Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Adobe Lightroom Q&A => Topic started by: wolfnowl on January 12, 2012, 01:31:17 am
-
Hi Folks: This may be a stupid question, but I've not yet published any photo books. Since LR4 Beta includes both softproofing and a book plugin for Blurb, and since Blurb has its own ICC profile (http://www.blurb.com/b3info) are people softproofing their images and creating proof copies before posting them in the 'book' pages?
Thx,
Mike.
-
That certainly sounds like a good idea!
-
I had a quick play with the 'book' tab and it looks good. There is a show stopper for me though. Unless there is some workaround that I have not found, there does not seem to be the option to adapt template layouts, or create your own. If your needs are met by th templates available that's great, but for me that is not the case. Don't know how hard it is to build that facility into this module, but without it this part of Lightroom is useless for me and I'll have to stick with Booksmart.
-
there does not seem to be the option to adapt template layouts, or create your own.
You're right :( I guess they'll need that as a feature in LR5. Maybe it'll be the surprise on release of 4 ? but I very much doubt it, they haven't given us that flexibility in the print module yet, so I guess it must be too difficult for them.
On Adobe TV they suggest making non templated layouts as single jpgs and dropping them in full page.
I read on one of the reviews that it's possible to build your own templates with Illustrator.
But neither of the above will provide the utility of the current Booksmart or using a dedicated layout program like InDesign or Scribus.
So at the moment it's either take what we offer, or spend ages kludging around the restrictions.
All rather a pity as the core ability to resize and sharpen correctly would be useful.
-
Adobe have said you will be able to create your own layouts. The method will be documented and you should expect it to be similar to how one can create new web galleries - so not through Lightroom's UI and only for those with some technical knowledge. Yes, Illustrator is involved, but other apps that create PDFs may be possible. I don't think users in general will have any need to do this though.
John
-
so not through Lightroom's UI
That's the killer limitation.
There are always work rounds on these sort of restrictions, but they take away the spontaneity and creativity of being able to move images and text around on the page freely. It's also an annoyance if it needs other expensive software too.
Blurb users shouted loudly for this and Booksmart soon had the options, I hope LR will eventually catch up.
-
Maybe, but I doubt it. What's there will satisfy the vast majority - if you really can't produce very creative output with what's there now, how many more baked templates do you need? When will that argument ever stop? Instead the focus is on the convenience of having the workflow entirely within LR, adding clever hidden stuff into AutoFlow (a tip is to define a small no of favourites and use AutoFlow) and on removing pain points like two page spreads. If you want to go off-piste, you can always output the Blurb book to PDF and bring in additional PDF pages using Acrobat Pro.
-
if you really can't produce very creative output with what's there now, how many more baked templates do you need?
Having to scroll through loads of presets just isn't the way a lot of people like to work. Plus many of us want to create something unique, not something just the same layout as others use.
I'll repeat again that the Blurb community shouted very loudly for this flexibility in Booksmart, and did get it. If Blurb can offer that, for free, why can't it be in LR ? It will be eventually.
If you want to go off-piste, you can always output the Blurb book to PDF and bring in additional PDF pages using Acrobat Pro.
Which again comes back to needing extra expensive software and spoiling the workflow.
Anyone know if the PDF output specifications meet Blurb's stringent requirements ?
-
Yes, they meet them - I've done a book.
You don't need to repeat it. I just don't think it'll change or really needs to do so. As well as the built-in layouts providing plenty of scope for creativity (if anything there are too many), you'll find plenty of third party templates will appear, or you can just roll your own, or even use background images. I agree about the dependence on other programs and even if you've already got them you may have no idea how they work - I'd never previously opened Illustrator - but I think you can also create these templates using Notepad and something to create jpegs. Just as you can get 9X% of image processing done with Lightroom and need Photoshop much less, if at all, so Book will satisfy the vast majority of needs.
-
Yes, they meet them - I've done a book.
Thanks, that's good to know.
I guess that also makes you a beta tester and/or a consultant for Adobe. Which explains the party line "Adobe don't provide it so you don't need it, it won't be coming"
Free layout will be a feature, maybe not in 4, but it will arrive sometime. Adobe just seem to be out of step with demand on this both in LR and PS, most other imaging products can implement this without difficulty and people want it.
-
Not a party line, just an educated guess - but I'd bet on it!
-
Rhossydd continually makes valid points here; johnbeardy - why do you feel the need to shut him down?
Let's look at it this way... If LR is being designed for the average home user, then one can accept johnbeardy's arguments - but it's not. LR is a professional, industry-standard application for creative artists, namely photography. Professionals expect their apps to be leading edge. In terms of Books, Web and Slideshow, LR4 is clearly not leading edge. Even iPhoto from 5 years ago has some better book implementations than LR4. While LR4 has some wonderful Book options for photo & text captions and customization of pages, at least two of us on this forum have noted shortcomings compared to what's already out there - that's what a Public Beta and the concept of feedback are all about.
With Booksmart being a subset of Blurb, one would expect to see those options in the LR4 implementation of Blurb, not simply the "general public let's do what everyone else is doing" options. It's the additional creativity that's missing. You can't fault creative people for wanting more creativity in their professional apps, especially from Adobe - a company that supplies the creative world with their apps.
-
Not shutting anyone down - just disagreeing and saying what I expect to happen. Lightroom's designed to span the range from aspirational hobby photographers to those who earn their living from it, and that's where Book is sitting, with its page/picture level control of fonts, or page-specific backgrounds, for instance. For leading edge, you have the full Creative Suite products, but just as Lightroom doesn't aim to do all that Photoshop does, so it's not going to be InDesign. If you ("one") can't be creative with what's there now, are you really that creative?
-
You'll find others agree with you - here's the best feedback thread (http://forums.adobe.com/thread/946768) to have your say.
-
If you ("one") can't be creative with what's there now, are you really that creative?
I don't whether to be insulted or just laugh at your naivety on that line.
Just be a user for a moment, rather than an Adobe evangelist.
It's not just about creativity, it's about ease of use, and those often go hand in hand. Just dragging a photo onto a blank page, then sizing and positioning it with the usual grab handles (like the crop function) is simple and intuitive, as is just drawing a text box that you can resize and position to suit a layout. It doesn't involve searching through lists of layouts, or complex adjustments of sliders to position things where you want them(assuming you can at all).
Using external software is just nonsense in this context. Shall we discuss this idea that building custom layouts can be done via notepad ? ie having to edit code ? please this is the 21st century, we shouldn't expect users to be coding where they want their photos on a page.
Apple offer it Aperture, Blurb offer it in Booksmart, Adobe will catch up, maybe in a while, but it's looking silly to have omitted it from the beginning.
-
Oh, so did I indicate Notepad is actually the way to do it? It sounds like you're just venting, but you've got the feedback link.
-
did I indicate Notepad is actually the way to do it?
No, but others have. Can you defend that sort of answer to this issue ?
but you've got the feedback link.
Not really the right topic, so I've started a new one there.
-
Since LR4 Beta includes both softproofing and a book plugin for Blurb, and since Blurb has its own ICC profile (http://www.blurb.com/b3info) are people softproofing their images and creating proof copies before posting them in the 'book' pages?
You can’t soft proof using a CMYK profile in LR4, Blurb is using such a process. Then the question becomes, are they really using that profile to convert ALL the data for ALL books (paper stocks)? Kind of doubt it. What is the deltaE of the various presses used to this one profile and over time?
-
Advocate it, no. Defend it? Maybe, but just on the basis that I'd rather have definitions as a text file which you can hack rather than in some proprietary format.
-
You can’t soft proof using a CMYK profile in LR4, Blurb is using such a process. Then the question becomes, are they really using that profile to convert ALL the data for ALL books (paper stocks)? Kind of doubt it. What is the deltaE of the various presses used to this one profile and over time?
Hence the question... what do you recommend as a best process then, Andrew?
Mike.
-
Hence the question... what do you recommend as a best process then, Andrew?
You can soft proof the CMYK in Photoshop but the question remains about the profile Blurb supplies.
-
Thanks for the information! Was kind of wondering about that since (as I understanding it) Blurb uses more than one printing company...
Mike.
-
Thanks for the information! Was kind of wondering about that since (as I understanding it) Blurb uses more than one printing company...
Even if it is the same company, it is certainly more than one press! As someone who’s spent a lot of time trying to get multiple digital presses to produce the same (within a reasonable dE) output over time, I can tell you it is not easy and takes a lot of process control and tracking. Plus each paper has to have it’s own profiles. I have no idea how many papers Blurb offers but the idea that one profile could be used for soft proofing doesn’t wash, you can’t separate to those papers with a single profile.
-
So, basically, if you're printing a book forget about softproofing?
On the Blurb site it says:
"Color Management: Controlling variables between screen and print
We’ve created this resource center because we understand how important your images are to you. Print on demand (POD) technology has come a long way, but still has a way go to match true offset quality. Results can be amazing, but getting an image you like – from your back-lit RGB monitor to a book printed on a CMYK printer – can sometimes be a challenge. Several variables come into play between your monitor and our global print network. In POD, books – covers and pages – are printed on different print devices, which means that even though everything is calibrated to the Blurb ICC Profile, variables are a given. Controlling as many variables as possible is what color management is all about.
With a properly calibrated monitor to accurately soft proof your images, using the Blurb ICC Profile helps you manage color more closely. Before embarking on setting up a color-managed workflow, please set your expectations appropriately. It is simply not possible for POD printers to duplicate the finely controlled color management that is possible with offset printing, so some slight hue differences may appear from book to book."
and
"The Blurb ICC Profile is based on the GRACoL2009 reference used in high-end commercial printing. Using this profile allows you to soft proof your images while in RGB or to convert your images to the CMYK color space of the print device."
Mike.
P.S. Sent an e-mail to the folks at Blurb Support to ask their opinion.
-
So, basically, if you're printing a book forget about softproofing?
Not really. Remember that you have to submit to Blurb in sRGB, so even if you can't perform an absolute perfect workflow of soft proofing to the actual printer's profile, you should still have a look at how things will look in sRGB.
I wonder if Adobe have missed a trick here with their implementation of soft proofing. Many users will only be interested in sRGB output, whether on the web, by email, printing by outside printers or via book publishers. Maybe they should have included a global "Show images in sRGB" option that would work across all modules. There will still be people getting surprises by the change in output colour even with the soft proof option only in Develop.
-
Not really. Remember that you have to submit to Blurb in sRGB, so even if you can't perform an absolute perfect workflow of soft proofing to the actual printer's profile, you should still have a look at how things will look in sRGB.
The issue with the “just send us sRGB but soft proof with some profile” is you can’t control the rendering intent, BPC and really have no idea if said profile describes the process or will be used. So it is half baked. As I mentioned a few times, we have no clue about this Blurb ICC profile in terms of what it really describes.
I wonder if Adobe have missed a trick here with their implementation of soft proofing. Many users will only be interested in sRGB output, whether on the web, by email, printing by outside printers or via book publishers.
You can do this. Just select sRGB as you would any other profile. You’ll see the sRGB values and histogram you’d get IF you export in sRGB.
-
You can do this. Just select sRGB as you would any other profile.
Really?? Did you miss the word "global" in there Andrew ?
I'm talking about only displaying images in sRGB across the entire program, library, develop, slideshow....... everywhere.
-
Really?? Did you miss the word "global" in there Andrew ?
I'm talking about only displaying images in sRGB across the entire program, library, develop, slideshow....... everywhere.
Yes, what you wrote wasn’t at all clear:I wonder if Adobe have missed a trick here with their implementation of soft proofing. Many users will only be interested in sRGB output, whether on the web, by email, printing by outside printers or via book publishers.
You did mention soft proofing, that IS possible with sRGB.
-
what you wrote wasn’t at all clear
Especially if you mis-quote me :(
The whole paragraph is clear enough.
-
Especially if you mis-quote me :(
Sorry, my copy and paste must be broken <g>.