Dramatic Tone filter vs. Lightroom [image comparison]

I had a recent order for a large print (24x32") as part of a multi-print installation in a client's home. They wanted an image that they had seen that I had posted on Facebook that was a conversion to B&W of the in-camera (E-M5) color Dramatic Tone filter JPEG. While the image looked perfectly adequate at web-resolution, it clearly wasn't going to cut it for a print, much less a large-scale print.

So, I went into the RAW file to see what I could do in Lightroom to re-create the overall look and feel of the filter while minimizing the excessive grain/noise and a few other weird things the filter did (a few dark patches on ground and clouds). Comparison results below, with the OOC file posted at the end.

It took more work than I thought, but I am pleased with the results. I am confident the final large print will look great, even given that it is up-rezzed to 300 pixels per inch from 138 pixels per inch (original file cropped slightly) at that print size.

One extra observation: I likely wouldn't have seen that composition and the correspondence between the clouds shapes and the hill shape if I had not had the Dramatic Tone filter turned on in the E-M5 at the time. Just one of the many advantages of Live View through the EVF!

B&W JPEG conversion of the in-camera Dramatic Tone filter:

Re-worked RAW file in Lightroom:

original out-of-the camera RAW file:

--
"If you simplify your English, you are freed from the worst follies of orthodoxy. You cannot speak any of the necessary dialects, and when you make a stupid remark its stupidity will be obvious, even to yourself." - George Orwell "Politics and the English Language"
"Unfortunately, in digital photography a lot of people are seeing pixels, not photographs ... Everyone together now: it's not the pixels. Sing it with me." - Thom Hogan
"If you pick up a camera with any sort of serious intent, you will at least occasionally need to use a flash. Done deal. Lock solid, Take it to the bank." - Joe McNally