I’m just guessing though, so I don’t know if this is helpful at all.
Any information is helpful and I truly appreciate you taking the time to summarize your workflow. I’ve actually never monitored the histogram outside of snapping the photo, so that alone is a great suggestion. I generally edit by eye and kinda feel my way through, but using a metric sounds like a great idea! It also makes a lot more sense if you’re right about RT/DT being more “literal.”
I know I haven’t given enough time to either piece of software, but I’ve been so shocked by how little of my process carried over, that I kinda ran away in fear almost immediately.
The histogram is neat, I used to just look for “lump in the middle = good exposure” but there are so many other way to make use of it.
There’s a panel that I think is present by default in RawTherapee, in the upper left corner, that shows a histogram, and when you hover your mouse over your photo, it has a sort of gauge across the bottom that marks where the pixel under your mouse is at. This can be helpful with determining which bit you want to target with adjustments.
There’s also a neat way I’ve found to get the most out of some images…in the curves panel, starting from the bottom/left/black, make the curve climb steeply where the histogram spikes, and then level off a bit (not totally level, but less steep) where the histogram dips. This seems to give more apparent contrast, without pushing the highlights or shadows too far apart. I hope that makes sense. It’ll take some trial and error but might give you something like what you were getting in Lightroom, with shadows and highlights both near “correct” exposure, but avoiding washed out and dull.
Any information is helpful and I truly appreciate you taking the time to summarize your workflow. I’ve actually never monitored the histogram outside of snapping the photo, so that alone is a great suggestion. I generally edit by eye and kinda feel my way through, but using a metric sounds like a great idea! It also makes a lot more sense if you’re right about RT/DT being more “literal.”
I know I haven’t given enough time to either piece of software, but I’ve been so shocked by how little of my process carried over, that I kinda ran away in fear almost immediately.
Well I’m glad that helps! I enjoy this stuff.
The histogram is neat, I used to just look for “lump in the middle = good exposure” but there are so many other way to make use of it.
There’s a panel that I think is present by default in RawTherapee, in the upper left corner, that shows a histogram, and when you hover your mouse over your photo, it has a sort of gauge across the bottom that marks where the pixel under your mouse is at. This can be helpful with determining which bit you want to target with adjustments.
There’s also a neat way I’ve found to get the most out of some images…in the curves panel, starting from the bottom/left/black, make the curve climb steeply where the histogram spikes, and then level off a bit (not totally level, but less steep) where the histogram dips. This seems to give more apparent contrast, without pushing the highlights or shadows too far apart. I hope that makes sense. It’ll take some trial and error but might give you something like what you were getting in Lightroom, with shadows and highlights both near “correct” exposure, but avoiding washed out and dull.