Lightroom Classic 14.2 and Lightroom 8.2 are available - Adaptive Profiles

Lightroom Classic 14.2 and Lightroom 8.2 are available, now with the Adaptive Profiles (colour and b&w). They were previously in beta and only available in camera raw (Photoshop).
I was not expecting this but I like these a lot. My default import preset changes the profile to Adobe Standard and some minor other adjustments. I've now made an alternative based on the adaptive profile (with contrast -10 and saturation -10) and I have to say that in most cases I have a much better starting point.
You can change the amount of the applied profile, zero gives the normal Adobe standard which is very good because I prefer Adobe standard over Adobe Color.

Regarding the new Adaptive Profiles, Adobe says "Adaptive profiles are most effective when used with raw HDR files." Why is that? Why would they be less effective with an ordinary RAW image?

dj_paige said:

Regarding the new Adaptive Profiles, Adobe says "Adaptive profiles are most effective when used with raw HDR files." Why is that? Why would they be less effective with an ordinary RAW image?

Click to expand...

More data to work with? Just guessing

dj_paige said:

Regarding the new Adaptive Profiles, Adobe says "Adaptive profiles are most effective when used with raw HDR files." Why is that? Why would they be less effective with an ordinary RAW image?

Click to expand...

Julianne Kost seems to imply that the new Adaptive Profiles work just fine with non-HDR raws.

dj_paige said:

dj_paige said:

Regarding the new Adaptive Profiles, Adobe says "Adaptive profiles are most effective when used with raw HDR files." Why is that? Why would they be less effective with an ordinary RAW image?

Click to expand...

Julianne Kost seems to imply that the new Adaptive Profiles work just fine with non-HDR raws.

Click to expand...

she also suggests that the file should have no adjustments whatsoever when applying the adaptive profile.

After trying out the adaptive profile on a number of different images, I find that the files are "overbaked" for my liking, & turning down the opacity does not really help. My preferred starting point (using Sony) is Camera Light with a few tweaks.

When editing a RAW file there is no change in data available if switch to HDR, it is just that extra highlight information can be displayed if display is HDR capable.

I think that the adaptive profiles are designed to take advantage of this extra headroom if edit is in HDR mode, but they also take SDR display into account. So if a file is edited in HDR mode using adaptive preset and then exported as standard JPG then this is an acceptable equivalent. Likewise if exported as JPG with HDR data then get good output on both SDR and HDR displays, when using suitable output method.

This approach looks as though it does away with the need to either fine tune the SDR version in Lightroom or combine specific SDR and HDR versions in something like Greg Benz's WebSharp Pro plugin for Photoshop. It is still possible to use these approaches for fine tuning

In tests I have done today I have used adaptive profiles, edited in HDR mode, exported as JPG with HDR data and then uploaded the images to Portfolio. If site viewed using Chrome then get HDR version, and using Safari get SDR version. Other than the brighter highlights when viewing HDR version the two displays look very similar.

Applying Adaptive Profile seems to give similar results to Adobe Colour + Auto for general scenes. Advantage is that this does not move any of the sliders so they are then available for fine tuning of the results, whereas Auto may not leave much headroom for adjusting some sliders.

I am liking what I am seeing as a way to get a good starting point for edits, if doesn't work on a particular image then easy to reset and try another approach.

The ACR version works with sdr and hdr raw just fine.

After quite a bit of experimenting I settled for Adobe Neutral and Auto. Includes are texture +12, clarity +12 and dehaze at + 10. I found that a good starting point to begin my tweaking.

Now with the new profile I’ll have to do some side by side testing.

Zeee said:

Includes are texture +12, clarity +12 and dehaze at + 10. I found that a good starting point to begin my tweaking.

Click to expand...

I don't understand it. I almost never use them. Somethimes I use negative Clarity to blur/making a dreamy effect.

Maybe you should take a look at this video. He call it the unholy 3 ....

ATP62 said:

Zeee said:

Includes are texture +12, clarity +12 and dehaze at + 10. I found that a good starting point to begin my tweaking.

Click to expand...

I don't understand it. I almost never use them. Somethimes I use negative Clarity to blur/making a dreamy effect.

Click to expand...

I don’t want the birds I shoot looking dreamy.

ATP62 said:

Maybe you should take a look at this video. He call it the unholy 3 ....

Click to expand...

selwynbr said:

dj_paige said:

dj_paige said:

Regarding the new Adaptive Profiles, Adobe says "Adaptive profiles are most effective when used with raw HDR files." Why is that? Why would they be less effective with an ordinary RAW image?

Click to expand...

Julianne Kost seems to imply that the new Adaptive Profiles work just fine with non-HDR raws.

Click to expand...

she also suggests that the file should have no adjustments whatsoever when applying the adaptive profile.

Click to expand...

From my limited testing, applying auto immediately after adaptive colour profile (or vice versa) sometimes produces bizarre results. The effect of applying the adaptive colour profile certainly varies depending on what previous edits you've done. With my Nikon, generally I use Adobe Camera profiles, and that seems to produce more (to me) natural colour than adaptive colour.

selwynbr said:

After trying out the adaptive profile on a number of different images, I find that the files are "overbaked" for my liking, & turning down the opacity does not really help. My preferred starting point (using Sony) is Camera Light with a few tweaks.

Click to expand...

My experience too (but with Nikon camera profiles). I'll play some more, as it always takes practice to get the best out of something new.

Simon Garrett said:

selwynbr said:

dj_paige said:

dj_paige said:

Regarding the new Adaptive Profiles, Adobe says "Adaptive profiles are most effective when used with raw HDR files." Why is that? Why would they be less effective with an ordinary RAW image?

Click to expand...

Julianne Kost seems to imply that the new Adaptive Profiles work just fine with non-HDR raws.

Click to expand...

she also suggests that the file should have no adjustments whatsoever when applying the adaptive profile.

Click to expand...

From my limited testing, applying auto immediately after adaptive colour profile (or vice versa) sometimes produces bizarre results. The effect of applying the adaptive colour profile certainly varies depending on what previous edits you've done. With my Nikon, generally I use Adobe Camera profiles, and that seems to produce more (to me) natural colour than adaptive colour.

Click to expand...

Yes. There are so many scenes out there to adapt to it won't get them all correct. Adobe will continue to train and like Auto it will just get better over time.

Simon Garrett said:

Simon Garrett said:

After trying out the adaptive profile on a number of different images, I find that the files are "overbaked" for my liking, & turning down the opacity does not really help. My preferred starting point (using Sony) is Camera Light with a few tweaks.

Click to expand...

My experience too (but with Nikon camera profiles). I'll play some more, as it always takes practice to get the best out of something new.

Click to expand...

Zeee said:

Simon Garrett said:

selwynbr said:

dj_paige said:

dj_paige said:

Regarding the new Adaptive Profiles, Adobe says "Adaptive profiles are most effective when used with raw HDR files." Why is that? Why would they be less effective with an ordinary RAW image?

Click to expand...

Julianne Kost seems to imply that the new Adaptive Profiles work just fine with non-HDR raws.

Click to expand...

she also suggests that the file should have no adjustments whatsoever when applying the adaptive profile.

Click to expand...

From my limited testing, applying auto immediately after adaptive colour profile (or vice versa) sometimes produces bizarre results. The effect of applying the adaptive colour profile certainly varies depending on what previous edits you've done. With my Nikon, generally I use Adobe Camera profiles, and that seems to produce more (to me) natural colour than adaptive colour.

Click to expand...

Yes. There are so many scenes out there to adapt to it won't get them all correct. Adobe will continue to train and like Auto it will just get better over time.

Click to expand...

Yes, definitely something to keep watching and trying.

Zeee said:

Zeee said:

Zeee said:

After trying out the adaptive profile on a number of different images, I find that the files are "overbaked" for my liking, & turning down the opacity does not really help. My preferred starting point (using Sony) is Camera Light with a few tweaks.

Click to expand...

My experience too (but with Nikon camera profiles). I'll play some more, as it always takes practice to get the best out of something new.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

ATP62 said:

Zeee said:

Includes are texture +12, clarity +12 and dehaze at + 10. I found that a good starting point to begin my tweaking.

Click to expand...

I don't understand it. I almost never use them. Somethimes I use negative Clarity to blur/making a dreamy effect.

Maybe you should take a look at this video. He call it the unholy 3 ....

Click to expand...

Have you actually watched this video. He uses these sliders localized more than I would ever use them and then counters them.

LarryRC said:

ATP62 said:

Zeee said:

Includes are texture +12, clarity +12 and dehaze at + 10. I found that a good starting point to begin my tweaking.

Click to expand...

I don't understand it. I almost never use them. Somethimes I use negative Clarity to blur/making a dreamy effect.

Maybe you should take a look at this video. He call it the unholy 3 ....

Click to expand...

Have you actually watched this video. He uses these sliders localized more than I would ever use them and then counters them.

Click to expand...

Don’t know about ATP but I have videos that explain what they do and how the presenters use them.

Zeee said:

LarryRC said:

ATP62 said:

Zeee said:

Includes are texture +12, clarity +12 and dehaze at + 10. I found that a good starting point to begin my tweaking.

Click to expand...

I don't understand it. I almost never use them. Somethimes I use negative Clarity to blur/making a dreamy effect.

Maybe you should take a look at this video. He call it the unholy 3 ....

Click to expand...

Have you actually watched this video. He uses these sliders localized more than I would ever use them and then counters them.

Click to expand...

Don’t know about ATP but I have videos that explain what they do and how the presenters use them.

Click to expand...

I have seen video ATP posted before. I don't set those sliders at 90 or 100.

Here is one I have book marked.


Now that I'm experimenting with Adaptive Profile I'm leaving Dehaze at 0.

Zeee said:

Zeee said:

LarryRC said:

ATP62 said:

Zeee said:

Includes are texture +12, clarity +12 and dehaze at + 10. I found that a good starting point to begin my tweaking.

Click to expand...

I don't understand it. I almost never use them. Somethimes I use negative Clarity to blur/making a dreamy effect.

Maybe you should take a look at this video. He call it the unholy 3 ....

Click to expand...

Have you actually watched this video. He uses these sliders localized more than I would ever use them and then counters them.

Click to expand...

Don’t know about ATP but I have videos that explain what they do and how the presenters use them.

Click to expand...

I have seen video ATP posted before. I don't set those sliders at 90 or 100.

Here is one I have book marked.

Now that I'm experimenting with Adaptive Profile I'm leaving Dehaze at 0.

Click to expand...

I was looking for something else and found this. Morganti gets into Texture and Clarity.

I think I’m going to create a preset to open all the files in Adaptive Colour and see how it goes. The amount slider is a nice touch that provides a lot of control. I’ll have no other tweaks like Texture, etc and apply them after via masking.

I’ll keep my old import preset around. Do some comparisons when in doubt. Most of the time Adaptive is pretty good. Occasionally it results in some weird adjustments.

Zeee said:

I think I’m going to create a preset to open all the files in Adaptive Colour and see how it goes. The amount slider is a nice touch that provides a lot of control. I’ll have no other tweaks like Texture, etc and apply them after via masking.

I’ll keep my old import preset around. Do some comparisons when in doubt. Most of the time Adaptive is pretty good. Occasionally it results in some weird adjustments.

Click to expand...

Good idea i think i’ll try it also.

ATP62 said:

Zeee said:

Includes are texture +12, clarity +12 and dehaze at + 10. I found that a good starting point to begin my tweaking.

Click to expand...

I don't understand it. I almost never use them. Somethimes I use negative Clarity to blur/making a dreamy effect.

Maybe you should take a look at this video. He call it the unholy 3 ....

Click to expand...

There are so many videos out there that are to long. Here is another short one that I have seen before.