LR Enhance: ...well, it's been out for awhile, what's the consensus on Lightroom's Enhance feature?

chasgroh Loc: Buena Park, CA

...well, it's been out for awhile, what's the consensus on Lightroom's Enhance feature?

bsprague Loc: Lacey, WA, USA

Depends on the source image. In order to know you will have to pick a dozen images and try it. Then, get a trial copy of Topaz Gigapixel. Some say they can't do without Topaz products.

Cany143 Loc: SE Utah

chasgroh wrote:

...well, it's been out for awhile, what's the consensus on Lightroom's Enhance feature?

I've used/tried it times enough to find that it provided no benefit that I couldn't achieve through other, faster, more focused means. And I say that as someone who uses LRcc for 90% of his processing.

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

I've found that to be the same with many plugins and addons to Ps. I can accomplish the same thing without them. In some cases, I've been doing what those plugins and addons do for years before those were released.
--Bob

Cany143 wrote:

I've used/tried it times enough to find that it provided no benefit that I couldn't achieve through other, faster, more focused means. And I say that as someone who uses LRcc for 90% of his processing.

Curmudgeon Loc: SE Arizona

Bob brings up an interesting point. I have been using Photoshop since Release 2 and can do a lot of things in that program BUT particularly the Topaz and NIK Silver Efex Pro do them at least as good as I can do in PS but so much faster. I will use any program that will accomplish something better and/or faster than I can do it in PS.

Canisdirus

I have both...no comparison between the two.
LR is limited upscaling...it works.
Think of it as Gig lite...

Gig does something LR cannot...or adobe...period.
Take a very small image file and blow it up immensely...and you cannot tell the difference side by side.
If your image was worthy before...with Gig...it will be worthy after.
LR the same...but not much upscaling ability.

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

Curmudgeon, many of the processes are repeated with every photograph I work on. I find if I'm doing the same repetitive steps with every photograph, I program and action to perform those steps for me. It saves doing the same dozen steps every time a photograph is processed.

I guess part of that comes from having done a lot of programming in the past, and some in the present.
--Bob

Curmudgeon wrote:

Bob brings up an interesting point. I have been using Photoshop since Release 2 and can do a lot of things in that program BUT particularly the Topaz and NIK Silver Efex Pro do them at least as good as I can do in PS but so much faster. I will use any program that will accomplish something better and/or faster than I can do it in PS.

chasgroh Loc: Buena Park, CA

Canisdirus wrote:

I have both...no comparison between the two.
LR is limited upscaling...it works.
Think of it as Gig lite...

Gig does something LR cannot...or adobe...period.
Take a very small image file and blow it up immensely...and you cannot tell the difference side by side.
If your image was worthy before...with Gig...it will be worthy after.
LR the same...but not much upscaling ability.

...that's what I noticed, too. But it's handy in its limited way, eh?

Canisdirus

chasgroh wrote:

...that's what I noticed, too. But it's handy in its limited way, eh?

If you have a mid to high MP camera...it's a real addition to the arsenal.
Crop all you wish to with gig...it will still make it a great looking print.

Curmudgeon Loc: SE Arizona

rmalarz wrote:

Curmudgeon, many of the processes are repeated with every photograph I work on. I find if I'm doing the same repetitive steps with every photograph, I program and action to perform those steps for me. It saves doing the same dozen steps every time a photograph is processed.

I guess part of that comes from having done a lot of programming in the past, and some in the present.
--Bob

I only learned to program in BASIC and Dbase was never very good and did not enjoy the process. I envy you your skill.

RightOnPhotography Loc: Quebec,QC

bsprague wrote:

Depends on the source image. In order to know you will have to pick a dozen images and try it. Then, get a trial copy of Topaz Gigapixel. Some say they can't do without Topaz products.

Unlike Lightroom or Photoshop "Enhance" feature, Gigapixel can produce a very good quality 6x enlargement.

bsprague Loc: Lacey, WA, USA

RightOnPhotography wrote:

Unlike Lightroom or Photoshop "Enhance" feature, Gigapixel can produce a very good quality 6x enlargement.

Which makes me wonder if Adobe will figure out a way to respond with improved code.

sodapop Loc: Bel Air, MD

Lightroom has one choice which doubles the size. And you can't go back and re double it

sodapop Loc: Bel Air, MD

Lightroom has one choice which doubles the size. And you can't go back and re double it

via the lens Loc: Northern California, near Yosemite NP

There actually is a way in LrC to upsize for printing. In the Print panel you choose Print to File and then you can specify the exact dimensions you want to print to as a JPEG. The program upsizes to that size. That file would then be sent to the printer. Your paper size would need to match the sizing. The image turns out great as long as you had a great image to begin with. I've created a print that was almost 4 feet wide with this.