info - I look forward to that.

[KeithR]

Yes, the Highlight recovery in LR is very good, but that's the only good thing I will say about LR.

I don't expect Lr to stand or fall on your opinion or mine - but it's the market leader for a reason, and a big part of that reason is IQ.

I look forward to seeing the improvements in the new ASP, as they compare to Lr.

[Fraenzken]

Yes, the Highlight recovery in LR is very good, but that's the only good thing I will say about LR.

I don't expect Lr to stand or fall on your opinion or mine - but it's the market leader for a reason, and the primary reason is quality.

I'd say you're right Keith. There may be software that does special things better than LR, but the strength of LR is it doesn't have an obvious weakness regarding the IQ it delivers. ASP does (highlight recovery, demosaicing), though I hope for some progress with regard to the first point (and, all in all, it's become better and better since the first days of B5).

[tomsi42]

I don't expect Lr to stand or fall on your opinion or mine - but it's the market leader for a reason, and a big part of that reason is IQ.

I look forward to seeing the improvements in the new ASP, as they compare to Lr.

You're right that our opinions don't mean much. But I don't believe that IQ is the main reason for LR's success. The main reason for it's success is that it has Adobe and the Photoshop industry behind it. It didn't take long for a large amount of tutorial material to show up on the internet, there are books enough to fill several yards of bookshelves and so on.

As a raw converter and workflow program, I don't find it better or worse than the others I have tried and used for a reasonable time, just different. (I have used ACDsee Pro, Aftershot Pro, Bibble 5 and CaptureOne 6, PS Elements 6, 8 & 10 as well as trying out LR2, 3 and 4). Bibble & AfterShot has a few quirks that will affect a few of my photos - usually the HR issue being the culprit. But with the majority of my photos, I get the same IQ with all these programs.

[gregglee]

When this happens, highlight recovery often makes it worse, even on monochromatic. Sometimes HLR off and lowering exposure removes the color spots. Then if too dark use fill light or BEZ to bring the rest back up.

[claudermilk]

I don't expect Lr to stand or fall on your opinion or mine - but it's the market leader for a reason, and a big part of that reason is IQ.

I look forward to seeing the improvements in the new ASP, as they compare to Lr.

You're right that our opinions don't mean much. But I don't believe that IQ is the main reason for LR's success. The main reason for it's success is that it has Adobe and the Photoshop industry behind it. It didn't take long for a large amount of tutorial material to show up on the internet, there are books enough to fill several yards of bookshelves and so on.

As a raw converter and workflow program, I don't find it better or worse than the others I have tried and used for a reasonable time, just different. (I have used ACDsee Pro, Aftershot Pro, Bibble 5 and CaptureOne 6, PS Elements 6, 8 & 10 as well as trying out LR2, 3 and 4). Bibble & AfterShot has a few quirks that will affect a few of my photos - usually the HR issue being the culprit. But with the majority of my photos, I get the same IQ with all these programs.

I have to agree for the most part. LR has the massive backing of Adobe & its user community. The sample images I've seen have pretty good IQ. I tried it out early on asn was immediately turned off by the all-in-one, we-know-better-than-you setup. So, I went with Bibble.

Unfortunately, IQ seems to have degraded. The issue that started this thread is a long-standing one, and with the ASP change it's gotten a lot worse--at least for me. I hope the upcoming version improves that, but because of these issues my eye is wandering. A meetup group is having a speaker demonstrate his LR workflow next week, and I'll be interested to see that presentation; I still dislike the basic premise of the LR workflow paradigm, but the final product is what it's all about so it's worth a look.

[tomsi42]

I have to agree for the most part. LR has the massive backing of Adobe & its user community. The sample images I've seen have pretty good IQ. I tried it out early on asn was immediately turned off by the all-in-one, we-know-better-than-you setup. So, I went with Bibble.

More or less the same route as me in other words.

Unfortunately, IQ seems to have degraded. The issue that started this thread is a long-standing one, and with the ASP change it's gotten a lot worse--at least for me. I hope the upcoming version improves that, but because of these issues my eye is wandering. A meetup group is having a speaker demonstrate his LR workflow next week, and I'll be interested to see that presentation; I still dislike the basic premise of the LR workflow paradigm, but the final product is what it's all about so it's worth a look.

I think there are two camps on the Bibble -> ASP transition. For some, like you, thing went to worse, and for others, like me, things got a lot better. I think it depends on which camera you have. Of course as the basic rendering of my GH2 files got much better than before, the remaining bugs seems more glaring.

If you still don't like LR after the LR workflow demonstration, and the ASP update doesn't fix the issues you have, I recommend that you take a look at ACDSee Pro and CaptureOne 6. It might be that one of them will fit your workflow better.

[claudermilk]

ASP is a mixed bag for me. Some things are better, some things are worse. Unfortunately I am finding my typical high-ISO shots are impacted more by the shortcomings of the change (HR issues, worse noise).

Last time I looked at ACDSee it was just a DAM & I much preferred IMatch. It appears they are also chasing LR. CaptureOne seemed so pricey I ignored it...though I am looking at DxO and the difference isn't that much now (after adding the FilmPack plugin). I'll look at them as well, though I doubt ACDSee will fit my needs. I briefly looked at Sagelight; it has some nice ideas, but is very clunky and extremely slow, so I was not willing to climb that learning curve.

Ultimately, I hope that the issues in ASP get resolved. I like the workflow I have with it--I don't use the catalog at all, just filter by XMP ratings I set elsewhere. I used to be able to quickly deal with images in batch, but as it stands now I have to fiddle a while on each image and I'm not completely happy with the results anyway. This gives me a sad.

Anyway, I've taken this OT far enough.

[gregglee]

I am looking at DxO and the difference isn't that much now (after adding the FilmPack plugin).

I'm sure it depends on camera, but while DXO does a few things really well (e.g. low contrast images like fog), its tools controls are much different from other raw converters I have used (indirect, highly interactive, we-will-handle-all-the-details-and-you-may-not).

And its really really really really really really really really really slow.