This post was last modified: 2011-04-27, 12:58 by byorii_desu.

First off, Gunther, Many thanks for developing what seems to be a viable software solution for flicker in time lapse for Mac users. The other features look like a great bonus bundle.

My experience with LR-Tl is brief but fairly intensive, and I have run into an issue.

Background: LR 3.3 (3.4 as of 1 hour ago), LR-Tl 1.2, OS 10.6, lossy uncompressed NEFs.

Technique (In brief):
LR - choose files, adjust first image (1 star/keyframe), select rest, sync settings, re-adjust last image (1 star/keyframe), save metadata to files.
LR-Tl - choose files, select auto transition, adjust de-flicker parameters, save metadata to files.
(I subsequently export my images (from LR) as appropriately-sized jpegs to assemble in QuickTime Pro.)

Results in/from LR:
De-flicker is good/great. Problem is that there is a large jump in adjusted parameters (e.g. exposure) between second last and last image.

(With some testing I need to amend this, see NOTE below.)

My (less-than-satisfactory) solution: Delete last frame from image group before assembly/render as video.

NOTE:
On subsequent testing it may be a white balance issue, which happened when using LR presets for WB (Cloudy, Shade etc) in the last image. If I adjust the slider just a little to change it to ‘Custom’ in the last image there was a successful transition. The remainder of the images were ‘As Shot’ before transition implemented.

A minor point (this may have been raised already) in the GUI the label “Exposure Affect” should probably read “Exposure Effect”,

Again, many thanks,

Peter Cooney.

This post was last modified: 2011-04-27, 13:51 by Gunther.

Hello Peter, first I want to thank you for your feedback and the in detail description of your workflow.

NOTE:
On subsequent testing it may be a white balance issue, which happened when using LR presets for WB (Cloudy, Shade etc) in the last image. If I adjust the slider just a little to change it to ‘Custom’ in the last image there was a successful transition. The remainder of the images were ‘As Shot’ before transition implemented.

I would bet this is as well the cause for your issue with exposure. If you didn't change exposure in the first image, synchronized and than changed exposure only in the last image this is what will happen.

Rule no. 1: Please Change every development setting you are going to change anywhere in your sequence in every image of the sequence!

Otherwise Lightroom will not export some parameters and you will get a warning "there are gaps..."

A minor point (this may have been raised already) in the GUI the label “Exposure Affect” should probably read “Exposure Effect”,

I'm not a native english speaker but I want to express how much exposure is affected by deflickering. You tell me - is this wrong?

Please get back to me if your problems persist. Meanwhile I will move this thread in the Workflow area.

This post was last modified: 2011-04-27, 15:46 by byorii_desu.

Hello Peter, first I want to thank you for your feedback and the in detail description of your workflow.

NOTE:
On subsequent testing it may be a white balance issue, which happened when using LR presets for WB (Cloudy, Shade etc) in the last image. If I adjust the slider just a little to change it to ‘Custom’ in the last image there was a successful transition. The remainder of the images were ‘As Shot’ before transition implemented.

I would bet this is as well the cause for your issue with exposure. If you didn't change exposure in the first image, synchronized and than changed exposure only in the last image this is what will happen.

Rule no. 1: Please Change every development setting you are going to change anywhere in your sequence in every image of the sequence!

Otherwise Lightroom will not export some parameters and you will get a warning "there are gaps..."

A minor point (this may have been raised already) in the GUI the label “Exposure Affect” should probably read “Exposure Effect”,

I'm not a native english speaker but I want to express how much exposure is affected by deflickering. You tell me - is this wrong?

Please get back to me if your problems persist. Meanwhile I will move this thread in the Workflow area.

Hi Gunther, Thanks for your comments. To summarize: To fully produce a correct transition any parameter changed in last image must be associated with a change (however small) in that parameter in the first image [and therefore other subsequently synchronized images]. Is this correct? I am not sure how this relates to intervening key-framed images but I will continue to test this out.

With regard to the affect/effect issue. Effect (a noun) is appropriate in this circumstance. Affect (which can also be a noun - usually in a psychological sense, example= the depressed man had a sad affect) is most often used as a verb - in either form it is not correct here to give meaning that what you want, I believe. It is a common trap for native speakers.

Thanks and regards,
Peter

Hi Gunther, Thanks for your comments. To summarize: To fully produce a correct transition any parameter changed in last image must be associated with a change (however small) in that parameter in the first image [and therefore other subsequently synchronized images]. Is this correct? I am not sure how this relates to intervening key-framed images but I will continue to test this out.

That's right...

With regard to the affect/effect issue. Effect (a noun) is appropriate in this circumstance. Affect (which can also be a noun - usually in a psychological sense) is most often a verb - in either form it is not correct here to give meaning that what you want, I believe. It is a common trap for native speakers.

Thank you, what about: "Deflicker exposure influence"

Best regards
Gunther

This post was last modified: 2011-04-27, 16:31 by byorii_desu.

With regard to the affect/effect issue. Effect (a noun) is appropriate in this circumstance. Affect (which can also be a noun - usually in a psychological sense) is most often a verb - in either form it is not correct here to give meaning that what you want, I believe. It is a common trap for native speakers.

Thank you, what about: "Deflicker exposure influence"

Best regards
Gunther
[/quote]

I think "Deflicker Effect" is just fine really (2 words instead of 3) - clearly implying that the higher number the greater the de-flickering effect (and vice versa, naturally). To be an extreme pedant the word should probably be 'De-Flicker' or 'De-flicker' rather than 'Deflicker' but that is just be me just taking it too far! Sorry.

Regards, Peter Cooney.