(Yes, I can use Snapheal as a plugin for Luminar, but do I need to go through every single one of their stand-alone applications on top of editing in Luminar? What's the point of having a generalized photo editing application if I need to do that?) I have Snapheal and for the most part I've been impressed with it not sure if they're trying to keep product lines separate or what, but I'd think that they could have implemented at least a bit of Snapheal's functionality into Luminar, which would remove this complaint. Really puzzling, considering that the company also makes Snapheal, a program dedicated to removal of unwanted objects in a photo. Luminar just seems to have the old-school clone and stamper, requiring that you choose the source. The "repair" tool functioned like a "smart" clone and stamp tool. Of note, I have some of their other programs, but do not have Noiseless to try their dedicated noise removal program.Ĥ) Small flaw correction (skin blemishes, stray strands of hair). Using the sliders in the middle values doesn't seem to make much of a difference, to my eye. Regardless, it seems to me that there's either a bunch of noise, or extreme loss of detail and minimal noise. Granted, noise reduction in Aperture wasn't terribly great, either, and I often used Noise Ninja (then the golden standard for noise removal - maybe still is?) as a plugin. (I give it credit for doing better highlight recovery than Apple Photos did, though.)ģ) Noise reduction. As it stands, I found it easy to make an image to my liking in Aperture, but despite spending more time on each image with all of the toggles and options, I rarely like the output I'm getting from Luminar. Maybe some day, when I learn the program better, I'll say that it's wonderful to have that fine level of control. The presets rarely get me to what I like, and then the slider adjustments are seemingly more complicated than what I need. They make it sound as if there's a gradation between those, but it seems like it's one (choose a preset) and the other (work with dozens of sliders). Luminar bills itself as working to your level, allowing you to do minimal slider-toggling yet also allowing you to deep dive into the sliders. Aperture had some sliders for these functions, and that was it (you could additionally use brushes for some of them). #Export from lightoom to aurora hdr 2018 not working how to#Maybe that's a superior option to some people? I'm probably missing how to make it more automated, but it doesn't stand out as being an easy or obvious function.Ģ) Saturation, contrast, and sharpening enhancements. Surely Luminar must be able to do this, but so far all I've found requires that I do the rotation and then manually handle the cropping, myself. It was a simple process: rotate it to the grid, and it would automatically crop what needed to be cropped to make it happen. I used Aperture for a few things fairly consistently:ġ) Correcting rotation of photos (leveling horizons and such). I'm still adjusting to the different editing style and learning how to use it, but in general it feels like it's a few steps back from what I was doing in Aperture. Sorry to hear it.Ī few weeks in, and I have mixed feelings about Luminar. Click to expand.I do not, partly due to space constraints and partly due to synchronization fears like what unfortunately happened to you.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |