Yohan Pamudji wrote:
Odd that it seems to add grain even at low ISO (m3rocket's landscape shot). If it just didn't remove grain as well at high ISO it might be attributable to them still working on the luminance noise removal (which they are), but why wouldn't it just leave low ISO as-is?
The "extra grain" is actually due to the lack of luminance noise reduction. Prior to Lightroom 3, even when it was set to zero luminance NR, there was some being applied to images 'behind the scenes.'
What you're seeing is more accurate to what the camera captured, which is why it may be somewhat more 'grainy' but that noise is much finer than it was and is a huge improvement in my opinion.
I am sure that once the luminance noise reduction is added, the results will be superior to Lightroom 2. (if you want completely noise-free images that is)
andrewfee wrote:
The "extra grain" is actually due to the lack of luminance noise reduction. Prior to Lightroom 3, even when it was set to zero luminance NR, there was some being applied to images 'behind the scenes.'
There ya go...
The lack of "clumping" of noise is a big thing here - it's that which has always put me off Lr and ACR, and this beta seems way better for that, suggesting a new demosaicing algorithm - and about time too.
That said, in terms of detail reproduction, I'm still seeing a bigger improvement in, and somewhat better results from, Bibble 5 preview.
Daan B wrote:
Contacted Adobe (Lightroom team) about it, this is what they said:
Lightroom 3 beta requires Mac OS 10.5.6 or higher.
The LR team member you spoke to must not have know what they were talking about. It requires an Intel Based Mac.
I have a Mac G5 Dual Core running 10.5.8 and I didn't even bother to download it even running 10.5.8 because it is the same as Snow Leopard and stated openly that.. It doesn't run on anything but INTEL based Macs.
So if you're running on a non Intel based Mac you can't run Snow Leopard or LR3 beta unless you want to spend $3,000.00 to $4,000.00 on a new Mac or laptop.
My current Mac is pristine and runs 2.X LR and CS4 just fine so I'm not about to spend thousands to run a $200.00 program until I'm ready to upgrade.
andrewfee wrote:
The "extra grain" is actually due to the lack of luminance noise reduction. Prior to Lightroom 3, even when it was set to zero luminance NR, there was some being applied to images 'behind the scenes.'
What you're seeing is more accurate to what the camera captured, which is why it may be somewhat more 'grainy' but that noise is much finer than it was and is a huge improvement in my opinion.
I am sure that once the luminance noise reduction is added, the results will be superior to Lightroom 2. (if you want completely noise-free images that is)
It is this type of "hidden adjustments" that have always irked me. With a prior life as a sofware designer, I understand the tendency to think you know what is best for the customer. However, it always is better if you make suggestions to the customer and then give them complete control over almost everything.
ChrisDar wrote:
The LR team member you spoke to must not have know what they were talking about. It requires an Intel Based Mac.
I have a Mac G5 Dual Core running 10.5.8 and I didn't even bother to download it even running 10.5.8 because it is the same as Snow Leopard and stated openly that.. It doesn't run on anything but INTEL based Macs.
Well what about both: it requires an Intel Mac _AND_ 10.5.6. It clearly says so in the Info.plist - minimum system required: 10.5.6. Since the binary isn't fat but only Intel, well, it won't run on a PPC machine. But that doesn't mean that the customer support person had no clue what they were talking about - as a matter of fact, they were correct.
Daan B wrote:
Contacted Adobe (Lightroom team) about it, this is what they said:
Lightroom 3 beta requires Mac OS 10.5.6 or higher.
Bummer
I hope the final version is supported by Mac OS 10.4...
If you have an Intel IMac get the Snow Leopard upgrade. (The Upgrade worked with Tiger for a friend of mine). In LR2 you had to specify 64bit. LR3 beta launches as 64bit. LR3 beta will only work with Leopard and I don't think it will change.
az-dave wrote:
If you have an Intel IMac get the Snow Leopard upgrade. (The Upgrade worked with Tiger for a friend of mine). In LR2 you had to specify 64bit. LR3 beta launches as 64bit. LR3 beta will only work with Leopard and I don't think it will change.
Well, I am on 10.4 right now. I think I need the box version to upgrade to 10.6. This includes upgrades for iLife and iWork too. Unfortunately I have no choice... if I want to use LR3 beta. Maybe I just wait until next year when LR3 is officially released. It seems LR3 beta isn't fully functional anyway... and then there is the "grain/noise"...
I'm thinking about buying the new iMac 27" with Dual Core 3.06 Mhz. I guess it will have power enough to manage 21Mp files from the 5D with LR2 or LR3?
Running Tiger here too on the Mac Pro Intel. Not about to upgrade to Snow Leopard until the printing bugs are worked out. I'll pass on the LR beta until there's no other option. Looks to me like switching over to a Windows PC may be one of those options, since LR seems to work fine on XP.
lexvo wrote:
I'm thinking about buying the new iMac 27" with Dual Core 3.06 Mhz. I guess it will have power enough to manage 21Mp files from the 5D with LR2 or LR3?
Why not run Leopard (10.5.x)? Snow Leopard is even better and I have no issues printing with newer Epson printers. I don't understand why you wouldn't upgrade to a more advanced OS (64 bit). If you want to run XP another option would be to install XP under Boot Camp or Parallels. I run XP and Vista on my MBP and no issues.
nathanlake wrote:
It is not just about bugs, some functionality is actually disabled for the beta. They are really trying to steer users to test certain things.
If that is true, then I won't be one of their testers ... I was considering trying the program - though on Win7 (which is why I was asking) - but I'm not interested in working with an intentionally crippled version.
The length of the beta (good until April 2010) will surely bring Adobe some business. Some, like myself, have never tried Lightroom or Aperture. This seemingly large beta will catch the eye of many, I'm sure. My first impressions are very good, and I will probably purchase it when it comes out
I'm not a LR fan, but I am interested in any processing improvements in Adobe's RAW stack. The reduced "noise clumping" and improved chroma NR is very welcome.
Since Luma NR is disabled in this beta, I have hopes that Adobe's holding back on something cool for later. IMHO, their current algorithm is just not that good, but if Adobe could get closer to the results of Neat Image or Noise Ninja, that would be awesome.
