Flat field correction in Lightroom

[dougpeterson]

Yes, still broken with 14.2. Sadly, Adobe's LCC correction seems to be the most convenient. Unlike Phocus and C1, you do not need to create an LCC first. I tend to shoot one LCC after each shot (correcting vignetting), and I do not know which focal length, focus distance or aperture I used in order to be able to reuse the LCC frame.

C1 does not require a particular order, and the flat field can be saved as a preset to be used in future projects. You can also batch analyze and batch apply different shot-specific even fields.

 

[mristuccia]

It may sound a bit harsh, but I've never though that a "pop" software like LR would ever commit to refining tools that target very small niches like technical photography.
Personally, I would not put all my eggs in it. Better to stick with companies committed to the specific markets, even at the expense of some extra side functionalities.

 

[SrMphoto]

C1 does not require a particular order, and the flat field can be saved as a preset to be used in future projects. You can also batch analyze and batch apply different shot-specific even fields.

According to this YouTube video (The LCC Tool in Capture One Pro 7 | Phase One), C1 requires the same ordering as Lightroom when doing batch LCC correction: LCC must be adjacent to its image, either before or after. The LCC tool in C1 is more powerful than in Adobe. Unfortunately, C1 does not work with Hasselblad files.
The problem with creating a library of LCC files is that they vary with the shift amount, focal length, aperture, and focus distance. That is a lot of variations. How are people handling that? Do you carry a notebook and write down every shot's data?

 

[SrMphoto]

It may sound a bit harsh, but I've never though that a "pop" software like LR would ever commit to refining tools that target very small niches like technical photography.
Personally, I would not put all my eggs in it. Better to stick with companies committed to the specific markets, even at the expense of some extra side functionalities.

What do you mean by "pop" software? LrC is designed for both experienced users and beginners. One can call Photoshop/ACR a more professional solution, but ACR does not support flat field correction. What is the alternative for Hasselblad files?
Phocus's Scene Calibration Tool looks cumbersome (per manual) and does not support batch correction.

A significant advantage of LrC's Flat Field tool is that it creates a raw-like DNG with all its post-processing advantages (compared to TIFF output).

What do you recommend?

 

[rdeloe]

It may sound a bit harsh, but I've never though that a "pop" software like LR would ever commit to refining tools that target very small niches like technical photography.
Personally, I would not put all my eggs in it. Better to stick with companies committed to the specific markets, even at the expense of some extra side functionalities.

I'm too deeply invested in Lightroom to switch to C1 for one lens that needs LCC frames. The functionalities LR brings to me are not "side". They're mission critical.

Flat field correction was working fine last year. It always had an unfinished feeling to it, but it worked.

 

[mristuccia]

What do you mean by "pop" software? LrC is designed for both experienced users and beginners. One can call Photoshop/ACR a more professional solution, but ACR does not support flat field correction. What is the alternative for Hasselblad files?
Phocus's Scene Calibration Tool looks cumbersome (per manual) and does not support batch correction.

A significant advantage of LrC's Flat Field tool is that it creates a raw-like DNG with all its post-processing advantages (compared to TIFF output).

What do you recommend?

With "pop" I mean general-purpose, intended for the mass, like pop music. So, priorities aren't the ones of a niche.

Phocus's Scene Calibration Tool looks cumbersome (per manual) and does not support batch correction.

You say "looks cumbersome (per manual)". Did you try it? It is true that there's no batch processing, but I think that processing a single LCC with Phocus is simple. You need to create it first, and then apply it on the destination RAW file, which embeds the correction, so you don't need the additional corrected file. You can batch apply the same LCC to many images.

I usually save LCC presets with a naming convention, so I can reuse. Something like 35XL_f8_10l_5s_inf which stands for: SK 35XL at f8, +10mm shift on the long side, +5mm shift on the short side and focused at infinity. LCC presets are real files, so I can backup or delete them. I have a script which deletes all of the presets not having my naming convention, since sometimes I don't take note of the image parameters and I create a temporary preset just to apply it once.

For Hasselblad I'd stick with Phocus. For other cameras I'd probably go with C1.

 

[mristuccia]

I'm too deeply invested in Lightroom to switch to C1 for one lens that needs LCC frames. The functionalities LR brings to me are not "side". They're mission critical.

Flat field correction was working fine last year. It always had an unfinished feeling to it, but it worked.

Let's hope they will fix the issue soon then.

 

[rdeloe]

Let's hope they will fix the issue soon then.

I'm not optimistic, for exactly the reasons you note! The flat field correction functionality looks like something that was created by a good co-op student who has since moved on, and now nobody is keeping an eye on it or trying to improve it. I keep leaving notes in the Adobe Community. Hopefully someone from Adobe will see them.

 

[SrMphoto]

With "pop" I mean general-purpose, intended for the mass, like pop music. So, priorities aren't the ones of a niche.



You say "looks cumbersome (per manual)". Did you try it? It is true that there's no batch processing, but I think that processing a single LCC with Phocus is simple. You need to create it first, and then apply it on the destination RAW file, which embeds the correction, so you don't need the additional corrected file. You can batch apply the same LCC to many images.

I have not tried it yet, but having to create an LCC first and then apply it looks cumbersome if you do not plan to reuse the LCC file and have to do it for every shot. With LrC, I select the two files and apply the correction. Most of the time it works fine.

I usually save LCC presets with a naming convention, so I can reuse. Something like 35XL_f8_10l_5s_inf which stands for: SK 35XL at f8, +10mm shift on the long side, +5mm shift on the short side and focused at infinity.

That means that you have to write down notes for every shot, as EXIF data does not contain any of the information (technical camera). Do you do that? Creating an LCC after every shot sounds simpler.

LCC presets are real files, so I can backup or delete them. I have a script which deletes all of the presets not having my naming convention, since sometimes I don't take note of the image parameters and I create a temporary preset just to apply it once.

For Hasselblad I'd stick with Phocus. For other cameras I'd probably go with C1.

I like staying in the "raw" format as long as possible (post-processing and stitching), hence my preference for LrC instead of Phocus.
I am new at this LCC business and am grateful for any advice.

 

[rdeloe]

I have not tried it yet, but having to create an LCC first and then apply it looks cumbersome if you do not plan to reuse the LCC file and have to do it for every shot. With LrC, I select the two files and apply the correction. Most of the time it works fine.



That means that you have to write down notes for every shot, as EXIF data does not contain any of the information (technical camera). Do you do that? Creating an LCC after every shot sounds simpler.



I like staying in the "raw" format as long as possible (post-processing and stitching), hence my preference for LrC instead of Phocus.
I am new at this LCC business and am grateful for any advice.

I have the same preferences as you I think (i.e., using Lightroom, staying RAW as long as possible -- preferably entirely).

I have been shooting LCC frames after every image that needs the correction. Batch processing in LR was working fine throughout 2024. I wasn't entirely happy because I found that flat field correction was overexposing the image, but it wasn't blowing highlights, so correcting that was easy.

I preferred this approach over having to create a library with all the possible combinations and permutations of movements at the apertures I use. Fortunately for the lens where I use flat field correction, I shoot at f/8, f/9.5 and f/11 almost exclusively, but that's still a lot of frames in an LCC library if I'm accounting for shift and rise/fall possibilities.

If Adobe doesn't fix this before I really need it again for my next field season (soon!) I'm going to explore @John Leathwick's approach, and I'll see where I get with applying all the basic development in LR, including camera profiles and colour adjustments, and then exporting a TIFF to Raw Therapee, applying the LCC, and continuing in LR. I hate the idea of having to do it in Raw Therapee (or any other external application).

Are you a member of the Adobe Community forum? This is one thread where the issue was discussed: https://community.adobe.com/t5/ligh...eld-correction-behavior/idc-p/15172744#M60050 Some people say it was fixed in December. It's not. If you're not a member, consider joining the forum and then adding your experiences here.

 

[mristuccia]

I have not tried it yet, but having to create an LCC first and then apply it looks cumbersome if you do not plan to reuse the LCC file and have to do it for every shot. With LrC, I select the two files and apply the correction. Most of the time it works fine.

Well, I hear you! I don't suffer that much this problem because I usually produce very few photos for each session to begin with, and then I cull them so that in the end I have very few ones to work with. Only on such few ones I'll apply the LCC and then continue with post-processing, mostly only in Phocus, sometimes through Affinity Photo (I'm trying to fight the Photoshop addition but it is really, really hard! )

That means that you have to write down notes for every shot, as EXIF data does not contain any of the information (technical camera). Do you do that? Creating an LCC after every shot sounds simpler.

Yes, I developed myself an iPhone app to take note of all parameters (manually) and write them to the EXIF metadata of my files (automatically). But any Notes app will work.
On the field, I take an LCC of any different shot in any case, regardless of the fact that I may have a preset, just to be sure.

I like staying in the "raw" format as long as possible (post-processing and stitching), hence my preference for LrC instead of Phocus.
I am new at this LCC business and am grateful for any advice.

As said, most of the times I'm okay with what Phocus offers to me in terms of post-processing. But my approach is minimalistic. I'm an IT engineer but when it comes to photography, the less time I spend in front of my workstation, the better. Stitching, when really needed, which for me is 1% of the time, will be done on the final TIFFs...

 

[rdeloe]

There are lots of ways to take notes while working. The built-in ability of Fuji cameras to record a voice memo that is linked to the file and then stored alongside the file in the Lightroom catalogue is by far the easiest and best. I only use adapted lenses, and I use the voice memos to record aperture, amount of shift/rise/fall, use of tilt and swing, and anything else I'm going to want to remember.

 

[SrMphoto]

I have the same preferences as you I think (i.e., using Lightroom, staying RAW as long as possible -- preferably entirely).

I have been shooting LCC frames after every image that needs the correction. Batch processing in LR was working fine throughout 2024. I wasn't entirely happy because I found that flat field correction was overexposing the image, but it wasn't blowing highlights, so correcting that was easy.

I preferred this approach over having to create a library with all the possible combinations and permutations of movements at the apertures I use. Fortunately for the lens where I use flat field correction, I shoot at f/8, f/9.5 and f/11 almost exclusively, but that's still a lot of frames in an LCC library if I'm accounting for shift and rise/fall possibilities.

If Adobe doesn't fix this before I really need it again for my next field season (soon!) I'm going to explore @John Leathwick's approach, and I'll see where I get with applying all the basic development in LR, including camera profiles and colour adjustments, and then exporting a TIFF to Raw Therapee, applying the LCC, and continuing in LR. I hate the idea of having to do it in Raw Therapee (or any other external application).

Are you a member of the Adobe Community forum? This is one thread where the issue was discussed: https://community.adobe.com/t5/ligh...eld-correction-behavior/idc-p/15172744#M60050 Some people say it was fixed in December. It's not. If you're not a member, consider joining the forum and then adding your experiences here.

Thanks for the link. I have posted my findings.

 

[rdeloe]

Thanks for the link. I have posted my findings.

I was notified by the system. I think you described it well. Let's keep their feet to the fire!

 

[Bill_Evans]

I guess I'm gonna need to redo my testing since I haven't noticed a problem. Surprisingly, I just had a client request 50 / 100 MP images. So I was testing & updating my Cambo with my CFV 100C process. My workflow usually is to frame the composition in Aperture Priority. Once I'm happing I snap an LCC. Then switch to exposure bracketing and grab 7 images 1 stop apart so I have options during post. In Lightroom I run the brackets through flat view correction than add the aperture with Lens Tagger. Then I typically process the the brackets as a group and match exposure. Then I pick the best "base" exposure and, if needed, grab highlight and shadow frames to blend in photoshop.

The Lightroom flat field correct seems to be working okay this way and all 7 bracketed images, once the exposure is matched, look the same with the exception of blown out highlights. I'm running Lightroom Classic version 14.2.

For me, the LCC process in the field is pretty simple and quick. And I actually like the approach. That said, I'm still pretty new to all this, so I could easily be missing the forest through the trees.

 

[SrMphoto]

I guess I'm gonna need to redo my testing since I haven't noticed a problem. Surprisingly, I just had a client request 50 / 100 MP images. So I was testing & updating my Cambo with my CFV 100C process. My workflow usually is to frame the composition in Aperture Priority. Once I'm happing I snap an LCC. Then switch to exposure bracketing and grab 7 images 1 stop apart so I have options during post. In Lightroom I run the brackets through flat view correction than add the aperture with Lens Tagger. Then I typically process the the brackets as a group and match exposure. Then I pick the best "base" exposure and, if needed, grab highlight and shadow frames to blend in photoshop.

The Lightroom flat field correct seems to be working okay this way and all 7 bracketed images, once the exposure is matched, look the same with the exception of blown out highlights. I'm running Lightroom Classic version 14.2.

For me, the LCC process in the field is pretty simple and quick. And I actually like the approach. That said, I'm still pretty new to all this, so I could easily be missing the forest through the trees.

Double-check that the LCC frames are not also corrected and converted to DNG. They have to stay 3FR; only the real images should have been converted.

 

[rdeloe]

I made some progress on this. The procedure I used is as follows:

1. Leave a post complaining about it on the Adobe forum.
2. For good measure, send Rikk Flohr from Adobe a PM.
3. Wait a day for the automated response from Rikk that says while he goes on the forum, he's not support so don't get your hopes up for an answer.
4. Spend a fruitless hour searching the entire Adobe community forum for all versions of "flatfield" and "flat field", hoping desperately for a solution.
5. Give up
6. Remember something you read, and try a Hail Mary Pass: someone said the update that "fixed" it requires you to put the LCC frame in front of the image. Try that.

Aha...

It works, mostly.

Experiment 1
I shot the same scene twice. The first pair is Image/LCC, and the second LCC/Image. I processed them separately. When the LCC is after the image, Lightroom used the image as the LCC and created that mess of a DNG. However, when the LCC is first, it works. Notice how the LCC is still a RAF (as it should be).



Experiment 2
I wondered if the file number sequence mattered, in other words, did the LCC actually have to be shot before the image, or just be in front of the image in the catalogue. Thankfully, it was the second option. I shot the image first (GFXD3095) and then the LCC (GFXD30906). I put the two files in my Quick Collection, and moved the LCC in front of the image. Flatfield correction worked properly. The LCC is still a RAF, and the DNG is corrected.



Experiment 3
What about batch processing? Unfortunately, that's still broken. For this test, I put the file pairs in my Quick Collection, ordered them properly, selected them all and ran FFC. The first pair worked properly (LCC is still a RAF and image is corrected DNG). The next two pairs produce an LCC that is now a DNG, and an uncorrected image that is a DNG.



To be sure it wasn't these particular files, I deleted all the files from that last set, imported them again, dumped them into the Quick Collection, put the LCC frame first, and then processed them one pair at a time. This time it worked properly. LCCs are still RAFs, and image files are DNGs.



The only silver lining in this cloud of Adobe incompetence is that you can run the FFC sessions in parallel. I have FFC assigned to a hot key, so it goes quickly. I start the next one as soon as the previous one gets under way. If you have large numbers of image pairs, you're going to hate this. But for me it is manageable. I can do my work if they don't break it again.

 

[rdeloe]

I guess I'm gonna need to redo my testing since I haven't noticed a problem. Surprisingly, I just had a client request 50 / 100 MP images. So I was testing & updating my Cambo with my CFV 100C process. My workflow usually is to frame the composition in Aperture Priority. Once I'm happing I snap an LCC. Then switch to exposure bracketing and grab 7 images 1 stop apart so I have options during post. In Lightroom I run the brackets through flat view correction than add the aperture with Lens Tagger. Then I typically process the the brackets as a group and match exposure. Then I pick the best "base" exposure and, if needed, grab highlight and shadow frames to blend in photoshop.

The Lightroom flat field correct seems to be working okay this way and all 7 bracketed images, once the exposure is matched, look the same with the exception of blown out highlights. I'm running Lightroom Classic version 14.2.

For me, the LCC process in the field is pretty simple and quick. And I actually like the approach. That said, I'm still pretty new to all this, so I could easily be missing the forest through the trees.

Bill, per my post below, it's working for you because you're putting the LCC first. The good news is you don't have to shoot it first; it just has to be first in the catalogue.

 

[SrMphoto]

Bill, per my post below, it's working for you because you're putting the LCC first. The good news is you don't have to shoot it first; it just has to be first in the catalogue.

To clarify, batch processing is still broken regardless of whether the LCC frame is first or second, right?

 

[rdeloe]

To clarify, batch processing is still broken regardless of whether the LCC frame is first or second, right?

Correct. Batch processing is still broken.