Why work backward? If a preset is designed with a properly exposed image as a starting point, why would I apply it first, then "properly expose" the image afterward? I then lose the intent of the preset.In Photomator Presets are meant to be applied to set a starting point. You do your manual adjustments after applying your preset. You try to work backward.
For example, say "Warm" preset was designed to increase the warmth of an image. My starting image was taken with its white balance (incorrectly) set very warm. After applying the preset, my image is now very, very warm. The creators of the preset never intended my image to look that warm.
That's the usefulness of LUTs vs. Presets - it's an adjustment separate of the other adjustments (exposure, color, etc.) that I can apply non-destructively. If I apply a Preset and tweak some settings, I am now "outside" of the Preset. If I want to go back to my "base edit", I can only re-apply the whole Preset, which destroys my base edit.
Right - I edit RAW, so I lose all my edits. Adding "Apply LUT" to workflow would make this process non-destructive.I understand you try to take a set of edited images and apply a LUT to create a new look. The only way I can think off is to export the images as JPEG or TIFF and apply the LUT to those using a workflow.
This is interesting - More generally, maybe Workflows should be able to apply a single adjustment, including applying a LUT, not just apply a whole Preset. e.g. adjusting white balance for a batch of images.The way to add a LUT to a workflow is to first create a Preset that only apply that LUT, and make a workflow that apply that preset. Since this will erase any pre-applied adjustments, you need to first bake them into a file, hence the export test prior to doing it.
There is some precedent for batch applying LUTs - there is even a tutorial doc for how to do it in Pixelmator Pro using AppleScript. If it's useful enough to be in a doc, IMO it should be a supported feature.
https://www.pixelmator.com/tutorials/an ... mator-pro/
Statistics: Posted by Matthew Block — Yesterday 17:21:29