# Why isn't there a magic wand in Lightroom?



## jdramirez (Oct 31, 2014)

I've been using the magic wand in photoshop since 1998... so it isn't exactly cutting edge technology. I want to select a background... darken it... and leave my subject untouched... 

I suppose I can guess the answer... it is because I should be using photoshop since they work best in tandem... but seriously... a magic wand... it seems silly to not have that stand alone functionality in LR.

Having said that... if it is there... and I'm merely ignorant... I will withdraw my outrage.


----------



## privatebydesign (Oct 31, 2014)

It's there, or a version to do exactly what you want.

Just use an adjustment brush with Auto Mask selected. Easy.


----------



## jdramirez (Oct 31, 2014)

I think I'm just lazy and I want to click once and have 90% of my lines done for me... 

Actually... LR and facebook are not playing nice together... what I'm seeing in LR is what I expect, but FB is making the black look horrible... I'm guessing it is just FB's compression... but sum bitch...


----------



## flyingSquirrel (Oct 31, 2014)

As mentioned, use the adjustment brush.

One partial answer to why LR does not have a magic wand is: Lightroom is specifically focused on PIE (parametric image editing) while Photoshop is specifically focused on RIE (raster image editing). They each do their own part best, and it doesn't make sense for Adobe to start mixing in the PS stuff into LR too much (although they are doing it more and more lately). The adjustment brush creates far better, more accurate masks/selections than a wand tool would, despite it taking longer and being a pain in the neck.

After the basic parametric edits in LR on my RAW, I move to PS for anything regarding selections or raster stuff.


----------



## Marsu42 (Nov 11, 2014)

flyingSquirrel said:


> The adjustment brush creates far better, more accurate masks/selections than a wand tool would, despite it taking longer and being a pain in the neck.



I agree, and we can look forward to LR6 here: In ACR 8.7 for PS CC Adobe already enabled the advanced mask editing tools so it'll be easier to edit selections. They could of course also have enabled it in LR5, but then again there has to be some reason to pay some $$$ to upgrade for the non-subscription users :-o


----------



## AcutancePhotography (Nov 11, 2014)

flyingSquirrel said:


> Lightroom is specifically focused on PIE (parametric image editing) while Photoshop is specifically focused on RIE (raster image editing).



I did not realize that but now that you mentioned it, it makes sense.


----------



## Skirball (Nov 13, 2014)

I always meant to have a look at my sidecars after heavy localized editing in LR. I'd assume as LR adds more and more pixel level editing that the data to retain this in parametric format must be increasing exponentially? Probably not a big deal for a sidecar, but that'd mean that the catalogs will increase dramatically as well.


----------



## Marsu42 (Nov 13, 2014)

Skirball said:


> Probably not a big deal for a sidecar, but that'd mean that the catalogs will increase dramatically as well.



Not dramatically: You can look at the sidecar files (or extract the XMP:xmp-MM dng tags with exiftool) and see that LR just stores the parameters where you brushed with what brush settings and so on. Much less data than pixels and nearly independent of the image res. What adds bulk to the LR catalog is the editing history and keywords.


----------



## Skirball (Nov 13, 2014)

Marsu42 said:


> Skirball said:
> 
> 
> > Probably not a big deal for a sidecar, but that'd mean that the catalogs will increase dramatically as well.
> ...



Interesting. So if you drag an adjustment brush does it just log a vector based on coordinates?

Keywords? Why would that make a significant impact?


----------



## Marsu42 (Nov 13, 2014)

Skirball said:


> Keywords? Why would that make a significant impact?



It's just my observation - it's not just the kws, but the whole bulk of metadata you can attach to the shots (iptc/xmp caption, title, photog, address, whatnot). The catalog isn't highly compressed as this would slow down things, so it's a memory hog. But you can zip a 3 *gb* catalog to 100 *mb* 



Skirball said:


> Interesting. So if you drag an adjustment brush does it just log a vector based on coordinates?



Just look at a .xmp file after saving metadata, it's easy enough to find. Adobe cooked up their own method, no idea what exact kind of math or method it is for which tool (brush, circle, linear, healing/cloning...).


----------



## Canon_Shooter (Nov 13, 2014)

LR does not have Hold SHIFT for a STRAIGHT LINE


----------



## Famateur (Nov 13, 2014)

jdramirez said:


> Actually... LR and facebook are not playing nice together... what I'm seeing in LR is what I expect, but FB is making the black look horrible... I'm guessing it is just FB's compression...



If you calibrate your monitor, could it be that your browser is not set to use your monitor's color profile?

Calibrating your monitor is a good start, but you also have to tell your browser which color profile to use for images, too. For Firefox, I use the Color Management add-on. It works well, but you have to manually select the profile to use (I wish it would dynamically apply whichever profile is in use by Windows for the monitor the browser is displayed in). Since I move between a two-monitor setup at home and another at work, I have to switch the profiles back and forth in the add-on. It's a minor inconvenience.

If you don't calibrate your monitor, well, all bets are off...


----------



## Canon_Shooter (Nov 13, 2014)

does? LR does not have Hold SHIFT for a STRAIGHT LINE?


----------



## jdramirez (Nov 13, 2014)

I used the x-rite that was in sale a few weeks ago... I still need to do the rebate... But I'll give that a look. Thanks for the suggestion.



Famateur said:


> jdramirez said:
> 
> 
> > Actually... LR and facebook are not playing nice together... what I'm seeing in LR is what I expect, but FB is making the black look horrible... I'm guessing it is just FB's compression...
> ...


----------



## wickidwombat (Nov 25, 2014)

privatebydesign said:


> It's there, or a version to do exactly what you want.
> 
> Just use an adjustment brush with Auto Mask selected. Easy.



auto mask is a bit flakey and can do some wierd things. I find its better to use the brush without automask to apply the setting and then erase using auto mask over the overlapped areas. this gives cleaner results


----------



## jannatul18 (Nov 28, 2014)

Though there is no magic wand tool in light-room but in other way the same thing can be possible to execute.


----------



## Marsu42 (Nov 28, 2014)

wickidwombat said:


> auto mask is a bit flakey and can do some wierd things. I find its better to use the brush without automask to apply the setting and then erase using auto mask over the overlapped areas. this gives cleaner results



+1, I have yet to find a shot that works with LR5 automask - probably non-nature shots are compatible. But rejoice, as indicated in the newest ACR for PS CC the new LR6 will also have enhanced masking tools!


----------

