On a recent trip to London, I took quite a few photos and some video at the top of the Shard, one of London’s most famous buildings. I have already posted a few of these, and there are a lot more to come. However, in this post, I wanted to talk about the challenges I faced editing a subset of the images I took and how I addressed them. I ended up using both Lightroom and DaVinci Resolve’s new photo editing mode for these. The latter is something I particularly want to talk about, as it has some interesting abilities, as well as some quirks that those not familiar with the software should be aware of.

Pre-Processing in Lightroom

I started with these images in Lightroom. The reason for this is twofold. Firstly, Resolve’s actual RAW conversion is still not great, to be honest. It lacks lens corrections and proper colour profiles. The second reason is that I wanted to remove the reflections. I was shooting through glass, and so it was difficult to avoid reflections because I didn’t have a polariser when I was shooting these. I also didn’t want to get right up to the edge to try and block the reflections (it’s very high!)

Luckily, Lightroom’s “Remove Reflections” works a treat on photos like this and totally removed the reflections. I actually batch processed the entire set of photos I took from the shard with the reflection removal tool. It took some time to process, but luckily it happens in the background now in newer versions of Lightroom.

Once I had done this, I made sure that there was no image information clipped and then exported them as TIFF files for import into Resolve.

Editing in Resolve

So you may be wondering, why bother editing in DaVinci Resolve at all? Why not just do it all in Lightroom? Well, the issue I was having was one of consistency. Because the light was constantly changing and I was shooting through glass, at different angles, and in different surroundings, I was having trouble getting consistent results. This is where Resolve’s much greater control over colour comes in. In Resolve, it’s much easier to do targeted and finer adjustments than you can in Lightroom.

The colour wheels offer much finer control in Resolve, not to mention that there are various modes for the colour correctors. They just work much better than the ones in Lightroom, which are sort of a blunt instrument. You can also specifically target colours and areas of the image more easily than you can in Lightroom, plus you get a visual reference for your corrections in the form of the node tree. Now, you absolutely could make these adjustments in Lightroom; it’s just much easier and quicker to get the results you want in Resolve. That is, of course, if you know how this kind of colour correction works. And this kind of node-based editing is something I’ve been doing for years, so it’s second nature to me.

Breaking down the node tree

One of the advantages of working with a node-based editor, is that it’s easy to break down the colour corrections, making it easier to see what you’re editing and easier to go back to it later. This also makes it easier when you apply those edits to another image.

If we look at the node tree I used for the image above, I’ll talk you through what I did. There are no hard-and-fast rules for this kind of thing, and you can work however you want, but this is how I approached it.

Node1: The first node is for overall brightness and tonal fixes. I haven’t done much here, except reduce the highlights slightly. Think of it as more of a technical fix before passing it to the second node.

Node2: This is where I did the bulk of the colour correction, using the standard and the HDR colour correction tools. The HDR three-way colour corrector lets you select finer areas of brightness to work on. It’s hard to explain in a short post. To be honest, I’m not even sure I fully get it myself; I just know how to use it!!!

Nodes 3 and 4: I used these two parallel nodes with the gradient mask to tweak the sky and ground values separately. There’s no direct “clarity” tool that I’m aware of in the colour editor, although there may be in the effects, but that’s one of the limitations that I’ll get to later. I did manage to add some details to the foreground, though, using a reverse blur modifier. (I’m not entirely sure how this works either)

Node 6: is an overall contrast addition using the curves tool. This was just because I thought it was a little flat and needed some more oomph

Node 7: This node adds some off-screen lens flare. I used the Red Giant “Real Lens Flares” plug-in for this. The reason I added this was that the reflections were gone, it lacked some interest in the sky, and there were still a few mismatched colours and artifacts where the reflection removal didn’t do the job properly.

Node 8: This node adds some subtle grain to the image

Node 9: I didn’t use this node in the end, so it’s turned off. It was a colour space transform to convert the colour space to RGB, but I ended up doing this a different way. More on this below.

Limitations and Issues

There are two things you need to be aware of if you plan on editing photos in Resolve. Actually, there are three. The first I’ve already covered: the RAW conversion for stills is still lacking, so you’re best off using something else for that.

Secondly, if you’re using the free version of Resolve, you are limited in the output resolution. You can also only use certain effects and are limited in the number of effects. For example, I was using the free version here, and I could only output at about half the resolution that the image actually was.

Thirdly, you need to be aware of the colour space you are using. This isn’t something that you have to really deal with too much when working with Lightroom, but it’s an issue with Resolve. Because it’s set up for working with video, you’ll have issues if you try to open the resulting images in Photoshop. So the best thing to do is set the output colour space in the project preferences. You can also just put a colour space transform node at the end of the node tree, but this will alter how it looks in Resolve. I would do this if you were working on a mixed project, but otherwise, it’s best to set the output to sRGB in the project settings.

Permalink

]]>London in MiniatureCanonGearThomas FitzgeraldWed, 15 Jul 2026 07:50:11 +0000https://blog.thomasfitzgeraldphotography.com/blog/2026/7/an-update-on-my-canon-24-105mm-f4l-problem53c631e4e4b0c4d68989cbef:540c893ee4b04215b3085eaf:6a573bb6df917e761370e4b6

I wrote a while ago about the issues I was having with my Canon RF24-105mm F4L. I noted that for some bizarre reason, the lens got softer at 24mm as you stopped down from f4. This is the opposite of what normally happens with a lens. I went through significant testing to make sure I wasn’t doing something stupid and to try to identify the problem. I also contacted Canon, and they said this was not normal behaviour and that I should send it in for service, as it was still under warranty. So I did that, and last week, after it took a month, I got the lens back. The results, unfortunately, were disappointing.

Before I get to that, a few other odd things showed up during my testing. First of all, it seems to be related to autofocus, as the issue doesn’t occur when you shoot manually. Also, you can prevent it by moving the focus point to the edge of the frame. So clearly, something weird is going on. Also, the reported focus distance changes when you stop the lens down, although this apparently is normal. The other problem is that at 105mm at f/4, focus tends to be a few mm in front of the object you’re focusing on. None of these problems occurs with my other 24-105mm lens, the STM version, but that’s a much poorer-quality lens.

So anyway, I sent the lens to Canon, which is kind of a ridiculous procedure. Because they have consolidated all their European warranty repairs under one roof, it has to go to Germany for service. This is all done through a web app on their site, but I had issues with it, as it’s a bit buggy. They pay for shipping, so that’s good, but it took a week to get there, and then it spent another week in the warehouse waiting for someone to look at it. In fairness, you could track this the whole time, so there’s that. Eventually, it moved to their workshop, where it was for less than 30 minutes before the tracking showed it on the way back to me. So, at this point, I wasn’t optimistic.

After another week, I got it back, and the service note said that they couldn’t find a fault with it. The thing is, I’m not sure they even checked properly. I had supplied detailed notes, and part of that was that the issue is not a manual focus issue, but the lens was set to manual focus. I had also sent sample files that were never opened (I used Dropbox to send them). I suspect they used some automated test rig and did a quick check based on the summary without actually reading the notes. I’m extremely disappointed in Canon's service because there’s clearly an issue here, and Canon’s own technical support person agreed with me.

Anyway, I’m left with a conundrum now. It’s such a weird, specific problem. I can work around it, but it’s not ideal. I could sell the lens and get another one, but there’s no way to know if that will be the same. The other thing that occurred to me is that it could be the camera. There was a video a while ago from Peta Pixel where they were reviewing a Canon lens and noticed excessive edge softness, and in the end, it turned out to be a misaligned sensor mount. So it could well be that.

So I’m going to try to either rent or borrow a different body to see if the lens performs the same on it. If it does, then I know it’s the lens and can just get a new one. If it’s not, then I’m going to have to look at either trying to get my body repaired or just replace it. I don’t have much confidence in Canon’s service centre now, so we’ll see what happens.

The thing that annoys me the most is that this would be a great lens if it worked. It’s super sharp apart from these issues, and the micro-contrast and colour are fantastic on it. At about 35mm to around 90 mm, it’s perfect. I downloaded samples online and can’t see any evidence of this issue, so it’s either mine or there is a problem with the camera. And it takes so long to get sorted. I bought this lens before Christmas. It’s partially my own fault as I didn’t get to test it straight away. But I also regret buying it from Amazon, as it would be easier if I could just bring it back to the dealer.

To be honest, I’m a bit disappointed with the whole affair, and I’m considering just getting rid of it and moving back to Nikon, or even Sony or Panasonic at this stage. But that’s a whole lot of pain, and I’m not really in the position to do it right now, so for the moment it’s a matter of trying to solve it or work around it until I can.

As before, if anyone has any insight or has ever come across anything similar, please let me know.

Permalink

]]>A Moody Day on an Incredible Beach: Newcastle, Co. DownLightroomPhotoshopThomas FitzgeraldFri, 03 Jul 2026 08:27:02 +0000https://blog.thomasfitzgeraldphotography.com/blog/2026/7/how-to-edit-your-photos-in-camera-raw-from-lightroom-non-destructively53c631e4e4b0c4d68989cbef:540c893ee4b04215b3085eaf:6a477029d7667757e159a2a1

With Adobe recently adding lots of new features to Camera RAW that so far aren’t in Lightroom, users of Lightroom may be wondering how to get access to some of those new tools. Well, it’s actually very straightforward, and you can use Camera RAW from Lightroom entirely non-destructively. You just need to follow the simple workflow below.

Send to Camera RAW (via Photoshop) the first time

The first step is to send your photo to Photoshop. The important part here is not to use the normal “Edit in Photoshop” command. Instead, you need to use the option:

Photo > Edit In > Open As Smart Object in Photoshop …

This will send your raw file to Photoshop without flattening it to a TIFF or PSD first. It will send the file to Photoshop as either a Tiff or a PSD depending on how you have it configured (it doesn’t matter which, really), and open in Photoshop as a smart layer. Once in Photoshop, all you have to do is double-click on the layer icon in the Layers palette, and the image will open in Camera RAW. Make sure to double-click the icon, not the layer name.

Now that you’re in Camera RAW, you can make all the edits you want and take advantage of some of the features not present in Lightroom. You will notice that any edits that you made in Lightroom before sending to Photoshop should be maintained here. In other words, any sliders you have changed in Lightroom will be changed here in Camera RAW.

Once you have finished editing, simply click ok to apply your changes. This will exit Camera RAW and return to Photoshop. Because it is a smart layer, you can double-click the layer icon again at any time to go back into Camera RAW and your edits will be exactly as you left them.

Once you’re finished in Photoshop, all you have to do is save your image to send it back to Lightroom. Make sure to just “save” and not “save as”, as this may break the connection.

Re-Editing your image in Camera RAW

If you want to re-edit an image in Camera RAW that you have already edited, you need to do it slightly differently. In this case, you’ll be working with a previously edited Photoshop or TIFF file and not an actual RAW file. This time, you do need to use the Edit in Photoshop command; if you use the Open as Smart Object option, you will embed the Photoshop file in another Photoshop file.

So use the command: Photo > Edit In > Edit in Photoshop (Photoshop version number)

When the dialogue box opens asking you what to edit, make sure to choose: Edit Original. This is very important, as otherwise, Lightroom will create a flattened version and send that to Photoshop

Once back in Photoshop, you can edit in Camera RAW by once again double-clicking on the layer icon in the Layers palette.

And when you’re finished, save again to send it back.

Note that while your image is open in Photoshop, you can just keep saving it, and Lightroom will update automatically. You don’t need to keep going back to Lightroom and re-sending it to Photoshop. If you have saved in Photoshop and the image hasn’t updated in Lightroom, just switch back to Photoshop, wait a second and then switch back to Lightroom. This usually fixes it.

Conclusion

That’s pretty much all there is to it. It sounds more complicated here because I’m laying it out step by step, but once you get into the habit of it, it’s fairly straightforward and much easier than trying to use Bridge and re-syncing your finished photos back into Lightroom. Just remember that the first time you send an image, use “Edit as Smart Object”, and when you want to re-edit, use Edit in Photoshop > Edit Original.

The news that Adobe has agreed to acquire Topaz Labs has hit the creative community with a collective “what the f….”. For anyone who relies on tools like Gigapixel, Photo AI, and Video AI, I’m sure this news is a bit of a worrying development, especially if you’re one of those creators who had exited the Adobe ecosystem (”you fool … there is no escape!”).

Some of the more cynical among the critics have pointed out that this is Adobe’s way of getting up to speed with technology it can’t build in-house:

“If in doubt, buy them out!”

My reaction upon reading the news was one of begrudging acceptance: “Yeah, that sounds about right”

Topaz has been around for quite a while and has a very loyal following in both the photography and video spaces. I never really used the photo software myself, but I’m always getting readers telling me to try it out. Their video upscaling and processing software is legendary and has become an indispensable tool across many post-production houses. And I’m not talking about influencers and youtubers either, I’m talking broadcast and film post houses. Many of those are based on Avid and Davinci Resolve, so I’m sure they’ll be wondering what this all means.

when it comes to their photography software, Adobe has been integrating Topaz AI models into its apps and firefly for some time now. Some are available as third-party model options inside the various AI tools in Photoshop or online in the Firefly web app. They recently added Topaz processing directly inside of Lightroom desktop, too. So in one respect, maybe we should have seen this coming.

While it might mean that, down the line if you use Lightroom or Photoshop you will get even more access to Topaz’s AI software, or maybe even fewer AI credits should you use Topaz models, it raises questions about what happens for users of non-adobe software, given Adobe’s history when it comes to acquiring companies. I know some people who are still bitter about Macromedia Freehand and that was years ago. While they have said that they will still be available as stand alone tools for now, this is Adobe we’re talking about.

Topaz’s Video Tools are indispensable for some

While photographers know Topaz for upscaling and sharpening, the professional video community considers Topaz Video AI an industry essential. Walk into a post-production house and somebody will probably have a copy of Topaz Video AI installed. If you need to up-res HD to 4k it’s one of the best software solutions, outside of dedicated hardware. I even know several 3D artists who use it to render at a lower resolution and then upscale the results to 4K for delivery when turnaround time is tight. It’s that good.

Crucially, a large portion of video pros who rely on it do not use Adobe products as their primary creative tools. They are colour grading in DaVinci Resolve or editing in Avid. They use Topaz as a dedicated, standalone utility because its local hardware rendering engine works locally, without having to upload to the cloud or use a credit system. This is very important when working on client work under an NDA.

If your workflow is built around DaVinci Resolve or even Final Cut Pro, and you rely on Topaz, this news naturally brings some trepidation. As I mentioned already, Adobe doesn’t have the best of track records when it comes to buying developers of popular software.

According to the official Adobe Press Release, the company plans to maintain the Topaz apps as standalone offerings on its website, and CEO Eric Yang is staying on to lead the team. Of course, just because they say that now doesn’t mean that will remain the case forever.

If you use non-Adobe software, you can likely keep using your current Topaz apps for the foreseeable future. The real concern is what happens in the long term.

If Adobe builds native, Topaz Video AI straight into Premiere or After Effects for example, will they eventually kill the standalone software? Hopefully not, but it wouldn’t be unprecedented. The standard practice when companies buy others for technology like this is to just leave the applications alone for several years without substantial updates, and then kill them, saying no one was using them anyway.

I’m being very cynical here, and I really don’t mean to be. I mean, it’s not all potentially bad news. If you are an Adobe subscriber, you may have access to more of Topaz’s tools with your subscription (unless they charge more - which let’s face it, they probably will). If you can get access to Topaz Video AI’s upscaling and denoising for the current Creative Cloud subscription, I will be happy. If you have to go through Premiere or After Effects, it’s not ideal, but not the end of the world. Having said that, the current Photoshop/Lightroom integration of Topaz’s tools doesn’t offer nearly the level of control that you get on the standalone software. If this means that you get more of the actual Topaz apps included with Creative Cloud, then that’s a good thing, right?

What Happens to Existing Topaz Owners?

If you already own perpetual licences or active subscriptions to Topaz products, nothing changes immediately. The transaction is not expected to close until the second half of 2026, pending regulatory approval, so this isn’t finalised yet. Both companies have stated that Topaz apps will remain available separately, although that doesn’t mean that they will continue that way forever. It’s not hard to see that this deal is primarily about the underlying technology and intellectual property including the AI models. The applications are undoubtedly secondary in Adobe’s mind.

As for how Adobe will integrate the software into its existing offerings, I guess time will tell. As I mentioned earlier, they are already offering the Topaz models as part of their AI tools in Photoshop, so that will likely continue with even more integration. Perhaps future versions of Photoshop will include Topaz’s local AI processing. Will they include the current Topaz tools as part of the Creative Cloud subscription, or keep them separate as they do with Substance Painter and Designer? What happens to current Topaz subscribers once the deal goes through? What happens to tech support? Adobe’s tech support is kind of infamous, so I’m sure that’s not going to sit well with current customers.

For now, not much will change initially. But unfortunately, it’s yet another chapter in the unending consolidation of technology, where big tech companies that take a great independent developer and suck it into the void of a huge corporation.

But the AI zealots would have you believe that your job will be gone soon to our AI robot overlords anyway, so in the end, it’s all a moot point.

Right? Right?

Permalink

]]>The Colours and Textures of SummerPhotoshopSoftwareLightroomThomas FitzgeraldTue, 23 Jun 2026 08:07:00 +0000https://blog.thomasfitzgeraldphotography.com/blog/2026/6/lots-of-new-features-in-camera-raw-that-arent-in-lightroom53c631e4e4b0c4d68989cbef:540c893ee4b04215b3085eaf:6a3a3cf432fe10648f4ea027

With the last few Photoshop releases, Adobe has kept adding new features to Camera RAW. Usually, these would be added to Lightroom either at the same time or with the following release, but so recently, this hasn’t been the case. And these haven’t been minor features either, we’re talking some big, long-sought-after tools, including the colour corrector in masks, and the ability to adjust the edges and feathering of AI masks. Not only that, but Lightroom (desktop) has been adding features that aren’t in Lightroom Classic, too. Are we seeing a different strategy emerging from Adobe regarding its photography applications?

What’s new in Camera RAW

I have been a bit remiss in following and reporting on this, because I mostly cover Lightroom here. I’m also in the Lightroom developer program, so I get more details about Lightroom before release, and I often miss or don’t pay that much attention to Camera RAW. I’m paying attention now, though! I was also reluctant to cover these as I figured they would be added to Lightroom, but now I don’t know what’s going on. Anyway, here are a few selected features that were added in the past few releases (going back to April)

Camera Raw 18.3 (April 2026)

• Depth range mask: Create a mask based on the depth of an image. Uses AI to create a depth map, similar to the way it creates a depth map for the lens blur feature. this allows you to apply corrections based on the depth of objects in your scene.

• Anamorphic Desqueeze: If you shoot with an anamorphic lens, this allows you to apply the desqueeze correction directly in Camera RAW

• Projection Correction: Allows you to correct for distortions at the edges of the frame when shooting with ultra wide angle lenses. Lets you fix the stretchy people phenomenon that I covered recently.

Camera Raw 18.3.1 (May 2026)

• Refine Mask Controls: Now lets you control the edges and feathering of AI masks. New sliders in the mask panels lets you contract or expand the edge, as well as blur the mask with feathering controls. I’ve been asking for this ever since they added AI masks !

• Colour Grading in masking: Finally, the colour grading tool is now available when using masks. This was the one major feature that was still missing from masks in Camera Raw. I really hope that they hurry up and add this to Lightroom(s)

Camera RAW 18.4 (June 2026)

• Bidirectional Gradient: This allows you to create two sided gradients. This is basically, a gradient which is soft in both directions. This is another one of those things I’ve been asking for forever.

• Vectorscope: They’ve actually added a vectorscope in Camera RAW. For those who are experienced with video editing and colour grading, this is a great way to see how the colour is spread out in your image, and a pretty important tool for colour grading once you learn how to use it, especially for people shots. Now, if only they would add Waveforms also.

Some of the new features in Detail

To give you a quick overview of how to use some of the new features, I have gone into a little more depth below on a few of them. I’ll cover the others in a future post.

Vectorscope

To turn on the vector scope, once in Camera Raw, simply go to the histogram and right-click on it. Then choose “Vectorscope” from the pop-up menu and check the box beside it. This will turn the feature on. If you’re not sure how a vectorscope works, there are lots of tutorials online on how to read one, as it’s been a feature of video production since colour television became a thing.

Bidirectional Gradient

This is quite easy to use, too. All you have to do is go to the mask tool, and add a gradient as normal. In the mask controls, you will see a checkbox for bidirectional gradient. Turn this on to get an additional handle to control feathering on the other side of the gradient. You can control both sides independently, though it would be nice to control how much of the centre section is solid. In other words, an additional control for the non-feathered middle section.

Depth Mask

You can add a depth mask like you can with the other masks. Just go to the mask panel and select “Depth Mask” as an option. There is one other thing you need to do, though. You have to click somewhere on the image to select the focal point to activate it. Once you have created the mask, you can edit it using the same controls as the depth map in the Lens Blur feature. To be honest, I’ve had mixed results playing around with this. Sometimes it’s accurate, and other times it’s very not accurate. It’s a useful feature to have, though, and I just hope they improve the quality over time.

Conclusion

So what’s going on here? I really don’t know. I’m pretty sure this is not a big deal, and I hope that they will add these features to Ligthroom(s) in future versions, but they normally don’t take so long. It’s a bit unusual, to be honest. It used to be that any feature added to Camera Raw was also available in Lightroom Classic, since they shared the same engine. Then, a few years ago, they started releasing “beta” features in camera RAW (or “Tech Demos”), a version or two before they were added to Lightroom. But this has been three versions now, and they keep adding major new features with no sign of these being added to Lightroom any time soon.

It also used to be the case that, even if a feature wasn’t in Lightroom or Camera RAW, because they shared the same engine, changes made in one would show up in the other if you saved the changes to the XMP file. Even if there were no controls for the feature. I checked, and that’s not the case here. So, has Adobe broken the connection between the two? Is Lightroom no longer using the shared Camera RAW engine? (To be fair, this may not have been the case for a while now. I haven’t followed Camera RAW’s development as much as I should have, because it was basically the same)

I’m sure they will be at some point, but this isn’t normally the way they do this. It could be a technical issue, but I honestly don’t know what’s going on. If you have any insight, please let us know in the comments below. For what it’s worth, I’m not the only one who has noticed this and the fact that this isn’t the usual release schedule.

[UPDATE]

I did find this comment on the Adobe forums about this from an Adobe employee, and I guess it makes sense:

“Camera Raw is the Edit/Develop Engine powering the Lightroom clients. New Edit features must be built in Camera Raw before the Lightroom clients can adopt them. Unburdened by the additional cataloguing, syncing, and other workflow functionalities, Camera Raw can move more quickly to get these desired new features into your editing workflow. Our goal is to eventually port these features into the Lightroom clients. “

After a lot of procrastination and an impending sense of dread that I might break it fully, I’ve finally taken the plunge and upgraded this site to Squarespace 7.1. This has also allowed me to create a new layout and experiment with some new features. It’s far from perfect right now, and I still need to make some tweaks, but I already think it looks a lot better than the previous one, which was getting stale. There are a couple of big changes, though, and I’ll go through those below.

No more sidebar

The biggest change is that the sidebar is gone. Unfortunately, this is no longer possible in the current version of Squarespace. This was the thing that put me off upgrading the most, but in the end, I realised that hardly anyone ever clicked on anything in the sidebar anyway, so it didn’t really matter. On the plus side, it does give a nice and clean layout, there’s that!

I can technically add a sidebar of sorts to individual posts, but it’s a lot of work, so I won’t be doing that, I think. The other downside to this, apart from not being able to display links in the sidebar, is that most of my posts were designed for a smaller-width column. Now, this is fine for 95% of blog posts, but a small few might look a bit weird.

Featured Image may be missing

The other issue is that the new version no longer automatically puts a featured image at the top of the post. The old version did this automatically from the thumbnail, but the new one doesn’t. The upshot is that I have to add them manually. I’m not going to go back and do this for thousands of posts going back 10 years, so most will have to do without it. For popular posts, I’m doing my best to include them.

Featured posts on the home page

I’ve used this opportunity to add a “Featured Posts” section to the home page, as I’ve wanted to do this before but couldn’t get it to work properly in the old version. I’m not 100% sold on this design yet, and it may need a few tweaks, but overall I think it looks ok and adds some nice functionality.

The featured posts are key posts I think are more timeless or prominent, and they will be updated regularly. I had marked some as featured years ago, and it’s funny to see what came up when I added the block in. Hopefully, this will make it easier to find key posts in the future.

Other miscellaneous points and future plans

So there are still a few bugs and design things that need fixing, and I’m sure I’ll find more. Some of the font sizes are a bit all over the place (hard to fix), and there are some issues with padding, etc. I had wanted to have fewer columns on the home page for smaller screens, but I can’t get it to work yet.

The menu layout is a bit haphazard, too. I had to change this as it didn’t update properly from the old one, so some things may be missing. However, I do like the fact that it’s a proper menu now. I don’t think people even realised the other one was there! I hardly ever went to it, and it was my own website!

I will be adding some more content back into the footer, too, such as links to my presets and so on, but I’m still working on that. I’m also considering bringing back the newsletter in one form or another, but I’m looking at how to do that. There is a built-in one in Squarespace, but I’m not sure it’s the best solution. But I do want to explore this option, as I think it’s the best way for readers to stay updated now, with social media downgrading links and Google reducing its actual search functions.

Anyway, please let me know what you think of the design. I’m not a web design expert, and there are limits to what can be done with the system, so I’m doing my best. If you have any suggestions, please leave them in the comments. Likewise, if you spot any major errors, please let me know.

DXO is running a special Father’s Day promotion, and my readers can get 20% off with the code THOMAS_FD26. That’s pretty much it, really! The offer runs until June 28th, and it’s only valid for new customers, I’m afraid.

Speaking of DXO, in case you missed it, I have recently been posting some tutorials and reviews on their products, including a nifty hack you can do with Nik 9’s Analogue Efex to turn your images into Red/Blue 3D. I also had a tutorial on how to fix the stretchy-people phenomenon you get with wide-angle lenses, and I did a review of the Nik 9 collection.

Note that this post contains a paid affiliate promotion. We receive a small commission on purchases made using the included code, which helps fund this site.

A set of June updates to Adobe’s Photography applications will be released later this week. This will include Lightroom Classic, Lightroom, Photoshop and so on. For the most part, these will be bug fixes and new camera support, but there are a couple of things worth noting.

Adobe are doing a weird thing here and lifting the embargo before the updates actually ship, so if you don’t see them in the Creative Cloud app immediately (at time of publishing), try again midweek.

Lightroom Classic and Lightroom desktop get new improvements to the AI models and technology. Assisted culling gets some improvements, and there is a new subject detection model, which they claim will improve … well…subject detection, I suppose. The biggest thing here is the new local models for Denoise. If you are on a Mac, Denoise now uses Apple’s ML cores and runs locally, so it should work even without an internet connection.

Lightroom Desktop (Or Just “Lightroom”) now lets you use Topaz AI Sharpening directly in the software, though it will cost credits. You can now also generate a video from an image directly in Lightroom (not Classic), without sending it to Firefly first, and it will use the various partner models. It’s basically the same thing; you just don’t have to send the image to Firefly first. The quality is still pretty bad in my opinion.

(See the video below - it might look ok in a little window on the web, but view it full screen and you’ll see what I mean)

Photoshop also includes updates to its on-device models, and the remove reflections tool is now available in Photoshop without going through Camera Raw. I’ve actually missed some of the recent Photoshop updates, as I don’t pay enough attention to the release notes, but in the May release, they added the local model for the remove tool, too.

Speaking of Camera Raw, there have been a whole bunch of new features added in the last few versions that have yet to make it to Lightroom. This is a bit strange, because it used to be the case that the two engines were kept relatively in sync. But with the past two versions, Camera RAW has added depth mapping in Masks, a new “Projection” tool to fix certain types of distortion, and a tool to feather AI masks (finally). None of these are in Lightroom yet.

Permalink

]]>A terrible start to the year (photographically speaking)StreetThomas FitzgeraldThu, 04 Jun 2026 08:39:15 +0000https://www.thomasfitzgerald.photography/photoblog/2026/6/recent-attempts-at-street-photography53c631e4e4b0c4d68989cbef:540c893ee4b04215b3085eaf:6a2139384617f32a867d3bebThe start of this year has been a bit weird for me, photographically speaking. I haven’t taken a large number of photographs for various reasons. The terrible weather being one of them. However, over the first six months, I have taken a few street photos, and while there aren’t many, I thought I would share them here.

Permalink

]]>Recent Attempts at Street PhotographyEditorialThomas FitzgeraldWed, 03 Jun 2026 10:57:13 +0000https://blog.thomasfitzgeraldphotography.com/blog/2026/6/fed-up-with-everything-being-a-subscription-maybe-its-time-to-regulate-subscriptions53c631e4e4b0c4d68989cbef:540c893ee4b04215b3085eaf:6a2005d80415b74251337861

While this article isn’t strictly photography-related, it addresses something that affects most of us who use computers or software. With the number of software and service subscriptions at an all-time high, and the loathing of software subscriptions even higher, maybe it’s time for governments to admit that there is a serious problem here. Companies will continue to push the envelope of what is acceptable, using increasingly sophisticated ways to lock in customers into unfriendly models. They will never regulate themselves, so maybe it’s time to consider legislation to address the issue. I’m not talking about banning subscriptions or anything, but rather regulating them so that they are a little more consumer-friendly, and a little less corporate-evil.

In the beginning, even though many people were against the idea of renting software, there were some aspects you could see as net positives. They did offer a lower entry price for people to access certain software packages than would otherwise have been feasible. When Adobe went subscription-only, despite all the pushback, it did offer a way to access its full software suite that many would have found difficult. The price was initially around €50 per month, but the full package cost more like €2500. Annual upgrades were around €1000, so it wasn’t entirely a terrible deal.

Unfortunately, any silver lining is long tarnished. Now that everything is a subscription, people are often shelling out hundreds or even thousands a month for software. And companies are constantly jacking up prices, killing products or changing their terms and conditions. Any sense of a user/developer balance has pretty much gone at this point. Now everything feels like you’re trapped in a corporate contract, whose sole purpose is to maximise shareholder returns and the user or even the product is now mostly an afterthought.

This has been getting even worse now that AI has entered the equation. The rush to make everything be about AI has pushed companies to do things that are, in many cases, against not only their interests, but also those of their shareholders and customers. Companies are funnelling money into bolting AI onto software regardless of whether it works or not. They just have to be able to say they have some AI strategy. Debt is being racked up on the promise that, at some point, this “transformative technology” will actually transform. And customers are the ones getting the most screwed.

The idea of the market sorting this out now seems a far-fetched dream, as no one is going to rock the boat now that they realise that subscriptions are the way to lock in customers and make the most money. While it may be the case that small companies are now dependent on subscriptions to even survive, I’m not sure if you can make that case for big corporations. Regardless, it seems unlikely that companies will suddenly get an infusion of moral clarity and reverse course.

So perhaps it’s time for this unchecked free-for-all to be, you know, checked. I get that some people out there are fundamentally opposed to any legislation, but something has to be done.

Humble beginnings and false starts

There have been some moves in the right direction. In the United States, under the Biden administration, the FTC was supposed to implement a rule to make cancelling subscriptions easier, but it was buried in legal challenges and is currently in limbo. It’s unclear if this will ever proceed (I did my best to research this, but couldn’t get a definitive answer to whether or not this is dead.)

The Digital Services Act in the EU includes provisions on subscriptions, but they are fairly weak and buried in bureaucratic language. For example, you can’t make cancelling a subscription harder than signing up for one. Stronger terms are currently being considered, but these are still not strong enough, in my opinion.

What is actually needed

So, what should be considered, then? I’m sure some people reading this want subscriptions banned outright, but that seems unlikely at this point. I will attempt to strike a balance with my suggestions here. Likewise, I’m by no means a legal expert, so I can’t say if any of these suggestions would be even enforceable or legal, but I do think it’s a fair compromise to protect consumers.

So, what follows are four suggestions for how to rein in the runaway subscription banditry. I don’t think any of these should be overly difficult to implement or overly onerous on companies. I’m also sure that if some of these were considered, the companies in question would push back massively.

Ban Monthly Pricing for Annual Subscriptions

This is something I’m sure everyone has come across at one point or another, and it drives me mad. When you go to sign up for a subscription, either to a product or a service, they give you the price of an annual plan but display it as “per month” pricing. This is totally misleading, as it’s not an actual monthly fee; it’s an annual fee. Often, the actual monthly price for a subscription is buried somewhere and is usually much pricier.

Now, to be fair, this has improved in recent years, and most places now at least display the actual yearly price in brackets beside the monthly price of said annual subscription. But not everyone. This may be because of the transparency clause in the DSA, although I’m not sure on that. In my opinion, this is not enough. They should display the actual annual fee as the price, making it the most prominently displayed. If they still want to display how this compares to the monthly price, then fine, have that the one in small print and in brackets. Regardless, the actual annual cost should be the one displayed prominently.

I know that this was standard practice for a long time, but I never understood it. It always seemed kind of scammy, and in my opinion, if you have to be this duplicitous about your pricing, it should be an immediate red flag about your actual services.

Regulate Minimum terms and cancellation fees

This is the one that Adobe got into the most actual trouble for. It still somehow gets away with it, mind you, by being marginally more transparent about it. It’s when a company offers a monthly subscription, but you have to sign up for a minimum subscription length, usually a year. This kind of thing was the typical mobile phone contract model, where you have to sign up for a two-year contract or something like that. In the case of mobile phones, though, you’re actually paying for the cost of the phone, and after the period, you get to keep the phone. With software subscriptions, there isn’t really a legitimate reason to enforce minimum contract terms like Adobe does. I do understand that some companies need a long-term commitment to break even, but if that’s the case, they should just offer only annual subscriptions and be done with it. The whole thing of offering monthly subscriptions, but you have to sign up for a year, is confusing, and again, kind of scammy. This is especially true when they hide the fact that you can get charged a massive fee if you cancel early.

There have been some moves on this, at least in terms of transparency, but I think they should ban this practice outright. Much of this is down to the fact that many companies know people won’t pay subscription prices if they see the full annual fee, yet they still need revenue to make a profit (or a large enough one to appease shareholders). But again, if you have to deceive or trick your customers, isn’t that a bigger issue with your business model? I don’t know if there’s some kind of compromise to be had here, perhaps by capping the cancellation fees, but either way, this is one of the most egregious practices by companies selling software subscriptions.

After a set time, you get to keep the last version of the software

Another thing that really ticks people off about all software moving to subscriptions is the need to keep paying for it, indefinitely. Even when companies stop updating the software or providing any meaningful new features, you have to keep paying. In some cases, people pay just to access files. In the good old days, before the proliferation of subscription software, you could skip a version or not update, and your software would still work. If a new version of an application didn’t offer any new features that you needed, you didn’t have to pay for the upgrade. You would still own the licence to use the software. This put the onus on companies to actually make upgrades worth paying for.

With subscriptions, you have to keep paying, even if you’ve paid more than the perpetual licence version of the software would ever cost. This is why people feel trapped. If you require said software for your job, and you don’t really have any alternatives, you are completely at a company’s mercy. You can’t cancel your subscription because you need access to your files, and you can’t “not pay for the upgrade” to express your dissatisfaction. The customer-developer relationship has become entirely skewed toward the developer.

To combat this and reset the balance a little, companies should allow you to keep the last working version of the software after you’ve paid for it for a set period. So, if you’ve subscribed to a software for three years, for example, and this is more than the cost of the software would have been, then if you cancel the last version you installed, it should keep working. It should effectively revert to a perpetual licence. Now, of all the suggestions here, I suspect this is the one that companies would fight the most.

Interestingly, there is one company that I know of that does this. Capture One offers a perpetual licence for free if you’ve subscribed for 5 years and then cancel. Before that, they offer discounts on their perpetual software depending on how long you’ve subscribed. I think something like this should be mandatory.

Make time-outs a mandatory option

Another thing about subscriptions is that they don’t really take into account of individuals or companies having cash flow issues. If you are a creative, this can be especially true, as the creative industry tends to ebb and flow with the seasons. Sometimes, having to continue paying for subscriptions, even when you might not need the application for a period, can be especially frustrating for people. What should be offered is the ability to “pause” a subscription.

This is especially true in situations with minimum terms; should banning that not be an option? You should be able to pause your subscription for a number of months without losing any long-term benefits or having to pay any fees. So, for example, you don’t lose any files that might be stored in the cloud and so on.

I know of some online services that already offer this option. Epidemic sound is one example. I think it would be beneficial if this were applied to software, so that you could at least open and save or export files during a paused subscription, but you just couldn’t use any other functions of the software. Obviously, you wouldn’t want to go into too many specifics, or this would be a bureaucratic nightmare, but it should be made an option. In the EU, companies must give you a 14-day grace period after you subscribe. I would consider this to be something along the same lines. Companies would have to offer a number of months’ time-out in a subscription.

Of course, this would be less of an issue if minimum terms were banned, as you could just cancel and renew. However, you would want to do so in a way that doesn’t lose any connected files, account settings and so on.

Conclusion

I realise that most of what I’ve written here is pretty much a fantasy, even if it is a reasoned one. Corporations have such dominance now that they’re pretty much calling the shots. And they’ve been using the threat of AI being some sort of mysterious force that will take over the world unless they’re allowed to continue unrestricted, as a threat to avoid any kind of legislation. For all the faults of the EU overreaching with some of their big laws, at least they’re doing something. Unfortunately, many of the big legislative projects, which start out as good ideas, tend to overreach and get buried in complex bureaucracy.

Reining in subscriptions doesn’t have to be overreach, though. A few simple steps like those outlined above could really help tilt the balance back a little towards the consumer. I’m sure many people would like to do a lot more, but I’m trying to be realistic here. Even if the very idea of regulating seems unrealistic in itself. But who knows, maybe some company will make a killing by reverting to perpetual licences, and everyone will jump back. One can dream, right?

Originally posted on my Designtography blog as a member only story

I’ve been publishing this website in one form or another since back in 2011. That’s fourteen years ago! Over that time, I have changed a lot, the world has changed a lot, and this website has… well, changed a bit, but frankly, not enough. The amount of time I’ve spent posting here has consistently dropped off recently, and I realise that at least part of the reason is that I kind of hate this website now. I know that’s quite a strong response, but it’s true. Well, mostly.

Originally, I hosted my site on a web hosting service and ran it on WordPress. But over time, I felt that I had outgrown that, and the service kept having problem after problem. So eventually, I switched to Squarespace in 2014. So I’ve basically been on this platform for 12 years now, and to be honest, lately I’m not entirely happy with it. I’ve blogged about this a few times, and I’ve regularly mentioned that I wanted to move on, possibly back to WordPress. But the problem is, I can’t. There is so much content on this site now that exporting it to WordPress is borderline impossible. After all, there is 15 years’ worth of content.

I’m currently using the previous version of Squarespace’s website software. The reason for this is that the newer version loses many features, some of which I actually use here. For example, I use the sidebar on my site, but on the new version, you can’t. So in a way, I feel trapped now. Part of me just wants to start over, but then again, as I said, there are 15 years’ worth of blog posts on here. While I can technically export my blog posts, it will lose a lot of the formatting and embedded content, such as images. It’s a precarious state to be in. I have exported it many times as a backup, but extracting the information from it would be challenging.

Ant therein lies the danger in relying on a hosted service like Squarespace. You’re entirely at their whim. Should they decide to stop supporting blog posts in the morning (which could technically happen), I could lose years of work. But apart from that, I want to move forward, and at the moment, every time I look at this, I’m reminded of the situation, and it puts me off blogging.

So for now, I’m probably going to bite the bullet and upgrade to Squarespace 7.1 (the latest version). This will mean a redesign and the loss of some features, but, in fairness, it is generally more flexible. I have already done this on my portfolio site, and while it has been a pain in some respects (there is one broken feature there that they are aware of but don’t seem to want to fix, which is holding me back). Still, I feel that I don’t have a choice because this has gotten stale and old, and the viewership is down, and my enthusiasm for it is down.

I feel that Squarespace first went all in on e-commerce at the expense of their traditional portfolio and blogging customers. Now they’re going all in on AI (like every other company out there) at the expense of, well, everyone. Which is kind of ironic given that they still sponsor loads of photographers to promote Squarespace as a way to make a portfolio site. One of the features that was really handy with Squarespace in the past was that you could import images with metadata attached for things like title and description, and it would populate that into the galleries and posts for you. This is broken in the current version. I asked support about it, and they know it’s broken but said it wasn’t a priority for them to fix. This is a crucial feature for photographers, which they still promote heavily, but they don’t want to fix it. The workaround is to re-enter all your metadata manually.

I think every platform is going through something similar. In an effort to constantly evolve and keep up with market expectations, services have become more complicated, and everything has gotten just a little crappier. I was planning to set up a mailing list again, but the platform I used, MailChimp, was acquired by Inuit, and it’s now all about driving sales. Things that used to be one or two steps, even just here in Squarespace, are now multiple steps. Simplicity has died in favour of cramming more and more features in at the expense of user experience. And with AI, everything has to have AI bolted on, even if it’s not necessary or no one wants it.

There are still some good points, though. It is still one of the best and easiest site builders for designing your website, and the newer version 7.1 offers some nice features. You can do some nice setups with it, although it takes a bit of work. It’s still far less complicated than with WordPress to set up a decent-looking site. I have been playing around with a copy of my current blog, which I upgraded to 7.1, and it looks much better than this, despite the missing elements. I mean, I don’t hate Squarespace. I still like the platform overall; I just think it might not be the best fit for magazine or blog type content, especially if it is an extra-large site like mine.

I’m planning on doing this sometime in the next few weeks. The update process takes a little time, and I have to rebuild some elements manually, so if you see things looking funky for a bit, you know what’s wrong! In the meantime, I will do my best to keep up my motivation and keep posting. I do apologise for the rant, but this has been very frustrating.

In the video, I show you how to combine two of the new features in Nik Collection 9’s Analog Efex plug-in to create a working 3d Anaglyph (blue/red) effect on your image. By combining the Chromatic Shift effect with the Depth Map, you can create a sort of 3d effect that actually works! (mostly) It’s totally pointless and has no practical value, but it’s a bit of fun!

It’s worth noting that this is far from perfect. It really only works if there’s a layer you can cut out of your scene. Ideally, you would control the separation of the left and right images with the depth map, but that’s not possible. It only fades it on and off, so this is far from a true 3d image. But it does work to create a 3d effect.

If you want to try this yourself, you can download a trial version of Nik 9 from the DXO website. You can also use my code: ThomasFitzgerald15 to get 15% off (new customers only, I’m afraid). These are the 3d glasses I got from Amazon.

Note that this post contains a paid affiliate code and affiliate links. We get a small commission for purchases made using this code, which helps run this site.

I was chatting online with fellow Irish photographer David Cleland, and he told me of a rather unfortunate situation that has happened to him. I’ve been following David for a long time. He was one of the first people I knew who was embracing the Fujifilm ecosystem in the early days. He is actually a former Fujifilm X-Photographer, and you may know him through his website, FlixelPix. Unfortunately, through a series of unfortunate events, David has lost control of that domain, and now has a new website where you can find his work.

The trouble began when a missed domain renewal set off a chain reaction that began to dismantle everything attached to it. The FlixelPix website had been online for more than 15 years, and losing it meant not just losing a web address. It also meant losing email accounts tied to the domain, years of search visibility, hard-won backlinks, and the trust of an audience built over time. Missing a domain renewal is something that is surprisingly easy to do, and it nearly happened to me recently too, so I totally feel for David in this situation.

But it gets worse. The domain did not stay dormant. It was picked up and repurposed into an AI-generated photography site, wearing David’s former identity for entirely different purposes. For a year, visitors arriving there could easily have assumed it was still his. It was not.

Then, in October 2025, the domain reappeared at auction.

At first, there was some hope. The opening bid suggested recovery might still be possible. That hope faded quickly: the price climbed past $1,000 and, ultimately, the domain sold for over $1,500, putting it out of reach. In the end, David had to walk away.

The domain has since been acquired and a website is back functioning on it. But the site is not David’s, it’s a bad clone. Parts of the site appear to have been reconstructed from archived material, and at a glance it resembles an earlier version of FlixelPix. But it is not. It is a recycled version of David’s former work, layered with advertising and affiliate content, which are of course, nothing to do with David. It’s a digital hijacking.

David has since rebuilt his presence at a new home: davidcleland.com. It is a fresh start, but not a simple one. Rebuilding means recovering what can be salvaged from backups and archives while accepting that much of what once sustained the original FlixelPix ecosystem, search presence, inbound links, and subscriber routes no longer leads where it should.

That, he says, is the hardest part: not losing the files, but losing the context. The web still remembers what was once his but no longer sends people back to him.

If there is a lesson in this, it is a simple one: do not treat domain ownership as background administration. Auto-renewals fail. Cards expire. Reminder emails get missed. When that happens, the consequences are rarely reversible.

Check your domains. Verify them. Treat them as critical infrastructure. Recovering a lost domain is far harder than preventing the loss in the first place. If you follow or link to the old FlixelPix website, it’s time to update to davidcleland.com. If you know anyone still going to the old site, make sure to inform them so they don’t get duped.

Capture One has released a new beta version of the software that adds a much-requested feature. The new version adds AI noise reduction to the photo editing application, and while currently only in Beta, it looks promising.

Anyone can sign up for the Capture One beta, and they have been actively promoting it recently. It used to be the case that the beta was under NDA, but for the past few years, you can talk about it freely. You can find the beta on the website. As with all beta software, be aware that this probably shouldn’t be used on work projects, and it does require you to upgrade, ore use a separate catalogue or session.

Anyway, back to the noise reduction! You will find it under the “Refine” tool tab, and it is simply named “Apply Enhanced Denoise”. Interesting that they chose to not use the term AI in the tool. When you click the checkbox to turn it on, it takes a few seconds to calculate, and then it displays the denoised version. You get a slider which you can control the amount of Denoise used. When you use the Enhanced Denoise, it disables the standard noise reduction.

So how is it?

Based on my limited testing, it seems pretty good. I tried it on an ISO 25600 image from my old Sony A6000, hardly a low-light beast. This image is basically unusable without treatment, but after applying the AI Denoise, it is usable.

Here’s my test image:

Above is the original (a crop) Here is a before and after showing the full sized image, and then and a 100% crop of the image.

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

And 1:1 Crops…

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

Note that in the tests above, I set the slider to 50% across all versions.

The results are, in my opinion, not quite as good as Adobe’s Denoise. It gets rid of the noise with no problem, but leaves the image looking quite soft by comparison. The Lightroom version has a more natural-looking texture. I also tried the DXO PureRaw version, and the Capture One version isn't as sharp or as detailed as the results you’ll get with DXO PureRaw. Pure Raw probably is the sharpest of the three, but it is also a little more processed-looking than the Adobe version. Some of this will be subjective, so I encourage you to try it yourself. I also don’t want to do too much testing as its still in beta.

Anyway, this is just a quick update to let you know about this and isn’t meant to be a full review or anything. As I said, it’s still in beta. I know many Capture One users have been clamouring for something like this, so now you have it. Or at least you will have it when the final version comes out!

I’ve had my Fujifilm X-E4 for a long time now, and for the most part it’s a great little camera. I’ve used it as my main “lightweight” travel and walk-around camera for years now. Any time I want to bring a camera with me and I don’t want to lug my Canon R6II, I throw the Fujifilm in the bag. I had originally bought it to replace my ageing Sony a6000 for street photography, but that never really panned out. Mainly because I didn’t do street photography as much any more, but also, an annoying bug in the camera made it difficult to use with my style of street photography.

I’m pretty sure I covered this before on the blog, but I can’t find the original post. I like to shoot from the hip with the screen flipped up. The problem with the X-E4 is that when you do this, if you bring the camera too close to your body, the image on the screen flips. This is because you can flip the screen right around 180 degrees to use as a selfie screen. But when placed vertical, the eye sensor seems to trigger the camera’s software to flip the screen.

You would think that turning the viewfinder off altogether would solve the problem, but alas it does not. I had searched for solutions online for ages but to no avail. Someone recommended using a half transparent piece of plastic over the eye sensor to make it less sensitive, but that doesn’t work at all. Covering the sensor doesn’t work either, it just triggers it. When I did finally find a solution I ignored it initially, as it just sounded too ridiculous to work. But it does.

The solution? Magnets!

Yes, you read that right. For some bizarre reason, placing a magnet on the underside of the camera in the correct spot stops the screen image flipping. The only thing I can think of is that it is related to the mechanism used when the screen is in its normal place, although the location is kind of away from there, so that doesn’t really make sense either. You need to put it on the right side of the bottom of the camera (when the lens is facing up) just where the holes are. The pull of whatever magnet is inside will pull it into place.

To test it I used the magnetic clip that came with my DJI microphone, which is a handy size. You’ll need to tape it into place, though, to stop it falling off. I genuinely wasn’t expecting this to work, but it seems to. If anyone has any explanation as to why this works, please let me know in the comments.

The only downside to this is now the screen turns off instead of flipping, but this is just the eye sensor doing its normal thing, and you need to be much closer to the camera than when it was flipping the image. You can solve this entirely by disabling the viewfinder in the menu. It’s still not an entirely ideal solution, but at least it’s a solution.

I am curious to know if this happens on the Fujifilm X-E5 also or did they fix this problem when that camera came out. If you have an X-E5, please let me know in the comments if this happens on the X-E5 too.

In the example above, I shot this image looking up at the cherry blossom, but there are still people in the frame at the bottom on the steps. If you look at them, you may notice that they look a bit funny. They look kind of stretched, as if they were taller and skinnier than they should be. This is an example of perspective distortion. You really only notice this on lenses wider than 24mm, but in this case, because of the angle I was holding it at, you can see it. Now, you may not even notice this, and it may be subtle enough that you don’t really need to care about it.

You can sort of fix this just within Lightroom. In the Transform panel, you can adjust the “Aspect” slider to stretch the image back out. This does fix the stretchy person look, but unfortunately it squeezes the whole frame uniformly, so objects in the centre are compressed, and it may alter the look of other subjects in the frame. Still, it will work in a pinch.

What you really need is a tool that will change the aspect at just the edges of the frame. Amazingly, this actually exists. It’s one of DXO’s applications that you may not know about, called DXO ViewPoint. I only know about this specific function because I made some tutorials for DXO a while ago for an earlier version. The software does a bunch of things, but it has a function to deal with this issue specifically.

So if you have DXO ViewPoint, just edit your image in ViewPoint using the menu command: Photo > Edit In > DXO ViewPoint. This will open up the application. From here, you need to go to the Volume Deformation section.

You want to use the first option here, the Horizontal and Vertical option. For this particular image, set the Horizontal to 100 (the default) and the Vertical to about 70. This immediately makes the people look less stretchy and more normal-looking. You can view the before and after by using the Before/After button at the top of the window. Once you’re happy, just hit Save to go back to Lightroom.

I don’t really know of any other tool that does this specific function. I tried doing it with the Puppet Warp tool in Photoshop, and it sort of works, but it’s tricky to get right. Another option is the Mesh Warp tool, which again could be used to fix this, but it requires some more manual work (although this is probably a better option than the Puppet Warp tool).

If you do want to try DXO Viewpoint, there is a trial version available, and if you do want to buy it, you can use my code: ThomasFitzgerald15 to get 15% off (new customers only, I’m afraid)

Incidentally, this is not a sponsored post by any means. While I am on their affiliate program, I am not being directly paid or even asked to write this. This post was entirely my own idea and DXO has no input into the content I make. If you use my affiliate code, I do get a small commission which helps pay for this site, and my coffee addiction.