Do you use lens correction profiles when processing raw files or not with LR4

[2n10]

I only use lens corrections in critical situations where lines should be straight, such as horizons etc. I however use it sparingly because it messes with the original composition ie what I saw through the viewfinder no longer matches the processed result.

I've only just installed LR4 because I need something to process the raws from my Sony Nex. Sony Image Data Converter is unworkably slow, so I had to find something else.

The 16-50 Sony lens heavily distorts and depends on post-processing to correct it. The camera already does that on the fly and so you see the undistorted picture when taking photos (and the correction is applied to the jpg's but not the raws obviously). LR seems to be doing a pretty good job of it, but I miss the automatic NR functionality from DPP.

So, does anybody know if its possible in LR to automatically apply different levels of NR depending on ISO used?

I think you need to do it manually.

 

[2n10]

Yes I use them in all of my PP.

 

[cocopop05]

I use it generally, but if I have important features near the edge or corners, I find it distorts those things too much, then I will not use lens correction.

 

[Apop]

I used to use them when i had the nikon 200-400

But now i have the canon 500mm f4 IS, and there is no such profile in LR4

I am not experienced enough to make my own profiles, and have not yet made the effort to see if others are offering them.

Even though the 500 has less 'flaws' than the 200-400, I would still like a lens profile

 

[RGF]

Yes 90+% of the time. LR4 is lacking a profile for the canon500 f4 so I use the 600mm F4 profile. Using profiles only has a small impact, but small impacts can add up

 

[RayValdez360]

SO What i get from all this is to use it if you need lines to be straight in an image, don't use it if detail is the most important factor because it softens or makes it less detailed(even though no one provides visual examples), don't use it if it messes with the composition too much ( if that is important.) Vignetting is totally optional.

 

[mrsfotografie]

SO What i get from all this is to use it if you need lines to be straight in an image, don't use it if detail is the most important factor because it softens or makes it less detailed(even though no one provides visual examples), don't use it if it messes with the composition too much ( if that is important.) Vignetting is totally optional.

That's how I go about it. Remember, there are no set rules in photography

 

[Dim]

Always use. I wrote it to defaults in LR4. And Camera Calibration for colours.

 

[mrsfotografie]

"So, does anybody know if its possible in LR to automatically apply different levels of NR depending on ISO used? "

Yes it is, you can set default develop settings to any camera model and iso combination. First go into Lightroom: Preferences: and tick the Make defaults specific to camera ISO setting box, then go into the develop module and develop one image at the specific iso in the way you would want every image shot at that iso with that camera adjusted, then go to the Develop sub menu, not the module button, under Develop click the Set Default Settings, you then get a dialogue box that sounds a bit sinister but it tells you what it is creating, all images shot with that model camera and iso will, by default, get the current develop setting applied. They are of course, completely reversible.

Wow, thank you very much! This is very cool indeed I also ticked the 'make defaults specific to camera serial number' option so I can distinguish between my camera's. I'm really happy now - still have to decide on the levels of NR I require though. Maybe I can have a peek at the default settings in DPP for each iso to get something to work from.

 

[pwp]

Lightroom 4. I have been using raws all the time now and I finally checked the lens correction button and I noticed my images getting brighter and stretched (undistorted?) I mainly shoot in clubs and some portraits. I honestly didn't noticed the pincushion effect but now that I know about it I am wondering if my images might be better in the long run if I correct them. I use a 24-70. I get slight pincushion on the long end. SOmeone help me thanks....

Hell yes....on every single file. Automated so I never have to think about it.
This is one of the gold plated functions of LR as far as I'm concerned.

-PW

 

[wickidwombat]

I find lens correction can make some portraits less flattering if pincushion is removed from the long axis in portrait orientation but will benefit if its a horrizontal format.
so i usually leave lens correction off uless i want it then just click it if i think it will help sometimes its good sometimes not. I definately dont have it applied to everything

 

[Rienzphotoz]

i usually leave lens correction off uless i want it then just click it if i think it will help sometimes its good sometimes not. I definately dont have it applied to everything

+1

 

[mrsfotografie]

You are welcome, I was out shooting but was amazed nobody jumped in with an answer for that, Lightroom is so powerful and considering the amount some people here shoot, literally thousands of images per shoot, I'd expect a robust preset strategy to be basic necessity and a huge time saver.

I only find the serial number setting useful when shooting with different bodies of the same model and their exposures are out compared to each other, then a basic exposure preset will even everything out.

I'm well under way now, I've enabled luminance NR at a fixed ratio, ie iso 400=8, 800=16, 1600=32 etc. The noise on the Nex 6 is quite nice, looks a lot like film grain so I'm not bothered with adjusting color noise.

However to set NR I need sample images at each iso - an inconvenience to say the least. I haven't been able to find a settings file where I could define this, such a shame because it's easy to miss out on NR settings for intermediate iso's this way. I don't suppose you know if this can be configured by editing a settings file by any chance?

 

[fyngyrz]

I'm not buying another "fast" wide angle lens until a manufacturer can offer me near-zero coma and near-zero CA. My Sigma 35mm f/1.4 was a *horror* in this regard at f/1.4; the only useful portion of an astro image was perhaps 10% (at most) near the center. And if a lens can't shoot cleanly at f/1.4, I don't think they ought to advertise it as such. My Sigma 35mm was only useful at f/2.8 and above. At 1.4 it was a joke.

As consumers, we've been far too forgiving of these horribly distorted lens designs. Here's hoping the manufacturers are listening.