Can Lr 13 Make Me Stop Caring About Minimum Aperture?

[Jake Shoots Birds]

I don't use Lr for much beyond cataloging, applying camera profiles, cropping, and minor light adjustments before sending stuff to Photoshop, but given that Lr's Develop Module is simply Camera Raw, and I use Camera Raw Filter in Photoshop after applying DeNoise there (I like the ability to apply it in a new layer and mask if necessary), any additions to the Develop Module are of interest to me. And Lens Blur is extremely interesting to me.

I'm a wildlife shooter and as such I lust for long, fast glass. I lust because I can't possibly justify the cost even as a sometimes-money-making serious hobbiest. I love the 100-500mm, but there are occasions where f7.1 allows just a little too much of a nearby busy background to come into focus. For example, we have a pair of first year bucks who visit our yard almost daily (story there but TLDR material). This shot was from 2 days ago and because of the background it's not something I would share anywhere other than on my personal FB for friends who know their story. In the background is a woodpile covered in various gardening stuff, and at 6.3 the background is very distracting. Now this is an extreme case so I'm using it on purpose to show you how effectively the new AI identifies areas of focus as well as where things are located in relationship to that.

• Join to view EXIF data.

With no other processing I've used the new Lens Blur feature to select the area of focus and then add natural blur progressively to the rest of the shot. I did this in a separate layer and then applied a mask slicing the image in half in the middle of the cart in the background so you can see the difference, and purposefully left the tree in the effected half. Even if it doesn't give you the amazing bokeh that fast glass might (I haven't tested this yet), I can now do in seconds what would have taken at least a couple minutes or more using other masking techniques to replicate a realistic DoF. If this performs consistently then maybe f7.1 for 100-500mm or f8 for the (hopefully coming) 200-800mm zooms aren't as problematic as some would like to point out?

I plan on finding and sharing some better examples of how well this works ... or doesn't. At least for wildlife.

 

[PKM-UK]

I don't use Lr for much beyond cataloging, applying camera profiles, cropping, and minor light adjustments before sending stuff to Photoshop, but given that Lr's Develop Module is simply Camera Raw, and I use Camera Raw Filter in Photoshop after applying DeNoise there (I like the ability to apply it in a new layer and mask if necessary), any additions to the Develop Module are of interest to me. And Lens Blur is extremely interesting to me.

I'm a wildlife shooter and as such I lust for long, fast glass. I lust because I can't possibly justify the cost even as a sometimes-money-making serious hobbiest. I love the 100-500mm, but there are occasions where f7.1 allows just a little too much of a nearby busy background to come into focus. For example, we have a pair of first year bucks who visit our yard almost daily (story there but TLDR material). This shot was from 2 days ago and because of the background it's not something I would share anywhere other than on my personal FB for friends who know their story. In the background is a woodpile covered in various gardening stuff, and at 6.3 the background is very distracting. Now this is an extreme case so I'm using it on purpose to show you how effectively the new AI identifies areas of focus as well as where things are located in relationship to that.

View attachment 20554

With no other processing I've used the new Lens Blur feature to select the area of focus and then add natural blur progressively to the rest of the shot. I did this in a separate layer and then applied a mask slicing the image in half in the middle of the cart in the background so you can see the difference, and purposefully left the tree in the effected half. Even if it doesn't give you the amazing bokeh that fast glass might (I haven't tested this yet), I can now do in seconds what would have taken at least a couple minutes or more using other masking techniques to replicate a realistic DoF. If this performs consistently then maybe f7.1 for 100-500mm or f8 for the (hopefully coming) 200-800mm zooms aren't as problematic as some would like to point out?

I plan on finding and sharing some better examples of how well this works ... or doesn't. At least for wildlife.

Hi Jake,

I haven't played with Lens Blur very much yet as I'm doing a bunch of other stuff, but I did have a (very) quick try with one of Karen's shots from the zoo.

(I used the tool in Photoshop Camera Raw - I basically left it to do its thing and then cranked the blur up to 75. Once I get time, I'd like to see how this tool compares with the Depth Blur filter in the Photoshop Neural Filters. Having said that, I haven't had time to play with that feature very much either... ).

So anyway, another example for the thread -

Phil


What a cutie...

• Join to view EXIF data.

 

[Only RF]

Interesting questions. I used to pine for the EF 500 f4 and in the last year for the RF 600 f4. My wife is great with my hobby but I myself have boundaries. If we win a lottery I'll have two of each, even if I just look that them

Maybe not so much now. I'm not getting any younger and it seems gravity is getting stronger. Einstein was wrong. Space/time fabric gets more dense as you get older.

When the 100-500 was announced it got a bit of a snub for 7.1. The 600 and 800 f11's were laughed at. Not so much after the releases.

I'm perfectly fine with sky replacement for others who use it. I'm still going to stick to my "if that is how the scene looked when I was there then that is what I work with". Same for generative fill. I want to leave something that I have to work for. If there is a twig in front of a bird that goes into the trash.

I was not going to but I tried lens blur and actually posted a file using it. I felt like I was cheating a little but I use masking to balance the subject and background exposures. Tone down hot spots. I go nuts with masking for my B&W work but so did Ansel dodging and burning.

I have a feeling it will become a tool I will use more than intended. Thanks Adobe for saving me $12,000.

Pretty amazing stuff these days. For me all LrC needs now is a Sharpen AI module.

 

[ACEkin]

I briefly played with this feature but I did not find that it had any finesse for changing distance, from near background to distant background. It felt as if it masked the subject and blurred the rest. The result may be refined but I have not searched for options that would make it transition from less sharp to blurry.

 

[Only RF]

- YouTube

Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.

www.youtube.com

- YouTube

Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.

www.youtube.com

 

[ACEkin]

- YouTube

Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.

www.youtube.com

- YouTube

Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.

www.youtube.com

Thanks, it must have been the image I used that made the transition not visible or meaningful.

 

[ACEkin]

Thanks, it must have been the image I used that made the transition not visible or meaningful.

I tried it on a different image with a definite depth that can be observed before and after. The two images below show the default adjustment I got. When I zoom in on the wall on the left, I see a sudden transition from sharp to blurry. Also, the car parked on the street should be in the blurry zone, but it is sharper than the car nearer to me. I am sure, users of this tool will improve on this result, but it requires care before releasing the image that may contain odd effects. I also noticed a significant slowdown in exporting images.

 

[Jake Shoots Birds]

I tried it on a different image with a definite depth that can be observed before and after. The two images below show the default adjustment I got. When I zoom in on the wall on the left, I see a sudden transition from sharp to blurry. Also, the car parked on the street should be in the blurry zone, but it is sharper than the car nearer to me. I am sure, users of this tool will improve on this result, but it requires care before releasing the image that may contain odd effects. I also noticed a significant slowdown in exporting images.

While no tool is perfect, particularly in its first release, I believe with a bit of practice this will be useful - moreso in Photoshop where I can use a gradient mask to "help" it some.

In the case of your shot, there's a targeting tool that allows you to choose the center focus point. I believe were you to place that down the left wall near to the doorway and allow focus to shift both in and out it might be more pleasing. I also think that changing the size of the focus area based on the content of each shot will help.

The purpose of my OP was not to call the tool perfect but to say that it can help to ease the pain of smaller apertures when you have no choice. Time will tell, but AI is certainly making this easier.

 

[Terrible Terrestial]

I just updated my LR to check this out. Nice tool, I like how software is getting smarter every year. I hope it doesn't get too smart.

The tool is not perfect, but I really like the manual adjustments one can make.

1st image is with no Lens Blur, 2nd is with automatic Lens Blur, 3rd is with automatic Lens Blur + manual corrections (see the lower monitor's top edge).

I think it can be great for rescuing important but not-so-well-planned photos.

• Join to view EXIF data.

• Join to view EXIF data.

• Join to view EXIF data.

 

[ACEkin]

While no tool is perfect, particularly in its first release, I believe with a bit of practice this will be useful - moreso in Photoshop where I can use a gradient mask to "help" it some.

In the case of your shot, there's a targeting tool that allows you to choose the center focus point. I believe were you to place that down the left wall near to the doorway and allow focus to shift both in and out it might be more pleasing. I also think that changing the size of the focus area based on the content of each shot will help.

The purpose of my OP was not to call the tool perfect but to say that it can help to ease the pain of smaller apertures when you have no choice. Time will tell, but AI is certainly making this easier.

You are right, tools and learning will improve over time. My words were merely a reminder to be careful.

 

[DWU2]

Interesting questions. I used to pine for the EF 500 f4 and in the last year for the RF 600 f4. My wife is great with my hobby but I myself have boundaries. If we win a lottery I'll have two of each, even if I just look that them

Maybe not so much now. I'm not getting any younger and it seems gravity is getting stronger. Einstein was wrong. Space/time fabric gets more dense as you get older.

When the 100-500 was announced it got a bit of a snub for 7.1. The 600 and 800 f11's were laughed at. Not so much after the releases.

I'm perfectly fine with sky replacement for others who use it. I'm still going to stick to my "if that is how the scene looked when I was there then that is what I work with". Same for generative fill. I want to leave something that I have to work for. If there is a twig in front of a bird that goes into the trash.

I was not going to but I tried lens blur and actually posted a file using it. I felt like I was cheating a little but I use masking to balance the subject and background exposures. Tone down hot spots. I go nuts with masking for my B&W work but so did Ansel dodging and burning.

I have a feeling it will become a tool I will use more than intended. Thanks Adobe for saving me $12,000.

Pretty amazing stuff these days. For me all LrC needs now is a Sharpen AI module.

I can't help but think Sharpen AI will be here soon in LRC - especially since Denoise AI is already in it.