AUTO feature for JPEGs in Lightroom

Discussion in 'Image Processing' started by roundball, Jun 14, 2015.

  1. roundball

    roundball TalkEmount Hall of Famer

    Oct 8, 2013
    USA
    The jury is still out on this but I’m beginning to get a feel for something using Lightroom, at least with JPEGs, and wonder what others may know, or think, about it……has to do with the AUTO feature in the DEVELOP module.

    I’ve heard it put that the AUTO feature is not very good, not worth bothering with, etc. And in experimenting with it I do agree the AUTO feature is kind of like rolling the dice…half of the time it might nail an image, the other half of the time it doesn’t…making it unreliable in the purest sense of “to AUTO or not to AUTO”.

    But…in playing around with the AUTO feature some, when AUTO messes up one of my JPEGs, it seems that the only issue is that the EXPOSURE has been way over-driven up too high for some reason.

    And so far…such an image seems easily corrected by simply teasing the EXPOSURE slider back down until the image is right. All the other AUTO adjustments of Contrast / Highlights / Shadows / Whites / Blacks seem to be fine left right where the AUTO feature put them.

    So at the moment, when I import an image the first thing I do is click AUTO to get a sense for where things stand…then half the time tweak the EXPOSURE slider if I need to. Then I check CLARITY and that’s pretty much it for most of my JPEGs.

    I gather few people use JPEGs but thought I’d post this anyway just to see if any other Pros & Cons about Lightroom's AUTO feature might come to light as it relates to JPEGs.
     
  2. Bill

    Bill TalkEmount Veteran

    339
    Oct 22, 2012
    Brisbane, Australia
    Bill
    Auto is just a way to get Lightroom to do to a raw file what your camera has already done in making the raw file into a jpeg. Although I haven't tried that in Lightroom with a jpeg, I don't think that adjustments on top of adjustments would provide much actual improvement.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  3. roundball

    roundball TalkEmount Hall of Famer

    Oct 8, 2013
    USA
    Thanks for the explanation, didn't know that
     
  4. southy

    southy TalkEmount Veteran

    370
    Feb 5, 2014
    Australia
    I click auto sometime at the start of processing. I figure it can't hurt and it's only one click to revert back to the original if you don't like what it does. Sometimes it gets you pretty close to where you want the image to be. But as you noticed Roundball, I find even with RAW files auto regularly pushes the exposure to high, or at least higher than my personal taste.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  5. roundball

    roundball TalkEmount Hall of Famer

    Oct 8, 2013
    USA
    Interesting to hear...may well be a chronic design flaw issue with the Lightroom AUTO feature.
     
  6. addieleman

    addieleman Passionate amateur

    Nov 13, 2012
    Netherlands
    Ad Dieleman
    Flaw or not, don't get your hopes up of it getting really better. Auto is what it is, it makes a decision based upon an algorithm which doesn't take your intentions and preferences into account. I guess most cameras will do a better job in processing jpegs from raw data than Lightroom. If you keep processing jpeg instead of raws, you might be better off with something like Google Picasa or Faststone Image Viewer, both of which can do a credible job and are free.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  7. roundball

    roundball TalkEmount Hall of Famer

    Oct 8, 2013
    USA
    Thanks for that
     
    • Like Like x 1
  8. roundball

    roundball TalkEmount Hall of Famer

    Oct 8, 2013
    USA
    This may also explain why the built-in editor (Aviary) at Photobucket does a better job on a lot of my JPEGs than Lightroom does...its probably geared towards the typical JPEG consumer.

    Anyway, I downloaded Google Picasa and was immediately reminded of how intrusive and controlling Google is in their approach to everything...forced a copy of all my photos into a picasa database with no chance for me to opt out...and did so with some unique naming / organizational convention of its own which made a nightmare out of trying to find anything compared to my detailed Windows file folder tree structure and naming convention. As soon as it returned control of my PC back to me I uninstalled it.

    Then downloaded Faststone and my initial reaction is very positive...it was obviously built for and with Windows in mind and operates off of my existing Windows folder structure the way I prefer...with the Windows folders visible on the left side and I select / import whatever image I want...it's a tool external to Windows that "I" control and use as I see fit, not the other way around.
    PS:
    I also noticed that it's design and layout looks very similar to the excellent PIE software product you shared with us last year, which I use every day...even displays the main Sony EXIF data attributes for a selected photo.

    I'll run some JPEGs through Faststone today to get a feel for how it works on them...if it operates / produces results as good as the program itself looks, you will have just hit another home run !
    :thumbup:
     
    Last edited: Jun 15, 2015
    • Like Like x 1
  9. roundball

    roundball TalkEmount Hall of Famer

    Oct 8, 2013
    USA
    AM low light shot to test JPEG in “FastStone Image Viewer (Editor)”
    Canon FDn 200/2.8 on NEX-7
    Figuring out how to use FastStone as I go but first test was very positive.
    These same basics in Lightroom would have had so much noise I‘d have discarded the image.
    More testing and refinement to go as I learn this tool, but it looks very promising for JPEGs.

    TEST JPEG SOOC



    JPEG AFTER FASTSTONE BASIC TWEAKS
    (Shadows / Highlights / Contrast / Saturations / Sharpening)

     
    • Like Like x 1
  10. Chris2500dk

    Chris2500dk TalkEmount Rookie

    17
    Jul 5, 2012
    I gave it a go, and I have to say I agree that it seems to work quite well for my Sony A6000.
    Load in a JPEG, hit auto and adjust exposure about about -0.7ev looks to work for most of the shots I tried.
    I'm not saying it's better than using RAW files, you don't get the full dynamic range of the sensor, and maybe you could get the same results by adjusting the camera JPEG engine, but I like the end results and it's very fast and easy to do.
     
  11. roundball

    roundball TalkEmount Hall of Famer

    Oct 8, 2013
    USA
  12. roundball

    roundball TalkEmount Hall of Famer

    Oct 8, 2013
    USA
    This make 3 for 3 so far…simple, quick, appears very accurate to me, interfaces with / utilizes existing Windows file structures and operating conventions, etc.

    Much better and more comprehensive than the built-in editor at Photobucket as well…which also means reduced work flow steps & time up and back to Photobucket’s editor…now it’s just do it locally then make one upload, done.

    So until further notice, “FastStone” will be my JPEG editor…and Addieleman is really a terrific unselfish wealth of information…thanks for hitting yet another home run ADD !!

    JPEG – FEMALE RUFOUS-SIDED TOWHEE…..SOOC


    JPEG - AFTER A FEW BASIC TWEAKS IN THE ‘FASTSTONE’ EDITOR

     
    • Like Like x 1