Is it "always" better to use a profile rather than fiddle with settings?

[Stephanie Booth]

Operating System

1. macOS 15 Sequoia

Of course there are no absolutes, but I'm wondering if it's generally worth rummaging through the available profiles to find one that best fits what I'm trying to make the photo look like (even if it's an "artistic" profile) rather than picking a camera standard or landscape one and then adjusting a few settings or hitting that "auto" button.

I've been looking at profiles again as I just inherited two nice (for me) cameras which have camera matching profiles (my old Panasonic G2 does not).

Question asked bearing in mind I'm not a "huge" photo editor, just an amateur that roughly tries to "make it look better" by fixing a few things if needed, which generally (given what I photograph) involves picking the Landscape profile, hitting the auto button (and undo if the result is eeek) and that's generally it. (I'm rarely capable of identifying "what's off" with a photo that doesn't look the way I want it too, so I try a few things that are on my radar and "compare", but I very often find myself going back and forth between two versions without managing to figure out which one I "like" best -- ADHD and its bad filter probably don't help me here.)

So I'm thinking it might be worth it for me to spend a few seconds comparing profiles rather than worrying too much about settings.

Any thoughts about this?

 

[charleskinghorn]

The profiles give you a base without affecting any settings. Its a starting point. Once you find a profile whose effects you like, then you make any necessary setting changes to fine tune it to your liking. Yes, it is worthwhilw going through your profiles to find one whose effects you like. Adjustments after that are up to you.

 

[Stephanie Booth]

Heavens. My search results just surfaced this thread of mine from 8 years ago: https://www.lightroomqueen.com/community/threads/out-of-my-depth-editing-raw-files.34378/
I've just read through all of it. What a trip down memory lane! Between then and now I learned I had ADHD, which explains a lot of my "drowning when having to decide". But I can see I've also really understood (through a completely different path) what many kind responders in that thread were trying to tell me: "style" is personal. It's "what I like". So at least I've made some progress there. And as far as I can recall, I bit the bullet and stuck with shooting RAW, and slowly got a little more comfortable with my "basic editing".
Just wanted to point to this for historical context and... well, it's fun that my search turned up one of my old threads

 

[Stephanie Booth]

The profiles give you a base without affecting any settings. Its a starting point. Once you find a profile whose effects you like, then you make any necessary setting changes to fine tune it to your liking. Yes, it is worthwhilw going through your profiles to find one whose effects you like. Adjustments after that are up to you.

Thanks! And if I find a profile that makes me happy without further adjustments, then it's a win, right? (not "cheating" or anything? )

 

[charleskinghorn]

Yes, it's a win-win. We don'thave enough of these these days!

 

[charleskinghorn]

However, its probably a good idea to learn some basic edits. Their effects can be considerable, so they can be very worhtwhile. And they don't have to take much time. At least, try "Auto".

 

[Stephanie Booth]

However, its probably a good idea to learn some basic edits. Their effects can be considerable, so they can be very worhtwhile. And they don't have to take much time. At least, try "Auto".

Oh, I'm definitely an "auto" person, and I'm moderately capable of using the edit sliders and have a reasonable understanding of what they do. I'm just thinking that if selecting a different profile spares me from hitting "auto", then it's for the best!

 

[charleskinghorn]

Do both, the Profile first and then "Auto". The profile alone may not be enough. You can always undo the Auto with Ctrl+Z (Windows Undo).

 

[Gnits]

Check out the fairly new Adaptive Profiles.
I ignored this feature when it was launched.. tried it for the first time a few weeks ago.. and was seriously, seriously impressed.

It does not work (for me) for every image.. but I use Adaptive Profile now as my first step.

Here is a short tutorial by Julianne Kost.. just as an intro.

https://youtu.be/USBk0R8pcD8?is=kTWNigwYwisUYCaC

 

[Johan Elzenga]

But do not use ‘Auto’ when you have applied the Adaptive profile. They don’t go well together.

 

[Conrad Chavez]

The new Adaptive profiles sure can save a lot of editing steps. If you want to learn about how they’re different than the other, conventional profiles, read this Adobe article:
https://blog.adobe.com/en/publish/2024/10/14/the-adobe-adaptive-profile

Do both, the Profile first and then "Auto". The profile alone may not be enough. You can always undo the Auto with Ctrl+Z (Windows Undo).

Note that both the Adobe article and the Julieanne Kost video point out that the Auto button should not be used if an Adaptive profile was applied. It’s OK to apply either an Adaptive profile, or a conventional profile plus the Auto button. In most cases the Adaptive profile will look a lot better than the Auto button, probably because the Adaptive profile can do something the Auto button can’t: Create (invisible) masked adjustments. Because Adaptive profiles look much better, I rarely use the Auto button now.

 

[Gnits]

Because Adaptive profiles look much better, I rarely use the Auto button now.

Plus.. my experience with Ai based masks (eg to select foreground, background, landscape elements, and more).. I have increased confidence that Adaptive Profiles are using a strong foundation... and I suspect.. as time goes by.... will improve further.

 

[clee01l]

I use the Adaptive profile exclusively instead of one of the other available profiles. I find this takes care of exposure and (usually) contrast. Sometimes I still need to boost shadows and tone down highlights. Next I adjust Clarity and if necessary dehase . Occasionally I will find I need to move the Adaptive Color slider off its center.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Johan Elzenga]

The interesting thing about ‘Auto’ is that the auto exposure is the only thing that seems to fail. Lightroom Classic has another, less known, ‘Auto’ function which is shift-clicking the individual sliders. That works perfectly when you use the adaptive profile for highlights, shadows, whites and black, but not for exposure.

 

[Zenon]

One thing that stopped me from banging my head against the wall was I gave up on accurate colour. Now I just go with pleasing colour. I like Auto features as well and I've been using the Adaptive Color profile since it was released in LrC. Saves me time and gets me to a good starting point.

You aren' cheating. It's your art. Ansel Adams has an entire system of taking the shot, processing the film and then working his magic under the enlarger when you make a print. I spent a lot of years doing that. One of most famous shots is Moonrise Over Hernandez. He spotted the scene while driving, had to move fast and guessed the exposure. If you compare the negative to the actual print it's not even close. About 15 years ago we went to one if his shows. I walked up to a poster sized print of Moonrise and jokingly asked if they would take a cheque. The attendant told me it was priceless.

Side note: In 2015 while touring the US we did day trip to Hernandes to find the spot where he took that shot.