Adobe Photoshop 2021 vs Luminar 4 - Sky Replacement

Started 5 months ago | Discussions
ATP62 Contributing Member • Posts: 631
Re: Adobe Photoshop 2021 vs Luminar 4 - Sky Replacement
2

Check out this video by Jim Nix. Photoshop seems to struggle , while Luminar is doing a great job.

10:50 in the video , Photoshop has problem with the sky behind the tree.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CkG7bIBr0Uw

Sagittarius Veteran Member • Posts: 7,046
Re: Adobe Photoshop 2021 vs Luminar 4 - Sky Replacement
2

ATP62 wrote:

Check out this video by Jim Nix. Photoshop seems to struggle , while Luminar is doing a great job.

10:50 in the video , Photoshop has problem with the sky behind the tree.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CkG7bIBr0Uw

Here is a sky replacement by PS including behind a tree. No struggle at all.

-- hide signature --

Best regards

 Sagittarius's gear list:Sagittarius's gear list
Nikon D810 Nikon D500 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm F1.4G Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II Nikon AF-S Micro-Nikkor 105mm F2.8G IF-ED VR +4 more
ATP62 Contributing Member • Posts: 631
Re: Adobe Photoshop 2021 vs Luminar 4 - Sky Replacement

+1

Just what I was hoping for. Haven't tried this in Photoshop yet.

Zoran K Contributing Member • Posts: 904
Re: Adobe Photoshop 2021 vs Luminar 4 - Sky Replacement
1

ATP62 wrote:

Check out this video by Jim Nix. Photoshop seems to struggle , while Luminar is doing a great job.

10:50 in the video , Photoshop has problem with the sky behind the tree.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CkG7bIBr0Uw

In this video Jim Nix said that it is not possible to edit foreground of the image in Luminar 4 when the sky is replaced. That is not true. You can do it switching to Essentials option ("sun" symbol).

Chris Sargent
OP Chris Sargent Senior Member • Posts: 1,180
Re: Adobe Photoshop 2021 vs Luminar 4 - Sky Replacement
1

ATP62 wrote:

Check out this video by Jim Nix. Photoshop seems to struggle , while Luminar is doing a great job.

10:50 in the video , Photoshop has problem with the sky behind the tree.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CkG7bIBr0Uw

In my experience to date the two applications are quite comparable.  Luminar often struggles with elements of a scene especially if the existing sky has high contrast elements (e.g. Clouds and Highlights)

-- hide signature --
 Chris Sargent's gear list:Chris Sargent's gear list
Fujifilm X-T3 Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R Samyang 8mm F2.8 UMC Fisheye Fujifilm XF 55-200mm F3.5-4.8 R LM OIS Fujifilm XF 10-24mm F4 R OIS +3 more
Jestertheclown
Jestertheclown Veteran Member • Posts: 3,057
Re: Adobe Photoshop 2021 vs Luminar 4 - Sky Replacement
2

Chris Sargent wrote:

ATP62 wrote:

Check out this video by Jim Nix. Photoshop seems to struggle , while Luminar is doing a great job.

10:50 in the video , Photoshop has problem with the sky behind the tree.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CkG7bIBr0Uw

In my experience to date the two applications are quite comparable. Luminar often struggles with elements of a scene especially if the existing sky has high contrast elements (e.g. Clouds and Highlights)

They're comparable as a one click fix but Photoshop has more to offer once you get going.

I've spent much of the afternoon replacing skies, using photoshop, on images from a grey, murky airshow, all of which had been replaced already using Luminar.

The Luminar replacements were, at best, adequate. There were loads of artifacts and in places bits of sky or aircraft were missing or replaced with patches of plain grey.

The Photoshop replacements (of the replacements) have turned out much better.

I used my own collection of skies which is now (tediously!) uploaded to Photoshop's sky thing.

Once the sky's been added to the image, all of the sliders work as they should; I found that Luminars,' by comparison, had little effect but I've yet to fathom out how to make adjustments directly on Photoshop's layer masks.

They come with their own brushes but all that I've been able to do with them, so far, has been to make a mess.

I even saved the whole thing as a PSD and reopened it using an old version of Photoshop (in case the problem lay with v.22) but no, I still just made a mess!

Onto the negative and neither programme actually 'cut's' its mask around the foreground. Instead the foreground lies over it and consequently there's a 'bleed' of sky evident in the foreground.

It's possible, using Photoshop to push the mask upwards which can help, in fact by scaling it up; just use the slider, and you can push it all over the place (I don't think you can do that using Luminar) but it's not ideal.

Using the dodge tool on the finished article helps as can using the 'divide' trick to remove it as a colour cast. Again, not ideal but worth a try.

So far, I'm reasonably impressed by Photoshop's efforts. I'll be more so, once I've figured out the layer masks. I my experience, despite initial similarities to Luminar, Photoshop's going to be a clear winner.

Now I've got to re-process about a thousand murky airshow images . . . !

"It's good to be . . . . . . . . . Me!"

Maverick07 Regular Member • Posts: 247
Re: Adobe Photoshop 2021 vs Luminar 4 - Sky Replacement

Since I do not use Luminar I am not able to compare and contrast the two apps. However, I have been going back through my old images as well with the drab skies using Sky replace. I am impressed with the results I am getting in PS.

I am still waiting for the AI assisted noise reduction module in PS. I will continue to watch whether Topaz will have any sales this year.

Chris Sargent
OP Chris Sargent Senior Member • Posts: 1,180
Re: Adobe Photoshop 2021 vs Luminar 4 - Sky Replacement

Photoshop does better with the more awkward images... glad it’s not just me that can’t find a way to tweak the mask after replacing... I’ll keep an eye out for tutorials from Matt K or similar...

Edit: Matt recently posted this video which is useful..

https://youtu.be/ktE8PIZAOC4

I also tried an experiment because I was curious. Photoshop added a feature under the select tool for selecting the 'Sky' - This works very well and interestingly if you flip the image vertically and try it selects the reflection! 
--
http://www.mostly.photos

 Chris Sargent's gear list:Chris Sargent's gear list
Fujifilm X-T3 Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R Samyang 8mm F2.8 UMC Fisheye Fujifilm XF 55-200mm F3.5-4.8 R LM OIS Fujifilm XF 10-24mm F4 R OIS +3 more
Krish6102 Forum Member • Posts: 84
Re: Adobe Photoshop 2021 vs Luminar 4 - Sky Replacement
1

photo_rb wrote:

.. . . . . . so far I can only figure out how to import them one at a time. When I try to import a group they are all grayed out. Any suggestions?

Currently they can only be imported one-by-one. Hopefully, a future update will address that.

DavidC Senior Member • Posts: 2,269
Re: Landscape Pro

Up to now I have used Studio 3, Landscape 3 to change skies.  I like both Landscape Pro, studio3 and PS.  PS does a nice job but both are very useable.

ADW02 Regular Member • Posts: 379
Re: Landscape Pro
1

It is obvious t that Adobe has included the new Sky Replacement feature in Photoshop as a direct response to Luminar, and it can be easily reasoned that as Luminar refines this feature, Adobe will attempt to more than equal that company's efforts. Adobe will have no problem doing this, as they have huge dollars and developers who are more than up to the task. All of which leaves us with a bit of a double-edged sword.

Companies like Skylum, On1 and Topaz gained a solid foothold in the world of photo development and manipulation when Adobe decided to transform Photoshop into a subscription model. These companies boasted that customers would only have to pay a one-time fee and the software would be theirs forever. And that sales strategy worked well enough to win customers from the Photoshop Empire.  Of course it was all nonsense, as new versions of these software programs charged customers in the same way that Adobe does.

But now various companies may be deciding to copy Adobe's strategy of resorting to yearly subscriptions, rather than sales, and this might put Abode into a much stronger position. Since customers would have to subscribe anyway, it would only make sense to go with a company that offers the best overall value, and that, I believe, is Photoshop/Lightroom.  As always, companies competing with Adobe will try to innovate, but with fewer customers they may not have the resources to do so. If this is the case, it will be a tragedy, as I think most of Photoshop's improvements are a direct result of competition.

Currently, that I'm aware of only Topaz is resorting to subscriptions, officially anyway. And I think that's ultimately going to blow up in their faces. Their improved AI filters probably are quite good, but not to the point where people have to subscribe to them every year. I think people are going to stick with the Topaz programs they already own until the competition passes them by, and then the company is going to have to resort to an about-face.

I can't help thinking that this will be true, as well, for the other companies competing with Adobe. And when the subscription-based strategy is implemented, customers will abandon these companies for Photoshop, with the result that Adobe will then  have little impetus to improve its product.

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads