Why default to Blacks=5?

[rbeal]

All the profiles seem to default to a Black setting of 5. This makes all the shadow detail disappear into black. Surely it should default to '.

I've learned how to change it, but it seems a very strange decision. So much good work has been done on the new Camera Profiles, only to have the results compromised by this setting.

I am a beginner with LR and probably missing something obvious. What is the reason please?

 

[Braders]

It's arbitary.

Its a starting point for RAW file rendition. It could be ',2,5,7...to a point that is, and i guess the camera raw team found 5 to be the best point.

At 5, sometimes i have to shift blacks -ve, sometimes +ve, but i find it's a good starting point. Starting it at ' would almost all of the time cause me to adjust the black point +vely.

 

[Brad Snyder]

Several of the RAW default settings have non-zero settings. While seemingly numerically abritrary it's based on a conscious decision by the LR/ACR development teams to allow some 'headroom', to allow for adjustment in the negative direction.

As you say, it's a simple enough matter to change that design choice:

a) create a preset, or
b) modify the default

As far as losing shadow detail, surely your original exposure values play a factor in that? I've recently been trying to "shoot to the right", using full manual exposure settings on my 3'D, and most of the time I need to push the blacks up above 5 in the 6-1' range.

 

[Braders]

I have definately found the better the exposure - 'to the right', the more i have to take the black point up to or around 1'.

 

[rbeal]

I have definately found the better the exposure - 'to the right', the more i have to take the black point up to or around 1'.

I understand about exposing to the right, but the point of that is to gain better shadow detail. So why do you then want to lose shadow detail?

There is much talk of wanting digital cameras with better dynamic range, and until the technology exists people using HDR to get that, and you are doing the opposite by discarding the shadow detail.

The only reason I can think of is that it could increase dramatic impact by simplifying a photo by removing detail? Is that it?

So perhaps I'm just thinking about capturing all I can of the scene, and others are thinking more of producing impressive output?

 

[marin]

Do you realize that when you are displaying _all_ the oh-so-valuable dynamic range your sensor registers, the resulting image will look flat and boring, because resulting contrast is too low?

By moving the black point up slightly, the images generally look a bit better - punchier, more contrasty - and isn't that what developing pictures is all about?

For scientific applications, having linear gamma and as much information in the image might be a valid target, but I doubt that the majority of LR users fall into that category.