a) already exists. I just get sometimes annoyed by the default “original” proportions. Sensor proportions can’t be the best decision for all crops, but I have not found where I could set it to “unlimited”.
b) could be nice but is sometimes limited. Faking a sky is no big problem, the foreground can be one.
Thanks for pointing out the auto-crop option. I setup my PL to only apply optical corrections at the start, which is probably why it didn’t auto-crop. I still think there’s some value in option 2 however, due to the auto-crop limitations JoJu mentioned.
In terms of “better” I still disagree. If I decide to crop my shot, there’s a reason for that. And taking it for granted I want to keep the given proportions is a dev decision which I judge to be ignorant and arrogant. Sorry to be so blunt, but this kind of dev decisions make DxO PL in my eyes a less attractive option.
Of course, better still is to level the camera before taking the shot
Sure it is, but humans are no machines, we tend to need help (electronic level or whatever) to get the horizon 100% straight. And by 100% I mean “in each picture, no matter if I try to follow a kite or compose a landscape with a tripod.”
Maybe it’s because I also use LF film cameras, where a 5" x 4" sheet of film costs around €10, that I learnt how to frame an image in the camera rather than relying on hoping I got everything in a digital shot and worrying about framing later
Of course, photographing kites can be quite difficult with a wood and leather camera on a tripod
Now, why do I have to create a standard set to do something which is “normal” in each other editor I know so far?
In all of them I need to select “original” on purpose. Worse: One “original” RAW in DxO PL is shown as 8368 × 5584 pixels. Setting the crop to unconstrained, all of a sudden I appear to have 8711 × 5584 pixels. So, what does “original” mean in this case, except showing me only 96 % of horizontally usable pixels? Simply nothing, therefore useless. And an obstacle for me each time I want to crop.
But in terms of "original ", the devs only did what’s in the manual displayed in the “technical data” - and crop a picture with some “sensor reserves” left and right. So, can I call this ignorant? Rather not. Because DxO devs let me see the fully usable sensor output - that’s a welcome exception compared to other RAW converters.
I’d love to see you swirling around your 4×5" cameras to a moving kite the visual made me smile already. Joanna with her black cloth over the head and the shutter release cable in the hand.
I fully agree with you, but without the electronic level and being not left handed, my horizons usually need correction, no matter how long I try or with or without a tripod (ignoring the bubbles… which usually are just glued into a hole but hardly ever being calibrated).
pl elite, partial preset: 02 Perspective AutoCrop.preset (1,2 KB) 01 Auto Horizon AutoCrop.preset (949 Bytes)
just one click on desired version.
perspective included visual angle correction and autohorizon only horizon.
you could make also a 16:9 version (horizon landscape)
and a preserve aspect ratio version.
May i suggest you make some personal presets and workspaces tailored to your liking?
i made my own palettes in the order i liked it, opend and closed the palettes in the starting order i like to see, saved that as my workspace.
if you like to have multiple versions like: artistic, landscape, portret you can change order and filling of your personal palette in order to scroll as less possible.
just switch to this workspace and your screen is optimised for your task.
Same in starting point: again also multiple possible:
one is possible to auto apply by NEW imported photo’s make you preset and set it in preference as default.
then make a few other starting presets like
01 general (default starting point?)
05 art and cars
you name it
and then you have a one click optional choise to start edit a image on your preference.
and if you need adjustment due advancing insight just edit the (partial) preset to the new likings done.
i don’t really see a negative in this very adaptable functionality.
i use “temp” partials presets as saved for image’s for a special set.
edit a photo to my liking and when i think it’s worth to keep it i create a preset for temp folder so i can “copy paste” when ever i like on every spot i am in the filmstrip and not have to return to my original to copy settings and return to my target image in order to paste. (mostly partial because of unique things i don’t like to override.)
just try this out and you see it will speed up your editing.
(and once in a wile clean up/organise the preset editor’s list to get rid of the doubles and old presets.)
Sure you may. And in terms of workspace I needed that, as PL gets crazy with two screens. But in terms of thematically sorted presets it’s so difficult: What to do with a normal horse-race (art (?) and cars*) in the coliseum (architecture) with on elf the gladiators (portrait) and his pet-lion (animals) in the foreground?
A simple mind like mine already struggles with the possibilities of 4+10 custom settings on one camera, the other has slightly less but better movie features, and another has… you get the picture. I would love to know all manuals by heart and setting the camera quicker to situations than situations are setting to my camera. But my braincells simply would wave the white flag. Both of them.
“art and cars” made me think if I miss the obvious connection here?