Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Adobe Lightroom Q&A => Topic started by: Phil Indeblanc on August 02, 2013, 08:49:39 pm
-
If I can get the majority of users to nod that they use dual screen, I can make my case for the NEED to seperate the Lib from Dev functionality!
This is LR achilies heel, and it is frustrating jumping back and forth.
If we can have LR 6 have the option to segment the 2 functions to the Grid view in the 2nd screen to behave as the Lib mode on screen 2, and stay with Dev mode on screen 1...Oh Boy would that be a major improvement in how the software and user interact. Right now it is a binary switch back and forth.
Anyone get tired of the switching, then finding the place where you left off, NOT being able to sort the Grid view in dev mode on the 2nd screen?
Seriously, I would think single screen users would rather Alt Tab then keep chasing locations and files ...If it weren't for the Go to Folder, I would be LOST!
But you can only do that in Dev to Lib mode, WhatInTheWorld!!! Then switch back to Dev mode to work!!! Just insane!
How backwards and dumb do we have to be to not think there are better ways to go about doing something? I can just hear.."Leave it its FINE, they'll adjust and forget once we toss that other doodad feature..." (puffing out a think smoke from the cigar as the rest at the round table don't make a sound while holding their breath and their seat position. Then the other reason, so conformed few individuals that think they are the END all of Adobe LR, and won't even stoop down to the level of a user standpoint, since they are the authoritative voice and all stops there...No sense in something they may have came up with..Why improve on a good idea?
Why! because nothing is constant...process evolve, and needs shift.
I can just see posts try to teach me how to work. Go ahead, let me hear it. But really?! Really? we all have to comply to some single approach in working to be as efficient as you? Really?! Where are we?
(made a couple corrections in my initial post, particularly re screen 1 vs2, and more rant :-)
-
Agreed - I use dual monitors and LR is just about useless as far as that functionality.
-
There are many areas where Lightroom is more than a bit lackluster .... the Book and Slideshow modules are abysmal to say the least ... and there has been little to no effort to improve upon the Web module.
These and a few other concerns have forced me to move my RAW workflow elsewhere ... while my chosen solution (Aperture 3) may be considered inferior in some concerns, I have much fewer problems in my day-to-day use ... it does a fine job with multiple monitors as well ... and once Maverick is out ... chances are it will even be better ... Actually, with a true full-sceen mode that is available in Aperture ... I find the need much less for multiple monitors in my workflow ... it's only a quick keyboard shortcut to go from a thumbnail to full screen mode with the full RAW HUD available ...
In addition, I have zero issues with shooting tethered. In fact every DSLR I currently own is supported including my original Nikon D1 and D70s that mostly collect dust these days ... in fact my D4 and D600 were supported in Aperture 4-6 months sooner that it took for Adobe to offer support ...
I do realize that I am giving up just a bit in using a less than popular solution, I have discovered, if I do the best possible job before I trip the shutter release, I don't really need all the bells, buzzers and whistles that software solutions can address ...
While I laud the Adobe engineers in their efforts to make the Develop module (a.k.a. - Adobe Camera RAW ... which if that was all I needed to save the day, I could just use Ps and be done with the matter) as good as it gets ... when I purchased Lightroom v1, it wasn't just for ACR with a different UI ... but the whole app ... as long as Adobe includes those other modules and capabilities ... I fully expect them to attend to support and/or improve ALL the features and modules ... not just one ...
Unless or until Adobe gets off their high horse and shows significant improvement in the entirety of the the Lightroom application, I'm going to continue to use other solutions.
While I was once a staunch and avid supporter of the Lightroom concept to streamlining a RAW workflow ... I have to admit, Adobe has dropped the ball in a very significant fashion.
-
I'm glad to hear I'm not alone....
I have to say, if the developing wasn't as good as it is, we wouldn't have this post, and I wouldn't be so frustrated. I would be on another application(Likely DXO), and that would be it.
I can jump back on my Mac to use Aperture, but I never got into it, so I can't comment any positives from that. But in general, ANY app that doesn't force a DAm with Dev is on the right track.
I wish C1 was more intuitive to use in my workflow, but for me it is just too differnt of an animal. As many images do get a Ps at the end of edit, the interface of an app being familiar to a standard OS is always a smart core to build on.
I've been preaching that these 2 tools (Dev Dam/Lib) are 2 different animals and mixing them will only slow things down. But it makes financial gain sense to include them. It locks you into one platform, and A LOT of your organization depends on it. It makes such business sense that C1 adopted the idea, yet most users that are not "dummied" down on how to work, don't bother using it. Some have different needs and that approach surely fits. but not in any fast paced environment that is not "unioned" out doing the tasks.
-
I don't object to the idea of Library and Develop going onto separate screens, but I don't think I'd consider it a high priority. Learn your keyboard shortcuts and the separate organisation and adjustment workspaces are more or less irrelevant. D to Develop, G or E for grid or expanded views in Library. If you really have to keep swapping between folders, look at the filmstrip's Recent Sources list and particularly at the Favorite Sources.
In my view LR6 development effort would much be better spent elsewhere - eg making the books and slideshow features good enough for Butch and me, better recording of people (not necessarily face recognition), making all IPTC and adjustment data searchable (like Aperture smart albums) through smart collections and filters, custom metadata fields (Aperture since day 1), a list view (ditto), network capability, multi-user capability.... Oh, and a B&W auto button that responds to the image type*.
John
* eg where the top third of the image is mainly blue and the rest is mainly green, B&W should apply a "red filter" conversion to the top third and a "green filter" conversion to the remainder as if you're using B&W film with an (imaginary?) red-green glass lens filter. In other words, where colour contrasts are detected, apply more than one filtration so that neighbouring colours become different greyscale tones.
-
In addition to John's comment: both in slideshow and in print to be able to have the tekst block function do word wrapping( just like tekst blocks in book module), so displaying a IPTC field or a custom text with a longer descriptive text is not just one line. For Book module to allow your own book templates or a development option for book templates so someone cn make them as a plugin at some reasonable cost. This would avoid the need to go to InDesign or Scribus for most book needs, with the huge advantage of full integration with the library functions of LR. Something i consider a real strength.
If printing of PDF files was added in addition that would be nice.
Another good idea would be the automation of printing, like we have already for exporting to HDD or Flick etc. So in the background the printing can take place, while you continue to prepare images for print.
Personally i do not work yet with dual screen (may go to that in the next month or so) , so i have no experience thus not yet the need for having a LR module active on each screen, but i can understand the need for others.
I still look forward to the concept of having extra LR module for pixel-editing (sort of limited PS functions, but with the intrinsic high image processing quality of PS) as Jeff Schewe started in a thread a while ago in the aftermath of the CC launch.
Sometimes i work together with other photog's on a job, then we really do miss the Multi-use capability, would be great if you can have multiple users work on the images in one central catalog. Of course there are work-arounds, but that takes extra time and that is usually not available in such jobs.
So summarised: move the focus from mostly image development to image management and managed image publication, perhaps a dual focus? At the end of the day, i believe we shoot and develop images for publication, thus the kick we get from the responses of people looking at our images.
-
If I can get the majority of users to nod that they use dual screen
You won't. I'm sure the vast majority of LR users only have a single screen.
Dual screen use is pretty much limited to a tiny percentage of high end users.
I can make my case for the NEED to seperate the Lib from Dev functionality!
This is LR achilies heel, and it is frustrating jumping back and forth.
Having used Lightroom since the very first beta I've never found this to be a problem. Use the keyboard short cuts and switching is effectively instantaneous.
I can just see posts try to teach me how to work. Go ahead, let me hear it. But really?! Really? we all have to comply to some single approach in working to be as efficient as you? Really?! Where are we?
So you appreciate you're not working as efficiently as you could in LR if already expect other people have solutions to your issues.
Why should Adobe consider your individualistic problems with coming to terms with the program, when so many are happy with the whole paradigm of it's workflow.
There's a lot of features that need to be improved more urgently and will have much wider appeal.
Make the book module work as well as the free alternatives.
Adding floating text to prints.
Improving the keywording options.
Panorama sticthing.
HDR blending.
-
Good point about the other features. Though they are other features. If I find my version of InDesign bamboozled for the sake of the cloud, I will switch to the book, so I can see how that function is integral for many users.
And good recommendation about the shortcuts for switching, as I use them....but obviously I'm not alone in my thoughts, so don't get too wound up on why it works just fine...
I use the shortcuts, but perhaps you think I need to apply myself more? Sure, why not. I didn't come on here to bash..I need multiple steps to get the file when editing out. If I open in TIF(default, and save in PSD, I have to do the Sync, then find the file(Goto folder)...3-4 steps just to get to the file is NOT MY WAY of working. But, I'm always looking to improve....so if you have the most efficient way of Opening a raw or tif file out of LR into Ps and then Saving it as a PSD, then getting back to that file to compare next to the other versions of the same (raw,Tif v1, maybe tif v2, PSD) without losing where the Sort is ...I'm totally open to it, and happy to try.
-
You won't. I'm sure the vast majority of LR users only have a single screen.
Dual screen use is pretty much limited to a tiny percentage of high end users.
Having used Lightroom since the very first beta I've never found this to be a problem. Use the keyboard short cuts and switching is effectively instantaneous.
So you appreciate you're not working as efficiently as you could in LR if already expect other people have solutions to your issues.
Why should Adobe consider your individualistic problems with coming to terms with the program, when so many are happy with the whole paradigm of it's workflow.
There's a lot of features that need to be improved more urgently and will have much wider appeal.
Make the book module work as well as the free alternatives.
Adding floating text to prints.
Improving the keywording options.
Panorama sticthing.
HDR blending.
I'm pretty sure your wrong, almost all the photographers I know that use PS/LR use dual monitors, even many of the hobbists now use two two monitors Yes a few years ago I'd have agreed with you but the worlds moved on.
-
I'm pretty sure your wrong,
I never met another photographer in person that use multiple monitors. I believe it's still a very rare configuration, outside of geeky forums like this.
Even I don't use LR across both of my monitors any more.
-
I use LR as a capture workflow. Auto import from a watched folder. Either out of leaf Capture or from an Eyefi folder.
Point is I get client approval on the spot and they get to see nice big previews off the 2nd monitor while I work. Most of the photographers I know work in this way.
I never gave any thought to having the 2nd monitor display a different module such as having library on the one and develope on the other. It would be useful I think.
-
I think LR needs a lot of TLC. Besides the pedestrian slideshow, book and web modules, the import module and image previewing could sure use a little turbo charging. I find it a tad embarrassing to be showing images to someone else and all of a sudden it takes 4-8 seconds to render a preview, then a little later a preview will only render fuzzy. Then the questions come. What is this program again? Is it really for professionals? You mean Adobe actually hasn't fixed this stuff? They are up to version 5, really?
I now export jpgs and show them in PhotoMechanic. It is a pain, but at least I am guaranteed to have a reliable, high performance experience. Same thing for importing. Review, select and ingest in PhotoMechanic and then use the import module to add to LR.
I still love LR (Develop, Print and some of Library), but it is a bit of a love/hate thing these days.
-
I never met another photographer in person that use multiple monitors. I believe it's still a very rare configuration, outside of geeky forums like this.
Even I don't use LR across both of my monitors any more.
I don't use two (have three computers on one screen though).
A poll would be interesting, but would have to include many more photographers than habituates this site or would be useless. Different forums attract different levels/types of users. This one seems much more technical (geeky) than the others I go to.
Dual monitors doesn't seem to be a high priority when there are still bug-like happenings.
G
-
Thank you for the confirmations, and on a personal note, I have visited many more dual display studios for editing than single. I do stress editing, as I use a single display for tether and ingesting.
If you want to be efficient with tools in PS, you realize quickly the value of 2 displays. I know I maybe in the rare with 2 30" 14bit LUT displays, but I think there are plenty 24" displays that beg to be used in dual mode.
If your doing close up editing for any public work, you will see very quickly the value of large display filled with close up pixels.
-
Priority?!! Anything foundational IS priority, wouldn't you think? It is the basis that all is built on!
You sound like a factory owner that just got a huge order for parachutes that are being delivered to your enemy.
-
I have visited many more dual display studios for editing than single....
If your doing close up editing for any public work,
Do you not see that professional users are a small percentage of LR users ?
Yes, some pros and geeks use multiple monitors, but they're not the majority of users.
-
If your doing close up editing for any public work, you will see very quickly the value of large display filled with close up pixels.
I both agree and disagree with that statement ... While on one hand, there are times when I actually need to see individual pixels up close and personal ... that really is a small percentage of my work. Though, once you factor in mastering a few keyboard shortcuts, and the reality that the number of image that actually need the level of processing that will be displayed large enough to benefit from the processing is dwindling ... for every image that is destined for a 24"x36" print ... there are millions that will never be viewed larger than 1,000 pixels on the long dimension ... while prints are not a medium of the past ... the number of print created vs. the number of images prepared for viewing in the digital medium is quite a difference to consider.
This was the topic of a couple of dozen portrait/wedding and event photographers at our quarterly meeting a few months ago ... only two of the folks attending use a multiple monitor setup ... though many had used multiple monitors back in the day of CRT monitors due to the limited screen real estate. Also of note, the two folks in question were also big into video production as well ...
All that said ... I don't think it is out of line or unreasonable to ask Adobe to support a multiple monitor workflow in a more meaningful manner ... even if one recognizes it doesn't appear to be a high priority currently.
-
for every image that is destined for a 24"x36" print ... there are millions that will never be viewed larger than 1,000 pixels on the long dimension
Those millions have hardly anything to do with LR or Raw processing. You just bridged the number of images people posting online with the number of people processing their raw images.
I see ZERO correlation. I can make the same argument with the # of iphone or cell users to the # of DSLR users.
I don't see a point in this example of use. If anything, you are mixing apples and oranges.
I'm glad you see the very little times that YOU see large or dual screens helpful. An industry has a need, and your personal perspective overrides that need on the error to limit a core function?
Why not error on the side NOT to limit in the first place. Everyone is happy.
Do you not see that professional users are a small percentage of LR users ?
I hate to ask this but, Can you define professional for me?
Then can you help me explain why LR is the ONLY application out of C1 that can process IIQ files. (other than 1 or 2 exotic non GUI usable application). I'm willing to bet that 90% of those users have at least tried LR.
These files are the ones so called professionals use to make agency quality work from your millions of 1000pixel images to the very few who make 180' billboard off the freeway, or the 20' duratran display on the wall of some Vegas boutique.
I can guarrantee you that the 10 pro shooters I come across in the next few days, USE LR..ok maybe a few on Aperture with 1 monitor(In case they have to fit the Apple status quo of "don't think, we got everything figured out for you. This IS how you'll do it"). Last time I was in an Adobe seminar, we were all LR users, and 80% were PC(out of over 120 users...What ever that is worth?)...Just 2 or 3 years ago. Some arguments are so narrow minded, I have to bring up Apple vs PC, ouch!
(please do take my input constructively to the issue, and not personally.Be understanding of how things might be beyond your needs, and how things may serve those other than you. Be open to a workflow that maybe flexible and adaptive. Not restricted).
Maybe I am hitting a wall where you shoot and only you process your own files for fine art work you do and sell on the boadwalk of some artsy town? Nothing wrong with that, but there is an idustry of users, from film posters to publishing material in glossy pages. Did you know that there is an industry of folks that get all the raw footage from shooters and do the heavy lifting of processing these files, and editing, retouching? These are called retouchers. Then there are some that fall into the small studio setting where the shooter also retouches while having 3 or so editors on staff. What do you think we should use besides LR? What options do we have with multi camera systems in the studio?
Sorry, but a few replies come from a very acute perspective, or experience pool... and I can't blame you...You don't know what you don't know. Perhaps I don't know something I have no idea about. Very possible.
But unless you have some facts that say only 15% of professional photographers use LR, then maybe there is something...Of course you would have to define professional for me. Again, why error on the negative.
-
Only a small percentage of LR users are professional is not the same as saying only a small percentage of professionals are LR users.
I think most professionals use LR. I think only a small percentage of LR users are professional.
-
...I think most professionals use LR. I think only a small percentage of LR users are professional.
I think that is exactly right!
Tony Jay
-
Sorry, but a few replies come from a very acute perspective, or experience pool... and I can't blame you...You don't know what you don't know. Perhaps I don't know something I have no idea about. Very possible.
You shouldn't assume what some folks "don't know" ... I opened my custom pro darkroom serving a select group of 20 portrait/wedding pros in 1979, I opened my own studio in 1980, by day, from 1988 to 2003, I was a chief photographer/photo editor for a medium size daily newspaper ... additionally, I was their itinerant trainer for Ps and color calibration/profiling for prepress CMYK workflow at the entire chain of 16 papers ... photography has been my sole source of income since 1978 ... I'll let you determine if that qualifies as "professional" ... I converted to a complete digital workflow long before it became popular with the cool kids and have been using Photoshop long before it became a verb.
I may indeed have been comparing apples and oranges ... I was merely pointing out that the trend from here into the future is going to be increasingly in the digital medium with the necessity for a pixel level workflow is going to be an increasingly smaller segment of the market ... professional or otherwise. I'm sorry that upsets you ... but that IS the trend. No different than burning images to CD/DVD is growing passé ...
..ok maybe a few on Aperture with 1 monitor(In case they have to fit the Apple status quo of "don't think, we got everything figured out for you. This IS how you'll do it").
Well ... for someone who seems to take it personally when others mention you may hold a minority point of view ... you seem to spend some time pointing out other minority views. Your opinion of Apple and Aperture seem to be based upon ignorance and not actual work experience with the OS and Aperture. It's like politics, some folks think if you repeat untruths often enough, in time, the general populous will accept them as fact ... your assumptions of Apple and Aperture in this respect are way off the mark. While I have my own issues with Apple, and Aperture 3 (nor do I believe they are perfect) ... the idea that Apple is a closed and confined system with limited customization and strict usability is simply not true. It is actually quite the opposite when compared to Lightroom.
I have FAR more control, customization and freedom in my workflow using Aperture 3 than has ever been available in Lightroom 5 ... dual monitors ... no problem ... it isn't perfect, but it works a heck of a lot better than it does in Lr ... Can you fully customize and create you own set of keyboard shortcuts in Lr? Didn't think so ... in Aperture 3 you can. Does that sound like a ... "This IS how you'll do it attitude?"
I personally don't find the need for dual monitors ... when I can go to a true full-screen mode (not what Adobe thinks is full screen mode either) in a single keystroke, bring up the Heads Up Display (HUD) with another keystroke, adjust and process the image, add/edit metadata, navigate my entire library from the same panel ... even temporarily hide the HUD except the slider I'm adjusting so I can actually see my full or zoomed in image using nearly EVERY pixel available in my monitor ... use another single keystroke to go to thumbnail view of my project to select the next image, another keystroke back to full view ... all on a single 27"-30" monitor ... I don't need two monitors to get the job done properly ... I can see my pixels just fine without using two viewing sources to complete the task. Unlike the days of yore, when working with Ps on two CRT screens, placing tools on one screen and images on the other, I fail to see how a second monitor would further enhance my finished product given the ease of use my chosen workflow offers. YMMV.
-
You are probably right about some of your second paragraph..I think I was cursing my iPhone at the time :-) I used to work on MAC's, but I aslo knew how PC's work. PC allowed me to know more about how they work. MAC programming was not open for a long time (OS based on Linux). So you are likely right about that.
Don't read too far into it...but I only state that as some people are in the mindset that PC can't even do "graphics" as well as Apple...and that is the weight of my reply to that.
Back to the keyword you mention...TREND! Why make a sw that pro's DO use and limit the functionality? That is my gripe...WHY closed, not open with option? It isn't more expensive. It is less on the long run.
-
Back to the keyword you mention...TREND! Why make a sw that pro's DO use and limit the functionality? That is my gripe...WHY closed, not open with option? It isn't more expensive. It is less on the long run.
I couldn't agree more ... and that is exactly why I moved my workflow from Lightroom to Aperture 3 ... So far in 2013, I have created over 100 books and albums and nearly 150 multi-media slideshows for clients ... none of them in Lr because of the limitations therein ... Adobe just doesn't seem to think those modules are important enough to flesh out and offer true freedom of control over the process ... so rather than bang my head against the wall ... I opted out. Mainly because whenever I would discuss my concerns I was told by many other users that I was in the extreme minority and I should just be quiet and let the big boys do their thing without me rocking the boat ... Which is why I eluded to the fact, your request may not see much movement in the near future ...
While I do miss a couple of features and functionality of the Lr Develop module ... I don't miss having to export thousands upon thousands of derivative files to complete tasks in other software to serve my clients ...
If Adobe would ever decide to bring the entire Lr app up to speed, I'd gladly reconsider returning ...
-
Makes sense to me ButchM,
Maybe Aperture can offer a PC version, but looking at iTunes makes me run think not.
-
Coming in a bit late, here. I am not a professional photographer or graphic artist, however I do use dual monitors. I originally went to dual monitors for my day job so as to have greater efficiency with my productivity programs. That I could move PS menus to the second monitor was simply fabulous.
I was disappointed when I got LR3 and now LR4 that I couldn't make use of the two monitors. (I'm not upgrading to LR5 until they fix the small export sharpening issue). I would love it if LR could make use of dual monitors. Count me on your petition!
-
If I can get the majority of users to nod that they use dual screen, I can make my case for the NEED to seperate the Lib from Dev functionality!
Yep. Adobe is going to listen to YOU rather than the thousands of users they hear from on their own forums. Because, let's face it, you and The Luminous Landscape are the bees knees, and Adobe know better than to trust its market research. All you need to do is get "the majority of users to nod" (the majority of what? users here?) and then they will certainly tell their software architects to change tact.
This is LR achilies heel, and it is frustrating jumping back and forth.
...
Seriously, I would think single screen users would rather Alt Tab then keep chasing locations and files ...If it weren't for the Go to Folder, I would be LOST!
But you can only do that in Dev to Lib mode, WhatInTheWorld!!! Then switch back to Dev mode to work!!! Just insane!
How backwards and dumb do we have to be to not think there are better ways to go about doing something?
There you go. Throw in a few exclamation marks and insults, and that will win you instant agreement from the masses.
-
Hi,
Mac OS X is not based on Linux, but uses the GNU tool chain, that Linux also uses. The kernel in Mac OS X is Mach, and Apple doesn't use X11, that is mostly used in Linux but uses Quartz.
Best regards
Erik
You are probably right about some of your second paragraph..I think I was cursing my iPhone at the time :-) I used to work on MAC's, but I aslo knew how PC's work. PC allowed me to know more about how they work. MAC programming was not open for a long time (OS based on Linux). So you are likely right about that.
Don't read too far into it...but I only state that as some people are in the mindset that PC can't even do "graphics" as well as Apple...and that is the weight of my reply to that.
Back to the keyword you mention...TREND! Why make a sw that pro's DO use and limit the functionality? That is my gripe...WHY closed, not open with option? It isn't more expensive. It is less on the long run.
-
There you go. Throw in a few exclamation marks and insults, and that will win you instant agreement from the masses.
The masses? They are the minority using dual screen! You contradict yourself. And the marks.....
What usually happens is I will be working, and repeatedly I come across something that is hindering my work, it slows me down. Then I think why are there such restrictions on how THIS software is laid out vs the majority that understand the advantage...IN PARTICULARLY AN IMAGING software, the base of where dual screen is so useful. Obviously Adobe gave it a burp of a thought, but they never completed it! (another exclamation mark for you)
Let me guess, you don't use dual screen?
Yep. Adobe is going to listen to YOU rather than the thousands of users they hear from on their own forums. Because, let's face it, you and The Luminous Landscape are the bees knees, and Adobe know better than to trust its market research. All you need to do is get "the majority of users to nod" (the majority of what? users here?) and then they will certainly tell their software architects to change tact.
Saddly true. with all the new photographers that enter the market every day, they are new to the game...Not knowing how useful dual screen is.
It will take time for that to weed out those that drop it, those that accept it, and those that want to work faster/more control.
Some gamers I can see know right away the benifits. But I think they rather be gaming :-)
-
I would use dual screens if the implementation was better. However, the app is designed to work in restricted monitor resolution, so it works quite well on a single monitor. I would prefer to see developer resources expended on fixing preview performance and reliability before tweaking dual monitor UI. IOW, fix the basics first.
-
Hi,
I had two screens for a while, but I don't have enough space. Another thought, a larger screen may be better than two smaller ones.
I am actually quite happy with Lightroom.
Best regards
Erik
I would use dual screens if the implementation was better. However, the app is designed to work in restricted monitor resolution, so it works quite well on a single monitor. I would prefer to see developer resources expended on fixing preview performance and reliability before tweaking dual monitor UI. IOW, fix the basics first.
-
I would prefer to see developer resources expended on fixing preview performance and reliability before tweaking dual monitor UI. IOW, fix the basics first.
I don't see a lot of lag in performance, unless I've been getting used to it?
I have yet to have LR crash on me in a Win7/64bit OS. I did start from LR3 as I was using C1 and ACR before hand.
I am actually quite happy with Lightroom.
Glad you made a choice that fit your needs Erik.
LR is in many ways a familiar UI. All things flow as much as it can with the OS. C1 is the antithesis of this.
I do enjoy LR greatly. I do resist to one track minded thinking.
For now it is great, as I HAVE to use LR since it is the only other Dev (other than C1) that can process IIQ files (besdies a couple exotics). I tried Dxo some time back, and that looked rather perfect for my needs. But they have this full approach of support a foramt with all the lens line. They did reply back and say that they have no intention in the near future to support IIQ.
So I fit in the exotics in dual screen mode, and format mode...What else can be snowballing down on my climb up?
-
I use two screens. I had an older 20" 16:10 LCD sRGB screen, and I purchased a 27" 16:10 LCD wide-gamut screen a couple of years ago. I keep the 20" rotated as a secondary screen because:
-It lets me view portrait pictures larger than my 27"
-It lets me keep track of the "big picture" while zooming in on details on the 27"
-When viewing details at 1:1 pixel, the picture is somewhat magnified
-I am always doubting my WB/color stuff, having two representations is comforting (+ non-color-aware applications look a lot better on the sRGB calibrated 20" without having to dive into any menus)
Having one, larger screen with the same area would be tempting but probably more epensive.
-h
-
I have 24 inch wide-gamut and 19 inch normal (approx sRGB) gamut monitors, both calibrated/profiled.
Always happy to see improvements, but the current dual-monitor support works for me.
-
-It lets me view portrait pictures larger than my 27"
-It lets me keep track of the "big picture" while zooming in on details on the 27"
-When viewing details at 1:1 pixel, the picture is somewhat magnified
-I am always doubting my WB/color stuff, having two representations is comforting (+ non-color-aware applications look a lot better on the sRGB calibrated 20" without having to dive into any menus)
EXACTLY some of the uses I make of it also. Also if you do any other than the well know "go make a cup of coffee" or wiggle your fingers while some processes take a few minutes.... great for multi tasking.
-
The changes needed are not big...They should be rather straight forward for Adobe...
They have Bridge already!! Just adapt that into the Grid mode (or vise versa).
How hard is that?!!
-
I would love to see a print cell where I can move around the image in the cell, resize in that cell as I like with the hand grabber etc. I could do this inn Qimage and it made my printing tasks so much easier. LR printing is still incomplete, albeit very well done, and prints beautifully.
Another feature I'd like not necessarily a must have, is right click and add to collection on an image or multiples. I have so many folders and collections it's a pain to go way up to a folder, select, then scroll all the way back down in the list until I find the collection. Do this many times and you see why it'd be more efficient to put a right click add to collection!
-
I'm pretty sure your wrong, almost all the photographers I know that use PS/LR use dual monitors...
I'm pretty sure he's not wrong, not that making dual monitors truly functional isn't worthy.
Still want:
1) Relative adjustment presets
2) The ability to Search Collections for content, namely text with collection names
3) The ability to search for Print as a Develop History state.
John Caldwell
-
I would love to see a print cell where I can move around the image in the cell, resize in that cell as I like with the hand grabber etc. I could do this inn Qimage and it made my printing tasks so much easier. LR printing is still incomplete, albeit very well done, and prints beautifully.
Another feature I'd like not necessarily a must have, is right click and add to collection on an image or multiples. I have so many folders and collections it's a pain to go way up to a folder, select, then scroll all the way back down in the list until I find the collection. Do this many times and you see why it'd be more efficient to put a right click add to collection!
Given that Lightroom seems to be all about "photography collection management" as opposed to "image editor", I am surprised at how limited the search options are, and how fixed/preset-based the DTP-areas are.
One would think/hope that Adobe wants to appeal to most photographers with LR, from those with an ixus and 500 images ordering prints online, to those with MFDB and collections of 100.000 images printing with a large Epson, probably focusing most of their efforts somewhere between those two extremes. I can see why making a robust, intuitive, high-quality application for such a crowd is challenging, but I can not see why Adobe seems to artificially limit its potential to avoid stepping on the toes of other products. At $100, the typical LR buyer may not purchase $1000 software no matter what. If a particular feature will make him/her more happy, chances are that he/she will continue paying for LR upgrades rather than switching to some competing product.
-h
-
You've touched upon an area of LR that I feel needs more attention - the Print Module. I would like to see the ability to select multiple cells in order to move or delete them and also the ability to "nudge."
-
LR 6 ought to auto-synch catalogues across devices - laptop-desktop-tablet (if Adobe follows through with the potential created by Smart Previews) amongst other things already mentioned (improved book, slideshow, print modules).
It took me a long time to get used to the pop-up filmstrip along the bottom, but now that I am, it is invaluable for navigating without going back to the Library.
-
Here's a huge request. Work on the import dialog box.
For example, if I have already imported 200 images into a folder from a card reader and renamed them "test_photo_0200.jpg" shouldn't the next number default to 201? No it defaults to 1 and gives you the name "test_photo_0200(1).jpg" instead. Huge fail thats been around since v1.
-
<LR 6 ought to auto-synch catalogues across devices - laptop-desktop-tablet (if Adobe follows through with the potential created by Smart Previews) amongst other things already mentioned (improved book, slideshow, print modules).>
+1!
-
I never met another photographer in person that use multiple monitors. I believe it's still a very rare configuration, outside of geeky forums like this.
Even I don't use LR across both of my monitors any more.
Most, if not all I know do. Using multiple monitors is a great way to improve efficiency, so why hobble yourself by using just one? And if doing film editing 3 is even better.
And I've often wished the second monitor could have library panels/functionality whilst in develop mode. Even being able to to filter one's shots whilst in grid view in Dev mode would be a good workflow improvement. And yes I do know all the shortcuts to move back and fore between modules. But at times it seems pointless, particularly when to use some shortcuts I have to use another shortcut first to get to Lib module for it to work like filtering as already mentioned. Now if that particular key was already used in say Dev Module, I could understand that. But in LR I sometimes hit a shortcut key, wonder why nothing has happened and realise I have to change modules to get shortcut to work.
-
<LR 6 ought to auto-synch catalogues across devices - laptop-desktop-tablet (if Adobe follows through with the potential created by Smart Previews) amongst other things already mentioned (improved book, slideshow, print modules).>
+1!
+10
-
It seems that custom color profiles can only be connected with "known" cameras. I'd argue that the best use-case for custom profiles is when a camera is not yet supported.
At least LR 5.0 allowed me to export via x-rite passport plugin for my Sony RX100M2 just fine, but the profile did not appear for RX100M2 images, even after restarting LR. Upgrade to LR 5.2RC ("preliminary" RX100M2 support), and the same worked w/o a hitch.
I'd rather not work on my full database using a release candidate. If there was a possibility to apply any known profile to any image (even well-hidden), I might be able to work-around this until the final release. If there is some unique property identifying unknown cameras, Adobe might even be able to connect my profile choices made for an unreleased camera, in future versions (whenever the camera was fully supported).
-h
-
o Phil I dodn't care anyhting about your OP suggestions. i would just like LR to take the right sample when spotting tool is used. Other than that I'm happy with LR as is.
-
How about combining the Gradient, Brush and Radial filter tools into one "Selective adjustments".
Within this Selective adjustments "tool" you could use any of the three previous tools to create and adjust as many selection masks as you liked (e.g. create a gradient then use a brush to add to or delete an area of the selection).
In an ideal world you could also restrict this selection mask to certain tones - usually to protect highlights and shadows (i.e. like adjusting the Blend If sliders in Photoshop). Imagine how much better Clarity would be if you could apply it truly just to the midtones.
In an even more ideal world you could do this with access to all the development panel adjustments (including sharpening - and not linked to the capture sharpening).
Wishful thinking but how good would that be!!
Tom
-
How about combining the Gradient, Brush and Radial filter tools into one "Selective adjustments".
I suggested that (for Schewe?), and got the impression that certain underlying implementation aspects made this unlikely.
I do agree that for the user, they are just different geometrical approaches to defining a parameter-controlling mask, and it makes no apparent sense to distinguish between them. We just want to define some area (with soft or hard limits) where e.g. exposure is up +0.3 Ev. If Lightroom continue adding Gradient, Brush, Radial, Rectangular, Triangular, Line etc tools it will become silly at one point.
Painting in the red overlay using any combination of brush, "GND", radial/rectangular/... helper functions seems like the most user-friendly approach. I am not sure how after-the fact re-editing (adjusting the graduated width or angle of the Gradient) would be presented in a unified manner, though. Just producing a static red blob might not be ideal.
-h
-
Hello,
if possible, it would be a good idea to add some additional possibilities to the local adjustments like
a radius slider for the sharpening, so that creative sharpening can be done with different perimeters than choosen in the details panel and
color corrections constrained to a local area of the image.
Additionally my wishes still contain the ability to merge several images to one 32bit image and combine several images to one panorama.
Robert
-
* Full 3rd party plugin integration in Develop module, even if in the simplest form i.e. only full image actions allowed (for different clarity processing, colorisation, grain, scratches, vignette etc) - that should be very viable as opposed to selective image areas processing.
* Book module, complete flexibility.
* Web export has got no attention in recent releases. Hierarchical collection to a full website with sub galleries? Current workarounds are clumsy. There are also weird restrictions for the number of columns and rows as to minimum and maximum in the default galleries.
-
Once you have chosen to softproof an image, why not stick to soft-proofing mode when choosing to print it? Even better, have some options for simulated passepartout/framing.
The multi-package print options are bad. If you cannot make the tabulated/default stuff work intuitively, why not let everything "free float" (this is true for many parts of LR: fixed function drop-down menus is bad. WYSIWYG direct interaction with the graphical objects is good)?
When switching between different papers in softproof mode, the image momentarily flickers in an in-between state (non-proofed?) just long enough to wipe out my memory of how the previous image appeared.
Why not embed custom camera profiles in the .lrcat database? This way, your database can be recreated with only that file + the raw files.
-h
-
* Full 3rd party plugin integration in Develop module, even if in the simplest form i.e. only full image actions allowed (for different clarity processing, colorisation, grain, scratches, vignette etc) - that should be very viable as opposed to selective image areas processing.
* Book module, complete flexibility.
* Web export has got no attention in recent releases. Hierarchical collection to a full website with sub galleries? Current workarounds are clumsy. There are also weird restrictions for the number of columns and rows as to minimum and maximum in the default galleries.
Hello,
I was told by a developer of NIK that it is not possible to store all development settings of third party programs within Lr because of the compatibility with DNG files. They, the DNGs, simply don' t offer enough space to save all perimeter of 3rd party programs.
I'm not sure if this issue still exists, though this info is a few years old.
Robert
-
I was told by a developer of NIK that it is not possible to store all development settings of third party programs within Lr because of the compatibility with DNG files. They, the DNGs, simply don' t offer enough space to save all perimeter of 3rd party programs.
I'm not sure if this issue still exists, though this info is a few years old.
The ability to store settings to DNG isn't what prevents a plugin being integrated in the Develop module, Robert. In any case maybe you misheard him, because DNGs have always allowed anyone to add extra metadata fields, and if they wanted to do so Nik could add their own development settings to a DNG's XMP data (the X stands for extensible).
-
when I can go to a true full-screen mode (not what Adobe thinks is full screen mode either) in a single keystroke
FYI: This was implemented in Lr 5. Press F to enter/exit fullscreen mode.
-
I suggested that (for Schewe?), and got the impression that certain underlying implementation aspects made this unlikely.
I do agree that for the user, they are just different geometrical approaches to defining a parameter-controlling mask, and it makes no apparent sense to distinguish between them. We just want to define some area (with soft or hard limits) where e.g. exposure is up +0.3 Ev. If Lightroom continue adding Gradient, Brush, Radial, Rectangular, Triangular, Line etc tools it will become silly at one point.
Painting in the red overlay using any combination of brush, "GND", radial/rectangular/... helper functions seems like the most user-friendly approach. I am not sure how after-the fact re-editing (adjusting the graduated width or angle of the Gradient) would be presented in a unified manner, though. Just producing a static red blob might not be ideal.
This depends on how you think about factoring the controls.
Currently the controls are factored first by tool type (brush, gradient, radial filter), then by the type of adjustment (exposure, contrast, saturation, etc.). So essentially you pick a tool to make/change a mask, and then you decide which subsets of adjustments to apply.
Another way we could have factored the controls is by type of adjustment first, and then by tool type. For example, you want to lighten an area by 1/2 a stop; then you use any of the available tools to help you define that area.
Both approaches have their advantages (Ps has both), but currently ACR/Lr implements just the former.
-
Once you have chosen to softproof an image, why not stick to soft-proofing mode when choosing to print it? Even better, have some options for simulated passepartout/framing.
This was considered but ultimately (unfortunately) abandoned. The image view in the Print module is based on the same preview system that the Library module is based on. This means that it doesn't really support the image re-rendering needed (a la Develop) to show a soft-proofed image. I was hoping we could modify the Print module to enable support of soft proofing there, but ran out of time. In the end, we had to decide between putting the effort to implement SP in Print module, or implement SP in Develop. We decided that it would be more useful in Develop, since SP is useful for guiding output-specific adjustments.
We may look again at this in the future, but honestly it's a long shot.
-
A simple one. The ability to create a virtual copy containing all the editing steps to date (I.e. not appear as a new import with all the earlier steps baked in)
-
A simple one. The ability to create a virtual copy containing all the editing steps to date (I.e. not appear as a new import with all the earlier steps baked in)
+1. That's a really good idea. I hope Eric Chan reads this.
I would have thought it's only a matter of how how edits are shown. I mean: all the edits before the vc was created are still there - albeit merged and without the individual steps. For example, suppsoe you increase exposure by +10, then by another +10, then create create a virtual copy. You now have a virtual copy with +20 exposure stored in metadata, but the steps to get there aren't stored. I'd love an option to copy the individual history steps as well as the agregate of the edits into the new virtual copy.
-
This was considered but ultimately (unfortunately) abandoned.
I'm not sure it's really necessary. We have a 'soft proof' mode or preview in Photoshop's Print dialog and I don't see the point either (although I'm fine with it being there). By the time you're ready to print, is it really necessary to see a soft proof? I'd suspect you'd have figured out what rendering intent you wanted for that image and you'd have built your output specific edits in Develop (or with Layers in Photoshop) prior to even thinking about making a print. I'm not against having a soft proof in the Print module but I don't think it deserves the engineering resources anytime soon.
-
I'm not sure it's really necessary. We have a 'soft proof' mode or preview in Photoshop's Print dialog and I don't see the point either (although I'm fine with it being there). By the time you're ready to print, is it really necessary to see a soft proof? I'd suspect you'd have figured out what rendering intent you wanted for that image and you'd have built your output specific edits in Develop (or with Layers in Photoshop) prior to even thinking about making a print. I'm not against having a soft proof in the Print module but I don't think it deserves the engineering resources anytime soon.
WYSIWYG seems like a sensible principle for something like Lightroom. When you "know" how an image will be printed, you should show it like that. I had assumed that once you had a soft proofing module, re-using it else-where would not be that complex.
In sharp contrast to the "display before printing" option of my Canon printer driver that makes me sick to my stomach when viewed on my wide-gamut display.
-h
-
I think LR should include a Jeffrey Friedl (http://regex.info/blog/lightroom-goodies) as lots of very useful tweaks would then be at your fingertips. ;D
-
I'm not sure it's really necessary. We have a 'soft proof' mode or preview in Photoshop's Print dialog and I don't see the point either (although I'm fine with it being there). By the time you're ready to print, is it really necessary to see a soft proof? I'd suspect you'd have figured out what rendering intent you wanted for that image and you'd have built your output specific edits in Develop (or with Layers in Photoshop) prior to even thinking about making a print. I'm not against having a soft proof in the Print module but I don't think it deserves the engineering resources anytime soon.
Our reasoning was the same. When push came to shove, we considered soft proofing more from a decision-making point of view, rather than a previewing point of view. That is, we focused on providing the soft proof functionality that would help photographers make the relevant decisions (which profile, render intent, output-specific adjustments, etc.), rather than providing the previewing system everywhere that it might have made sense to provide it (e.g., Print module).
-
I had assumed that once you had a soft proofing module, re-using it else-where would not be that complex.
Unfortunately, it is. Otherwise we would have been sure to include it!
Don't get me wrong -- ideally, we would have the SP preview available in the Print module as well (at least as an option). I think it would make sense from the point of view of the user experience.
[/quote]
-
WYSIWYG seems like a sensible principle for something like Lightroom.
It is indeed and works that way in Develop where presumably you'll make an rendering intent decision that will stick to the Proof Copy and maybe make some output specific edits.
I had assumed that once you had a soft proofing module, re-using it else-where would not be that complex.
Unfortunately there were some preview architecture decisions from early on that makes it very difficult. Develop's preview is somewhat unique. It would be nice to see a soft proof in the Print Module and even apply edits there but it wasn't built for that. I'd rather leave the heavy lifting in Develop then use the other modules to process that data fast.
-
Hi,
What I would like to have in the next Lightroom version, is to have, in the import module, a way to be able to use the same keywords as I used in the previous import. That would be very useful feature to import data from memory cards taken with the two different bodies I use while I am traveling (and since most of the keywords I input are location information, it doesn't change much between 2 consecutive imports).
Maybe there already a way to do this, but I haven't been able to figure it out.
-
What I would like to have in the next Lightroom version, is to have, in the import module, a way to be able to use the same keywords as I used in the previous import.
Create an Import Preset, specifying all the Import features you care to have, including Keywords. Call up that Preset when you Import.
-
On the subject of keywords, please get rid of the frustrating 9 word limit for presets.
-
On the subject of keywords, please get rid of the frustrating 9 word limit for presets.
All for it, but what key strokes will allow us to go beyond 9? Opt-1 to Opt-9?
-
Or use a mouse/trackpad/tablet..... :)
-
Or use a mouse/trackpad/tablet..... :)
Sorry, I am missing it but I not saying you are wrong: How would you short-cut key-stroke Keyword Slot number 11?
-
Although I'm a big fan of using shortcut keys, sometimes a mouse, trackpad etc is the better solution. But Alt+1 would do for 11.
I can't be bothered with the keyword presets as it's too crippled, so I just type/autocomplete stuff or click on words from the suggestions box.
-
In the Library module I would like the ability to use some colour coding in the folder directories, either by changing font colour or having coloured flags that could be alongside each line. I have over 200,000 pictures in my main Catalogue in hundreds of folders, and it would be great to ease my eyes when rapidly looking for a particular folder.
Jim
Edit - this would be a 'nice to have' rather than a 'must have'.
-
Simply allowing LR to show how you personalise folders in Explorer/Finder, would be a good start like other software does - such as Adobe's very own Bridge for example
I use specifically chosen icons or labels rather than the vanilla folder icon to highlight some folders, such as the current work project or major categories to make finding things a bit quicker and find it a bit frustrating that these disappear in LR's Library and import dialogue. A non distracting workspace is all well and good, but not when it reduces usability. OSX's Finder with all the icons one tone is a classic example of this. Thank god I can replace that useless piece of crap with PathFinder.
-
I am in favour of coloured folders/collections and text notes for them, but what I think would help most is a filter for the left hand side that acts just like the one at the top of the Keyword list. As you type "Langdale" into the box, for example, only folders/collections containing that word would be displayed.
If you have problems in this area, one little tip is to make more use of the "Favorite Sources" which is accessed through the recent sources (folders/collections) in the filmstrip. I rarely see people using this feature, but I find it invaluable for quickly getting to important smart collections such as "Edited Today" or folders such as "Scanned Contact Sheets".
-
I also really like the way folders work in the import dialogue, it's a great way to reduce clutter/use space and find it frustrating that a similar thing is not used in LR itself. It would also be useful for collections.
Favourite sources? I never use film strip, don't see need for it myself so had a look, still probably won't use it, but may be of use to others.
-
A tiny tweak that I'd like is to do with hidden panels. I tend to auto-hide the top and bottom panels so if I need them I move my cursor to top/bottom of screen and they appear. However should I very briefly move my cursor over there whilst mousing around screen I do not need them to instantly pop up and obscure my workspace. There needs to be a brief wait time before panel appears. I use always full screen mode and should I need the menu bar, I move mouse to top hover very briefly and it appears and never does so unless I pause mouse at top of screen. Which is perfect and how all the panels should operate.
I should mention the reason the panels appearing if a cursor very briefly passes over them is so annoying is that they can be really slow at returning on my desktop machine. The laptop is much better in that respect.
-
I am in favour of coloured folders/collections and text notes for them, but what I think would help most is a filter for the left hand side that acts just like the one at the top of the Keyword list.
Yes! Once we have a dozens, or more, Collections the inability to Search or Filter within is a real problem. FWIW, this has been on my Wish since LR3, and the record speaks for itself. But from a programming standpoint, I'll guess it's not burdensome.
John-
-
The ability to switch (as rapidly as possible) between two images _without_ having annoying intermediate renderings presented. In library mode I am all for presenting an "early" pre-rendering for having "something" as early as possible. In development mode, I'd rather wait for the final result.
-h
-
"Softproofing" of printed sharpness. I don't care how it is done (actually, I think it is an interesting question, but let's leave that for now). Perhaps it will only be available for special displays (retina macbooks, or connected retina iPads) and selected printers (Epson might be an obvious choice, but I am hoping for Canon as well).
If a given printer/driver/driver setting/paper/ink/... is at all repeatable, then it must be possible (somehow) to measure and characterize it. If you have a display with incredible pixel density, then it must be possible to make some perceptually relevant "simulation" of the printed spatial distribution (no matter how crude, it ought to be better than "not simulated at all")?
-h
-
Interesting idea.
-
Which one?
BR Erik
Interesting idea.
-
The one directly above it. If it had been any other post, I would have quoted it.
-
Speaking for the .1% here;
- Fix tethering and make it fast. Hell, fix it in LR5 - it's so broken right now it's unusable due to it's instability (loses camera connection constantly regardless if it's on a laptop or a desktop). Also, how about being able to create multiple folders beforehand and then select the desired one as your "capture-to" folder? And be able to re-select the folder as a "capture-to / shoot-to" folder by right mouse clicking it? Instead of having to type it's name in again (current implementation) ? C1 borrowed ideas from you, why not borrow from them?
- The ability to color folders would be nice.
- Lastly, a biggie, multi-user Catalogs.
-
Speaking for the .1% here;
- Fix tethering and make it fast. Hell, fix it in LR5 - it's so broken right now it's unusable due to it's instability (loses camera connection constantly regardless if it's on a laptop or a desktop). Also, how about being able to create multiple folders beforehand and then select the desired one as your "capture-to" folder? And be able to re-select the folder as a "capture-to / shoot-to" folder by right mouse clicking it? Instead of having to type it's name in again (current implementation) ? C1 borrowed ideas from you, why not borrow from them?
- The ability to color folders would be nice.
- Lastly, a biggie, multi-user Catalogs.
+1 on the tethered shooting plus Multi-folder
+1 on the Multi-user catalogs, including the option for secure access across the internet.
-
I might have 5 different virtual copies of the same file, edited for different purposes. It would be nice to (more easily) be able to distinguish them at a glance (while rendered as a small tile). If one was last printed on glossy photopaper, while the other was exported as sRGB JPEG, cannot this infomation be presented in a way that lets me choose the file that I am most probably searching for instead of having to inspect them more closely?
-h
-
I might have 5 different virtual copies of the same file, edited for different purposes. It would be nice to (more easily) be able to distinguish them at a glance (while rendered as a small tile). If one was last printed on glossy photopaper, while the other was exported as sRGB JPEG, cannot this infomation be presented in a way that lets me choose the file that I am most probably searching for instead of having to inspect them more closely?
-h
+1 on this.
-
I agree! I'm so tired of wasting time switching back and forth all the time!
I would also love to be able to have preset carry over from a previous image while shooting tethered.
-
If you want a preset to automatically apply when shooting tethered, change the default for that camera to your preset for the duration of the shoot. Change it back when you're done.
-
Add grain to the adjustment brush, or add a slider sort of like the mask in sharpening that varies the grain by value. Film grain is not uniform but varies, as is it often looks fake.
Extrapolating this out to pie-in-the sky (Ideally combined with an earlier suggestion to let all the adjustment tools work together - gradient, brush, radial filter) - when selecting the mask tools allow all the adjustments to be used with the masking tools. The small panel that pops up would be eliminated and the look of the entire right panel would change (different color?) to indicate global adjustments vs being in a masked mode.
In the slideshow module bring back the toggle to require/not require a preview before the slideshow will run. It is frustrating to watch Lightroom crank away before it will start the slideshow, never had a problem with them being built on the fly before, and if there was a slight stutter between images occasionally it is better then the long wait before. I should be able to decide which is preferable.
-
I'd like to see a voice memo feature added. While in the field, I sometimes shoot an image that's going to have a very small, very specific role in the post-processing, and it'd be nice if I could click a button, dictate a quick memo to myself about what that image is for, and then have a little badge show up on the thumbnail so that days (or weeks) later I'll know that there's a memo associated with that image.
-
I'd like to see a voice memo feature added. While in the field, I sometimes shoot an image that's going to have a very small, very specific role in the post-processing, and it'd be nice if I could click a button, dictate a quick memo to myself about what that image is for, and then have a little badge show up on the thumbnail so that days (or weeks) later I'll know that there's a memo associated with that image.
You sure you cannot do this now?
-
It can play voice notes recorded by the camera, that's all.
-
I might have 5 different virtual copies of the same file, edited for different purposes. It would be nice to (more easily) be able to distinguish them at a glance (while rendered as a small tile). If one was last printed on glossy photopaper, while the other was exported as sRGB JPEG, cannot this infomation be presented in a way that lets me choose the file that I am most probably searching for instead of having to inspect them more closely?
-h
You could use the copy name field to fill with its purpose, e.g.: SRGB JPG, Print. Also use the softproof create softproof copy, it adds the printerprofile used in the copy name. Typically you would use a vc in an outrput driven way, to achieve some form, size, color of b/w variant or what ever output objective you have.
-
I'd like to see the ability to turn on / turn off (preview) individual adjustment pins. Unless I've misses something, currently preview turns them all on or off.
-
Performance improvements have to be number one for me. Higher MP photos with a few localized adjustments can really bring LR to it's knees. I think GPU acceleration would be a great start.
-
I think GPU acceleration would be a great start.
I'm not so sure GPU acceleration would do for Lightroom what you hope, as with most things in life it's not that simple. Data has to be presented to a GPU in a very specific way, and the overheads of that processing can outweigh any benefits. Jeff Schewe explains it well (and more directly!) in this message (http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=67029.msg534360#msg534360).
-
What I would really like is the ability to use the straighten ruler in the crop section when zoomed into an image. Often I find it difficult to correctly draw the line when zoomed out.
-
I'm not so sure GPU acceleration would do for Lightroom what you hope, as with most things in life it's not that simple. Data has to be presented to a GPU in a very specific way, and the overheads of that processing can outweigh any benefits. Jeff Schewe explains it well (and more directly!) in this message (http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=67029.msg534360#msg534360).
Image processing should generally be well suited for GPU. Especially batch-processing many images. But doing algorithm X (well, i.e. accurately, stable and fast) on a hand-ful of GPU architectures, debugging, etc is more complicated than doing the same algorithm on x86. So how is this complexity going to be "paid"? By Adobe nicely hiring more staff? By Adobe redirecting algorithm development resources into GPU acceleration tasks? By Lightroom 6 having more bugs? By customers paying more for the product?
I am guessing that it should be relatively "easy" for e.g. Nvidia to port significant parts of the Lightroom pipeline to a recent generation Nvidia/CUDA GPU and making it produce equivalent output 2x or 10x faster than a recent Intel CPU for a demo. Making this into a robust software product that can be sold to customers of various hw configurations (and competence), making the software maintainable for adding features and fixing bugs, making money off of the thing, that is harder (I guess).
-h
-
I'm not so sure GPU acceleration would do for Lightroom what you hope, as with most things in life it's not that simple. Data has to be presented to a GPU in a very specific way, and the overheads of that processing can outweigh any benefits. Jeff Schewe explains it well (and more directly!) in this message (http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=67029.msg534360#msg534360).
The bottle neck for most people that have just about all things updates ends up being the server or harddrive the file reads/writes to. It maybe worth it for some, as I consider it to have a "staging" drive. A large SSD drive to have all the projects/files your working on and then copy over to the server/main storage. One thing that would concern me is the possibility of the SSD being bricked/wiped, as it isn't written on to the drive. So perhaps you have to save to the server move files to the staging drive, then move them back? Not sure. I obviously havnt figured a way for this, but I think I would gain at least a couple hours if I could make things read/write faster.
I for one get up and do something else while a 1-2gB PSD in max compatible mode starts writing. I try and do this after major changes. So it breaks up the workflow a bit.
-
I have a NEW Must have....(along proper dual screen)
How many times do you have to edit something in PShop and then go back and forth with Synchronizing the folder to finally have it appear?
LightRoom needs a "HOT FOLDER". A folder that you can designate when ever you work on a project. The designated folder will be monitored and will automatically create previews for the folder gaining new files from outside folders. This would make LR more of a active DAM that you can cotrol, rather than a DUM DAM, ughmm.
-
LightRoom needs a "HOT FOLDER".
Already implemented.
RTFM WRT tethering and auto importing
-
I'm referring to editing time. I will have to take another look at the settings, but perhaps making it part of the RightClick on the folders to enable on the fly might be helpful....But taking a look now.
?RTFM WRT?
-
No, thats nopt what Im talking about. Thats a folder you assign for shooting/tethering into.
I mean during editing. And I would hate to go to Preferences everytime I want to editing in a different folder.
-
RTFM WRT ...
Feature request: A photo editor that is flexible, yet sufficiently intuitive that I never have to RTFM.
-h
-
No, thats nopt what Im talking about. Thats a folder you assign for shooting/tethering into.
I mean during editing. And I would hate to go to Preferences everytime I want to editing in a different folder.
It's documented in a shooting/tethering context because it was available when we didn't have tethering in LR and was a workaround. But you can use it for what you initially described.
IIRC, iView MediaPro / Expression Media allowed you to set any folder to automatically catalogue any new files. There are some downsides (eg controlling files which the user has moved in Explorer/Finder), but the concept isn't ridiculous or totally alien to this type of program.
John
-
Feature request: A photo editor that is flexible, yet sufficiently intuitive that I never have to RTFM.
Strange, if you look at Adobe's own feature requests it says "users that be bothered to learn the program before asking for things it can already do" ;-)
-
Feature request: A photo editor that is flexible, yet sufficiently intuitive that I never have to RTFM.
Hopefully I will not get into NDA trouble but the next version will have the optional brain probe that reads your mind. Hope you don't mind the out patient surgery...
-
Ha, Ha :-/
I remember what RTFM was...but again, that is not what I am talking about. Yes the brain probe would be a great option.
The FM says...
"Set up watched folders
In the Auto Import Settings dialog box, click the Choose button next to Watched Folder.
Navigate to the location you want and do any of the following:
To create a watched folder, click Make New Folder and then overwrite New Folder to give the folder a name (Windows), or click New Folder (Mac OS), give the folder a name, and click Create.
To select an existing watched folder, select the folder.
Note: You cannot choose an existing folder that contains photos as a watched folder."
I DO try and read a bit before I post!
So with that added note, it is just for importing to a new folder. Its not applicable to someone editing within a folder full of images. Lets say you did make a new folder for the new edits to be saved under, and that was the hot folder. As soon as 1 file is added to that folder what happens? I would also suggest that a Right Click on a folder should show options for such an action.
-
Did not read entire thread. Guilty. What I did read is mostly a laundry of favorited. Ithink it needs to completely reimagined. Start with floating point, not integer representation. This will allow the hdr eensors of the near future to produce 32-bit floats from the raw data.
-
Unless I'm missing something having a "Bookmark" facility would be great. I'll be working through a folder of images processing, ranking, key wording, etc. and then have another import to perform. If I'm not on top of it (and I'm usually not) I can quickly get backlogged on my images.
I've thought of rankings, keywords, and color rankings but none really work for me.
If you have any thoughts or ideas I'm all game!
-
Unless I'm missing something having a "Bookmark" facility would be great. I'll be working through a folder of images processing, ranking, key wording, etc. and then have another import to perform. If I'm not on top of it (and I'm usually not) I can quickly get backlogged on my images.
I've thought of rankings, keywords, and color rankings but none really work for me.
If you have any thoughts or ideas I'm all game!
I suppose you could use the flag, Flagged, Unflagged, Rejected. Set the Rejected flag on the rejected images and the Flagged flag on the reviewed images, the deleted the rejected images and change the flagged to unflagged when you've reviewed all in the folder.
Alan
-
The bottle neck for most people that have just about all things updates ends up being the server or harddrive the file reads/writes to. It maybe worth it for some, as I consider it to have a "staging" drive. A large SSD drive to have all the projects/files your working on and then copy over to the server/main storage. One thing that would concern me is the possibility of the SSD being bricked/wiped, as it isn't written on to the drive. So perhaps you have to save to the server move files to the staging drive, then move them back? Not sure. I obviously havnt figured a way for this, but I think I would gain at least a couple hours if I could make things read/write faster.
I for one get up and do something else while a 1-2gB PSD in max compatible mode starts writing. I try and do this after major changes. So it breaks up the workflow a bit.
With parametric editing the speed of drives is no big issue. And looking at benchmarks you can see for Lightroom files can be on a HDD. Not a big problem.
Now writing work files from Photoshop is different and again, most of that time is spent waiting for the CPU to do PSDs mandatory compression . This is why working with TIFF that let's you save uncompressed really makes saving files faster.
Having a SSD as a work drive is a good idea of course.
-
With parametric editing the speed of drives is no big issue. And looking at benchmarks you can see for Lightroom files can be on a HDD. Not a big problem.
Now writing work files from Photoshop is different and again, most of that time is spent waiting for the CPU to do PSDs mandatory compression . This is why working with TIFF that let's you save uncompressed really makes saving files faster.
Having a SSD as a work drive is a good idea of course.
I think you're right about that. I can't see it hurt having an SSD as a catalog drive, with backups going to another drive.
-
What I would really like is the ability to use the straighten ruler in the crop section when zoomed into an image. Often I find it difficult to correctly draw the line when zoomed out.
+1 for this: the ability to use the crop tool while working in zoomed views would be up at the top of my list for LR6
Jim
-
Already implemented.
RTFM WRT tethering and auto importing
RTFPost is more like it.
We aren't talking about a hot folder to shoot into. Not an empty folder to auto populate at a start of a project....
I mean to be able to easily select a folder to be a hot folder "on the fly". Images inside already.
So when you browser through the catalog and need to start editing something you mark it as the Active Folder, and it monitors that folder, so what you edit in PS or other program it creates a preview.
Its frustrating to Edit in PS and every file format you save it in other than the TIF in the same file name it is BLIND to it. You have to Sync the folder.
When you have large amount and size edits, it makes importing time consuming. If it had a Browser Tab in Library mode, it would make great sense.
-
RTFPost is more like it.
I did, but you've changed what you want with every post.
Posting requests that are poorly thought out or explained is no use at all.
-
I did, but you've changed what you want with every post.
Posting requests that are poorly thought out or explained is no use at all.
I just reread Phil's original post and the subsequent posts in this thread, and I feel he explained pretty clearly in his original post just what kind of "hot folder" he was looking for. He did explicitly state that it was a specified, active folder in which every file that appears there while editing in PS, for example,, would be pulled into LR without the need for synching.
It seems fairly obvious to me that the "hot folder" described in TFM is of no use for what he wants to do. I also feel that a "user-specified work folder" of the sort he describes would be very useful for me and probably for many others as well. Perhaps it shouldn't be called a "hot folder" if that term makes some people think immediately of tethering.
-
Thanks for making it more obvious Eric,
Maybe when some people help design something they no longer can think for themselves outside what they created?.... just force the limitations they create....I donno if thats the case, but, whatever.
I have noticed some LR "guru" folks sit on clouds and can't see past what they know. If it makes sense, they say of how unpopular the idea is without even thinking that popularity shouldn't be the only driving force for innovation.
there is a quote that comes to mind"....Create it, and they will come...".
I did, but you've changed what you want with every post.
Posting requests that are poorly thought out or explained is no use at all.
Then your reply is just as useless. Except you failed to read the entire post....Here is the origial...with some highlights
I have a NEW Must have....(along proper dual screen)
How many times do you have to edit something in PShop and then go back and forth with Synchronizing the folder to finally have it appear[/u]?
LightRoom needs a "HOT FOLDER". A folder that you can designate when ever you work on a project. The designated folder will be monitored and will automatically create previews for the folder gaining new files from outside folders. This would make LR more of a active DAM that you can cotrol, rather than a DUM DAM, ughmm.
-
Here is the origial...with some highlights
LightRoom needs a "HOT FOLDER". A folder that you can designate when ever you work on a project. The designated folder will be monitored and will automatically create previews for the folder gaining new files from outside folders.
Your original request was for a singular location, not as you later refined it to being able to nominate any folder to be regarded as 'hot'.
-
"A", Yes meaning one at a time. I'm NOT expecting a bunch of folders being monitored at the same time.
I also put Hot folder in quotes, as I am rather family with the term from printing RIP systems and other scripts that do auto fetch/populate/monitor.
"Any" doesn't mean multiple either. It's clear that you would have no use for such a featuer. When working multiple projects that require PS editing or external program editing, it would be a VERY helpful feature.
Its only helpful to try seeing posts from all members, (let alone long time contributors with experience) with a little more credit to their understand of whats being said.
oops: revised my sentence which omited "NOT" :-)
-
If I can get the majority of users to nod that they use dual screen, I can make my case for the NEED to seperate the Lib from Dev functionality!
This is LR achilies heel, and it is frustrating jumping back and forth.
I absolutely agree to this request. But, for an additional reason. The inherent database of LR is still a show stopper and needs to be changed by a new one with reasonable performance, or the existing one needs a vast bunch of optimization (at least for Wintel computers, such as Win 7 Ultimate 64bit in my case). It was of bad performance from the beginning and is of bad performance ever since. Two examples: When opening my D800 36MPixel files which are losless compressed (which reduces the file size by about 40% compared to the uncompressed files) LR is always showing its "Loading" info for about 4 sec, everytime I switch from one image to another. LR is doing this even though 1:1 previews are available in the highest resolution (for my 27" display). This is not the case when opening the same files with ACR in CS6 and when using Capture NX which is not known for its high performance either.
Second example: Recently I merged my different LR databases into one single database again. The database now has roughly 40.000 images in it. Every time I open LR it takes a while for the programm to finish its counting procedure for the number of images that are stored in the folders on the harddrive (3TB Seagate Barracuda with 7.200 rpm). This is not as annoying as the 4 seconds delay per image, but it's another hint for the bad performance or programming of the database.
Thomas
-
I always have and still do use two screens for the editing computer.
Agreed with the post above, the DB is making my beloved LR become pain ware.
>100k images yet I go in and work on images in this archive daily for fun. Separating catalogues would make doing this worse, as even as is, I have forgotten about shoots that have gems inside.
If the problem is brush tools adjustments then for LR6 why not have a toggle for switching them off unless in dev module?
-
The more I think about it the more I see LR greatly benefits from a option to use Library mode as Browser only. Not force a catalog.
-
The more I think about it the more I see LR greatly benefits from a option to use Library mode as Browser only. Not force a catalog.
So you want a pixel editor then? Use Photoshop.
Tony Jay
-
The more I think about it the more I see LR greatly benefits from a option to use Library mode as Browser only. Not force a catalog.
I'd keep thinking, Phil! What Lightroom needs is more/better features in Library, not to have one of its key features undermined.
John
-
The more I think about it the more I see LR greatly benefits from a option to use Library mode as Browser only. Not force a catalog.
That's like saying "I see cars would benefit from an option to use them in free wheel only. Not force an engine on people."
The catalog is central to the way Lightroom works, it's the engine.
-
I'd keep thinking, Phil! What Lightroom needs is more/better features in Library, not to have one of its key features undermined.
Absolutely. Lightroom juts needs a few tweaks and feature additions to be as near as perfect as we could hope for.
Whilst Phil tries to work in an unintended way with LR it's going to keep him frustrated.
-
I would like to see all adjuments implemented through tonal range selection highlights, mid tones, shadows similar to curves since it exists it shouldn't be difficult to achieve.
-
I think that the Develop module works reasonably well. That is also where I spend most of my time. Print also does what it is supposed to, I guess.
I think that the search and cataloging features of Lightroom are surprisingly weak. I mean, that is supposed to be one of the selling points of this kind of software. So why is it so unintuitive (introducing non-familiar UI conventions) and limited? Why are there no search functions based on image analysis (face detection, color content, in-focus estimation,…)? Why is not the tagging system better organized (nice hierachical tags? default tags/cloud-based auto-complete?) Ideally, I want this kind of program to keep track of every way in which I have ever accessed my image collection (search, collections etc) in a manner that is better than I could ever think of myself. That should be the main benefit of database-driven collection as opposed to just moving the files in a file folder system.
A friend of mine claims that Photoshop Elements (!) has search functions surpassing LR, at least in some areas. Is this really true?
The Book and Web modules are places I avoid spending time (I find that MS Paint gives me better flexibility in arranging multiple images before print, too bad that one loose color management that way). The Map module I haven't had a reason to test (due to lack of GPS). The Slideshow thingy works, although generating the show is painfully slow.
At least it is possible to switch to fullscreen with a simple keystroke now. This indicates to me that Adobe actually listens.
-h
-
Those are the kinds of things I'd like to see too, especially filtering based on colour content and other data which is already harvested and should be available to us. Why for example can't I find all my B&W images? Sure, you can find those converted in LR, but not TIFs converted in PS or Silver Efex etc which LR categorises as colour.
I also think we'd get a lot of bangs for our bucks from refinement of existing features such as smart collection criteria. For instance, we can't query all data in the database and use it to improve our quality control (eg find all pictures taken in the last x days with ISO > y but noise reduction not adjusted).
John
-
[..]
What Lightroom needs is more/better features in Library, not to have one of its key features undermined.
John
+1
Anthony.
-
I'm sorry if this was cvoered. But will there be a LR6? Wouldn't Adobe be making changes for CC members only?
-
Remember when the Mac download was 80-90 megs? Now it's >400 megs.
I'd like to see them remove the book module, the map module and while they're at it the slideshow module.
Then they could concentrate on what Lightroom does.
-
I'm sorry if this was cvoered. But will there be a LR6? Wouldn't Adobe be making changes for CC members only?
No. Adobe have said LR will remain a stand alone perpetual license product.
Rand
-
I would like to see all adjuments implemented through tonal range selection highlights, mid tones, shadows similar to curves since it exists it shouldn't be difficult to achieve.
You can do that by using the TAT.
-
I'd keep thinking, Phil! What Lightroom needs is more/better features in Library, not to have one of its key features undermined.
True indeed. But Phil is wanting to throw out the DAM baby with the bath water because he doesn't understand how the product works and is using it incorrectly. Hence his frustration. Over on PhotoNet, he posted the following which many here know to be untrue:
You can't even make adjustments and save the file and find it unless you Sync the folder every time.
I was talking about how saving files in PS force you to sync...So meaning, unless you saved the file in the same format in PS, LR will force you to sync.
When you are in LR, you make some adjustments and launch out to PS in TIF (set in Preferences to do so). Make your edits in PS that need layers etc, and save a PSD (AR: user error) OR if you launch out in PSD and save in TIF, (AR:more user error and misunderstanding) you lose the connection there also...or JPEG..either way it is not known to LR.
I tried to explain to him how this all works with the Edit In command and explain his misunderstanding of file formats required to use layers. But he's justifiably frustrated and I explained to him that Bridge + ACR will "free" him from one of the most important features of LR, the Library. So yes, getting back OT on the subject of what LR6 needs based on a sound understanding of the product, I agree with you and hjulenissen, we should be able to search for any or all metadata that exists and currently we can't. I know all my rendered images have color space tags, why can't I find them within LR? Why are the Filter attributes not the same as the Smart Collection attributes?
-
I'm sorry if this was cvoered. But will there be a LR6? Wouldn't Adobe be making changes for CC members only?
In addition to what Rand mentioned, they've also said there'll be feature parity if it ever splits into Lightroom and Lightroom CC. Any theoretical difference would be in features specific to what Creative Cloud offers (e.g. doing something with that mostly-useless 20GB of storage, syncing settings across computers, etc.).
-
I'd like to see them remove the book module, the map module and while they're at it the slideshow module.
For a smaller installer? How about users like myself that use those modules, screw us? This is a lot like the DNG or Gay Marriage 'debate'. If you don't like those modules, don't use them. I'd be super pissed off if the some of those modules were gone, I use them. I also don't suggest the Photoshop team remove all the 3D functionality because I don't use them.
-
You can do that by using the TAT.
I know Stamper that's what I want for all tools and brushes not just those covered at present
-
Remember when the Mac download was 80-90 megs? Now it's >400 megs.
Is that really a major problem to you for a once or twice a year download ?
I'd like to see them remove the book module, the map module and while they're at it the slideshow module.
I use both book and map modules, so I'd be very unhappy to see those left out.
and if you think removing the minor modules would reduce the download size, think again. On Windows the book module only adds 14Kb (yes Kb), next to nothing in the whole package.
-
...I use both book and map modules, so I'd be very unhappy to see those left out...
I think we are pretty safe from having the book and map modules removed (!) - and even safer from having the catalog removed from Lightroom (!!?!).
Tony Jay
-
I think we are pretty safe from having the book and map modules removed (!)
One would hope so, but other people want modular software. Who knows how Adobe might market it in future ? One develop and library package and all the modules separately purchasable (rentable ? <spit>) ???
Sometimes you can't rely on what might seem the obvious choice for development :(
-
For a smaller installer? How about users like myself that use those modules, screw us?
If there ever is a conflict of interest between me and you, I would go for what benefits me, even if it means the opposite for you. I expect you to do the same? The entire philosophy of Lightroom seems to be (to a degree) "screwing" the Photoshop concept/users in order to make a leaner, more photographer-oriented package. To do so, some tools (and legacy usage habits) had to go.
This is a lot like the DNG or Gay Marriage 'debate'.
I have no/very few opinions on how citizens live their life as long as it does not significantly affect me or society. Thus they may choose any way of organizing their familiy that please them, as long as it is based on consenting adults.
Now, a private company that have accepted my money in the past and wants my money in the future, I do offer opinions on how I would like them to proceed.
If you don't like those modules, don't use them. I'd be super pissed off if the some of those modules were gone, I use them. I also don't suggest the Photoshop team remove all the 3D functionality because I don't use them.
I think it is perfectly okay to ask for removal of functionality. There is even a software term for the problem: feature creep. Every function added to the software adds some cost. You need to QA the software prior to every release, you need to allocate limited developer resources to maintain and improve the functionality, it makes it harder to refactor the software, it clutters the user interface/overview, you need more bandwidth to ship the executable/updates etc.
Now, the real discussion is, perhaps, if those modules really should be removed. I don't know. Users tends to be "super pissed off" when features are removed, so it might not be a smart move by Adobe. Rather, you want to be very conscious about what features are allowed into the product at any time (Apple seems to be good at this, and their share-holders should be happy about that).
I think it was a bad choice of Adobe to "let in" modules of such poor design in the first place. Now that they did, the best they can do is try to improve them.
-h
-
it clutters the user interface/overview, you need more bandwidth to ship the executable/updates etc.
Absolutely non-issues.
One gem of UI for LR is the way the different modules are selected, they don't interfere with each other and you can hide the switching panel easily off the screen entirely and work with simple keyboard short cuts to switch modules. You could add another three modules and it would make precious little difference to the use of the program.
As previously pointed out; Modules had very little to the overall program download size. If Adobe cared even slightly about this they'd separate the 64 & 32 bit versions to different packages. Does increasing the size of the download really matter much when you only have to download once or twice a year ?
-
I've got a "simple" one, that'd work for both LR and ACR : the alt-preset-batshit-insane-quality export option.
Jim Christian of PictureCode mentioned (http://portfoliography.com/2012/12/conversation-with-jim-christian/) that if he had 100x the processing power at his disposal, he'd try different approaches to demosaïcing and noise reduction. If there was a way to implement that in practice, in any raw converter, it'd be something that I'd really like to see.
(and yes, I know - DxO 9 does it, and, in a way, so does RawTherapee)
-
I've got a "simple" one, that'd work for both LR and ACR : the alt-preset-batshit-insane-quality export option.
Lightroom CC will feature a cloud-based export option like you are describing, spreading out across computing resources around the world, benefitting from a high computation complexity (the equivalent of 1 gazillion calculators), relatively low bandwidth (20MB per image) and very low computation duty cycle (1 print per week, finished in 20 seconds).
The deluxe version will do 100 alternate renderings, automatically post them on photography forums all over the world, and based on user feedback will pick the "best".
Non-CC customers will be left off. :-)
-h
-
If there ever is a conflict of interest between me and you, I would go for what benefits me, even if it means the opposite for you. I expect you to do the same?
I don't expect the same (I said otherwise but you must have missed that). Good thing that you're not in the software or service business with that attitude.
I have no/very few opinions on how citizens live their life as long as it does not significantly affect me or society.
So should a camera natively by option save a DNG, should my Neighbors who are gay wish to marry, or should your lack of use of certain LR modules at the expense of a larger installer fall into that category?
I think it is perfectly okay to ask for removal of functionality. There is even a software term for the problem: feature creep
How you connected those two dots is a mystery. It is OK for your software company, assuming you have one, to remove functionality. How your customers may feel is another story. Feature creep, the term you apply is subjective. One man's feature creep is anothers must have tool. As I pointed out, I don't use any 3D functionality in Photoshop. Others do and I don't consider that feature creep nor if I had the power would I remove those features. As someone who is a partner in a software company, I have some experience in deciding what can and cannot be done in our product and how it affects our customers satisfaction.
The removal of two modules I and other's use, to make a smaller installer is just ridiculous. Thankfully that's not going to happen.
-
Hi,
I would really love LR to recognize the "star" rating that I give to my pictures on the Phase One IQ160 digital back. It's potentially pretty useful, for example, I'd like to use that to code the lens I am using, because it doesn't support EXIF - 1 star is the 50mm, 2 stars is the 80mm and so on.
Sounds like a JDI to me, but maybe it's P1 proprietary...
-
Hi,
I would really love LR to recognize the "star" rating that I give to my pictures on the Phase One IQ160 digital back. It's potentially pretty useful, for example, I'd like to use that to code the lens I am using, because it doesn't support EXIF - 1 star is the 50mm, 2 stars is the 80mm and so on.
Sounds like a JDI to me, but maybe it's P1 proprietary...
Doesn't P1 put that into the EXIF comment field? I think that does shows up in LR but LR wouldn't have an automatic way to match that to the IPTC rating. If you want to send me a file (eg by Dropbox) I'll take a look and report back.
John
-
If there ever is a conflict of interest between me and you, I would go for what benefits me, even if it means the opposite for you. I expect you to do the same?
I don't expect the same (I said otherwise but you must have missed that). Good thing that you're not in the software or service business with that attitude.
You are saying that if you must choose between my house burning and yours, you will choose your own? That is very altruistic of you.
Feature creep, the term you apply is subjective. One man's feature creep is anothers must have tool. As I pointed out, I don't use any 3D functionality in Photoshop. Others do and I don't consider that feature creep nor if I had the power would I remove those features.
Of course feature creep is subjective. In software, any tool can be made into any other tool (given enough blood, sweat and tears). Thus, we may assume that different leadership, developers and customers have very different expectations about what a software product should be (or not be).
The point I hope that we can agree on is that feature creep can be (and often is) a problem. Did you notice the stock prices of a certain fruity company that famously removes features and limits the number of things that their products can do? Imagine the meetings at Nokia headquarters back in 2007? "What? A Cell-phone without MMS? <laughter>"
The removal of two modules I and other's use, to make a smaller installer is just ridiculous.
If you think that two extra modules just affect the installer size, then we are back to square one in terms of agreeing on this matter.
-h
-
You are saying that if you must choose between my house burning and yours, you will choose your own?
Not only am I not saying that, it's time to get back to the realm of reality and I gave you two, real world examples based on software products defining what I mean!
As part of my day job, I'm a partner in a software company that produces solutions for this very audience. Been doing that for over a decade too. Removing features that customers use is a piss poor idea, cost engineering money, upsets the customer base, ruin's legacy workflows and more. I'm not sure what your day job is as your user info here is as anonymous for whatever reason. IF it involves the production of software, please let us know what that produce may be. I want to keep that product on my radar for what I think is obvious reasons. Bottom line is removing features customers use is a bad idea. If 98% of my customer base don't use a feature, it's going to stay in there for the 2%, the other's don't lose out in any way. Don't understand or like the feature, don't use it there are others who do.
Can you provide an example of a feature in LR or Photoshop that is ignored by even 90% of the installed base?
Look at Adobe and how they dealt with the much maligned Contrast/Brightness command. Not removed, improved. BUT, legacy behavior remains an option because removing it would be really stupid to do for a number of reasons expressed above.
-
Hi,
I am quite happy with Lightroom as it is now. There may be some wishes I have.
1) I would like to have the option to apply sharpening with different radius, amount and detail. I would like to be able to enhance both low and high frequency detail simultaneously both globally and locally.
2) It would be nice to have more control on tonal mapping on highlights/shawdows.
3) I would rather seen plugins that don't go over TIFF but are applied parametrically.
4) Histograms showing raw data. I often go RawDigger to find out the raw histograms. The histograms shown in LR are usable but don't show if the raw data is clipped or not.
Best regards
Erik
-
Hi,
I am quite happy with Lightroom as it is now. There may be some wishes I have.
1) I would like to have the option to apply sharpening with different radius, amount and detail. I would like to be able to enhance both low and high frequency detail simultaneously both globally and locally.
This is available now in the develop module and also with selective editing. See the screen shot below.
2) It would be nice to have more control on tonal mapping on highlights/shawdows.
3) I would rather seen plugins that don't go over TIFF but are applied parametrically.
I think this would require Lightroom to pass RAW data to the Plugin which is written by another party that has no access to Lightroom's raw processing features.
4) Histograms showing raw data. I often go RawDigger to find out the raw histograms. The histograms shown in LR are usable but don't show if the raw data is clipped or not.
Best regards
Erik
-
Hi,
I am quite happy with Lightroom as it is now. There may be some wishes I have.
1) I would like to have the option to apply sharpening with different radius, amount and detail. I would like to be able to enhance both low and high frequency detail simultaneously both globally and locally.
2) It would be nice to have more control on tonal mapping on highlights/shawdows.
3) I would rather seen plugins that don't go over TIFF but are applied parametrically.
4) Histograms showing raw data. I often go RawDigger to find out the raw histograms. The histograms shown in LR are usable but don't show if the raw data is clipped or not.
Best regards
Erik
You have my vote for those too.
I'd also like to see full set of Develop tools in the adjustment brush, but this might really bog things down. Not a programmer so don't really know, but my quad core sure gets bunged up with a large area that is brushed with a lot of detail.
Cheers,
Glenn
-
Hi,
I would really love LR to recognize the "star" rating that I give to my pictures on the Phase One IQ160 digital back. It's potentially pretty useful, for example, I'd like to use that to code the lens I am using, because it doesn't support EXIF - 1 star is the 50mm, 2 stars is the 80mm and so on.
Sounds like a JDI to me, but maybe it's P1 proprietary...
OK, I can't see the rating in various Adobe apps or PhotoMechanic, so it looks to me as if it is initially being written to the EXIF MakerNote and not in a place that LR would read.
However, I did see it in C1 and it's not too difficult to get into LR if you have C1 (does it come with the back?). In C1's Preferences > Image > Metadata, I have Auto sync sidecar xmp set to Full Sync, and merely opening the file once in C1 creates a sidecar xmp file which does have the rating in its normal place. I can then import the file into LR or use Metadata > Read metadata and get the rating.
John
-
OK, I can't see the rating in various Adobe apps or PhotoMechanic, so it looks to me as if it is initially being written to the EXIF MakerNote and not in a place that LR would read.
However, I did see it in C1 and it's not too difficult to get into LR if you have C1 (does it come with the back?). In C1's Preferences > Image > Metadata, I have Auto sync sidecar xmp set to Full Sync, and merely opening the file once in C1 creates a sidecar xmp file which does have the rating in its normal place. I can then import the file into LR or use Metadata > Read metadata and get the rating.
Interesting. I want to avoid using C1 for as long as I can :-) Do you think LR could (in a future version) do this automagically ? That would be very convenient...
Thanks for looking at the problem !
-
Assuming I'm right about it being in the MakerNote, my guess is you'll be waiting a long time before LR reads it...
Exiftools is a bit geeky, but conceivably it could extract the data to a sidecar file.
-
The ability to use more of apple's cpu/gpu power to process. LR doesn't tax the cpu hardly at all in batching and is much slower than c1 for batching jpegs.(and as I have said before, would be great to have a count down timer so when exporting 3000 jpegs from a job I have an idea when that will be done)
-
As per the latest feature delivered in Adobe Photoshop CC.
-
Features:
* Use levelling tool when zoom'd in
* Use rotation tool when zoom'd in
* Let me select a "line" in a photograph rather than draw one for
- use in levelling
- use selecting edges to be used in perspective correction
e.g. if I have a curvedhorizontal line (sea/sky boundary is good) due to lens imperfections after applying the lens profile to the image, let me select the "line" that the edge between those two makes and "straighten" it.
And for doing perspective correction, rather than use "boxes", let me:
- select vertical and/or horizontal "lines" (boundaries) that are distributed throughout the image and click on a button that says "Make 'em straight!"
-
And for doing perspective correction, rather than use "boxes", let me:
- select vertical and/or horizontal "lines" (boundaries) that are distributed throughout the image and click on a button that says "Make 'em straight!"
+1
-
+1
Add my vote for that!
-
"Make 'em straight!"
Define straight?
-
Remember when the Mac download was 80-90 megs? Now it's >400 megs.
I'd like to see them remove the book module, the map module and while they're at it the slideshow module.
Then they could concentrate on what Lightroom does.
A large part of the download is to support camera and lens profiles. Over time that will grow.
I don't know if separating out the camera and lens support would deliver the user experience that Adobe wants to deliver from Lightroom.
Maybe that part of it needs to be extracted out into a separate tool that you invoke from Lightroom that contacts Adobe's website and downloads the required files rather than shipping them all? That would eliminate needing to "Update to Lightroom latest.version to get support for your new camera"
-
Maybe do some more with the web module so I don't have to export into other programs.
For those with multiple monitors (I use 3) we need the ability to set which is the second screen please! This has been an issue for ages.
-
Spell checker in the Book Module.
-
One thing I would like to have is the same histogram functionality in Library that exists in Develop...along with a better target (bullseye) cursor in both Library and Develop for checking rgb (actually, I use L*a*b values) - or at least allow clipping indicators to work in Library - I find this very useful in evaluating similar images for wildlife when I do my selects and deletes...
Secondly, for speed purposes, how about a "turbo" button, preferably one that can be edited? If image redraws are slowed in Develop while editing due to heavy use of brushes, spotting, lens corrections - how about a menu behind the button to deselect some of the items in the re-draw pipeline that take a lot of CPU strength? It should only affect the image redraw display and not be a true interruption of the processing pipeline - I can see obvious problems with synchronize and export functions otherwise...
I am fully prepared to be educated on just how dumb and unworkable an idea this is :o
-
For a smaller installer? How about users like myself that use those modules, screw us? This is a lot like the DNG or Gay Marriage 'debate'. If you don't like those modules, don't use them. I'd be super pissed off if the some of those modules were gone, I use them. I also don't suggest the Photoshop team remove all the 3D functionality because I don't use them.
Absolutely. My pet hate in feature request threads is when people ask to remove functionality that others depend on, just because they do not use it. It's a very selfish and ignorant attitude. And the correct meaning of 'Bloat' in software is actually 'Things I don't use'.
-
I think I have a suggestion that should be pretty easy and not much of a change.
This is mainly helpful for multiple screen users (not sure about 3+), but at least dual....
When you have both screens up, the OPTION (And don't misrepresent "Option" with remove or change. Thats a just not knowing the language you're using) to lock Folder view with Grid view on second screen.
When in Develop mode with Dual screen, once you select Grid view on the second screen, allow the option to "snap" the Folder list to this second screen when selecting Grid view?
This will allow for us to browse folders while staying in the Dev mode on the main screen since no new files are selected.
-
Absolutely. My pet hate in feature request threads is when people ask to remove functionality that others depend on, just because they do not use it. It's a very selfish and ignorant attitude. And the correct meaning of 'Bloat' in software is actually 'Things I don't use'.
Actually, understanding that making "good" software is a balance between satisfying every narrow use-case (swiss army knife-syndrome) and making an excellent one-trick-pony is a basic skill that most software people get, either in school or later. Not understanding that there is such a trade-off would be pretty ignorant and (probably, in time) lead to a poor product.
As I have clearly stated, _finding_ this optimal trade-off is hard. I don't claim to know what features should and should not be included in Lightroom 6 in order to make it a "good" or "successful" product (but, like everyone else, I offer my humble opinion, obviously biased by my own needs and knowledge). I do believe that having a "man with a vision" helps in many ways making "strong" products. I.e. reducing the influence of traditional "design comittees", "user study groups" or "every developer gets to put in whatever he wants to put in".
-h
-
I'd like a more visual way of making /adding to [smart] collections.
Example: I recently trekked 10 days in the Sahara. Obviously, you get the same motif on many days and want to select from them. Currently you have to make a verbal description, like 'camel' (dromedary actually) or 'sickle dune'. Most of these words won't be useful for a trek in the Himalayas. And 'those mountains in the distance that don't seem to get any closer' is also very long.
So I'd like a pane where you can drag and drop photo's on one or more 'piles' for further selection.
-
If there ever is a conflict of interest between me and you, I would go for what benefits me, even if it means the opposite for you. I expect you to do the same?
Me, me, me, me, me!
Also, don't assume everyone else as selfish as you.
The entire philosophy of Lightroom seems to be (to a degree) "screwing" the Photoshop concept/users in order to make a leaner, more photographer-oriented package. To do so, some tools (and legacy usage habits) had to go.
No the philosophy was to design a programme that reflected a different way in which photography was being done and for which PS was increasing unsuited. Also seeing as PS still exists how is anyone screwed over? ??? LR just adds more options and an easier workflow for digital images.
I seem to recall you admitted that you struggled to even get to grips with the basics of PS, you should be thankful an alternative appeared.
Now, a private company that have accepted my money in the past and wants my money in the future, I do offer opinions on how I would like them to proceed.I think it is perfectly okay to ask for removal of functionality. There is even a software term for the problem: feature creep. Every function added to the software adds some cost. You need to QA the software prior to every release, you need to allocate limited developer resources to maintain and improve the functionality, it makes it harder to refactor the software, it clutters the user interface/overview, you need more bandwidth to ship the executable/updates etc.
Me, me, me, me, me!
A modular programme like LR means zero clutter in the interface if other modules are added. And you can simply not update some modules between updates as Adobe has done. All of which begs the question, have you even used the programme?
-
Actually, understanding that making "good" software is a balance between satisfying every narrow use-case (swiss army knife-syndrome) and making an excellent one-trick-pony is a basic skill that most software people get, either in school or later. Not understanding that there is such a trade-off would be pretty ignorant and (probably, in time) lead to a poor product.
You are missing the point. Asking to remove functions that you do not need, but others do is purely selfish. It also shows a lack of perspective on the software and is a view that is less relevant in my opinion because of that.
As I have clearly stated, _finding_ this optimal trade-off is hard. I don't claim to know what features should and should not be included in Lightroom 6 in order to make it a "good" or "successful" product (but, like everyone else, I offer my humble opinion, obviously biased by my own needs and knowledge). I do believe that having a "man with a vision" helps in many ways making "strong" products. I.e. reducing the influence of traditional "design comittees", "user study groups" or "every developer gets to put in whatever he wants to put in".
-h
And the problem with that is you get a tool that suits that one person.
The reality with software such as PS is that people use it for a multitude of purposes and to solve a even more varied array of problems. And to my mind, some issues in software are due to those responsible for putting it together, are not really the typical end user and as a result do not always solve the right problems.
Feedback from multiple users can be quite illuminating as they can show where the software is broken or needs modifing in real world use.
In fact the original version of LR was changed significantly in exactly this way and thank god that happened
-
I'd like a more visual way of making /adding to [smart] collections.
Example: I recently trekked 10 days in the Sahara. Obviously, you get the same motif on many days and want to select from them. Currently you have to make a verbal description, like 'camel' (dromedary actually) or 'sickle dune'. Most of these words won't be useful for a trek in the Himalayas. And 'those mountains in the distance that don't seem to get any closer' is also very long.
So I'd like a pane where you can drag and drop photo's on one or more 'piles' for further selection.
What would this do that you can't do with tags?
-
I think I have a suggestion that should be pretty easy and not much of a change.
This is mainly helpful for multiple screen users (not sure about 3+), but at least dual....
When you have both screens up, the OPTION (And don't misrepresent "Option" with remove or change. Thats a just not knowing the language you're using) to lock Folder view with Grid view on second screen.
When in Develop mode with Dual screen, once you select Grid view on the second screen, allow the option to "snap" the Folder list to this second screen when selecting Grid view?
This will allow for us to browse folders while staying in the Dev mode on the main screen since no new files are selected.
If you use 'D' and 'E' to swap between Develop and Library, then Grid view stays on the second screen.
Sadly I seem to recall that customising the interface by dragging panels around is not going to ever happen, because of how LR was initially built. Having Folders/collections panel on second screen could be useful whilst in all the various modules. I'd like to be able to place the develop settings on the second screen and keep your main screen for the full image. Alternatively allow grid view on main screen in Dev Module and then have second screen for the whole image. Alt+G could be used for that option as currently G=grid view in Library and Shift+G=Grid view on 2nd screen.
-
What would this do that you can't do with tags?
It would enable sorting visually, which for some people is a better way of working. A flexible, virtual lightbox is something that many people would find handy with image management, editing [not post processing], collating etc and could be more versatile than a physical one.
-
It would enable sorting visually, which for some people is a better way of working. A flexible, virtual lightbox is something that many people would find handy with image management, editing [not post processing], collating etc and could be more versatile than a physical one.
I did once see a Microsoft application (never released but designed by the guys who had been behind iView) which replicated the experience of dragging trannies around a lightbox. Instead of dragging thumbnails into a folder or collection list, you dragged them into what looked like piles
-
Me, me, me, me, me!
Also, don't assume everyone else as selfish as you.
I truly don't know how to react to your posts. Thankfully most other people on this forum are very unlike you.
-k
-
I did once see a Microsoft application (never released but designed by the guys who had been behind iView) which replicated the experience of dragging trannies around a lightbox. Instead of dragging thumbnails into a folder or collection list, you dragged them into what looked like piles
Apple's Aperture has had that feature since it was first introduced. It's called Light Table.
-
Fair point, though Aperture's feature is only a layout tool. What Microsoft showed was building collections or "projects" visually.
-
I truly don't know how to react to your posts.
-k
Logic, facts and some well thought out reasoning is the the best way.
-
Fair point, though Aperture's feature is only a layout tool. What Microsoft showed was building collections or "projects" visually.
That's true.
-
A few things I'd like to see:
1) Auto-stacking. I spent over an hour yesterday organizing a mess of pano and HDR sequences into stacks in the library. I would think this could be automated, perhaps based on image capture time - with user set options to control the process.
2) The ability to view, on separate monitors, two different folders or collections in grid view and to drag photos from one to the other (copy or move).
3) To have F11 actually work to show/hide the 2nd window as the menu says it should, but never has.
4) The ability, with web galleries, to upload minor changes without having to generate and upload the whole thing.
5) Better web gallery templates with more control over text, fonts, image size, etc.
'nuf said.
-
A few things I'd like to see:
1) Auto-stacking. I spent over an hour yesterday organizing a mess of pano and HDR sequences into stacks in the library. I would think this could be automated, perhaps based on image capture time - with user set options to control the process.
Auto stacking on import could drive people nuts as various images would randomly end up vanishing it would appear. Using the spray can to apply a stacking criteria could be useful though.
2) The ability to view, on separate monitors, two different folders or collections in grid view and to drag photos from one to the other (copy or move).
A dual pane file manager would make file managing so much easier. As would being able to put the folders panel on second monitor to use in any module. Currently the second monitor is like a crippled library module if used in grid view.
Though, really one should import files to a well organised location, where they stay forever and for organising images should be added to collections, preferably smart ones. And if you need to place [not move] a file elsewhere, that's what the export dialogue is for. But even so having folders and collection on separate monitors [and thus available in other modules] would be great.
3) To have F11 actually work to show/hide the 2nd window as the menu says it should, but never has.
Shift+E, Shift+N, Shift+G, Shift+ C hides/shows the second window in whatever display mode you want. And cycling through main monitor views [using 'f] does the equivalent of F11 (which is used to toggle full screen on Windows).
4) The ability, with web galleries, to upload minor changes without having to generate and upload the whole thing.
Doesn't that depend on the type of gallery and more importantly how you upload it.
5) Better web gallery templates with more control over text, fonts, image size, etc.
Other people do a range of web galleries for LR. My non-Adobe galleries were created and customised entirely within LR.
-
I would like to have the ability to softproof the image on the second monitor.
Best regards.
-
I truly don't know how to react to your posts. Thankfully most other people on this forum are very unlike you.
Logic, facts and some well thought out reasoning is the the best way.
What might a "Logic, facts and some well thought out reasoning" response to this post be?:
Me, me, me, me, me!
Also, don't assume everyone else as selfish as you.
...
Me, me, me, me, me!
...
-h
-
Logic, facts and some well thought out reasoning is the the best way.
What might a "Logic, facts and some well thought out reasoning" response to this post be?:
-h
Not for me to put words into your mouth. You need to be logical all on your own.
The fact that I was mocking your stance, does not preclude a sensible rebuttal.
-
I would like to have the ability to softproof the image on the second monitor.
Best regards.
Yes, full second monitor support would be very welcome!! It would help any module. I would love to separate the Develop window to one screen while the Library is on the other.
Also, I wish in Lib mode the "Quick Dev" module, which I find so limiting and a tease to use, yet useless...Would be great if it can be the full Exposure tool. It would even be better to be a flyout panel we can move off the window so we can use it to do a fast general look to see the direction the images can go.
-
I would like a higher "Amount" of sharpening. I don't like the noise pattern that "Detail" produces, so I like to work at low detail and high amount, but amount doesn't go high enough. I'd also like to the ability to use different sharpening radii via the adjustment brush.
I'd also like the ability to remap keyboard shortcuts so that shortcuts are consistent across modules. IOW, so that my crucial shortcuts don't depend on me already being in the right module to use them. What a drag that is.
-
I'd also like the ability to remap keyboard shortcuts so that shortcuts are consistent across modules. IOW, so that my crucial shortcuts don't depend on me already being in the right module to use them. What a drag that is.
Shortcuts that do not work in one module are maddening, particularly as they do not do anything at all in the wrong module. It wouldn't be so bad if they were used for something important within that module.
I've never understood why companies are so reluctant to let users customise shortcuts and interface. By doing just that, you'd get rid of a significant percentage of feature requests and make for much happier end users.
-
I would dearly like 'digital post it notes' - there are some third party options, but the ability to scrawl/notate right on a file quickly would be very useful when editing in a busy workflow
-
I would dearly like 'digital post it notes' - there are some third party options, but the ability to scrawl/notate right on a file quickly would be very useful when editing in a busy workflow
Yes, I came across this yesterday with a client who wanted an embargo notice in a folder. We created a small JPEG with some text and named the file so it would sort at the beginning of the photos, but it would be good to avoid workarounds.
-
Not for me to put words into your mouth. You need to be logical all on your own.
The fact that I was mocking your stance, does not preclude a sensible rebuttal.
I see. So your recommendation is that the rest of the forum should use "Logic, facts and some well thought out reasoning", while you yourself should continue to post mockery? Did it occur to you that bad manners may be a reason why some of the discussions that you participate in go sour?
If you apply some logic and well thought out reasoning, how would you yourself respond to a poster that wrote:
You are missing the point... is purely selfish...shows a lack of perspective...begs the question, have you even used the programme
Might I suggest that you try to tone down that attitude and rather show more clearly that you actually read posts, before replying in a well thought manner (it is possible to respectfully disagree).
-h
-
I do read posts, quite carefully in fact but some others sadly do not. They and other people who air selfish viewpoints or post inaccurate rubbish despite people politely using facts or reason to counter their argument should expect to be made fun of if they persist in their nonsense.
Usually things go 'sour' because I reasonably counter someone's absurd claim and they take offence at that. The easiest way to upset someone is to prove them wrong, simply being rude will have far, far less effect.
-
Yes, I came across this yesterday with a client who wanted an embargo notice in a folder. We created a small JPEG with some text and named the file so it would sort at the beginning of the photos, but it would be good to avoid workarounds.
Good solution. If I can find the third-party workarounds, I'll post. One was quite useful I recall.
-
If I can get the majority of users to nod that they use dual screen, I can make my case for the NEED to seperate the Lib from Dev functionality!
This is LR achilies heel, and it is frustrating jumping back and forth.
If we can have LR 6 have the option to segment the 2 functions to the Grid view in the 2nd screen to behave as the Lib mode on screen 2, and stay with Dev mode on screen 1...Oh Boy would that be a major improvement in how the software and user interact. Right now it is a binary switch back and forth.
Anyone get tired of the switching, then finding the place where you left off, NOT being able to sort the Grid view in dev mode on the 2nd screen?
+1 here
-
I don't begrudge you guys better 2nd screen implementation, but I for one use one screen, and I think the majority of usesrs do same.
-
but I for one use one screen, and I think the majority of usesrs do same.
I'm sure you're right that the majority of LR users only have a single screen and I'd also guess that quite a few of those that do have two screens just use LR on a single big screen now.
There are a lot more useful features that would have wider appeal that deserve to be much higher up the request list.
-
I'm sure you're right that the majority of LR users only have a single screen and I'd also guess that quite a few of those that do have two screens just use LR on a single big screen now.
There are a lot more useful features that would have wider appeal that deserve to be much higher up the request list.
And others would disagree. Even my elderly neighbour who dabbles in photography has two screens. Most of the people I know have two screens in fact and if they work in photography/music/film, then two would be the minimum, 3-4 is not unusual.
Now why on earth would you only use one screen for LR if you have two?
-
Because you want other apps on the second screen?
Sure, Lightroom's second screen is a bit awkward, but I agree with the comments about people using bigger screens. Plenty of other improvements would be more worthwhile.
-
Because you want other apps on the second screen?
Is that so you can be distracted by them and work less efficiently? ;)
LR's not exactly a drag and drop kind of programme. As you've correctly mentioned before, you manage your files from within LR and export things out form there. If you simply drag an image out of LR to a different folder, you lose any work. You can drag images to import, but if LR is using entire desktop simply drag to the LR icon in Dock and it's the same as if you drag LR itself. I use keyboard shortcuts in LR to do imports even easier.
Alt/Cmd + Tab takes to another app if you need to go there. I've always used my software to fill screen or screens and swap between them, less clutter and more efficient. Never understood why people like to waste waste time dragging windows around screen with mouse to access other programmes. Maybe they want RSI. ???
Sure, Lightroom's second screen is a bit awkward, but I agree with the comments about people using bigger screens. Plenty of other improvements would be more worthwhile.
Yet dual screen support was a very popular request when it was absent and now the same people would like it to have been implemented in a more useful manner. Being able to have library module on both would be very useful when file managing or as many people have said, having Library module and Dev on separate screens would be nice.
A bigger screen would make makes no real difference to how LR works either [for me that is, besides I have two of them. ;D] If anything unless you hack LR, I'd imagine the side panels get less easy to use the more pixels you have in screen, can't test theory because I already hack LR to get panels that are useably wide enough. Maybe if you use the film strip at bottom....I don't as I have a second screen and find library is much easier to use if I only have one screen, such as with laptop.
-
Sorry, you've been very argumentative recently, so I'll just reiterate my comments. Yeah, sometimes I do like the telly on my second screen, or whatever.
-
Yet dual screen support was a very popular request when it was absent
When LR was first released the use of large 24"/27"/30" was far, far less common. To get enough screen estate people used two screens.
Now 27" is becoming almost a standard for serious imaging, the need for two screens is very much diminished.
As John rightly points out, second screens are often used for other applications, eg mail readers, web browsers, file managers or even just a clock, but not LR.
-
And others would disagree. Even my elderly neighbour who dabbles in photography has two screens. Most of the people I know have two screens in fact and if they work in photography/music/film, then two would be the minimum, 3-4 is not unusual.
Now why on earth would you only use one screen for LR if you have two?
+1
Cheers,
Jay
-
Sorry, you've been very argumentative recently, so I'll just reiterate my comments. Yeah, sometimes I do like the telly on my second screen, or whatever.
Which is fine and dandy. But in the context of people making feature requests, ostensibly to make LR that bit more efficient, deliberately using it less efficiently seems at odds with this thread.
Argumentative... well sadly people have been talking more crap/posting misleading rubbish than is usual here, such as the innacurate 'Duotones can be be saved as RGB files'. They seem to get abusive if you dare to offer any facts to counter that. And apparently I have a brain tumour, so maybe that is the issue! ;D
When LR was first released the use of large 24"/27"/30" was far, far less common. To get enough screen estate people used two screens.
Now 27" is becoming almost a standard for serious imaging, the need for two screens is very much diminished.
The second screen adds functionality not just real estate. Which is what those talking about the second monitor are asking for more of, not more space. And the way it was implemented didn't really actually help with real estate as much as it could have done. One reason being that the panels are still stuck on main monitor.
And I really do not get why people spend so much time saying that other people's feature requests are not important. People ask for things that are of no relevance to me all the time. I wouldn't dream of saying that a certain feature should be ignored in favour of the improvement I want. The debates here and on Scott Kelby's site with regard to a version of photoshop with just the essential features showed that pretty much all features are essential, just a different subset of necessary tools for each user.
As John rightly points out, second screens are often used for other applications, eg mail readers, web browsers, file managers or even just a clock, but not LR.
But not by everyone, otherwise there wouldn't be the regular requests for added functionality over what we have now.
-
Which is fine and dandy. But in the context of people making feature requests, ostensibly to make LR that bit more efficient, deliberately using it less efficiently seems at odds with this thread.
No, it's not using it less efficiently but recognising what people do even if they have a second screen - call it multi-tasking.
And is fiddling around with panel layouts really the same as efficiency? Sure, one or two things might be moved (eg camera calibration) but one of LR's great virtues is you know exactly where every panel is.
-
The second screen adds functionality not just real estate. Which is what those talking about the second monitor are asking for more of, not more space. And the way it was implemented didn't really actually help with real estate as much as it could have done. One reason being that the panels are still stuck on main monitor.
I'm curious as to what functionality you mean
-
He might be talking about how to manage the Library view on a second screen independently from the Dev view on the main screen.
Or have the tool sets on the second screen.
Or having all the folders on the second screen with the grid view.
Filters and metadata as a option to lock in would also be nice.
I hardly ever use the Quick Dev, Since the space is locked in, might as well have it be the main Dev tool for Basic adjust.
Either way, it isn't designed to have options out of the framework of itself.
-
No, it's not using it less efficiently but recognising what people do even if they have a second screen - call it multi-tasking.
Multitasking is doing several things less well. ;)
Apparently less than 4% of the population can genuinely multitask and despite what women like to claim there is no sex bias with regard to who is most able. So yes it is inefficient, unless you are one of the 4%.
And is fiddling around with panel layouts really the same as efficiency? Sure, one or two things might be moved (eg camera calibration) but one of LR's great virtues is you know exactly where every panel is.
And you accuse me of being argumentative!! :o
Why would people not know where things are if they can place tools in a better location for their needs? ???
I use programmes like PS and Premiere where one can rejig the layout of the tools to suit the task [and screens] at hand. This makes it much easier, not harder to use. FCPX is clumsy in comparison with it's less flexible layout.
Would you argue against customisable keyboard shortcuts with the same logic? "You know what they are, so why change them?"
Not having customisable shortcuts is a terrible decision as you always end with varying shortcuts for the same tool in different software packages. LR's current keys are a bit batty in places ['b' for quick collection and 'k' for brush ???], inconsistent in how they work and apparently LR's fixed keys can cause real problems for those who speak other languages and have different keyboard layouts. If you also use ACR, as I do with editing smart objects from PS, you then have different shortcuts for the exact same tools you have in LR, gah!
-
I'm curious as to what functionality you mean
Things like what Phil suggested. The spraycan being in the Dev or Map module could be useful is something else I was just considering. I thought of some more yesterday whilst in LR, but I was busy working at the time and forgot to write them down afterwards.
I did some UI rejigs a while back, but not sure if I kept them.
-
I would like to see the thumbnails show the grayed out cropped area.
-
- My number one must have is improved preview performance and refresh logic. What is especially troublesome is that sometimes (infrequently) previews to not "complete" or "refreshed". I have deleted some images as being soft, only to discover they were sharp as a tack, but not properly rendered in Lightroom. As a consequence I use PhotoMechanic to cull images, as I cannot trust Lightroom.
- I would like to see improved midtone control tools. I find clarity to be a bit heavy handed and would like to see a way to emphasize midtone details, such as the structure control in C1 or the tonal contrast filter in Nik.
- Continued improvement of distraction removal tools. I like the improvements made to the spot removal tool but feel there is lots of room for further enhancements, both in defining the mask shape and in the algorithm to blend the masked and unmasked areas.
- Finally, please, please tweak the auto mask feature in the adjustment brush to avoid halos on sharp contrast boundaries.
-
Multitasking is doing several things less well. ;)
Apparently less than 4% of the population can genuinely multitask and despite what women like to claim there is no sex bias with regard to who is most able. So yes it is inefficient, unless you are one of the 4%.
Apparently, according to a quick search, it's 2% ...
Notwithstanding that ... I have 2 computer systems (different sites) one with 2 monitors, one with 3. I use Lightroom on the one with 3, and often have the preview screen on one screen, while making changes on the other screen, with mail, etc. on the 3rd. Less efficient? No, it allows me to have a holistic view without drilling into a program, then back up (or back and forward it you please). From others in the graphics works, I don't know of anyone with less than 2 screens - I'm sure they are out there ....
At the price of screens these days, why wouldn't you?
-
Apparently, according to a quick search, it's 2% ...
Notwithstanding that ... I have 2 computer systems (different sites) one with 2 monitors, one with 3. I use Lightroom on the one with 3, and often have the preview screen on one screen, while making changes on the other screen, with mail, etc. on the 3rd. Less efficient? No, it allows me to have a holistic view without drilling into a program, then back up (or back and forward it you please). From others in the graphics works, I don't know of anyone with less than 2 screens - I'm sure they are out there ....
At the price of screens these days, why wouldn't you?
Uh, I've used multiple screens for over a decade including a 4 screen setup for Premiere and never said they were an impediment to workflow, because I'm a big fan of using software across multiple screens.
-
I use a pair of 17 inch non-glare MacBook Pro's. An NEC PA271w display is connected to one of them. The other MacBook Pro has an inexpensive 19" monitor connected. Not used for any critical work!
Of course the NEC PA271w display is for digital imaging, client work.
Dual displays is part of my passion with digital imaging.
Cheers
David
-
I don´t know if this was mentioned before, but I would love to have some more features to help the layout on the print module, especially on the "custom package":
- Zoom (mostly to check and adjust the alignment).
- To move (nudge) the selected cell using the arrows or other keys.
- An "auto arrangement" option to evenly space the created cells on the paper.
That is what I remember now.
-
- Ability to zoom-in when using the “angle” (straighten) tool
- Ability to make a fully formatted identification plate with multiple lines of text in different fonts/sizes for printing posters
-
When exporting multiple images using a sequence number, the ability to haev leading zeros: Title-001, Title-002 etc.
-
When exporting multiple images using a sequence number, the ability to haev leading zeros: Title-001, Title-002 etc.
Been there since version 1.
-
1) Auto-stacking. I spent over an hour yesterday organizing a mess of pano and HDR sequences into stacks in the library. I would think this could be automated, perhaps based on image capture time - with user set options to control the process.
Sorry to reply to this so late (I'd lost track of this thread), but that option already exists: "Auto-stack by capture time". And it has options to control it. I use it a lot.
Jeremy
-
Been there since version 1.
Thanks! I never thought to click the Filename Edit button!
-
The least I want from LR 6 is 16-bit output print for Win users >:(
-
The least I want from LR 6 is 16-bit output print for Win users >:(
Better talk to MSFT bud, because until the print pipeline in Windows can handle 16 bits, neither LR nor PS can send a full 16 bit output to the print driver. (besides, you really are not losing much of anything b not having it...)
-
I'm hoping LR6 will include a proper (editable) list view. I'm surprised it hasn't been included yet as IMHO it is such a basic feature from a file management perspective. I love LR, it's one of my favorite piece of software but this is my main gripe.
For those closer to the LR team...has this feature ever been on the to-do list or perhaps in the pipeline for future upgrades?
I can't see that it would be very demanding to add but then I'm ignorant about programming so I may be wrong.
-
I'm hoping LR6 will include a proper (editable) list view.
What's that? Not being critical - I just don't kinow what it is!
-
What's that? Not being critical - I just don't kinow what it is!
It's an alternative (library) view to the thumbnail view you have now in the LR. It makes it MUCH easier to view (and edit) metadata. Think of iTunes when not in album view...you see the songs in a list and you can decide what various columns you want to display (eg year, ratings, bpm etc). In iTunes 9 (still my fav) the album art was the first column and the size could be adjusted to suit (that would be your image in LR...). The way I would like LR would be similar in style to iTunes 9 but in use perhaps more like mp3tag which is a great music file metadata editor.
Probably easier to look at the screenshots than explain...http://www.mp3tag.de/en/index.html (http://www.mp3tag.de/en/index.html)
From what I understand Aperture have had it forever but unfortunately not LR (can someone confirm this and maybe comment on how they think it works).
IMO if LR is to be great photo manager this is necessary.
-
What's that? Not being critical - I just don't kinow what it is!
Something like this List View plug-in for Lightroom (http://lightroomsolutions.com/plug-ins/list-view/) which I wrote because I also found it very odd that Lightroom lacked a list view. You find list views in Explorer or Finder, Adobe's Bridge, DAM programs like iView MediaPro, and there's one in Aperture etc.
We all think our own special requests won't be that difficult to program....
John
(http://lightroomsolutions.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/SNAG-0014-1024x650.png)
-
We all think our own special requests won't be that difficult to program....
yes yes very true lol
John, I've had a brief look at your plugin but I couldn't find a way to edit anything directly in the list. It just displayed the data. Am I correct? If so, is it anything you could look into? I'm sure it's not that difficult... ;)
edit: hm, looking at you attachment, it looks like it is possible to edit in a separate window at least. Can you make batch changes too?
-
Thanks John and Possum. Yes, that would be a very good idea!
-
No, you can't edit directly in the list. I'm already stretching what you can do with the third party API, and spreadsheet-like editing layouts are very awkward. Also, people seem to use ListView mainly for review, sorting by fields which Lightroom doesn't allow, metadata export (eg to InDesign), and I've not had that much interest in editing.
However, I've recently figured out a way for Excel to write directly into Lightroom, and this allows batch edits. My initial proof of concept was shown here (http://lightroomsolutions.com/is-there-an-easier-way-to-get-text-data-into-lightroom/) and the current version is much more sophisticated - up to 250 columns, keywords.
-
OK. late to this thread, sorry. And of course, hoping someone on the LR team is reading ...
But I'm tiring of something which is extremely annoying, which is Lightroom finding a backup up copy of Photoshop CC that is buried 6 folders deep on a secondary drive which is a backup of my Laptop, and launching this instead of the copy that is located in the same folder as lightroom itself is on my Mac. Even if I have photoshop running, it will launch the wrong copy. I just don't get it, and have found no way to fix it. My solution (since I can't unmount the drive because it has stuff I use all the time) is to set the correct copy of Photoshop CC as the secondary editor.
OK easy enough, except now when I edit in PS CC, then save, Lightroom no longer automatically adds the resulting tiff file because it wasn't edited in primary editor. So I have to resync my folder in LR.
Oddly enough if I choose merge to pano the correct copy of PS launches.
-
I would like to be able to save custom workspaces so I don't have to manually close panels and adjust image size. Just a simple preset is all I want.
-
I would like to see mobile LR work with smart collections. I want the last 30 days available without having to update and resync.
-
The option to export PNG files.
-
I need to make circle crops as easy as it is to do rectangular / square crops in LR. I hope they add it to upcoming versions of LR. From my limited research there is not an easy way to do it with the current photo software on the market. I need simple! I can use LR pretty good, but don't not use Photoshop or any other complex computer methods.
I have a lot of circular fisheye images that need to have all the black background cutout. I want to be left with only the circle image. Here is a sample of an image that needs to be cropped into a circle.
(nsfw)
http://zonefocused.tumblr.com/image/87016869234
-
Re: Circular Crops
Bitmap graphics are stored as rectangular arrays. If you crop circularly, you will still be saved to disk, output to web, or where ever it ends up, as a rectangular bitmap. Software will have to fill in the non-circular area with something. White, Black, other, include a mask, etc. The end result will still be rectangular.
I am not sure what this buys you that you don't have today.
-
The elimination of fringing/halo on fine detail that gets introduced when (for example) changing the luminosity of the background colour.
Most easily seen with dark branch details on trees, light blue background, darken up with luminosity and you get a halo effect on all the branches.
Getting rid of that would be most welcome.
-
To Save Keyword Filter lists, and name those lists descriptively, and update those lists. I find I recurrently use lists of filtered words, and they can be time consuming to re-enter each time that list of keyword filters is needed.
To Search within Collections for a Collection Attribute, particularly text within Collection or Collection Set titles.
To Search within History States, for a given Develop state - particularly the state of Print.
Relative Adjustment Presets, rather than absolute values, as many have asked for previously.
Thank you,
John Caldwell
-
I'd really like to be able to sort Collections by alphabetical order of Title for some purposes (e.g. I've been working today with the TTG Client Response Gallery plugin) . Not sure if John's ListView does this, but the sort options for Collections seem a bit basic, Title order seems an obvious lack to me.
-
Jim,
Mine are in alphabetical order by default in 5.4, Win7.
Rich
-
Jim,
On my Window 7 system, the smart collections are listed first, then the regular collection.
Alan
-
Yes, the collection groups first, then the regular collections and at the bottom I have two book collections and three print collections.
Jim may be referring to some other capability than what I am understanding.
Rich
-
Sorry if I was unclear in my last post: I meant I'd like to have the option to sort files by Title within Collections, not just to sort Collections by Title :-[
In other words, I'd like to see Title added to the Sort menu below the grid view of a collection, which at present is quite limited in scope (see attached) and it's a pain to sort 50 images in a collection by Title manually
-
We all think our own special requests won't be that difficult to program....
John
And we all think that our "requirements" won't affect the responsiveness of LR. ::)
Glenn
-
Its been some time now...Anyone want to vote on the initial post?
I have a thought that since Photoshop is now in heaven, perhaps LR would have a chance to evolve its capabilities...At least only in having the options of doing things mentioned initially and many of the wonderful and key points made by you.
-
Sorry if I was unclear in my last post: I meant I'd like to have the option to sort files by Title within Collections, not just to sort Collections by Title :-[
In other words, I'd like to see Title added to the Sort menu below the grid view of a collection, which at present is quite limited in scope (see attached) and it's a pain to sort 50 images in a collection by Title manually
Now I understand, sounds very useful.
Rich
-
Little guessing game:
- no beta this time for LR6
- announced 18th of June
- set in stone features (found in ACR beta): gradients and radial filter can be edited/modified with the brush tool
- the same process version
- improvements in other modules (???)
Not much to wait.
-
I'd really like to be able to sort Collections by alphabetical order of Title .... Not sure if John's ListView does this.....
Yes, it does. But I agree, one shouldn't be forced to use a plug-in for sorting by such common fields.
-
Yes, it does. But I agree, one shouldn't be forced to use a plug-in for sorting by such common fields.
Thanks John, good to know there is a solution!
Jim
-
I'd love an upgraded camera tether function that includes live view and automated focus/exposure bracketing.
-
I like LR to also delete the file in my backup drive when I choose "remove from the disk" because after you deleting lots of pictures from the disc, they are still in back up drive and its annoying to delete them one by one. At least it can give you the option if you want to delete them or not
-
How would it know there is backup and where it is?
-
I like LR to also delete the file in my backup drive when I choose "remove from the disk" because after you deleting lots of pictures from the disc, they are still in back up drive and its annoying to delete them one by one. At least it can give you the option if you want to delete them or not
Sync your back up drive/folders to the main drive and you're sorted. Lots and lots of software that can do that for you.
-
Sync your back up drive/folders to the main drive and you're sorted. Lots and lots of software that can do that for you.
Yes, this isn't really something LR can do - not safely. It's something you have to arrange in conjunction with your backup software. Loads of stuff does that. I use the Microsoft utility Robocopy. Look for something that can do mirror copies or synchronised copies.
Note that this sort of thing is a bit dangerous if you don't have a multi-copy backup system, or some archive system. Otherwise, the moment you mistakenly delete a file, it's also gone from your backup!
-
Note that this sort of thing is a bit dangerous if you don't have a multi-copy backup system, or some archive system. Otherwise, the moment you mistakenly delete a file, it's also gone from your backup!
Not quite as until you empty Trash on the Mac or Recycle bin on PC, it's still hanging around. But once they are emptied....
Also recovering deleted files is quite easy as until written over they are still there.
-
How would it know there is backup and where it is?
When you import file in LR, it also asks where to put the backup files so it supposed to has FAT of all backed-up files I think.
-
When you import file in LR, it also asks where to put the backup files so it supposed to has FAT of all backed-up files I think.
But that's a waste of time as it doesn't then take note of your alterations once in LR, so you may as well back your work up properly.
-
Better talk to MSFT bud, because until the print pipeline in Windows can handle 16 bits, neither LR nor PS can send a full 16 bit output to the print driver. (besides, you really are not losing much of anything b not having it...)
Jeff, can I ask that either you or Michael or the two of you write up an essay on this? I suppose the implication here is that the Apple versions of LR/PS can deliver 16bit output to the print driver and print using that rather than from an 8bit image. As a Windows users, I never suspected this kind of difference, now I'm wondering if all the professionals use Apple for good reason (aside from usability preferences) but you're suggesting not? The pixel peeper in me is curious about this topic (and I'm sure others would be too!) but this thread doesn't seem the right place for it.
-
It would REALLY be USEFUL to have histogram pixel readouts and clipping indicators in Library.
-
As a Windows users, I never suspected this kind of difference, now I'm wondering if all the professionals use Apple for good reason (aside from usability preferences) but you're suggesting not?
I really wouldn't loose any sleep over it...fact is, if you are working with 16 bit images and using the Adobe ACE when printing from LR or Ps, you won't really be at a disadvantage...The Adobe ACE CMM does it's color transforms in 20-bit precision before sending the final 8-bit to the print pipeline.
-
Two things I like LR has:
-Easy mirror for canvas without using PS, automatically.
-Restro option in case you loose your main hard and want to restore everything from your back-up external drive without hassle. I am still not sure if anything happened to my hard disk, how to use all these back up files!
-
An export preset that activates a group of export presets. Is such a thing that hard to add?
-
The ability to batch export embedded raw smart objects, without having to open and save them in PS as is now required.
-
I wish LR could show the focus point.
This information is displayed for my Canon DSLR cameras using DPP (Digital Photo Professional) and with Aperture.
Seeing the focus points can be very helpful for understanding why some pictures seem out of focus.
-
Its been some time now...Anyone want to vote on the initial post?
I have a thought that since Photoshop is now in heaven, perhaps LR would have a chance to evolve its capabilities...At least only in having the options of doing things mentioned initially and many of the wonderful and key points made by you.
+1 for Better Dual Monitor support.
(+1Trillion if I could !)
-
When importing images, quick access to the Desktop as the source without having to drill down thru c:\users\username\desktop.
-
And if I drag a group of images or a folder from the finder to a LR folder, that LR folder should automatically be selected as the destination folder in the import dialog box. Duh.
-
When importing images, quick access to the Desktop as the source without having to drill down thru c:\users\username\desktop.
You can already do that as the arrow next to the 'Select a source' gives you a list of places recently imported from. I always copy off card to a folder named 'To Import' and then that's top of the recent list when I import pics into LR. And as it happens 'Desktop' is also there along with 'recent places'.
-
As long as Adobe includes an Apple I phone camera profile in Lightroom; how about a profile for Samsung Note / Galaxy currently the most popular phone in north america ?? I never thought I would ever take a meaningful photograph with a camera phone but late last week I caught a Commercial spray truck (1,500 gallon tank) cleaning his tank with water from a trout stream and flushing the residue into the trout stream. I have already printed pics for the prosecuting authorities and for myself to use as an exhibit when testifying.
-
You can already do that as the arrow next to the 'Select a source' gives you a list of places recently imported from. I always copy off card to a folder named 'To Import' and then that's top of the recent list when I import pics into LR. And as it happens 'Desktop' is also there along with 'recent places'.
OK, thanks!
-
Automatic paper length when using roll paper. If I set 1" top and bottom margins and my print is 12.5" high, the paper size should automatically be set to 14.5". If the print is 16.25" high, then it should be set at 18.25".
-
In the Develop module: Love the local adjustment tools. A polygon, square / rectangle version of the Radial filter would be handy. If there is one out there, or I'm missing it, let me know.
John
-
When defining rules for smart collections, it would help in debugging if one could temporarily turn off a rule without deleting it.
-
It would be very useful if Lightroom could take the dust delete map which can be output from a Canon camera and automatically apply that information to photographs in the way which can be done with Canon's own DPP.
-
I'd like to have a way to change the default "Edit In" application. Right now, LR defaults to the latest version of Photoshop installed on the computer and there's no way to change this. Yes, you can select a secondary application, but the "Open in Layers" and "Merge to Panorama" options only work with the default application.
Given the recent problems with Photomerge, etc. in CC 2014, it would be nice to be able to bypass it and use an earlier version -- with these time saving options in the "Edit" menu.
(sorry if this has already been posted -- I haven't read the entire thread)
-
and instant slideshow... ???
-
There is a quick slideshow feature in LR now. Select the images from the library. Hold down ctrl and enter (windows)
-
I'd like to see the Whites and Blacks sliders added to the adjustment brush.
Sometimes I like to use the brush to reduce exposure, contrast, and saturation of the background of outdoor portraits and sometimes as part of that I need to bring up the black levels so the background contrast doesn't compete with the subject. None of the existing brush sliders, including Shadows, really allow you to bring up values that are close to solid black.
-
I want to be able to more finely tune the counters at export to use leading 0s (zeros). When I export, I get things like "myfile-9.jpg", "myfile-10.jpg"... and of course these don't sort properly alphabetically. I'd want to be able to export to a naming scheme like "myfile-009.jpg", "myfile-010.jpg" - and be able to specify the range of course.
I do know they are DOZENS of ways to adjust the file names after the fact, from dedicated apps to scripts in dozens of scripting languages, and I'm using them... But really, I shouldn't have to do it.
-
I'd want to be able to export to a naming scheme like "myfile-009.jpg", "myfile-010.jpg"
You've been able to do this since Lr1. In the export dialog, filename section, edit the filename and choose sequence which allows you to add leading zeroes.
-
Yay - I hadn't realized that - and yes, I HAVE been working with LR since version 1...
Thanks a lot!
-
I want to be able to more finely tune the counters at export to use leading 0s (zeros). When I export, I get things like "myfile-9.jpg", "myfile-10.jpg"... and of course these don't sort properly alphabetically. I'd want to be able to export to a naming scheme like "myfile-009.jpg", "myfile-010.jpg" - and be able to specify the range of course.
As John has pointed out, it's easy to do in LR. In fact, at least under Mavericks, the Mac Finder will sort files with numbers in their names properly even without the leading zeroes. See here (https://www.dropbox.com/s/8hstvgzlf5p0dpq/Screenshot%202014-09-20%2018.38.53.jpg?dl=0), for example.
Jeremy
-
As John has pointed out, it's easy to do in LR. In fact, at least under Mavericks, the Mac Finder will sort files with numbers in their names properly even without the leading zeroes. See here (https://www.dropbox.com/s/8hstvgzlf5p0dpq/Screenshot%202014-09-20%2018.38.53.jpg?dl=0), for example.
A slight digression - If you want to improve your computer time on a Mac replace Finder with something useful instead - Pathfinder (http://www.cocoatech.com/pathfinder/)
If I had to use Finder, I'd wipe my Mac and install Windows instead.
-
A slight digression - If you want to improve your computer time on a Mac replace Finder with something useful instead - Pathfinder (http://www.cocoatech.com/pathfinder/)
If I had to use Finder, I'd wipe my Mac and install Windows instead.
I suppose it depends on how you use the Mac. I spend minimal time in the Finder and the vast majority in Word, LR and PS (and their plugins), Mail and 4th Dimension. I use DefaultFolder and Butler (or some equivalents). I've looked at PathFinder - and I know a lot of people swear by it - but I've never seen that it offers me anything I really need.
Jeremy
-
LR6 needs to have a wait to "abort" an image processing task of some kind of warning that the expected processing of the image will "hang" the application.
On smaller capacity hosts (say ~4GB), opening large TIF files (for example) leads LR to become unresponsive, giving Windows reason to say "Do you want to end the process."
It would be useful if LR could try and predict if the image file is going to cause this kind of thing to happen or present a dialogue of some description allowing "long render file tasks" to be aborted.
-
Something I noticed doing a lot.....I'm in Dev mode, and doing some basic edits and I often need to copy the Receipt from a file earlier. I have tried going to the previos file and Right Clicking on it to Copy Settings, but it just copies the selected file. I don't want to select it and wait for it to Load and be in focus before I can have the receipt and move one.
Perhaps there already is a way to copy the Settings in Dev mode without selecting?
-
Perhaps there already is a way to copy the Settings in Dev mode without selecting?
Yes, just right click on the file in the filmstrip and select: Develop Settings > copy settings
-
In the list of things that can be disable on top of images (CTRL-J, View Options), can "Print size at 300dpi" be included?
Whilst knowing the "dimensions" is useful, the only time I care about that is when I need the dimensions to divide by 300 to see how big it will be when printed.
-
My current small annoyance: I'm currently cleaning up a series of photo's from a very dirty sensor. The height of the sky differs from shot to shot, so they need individual attention. But to move to the next shot, I have to go out of the healing tool, go to the next shot, turn it on, turn visualise on (at the other end of the screen, also annoying)
-
But to move to the next shot, I have to go out of the healing tool, go to the next shot, turn it on, turn visualise on (at the other end of the screen, also annoying)
No you don't :) You just click the other image in the filmstrip.
-
Thanks a lot
(hardly ever use the film strip, always the arrows)
-
Thanks a lot
(hardly ever use the film strip, always the arrows)
Better yet, just use cmd + arrow
-
Adding the export dialogue as a panel in the library module. Allowing multiple formats of the same image(s) selected to be exported simultaneously.
Capture One Pro 8 does this well.
-
I would like to be able to set white balance for infrared images. A Channel swap would be a bonus too but I suspect that's not possible.
-
Adding the export dialogue as a panel in the library module. Allowing multiple formats of the same image(s) selected to be exported simultaneously.
Capture One Pro 8 does this well.
Ah, it's actually more efficient [multi-processor wise] to do this in separate steps. Though being able to do as you say would indeed be useful.
-
Though being able to do as you say would indeed be useful.
The main request would be to be able to do this via a panel in the library module, rather than wading through drop down menus.
-
I don't think this merits its own panel. But there is a need to select and simultaneously run multiple presets in the export dialog, and a few plug-ins offer this kind of workflow.
-
I don't think this merits its own panel.
YMMV, the left hand side of the library module isn't exactly over populated. I've never used the 'publish services' panel and 'an 'Export' panel would sit nicely and logically above it.
-
The main request would be to be able to do this via a panel in the library module, rather than wading through drop down menus.
A panel wouldn't work as the limited narrowness of the panels would make for an inferior interface compared to the current modal dialogue.
Not sure what you mean by drop down menus, I simply use Cntrl/Cmd + Shift + E to open Export dialogue. I hide menus anyway and very, very rarely need to use them.
-
A panel wouldn't work as the limited narrowness of the panels would make for an inferior interface compared to the current modal dialogue.
Works fine in Capture One 8
-
I'm really late to the party but I would love to see a couple of changes in the adjustment brush area:
1. I'd really like the flow and density sliders to be in "real time". Now if I want to change either I have to erase the pin and start again or else create a new pin nearby the first. I know that the current system is "additive" and similar to PS, but PS has the opacity adjustment for layers and LR obviously does not.
2. Just a tweak but I sure wish LR would create a keyboard shortcut for turning the active pin's painted area on and off. I find it a pain to have to check and uncheck that box at the bottom of the screen. I know that I can highlight the painted area by hovering my cursor over the active pin but that goes away when I move the cursor.
-
2. Just a tweak but I sure wish LR would create a keyboard shortcut for turning the active pin's painted area on and off. I find it a pain to have to check and uncheck that box at the bottom of the screen. I know that I can highlight the painted area by hovering my cursor over the active pin but that goes away when I move the cursor.
Keyboard shortcut is "O" (the letter).
-
Thanks Rory. I never knew that but sure wish I had.
-
Perfect Photo Suite 9 integrates a new option for Noise Reduction.
You can apply "only for Blue or green, or ..." !
Seems to be very interresting in some cases.
Hope Lightrom 6 will integrate such possibilities or better of course :-)
Have a Nice Day.
Thierry
-
I like to have access to all tools in Adjustment brush especially HSL and B&W that I can apply color correction in just selected area of photo that it needs. This almost (almost!) let me get rid of Ps!
-
I haven't read though all the previous posts, so I apologize if someone has already suggested this...
I would like an option that prints out text (with at least user-defined font size and text location) overlayed on a print that shows selected settings in at least the basic and color panels of the Develop module, that correspond to the image being printed. The idea being that this would help with dialing in a rendering intent by documenting incremental changes when soft-proofing is just not cutting it for a particular paper/profile combination.
-
Seems like many requests are already implemented!
Here goes ... i'd like to have grid show bigger images. On a 30" screen i can only get a max of 4 per row, which often makes them too small for culling.
Alternatively, i'd like to be able to enter survey mode (n) and then be able to select the same next number of images. So for example, if i was seeing 4, i'd press a key, and the next four would be selected and displayed.
Appart from that, faster would always be good!
-
I'm very happy with LR5, but there are a couple of small things I would love to see added.
1. In Develop module, when syncing development settings across images, I would like the History (left-side panel) to actually list what settings where sync'ed. Right now it just says "Synchronize Settings." Maybe have the individually synced settings listed indented under "Synchronize Settings." I'd also like to see this implemented for the "Apply During Import" "Develop Settings." In my opinion, listing "Synchronize Settings" in the history panel doesn't tell me anything and can make it difficult to figure out what was applied with the sync versus what was applied otherwise.
2. If exporting files to be editing in another application (e.g. Nik or OnOne, etc), it'd be great if the exported file name could be tailored for each program. Instead of just appending "-edit" at the end, I'd like to have LR append unique identifiers based on the program it was exported to. When the external editing it done, and the file is automatically imported back into LR, I would love if the History panel told me what program the image was imported from, rather than just "Import (date & time).
3. My dream addition to LR6 would be for the program to be opened up for third-party modules. For example, a Nik Software module (along side Library, Develop, Map) that could include all their products and enable non-destructive editing. I think Jeff Schewe mentioned this as something he wanted during one of the LuLu LR video tutorials.
No matter what, I'm looking forward to seeing what Adobe does with v6.
Cheers,
Jeff
-
3. My dream addition to LR6 would be for the program to be opened up for third-party modules. For example, a Nik Software module (along side Library, Develop, Map) that could include all their products and enable non-destructive editing.
I think a lot of us were expecting this to be in the future when we were going through the initial betas. I've personally given up hope that this will happen, but I sure would love to be wrong. It would be a killer improvement.
-
I think a lot of us were expecting this to be in the future when we were going through the initial betas. I've personally given up hope that this will happen, but I sure would love to be wrong. It would be a killer improvement.
Isn't that essentially what we already have with the "Virtual Copy/Right-Click" protocol?
Using stuff like the Nik suite is just so easy from within Lightroom at present, that I can't imagine much benefit from messing around with it.
What would the proposed "enhancement" save? Two mouse clicks?
-
What would the proposed "enhancement" save? Two mouse clicks?
It saves the need to create big TIF files whose settings can't be edited....
-
It saves the need to create big TIF files whose settings can't be edited....
Which is the primary reason I rarely if ever use the plug-ins.
-
A 'Back up now' button.
An option to complete a back up when LR closes next, but after the one off back up reverts to the previous schedule.
Useful when upgrading, or having done a major import or catalogue reorganisation.
-
A 'Back up now' button.
An option to complete a back up when LR closes next, but after the one off back up reverts to the previous schedule.
Useful when upgrading, or having done a major import or catalogue reorganisation.
TPG Lr Backup (http://photographers-toolbox.com/products/mdawson/tpglrbackup/) - donationware
Backs up all your config files as well as the catalog
(http://photographers-toolbox.com/products/mdawson/tpglrbackup/images/Menus.png)
-
TPG Lr Backup (http://photographers-toolbox.com/products/mdawson/tpglrbackup/) - donationware
Backs up all your config files as well as the catalog
Which confirms there's a demand for it that feature to be part of Lightroom.
-
Which confirms there's a demand for it that feature to be part of Lightroom...
... and in the meantime there's an excellent plug-in, offering all your requested functionality and more, for a few pennies (if you're honest), to you, and anyone else reading the thread, who might have thunk it yet been unaware of it.
No more waiting for Godot.
-
I was planning to build a new PC system, and over at the Adobe forum (LR) asked about best video card. I weas told that unlike PS, LR doesn't use the GPU, all processing is on the CPU. Is this true? Seems weird Asobe doesn't utilize the GPU to process raws, render out video slifdeshows, etc.
I love the slidesho modulke output 1080p and 720p videos.
Now with4k maturing, I'd like to see a 4k slideshow option in 6
I'm excited to get a 4k monitor. Would love to see the photos on a 60" 4k!
Also on my list:
1) A drop shadow option in the print module, I do comps to jpgs from the print module and have to go into PS to manually add a little drop shadow.
2) In the Slideshow module, ability to a a fade to black. a photo by photo ability to set duration. A simple text ability. Add say a black frame with a title (other than the start and end slide) should be simple.
3) Ability to have floating windows. Example, have 2 collections open at once to copy images back and forth.
4) I like how LR mobile displays the thumbnails. I see no benefit how the library module only display images with that wasted grey slide around the image. At least allow the option of having no gaps between frames.
-
How about a Gallery Wrap preset in the Print module
greyscale
-
Ability to set a path variable to Photoshop (in Preferences). That way we'll hopefully eliminate the persistent 'Application Moved' warning dialog - see screenshot attached.
-
I use dual screens, I'm just so used of it at this stage that it doesn't bother me, although with that said I certainly wouldn't mind LR making some big improvements to its functionality. :)
-
The ability to Edit in the open photoshop application on the main drive rather than the backup application on the remote drive.
-
The ability to create a smart collection based upon whether or not a series of photographs have or have not been printed. I don't really understand why that isn't available anyway but I suppose there is some complex reason for this omission.
-
I would like to be able to set white balance for infrared images. A Channel swap would be a bonus too but I suspect that's not possible.
Channel swapping is already possible with custom profiles:
http://www.capturemonkey.com/redblueswap-lightroom-profiles
Some cameras could use a bit more range in the adjustments, but at least it allows initial previewing.
-
The ability to create a smart collection based upon whether or not a series of photographs have or have not been printed. I don't really understand why that isn't available anyway but I suppose there is some complex reason for this omission.
Yes! Or more broadly, to be able to Search within History states for states like Print, Export and so on.
John Caldwell
-
In addition to a fix for the very annoying "Application Moved" dialog that insists on appearing every time I want to go to Photoshop, I'd like an easy, intuitive way to manage, modify, and otherwise edit keywords.
-
Apologies if this has been mentioned elsewhere, but.....
LR 6 should be adapted to work much better with the Surface Pro 3. The latter is a great machine for managing and editing images while travelling, as is the MacBook Air. The Surface unique touchscreen and stylus interface are not well used however: you still need the physical keyboard for the CTRL and SHIFT keys, and the stylus right-click features are not recognised. I am likely to have the Surface's keyboard with me at all times, but I really don't want to bring a mouse.
PS is slightly better adapted to the Surface Pro 3 (after all, Adobe has made a great play on this), but it still does not recognise the stylus right-click (eg for selecting curve points in ACR).
-
LR6 or the next version can seriously help users if it would have a Library Location History(Recent Locations).....And allowing a good chunk of a log file would be very helpful when managing edits for clients and moving from one project to another.
The History feature is really helpful...Indispensable really, and does include some history to the location among all the developing steps!...... BUT....I think there is a major way to improve or add functionality by having a Location History/Recent Locations, or viewed files that would take you back to the file location.
I had posted this thread sometime back, and I thought I would forget about the initial features I wanted, but mostly I have been dummied down and dealing with the way it is.
Well, I hope someone else sees the value in this Library History feature I wish Adobe would implement!
-
Look in the filmstrip where you'll find Recent Sources and can save favourites. Been there since 1.0 ;)
-
LOL!! :o
Not the first time I've done something the hard way.
I could delete my post :-\
-
It's a good and, as you say, a necessary feature and I'm surprised Adobe haven't made it more obvious or extended it.
Also in the filmstrip are a couple of back and forward arrows which also have keyboard shortcuts - Alt+Ctrl+left/right arrow or Mac Opt+Cmd+left/right arrow.
-
OK, Just tried using the Recent folders feature today...
Its got a list of only 12. Can we change that to 20 or 30?
If you have your personal images in 1 year even, all by dates That is potentially 365 days. This area can use improvement if its limited to 12 recents. I see the Fav feature and maybe helpful for other things.
Even a popup thumbnail of what image I last looked at in the folder would futher enhance this area.
Bottom line is that 12 is not enough and should be definable. It obvious this was a needed feature since v1 (I got on LR @v3).
If your database is relatively large (300,000-350,000 images), and contains many folders with date organization, this area is lacking some features. I know creating metadata and collections might help for more long term image organization and this I have slowly added to newer shoots, but for personal images I often don't go through the trouble, and store by date.
-
I think the limit of 12 is sufficient, and you also have favourites. Surely the problem is that not many people notice it's there?
Other solutions might work better. For example, I love how the filter box at the top of Keyword List makes managing long lists so much easier. I'd love to see that feature copied to the Folders panel, and augmented by recent/favourite sources.
-
Yes, if you use the other tools as you mention and collections/smart, its much easier to manage.
I have been using it mainly as a Developer with folder hierarchy style management. I have been a bit less invested in it as I am not sure about its future as far as going CC or not. So I simply don't trust Adobe.
Although I think investing all the keywords in LR would help universally, and other DAM's could pick up and use that info to manage with more or less little effort. The Filtering of Keywords on Folders would be nice way to use the Smart collections more dynamically.
But you are correct, using those tools(keywording with filtering/collections) make that Recent 12 OK. Just not looking forward to doing so much to over a 2mil photos on multiple Catalogs. I just rather use a 30+ step log in Recent Edits(I should have clarified earlier. Not just recent browsed, but folders that I made edits in would be more useful than pointless logs of browsing) :-)
-
Being able to rotate image without a constraining crop. A bit like as you can with lens corrections could be very useful, but working in reverse - an expanding crop as it were. Which I was sure PS did at one time, though can't find option now. :-\
Currently even with no constraining crop enabled in lens correction, you lose pixels off images edges.
This idea means you can easily fill in blank areas in Photoshop using say content aware without a lot of faffing/workarounds or losing smart object status. Plus being able to rotate/correct with raw images and not lose pixels.
-
I'd like to see the Web Galleries be based on HTML5 so that one gets flexible formatting whether the screen in a tablet, phone, or 30 inch monitor.
-
This idea means you can easily fill in blank areas in Photoshop using say content aware without a lot of faffing/workarounds or losing smart object status. Plus being able to rotate/correct with raw images and not lose pixels.
Good Idea. Often I am forced to go to PS earlier than I need. Or even compromise the image final sometimes out of speed over artistic preference.
But since the "page size" is locked in LR, it cant expand past the size to do what you say. That would be a nice addition to unlock it.
-
First of all, i'm new, great forum! ;)
About the op question, i would really be happy to have the HSL/Color/B&W Panel available in the brush. Would be really amazing :)
-
Yes, I wish they would have more fine detail adjustments in the "select regions" ie brush and grads.
I also think the "Quick Adjustments" in the Library mode is a crutch.
I think I understand its intended purpose to be a fast way to sort and see the image in a couple clicks of different adjustments, but why not just have the main exposure adjustments with the sliders? If you want those large steps in adjustment, just add something with arrows that make larger incremental changes.
-
I also think the "Quick Adjustments" in the Library mode is a crutch.
No, it can be useful. Say you have 10 images that you judge to be .3 of stop too light. You want to change them as a group all at once. If you use the Develop module, the exposure change will be the same for all 10 images. Lets say image one is -1EV and image two is +1EV. If you set the exposure to -.3 for all, then image one is now -.3EV and two is -.3EV. Not what you wanted.
If you use the Library module and darken by -.3EV then image on is now -1.3EV and two is +.7EV. The exposure is relative in this case and absolute in the case of the Develop module.
Larry
-
No, it can be useful. Say you have 10 images that you judge to be .3 of stop too light. You want to change them as a group all at once. If you use the Develop module, the exposure change will be the same for all 10 images. Lets say image one is -1EV and image two is +1EV. If you set the exposure to -.3 for all, then image one is now -.3EV and two is -.3EV. Not what you wanted.
If you use the Library module and darken by -.3EV then image on is now -1.3EV and two is +.7EV. The exposure is relative in this case and absolute in the case of the Develop module.
Larry
I agree ... Quick Edit is very useful for working with larger volumes of images on a tight deadline for proofing. I routinely shoot events where I and my team accumulate 2,000-6,000 images in the course of a day ... we need to turn those images around quickly. While sliders may improve the ability to fine-tune an adjustment ... it certainly wouldn't save me any time.
I would be very pleased to see an option for a slider, or the ability to enter a numerical value that is different from one-third or full step.
-
Agreed. Quick Develop is one of the best features (and little understood) areas of Library. It is the sole place where relative adjustments are possible. More flexibility would be great. I don't know if sliders would help the intuition of the feature however. Since the adjustments are relative, the arrows are much more descriptive of what is actually going on.
-
The treatment for this problem is to actually have Relative Adjustments available in Develop. To have access this feature in the module where no one actually does serious image processing, Library; instead of in Develop, is odd - no? Odd or not, Relative Adjustments should be in Develop, through Preset, Synchronize or some other means.
John Caldwell
-
I certainly see your point Larry, and I also would agree with John. I see them as each a "crossover" feature .
Of course keep the feature in the Library, but have the hybride of the opposite. So both having the same features now, but in hybrid. The dominant being the same, but the added feature of the opposite.
I honestly never used the 1/3 across a group of images, and maybe I never felt the need, but sure see its use...YET, I would like at least the exposure and the main adjustments to be a available with sliders as an option to adjust while browsing around in the images, and then go to full dev after evaluating the images. I guess this thought came to me after needing it and I got tired of doing all the multiple clicking and then using the >> which is a 1 stop, and finding that often to be too much in multiple clicks , etc.
In the end, its all digital, how hard is a flyout set of sliders tools in one module vs a set of linear stop click tools in the other module :-)
I have to admit, there are much more important Must Haves :-)
-
The treatment for this problem is to actually have Relative Adjustments available in Develop. To have access this feature in the module where no one actually does serious image processing, Library; instead of in Develop, is odd - no? Odd or not, Relative Adjustments should be in Develop, through Preset, Synchronize or some other means.
That's exactly what I though, but even better have it in both places.
Relative adjustments would be very useful for presets.
-
Drag and drop quick edit function would be useful to have
Otherwise I'm mostly happy speed could be better though
-
Yes, I think speed is #1.
At some point you have to think, it is taking advantage of X# of processors, it is using all the ram, it is making thumbs in the DB for small sizes as option, and although catalogs can be very small, large, med, XL, etc...
What is the threshold for optimal speed?
After how much does it see a real sluggish performance?
What can the software developers do to make things faster?
These are things I wonder if they are just a matter of the DB size. Maybe there is a sweet spot to breakup the DB into multiple? I already have with image usgae, but still have lots of images in a couple of them.
Another thing I have been doing...Spot removal in Photoshop. Why use up all that math to image which does slow things down when I don't expect to undo this edit.
-
Gosh, I learn something new every day. I never thought to explore the "quick develop" in Library.
-
It would be helpful to see a time stamp when you passed the cursor over an entry in the History log.
-
It would be helpful to see a time stamp when you passed the cursor over an entry in the History log.
You mean you don't? By default I see the date and then the time with no need to hover. Or maybe I don't understand what you are looking for. ???
-
You mean you don't? By default I see the date and then the time with no need to hover. Or maybe I don't understand what you are looking for. ???
I see date and time for import and exports, but not for edits. This is good news if the feature is already there. Anyone know how to turn it on?
-
I see date and time for import and exports, but not for edits. This is good news if the feature is already there. Anyone know how to turn it on?
Ok, now I see what you mean. I have the date/time for import and exports, but not for edits. Sorry.
-
It would be helpful to see a time stamp when you passed the cursor over an entry in the History log.
Out of curiosity, why would you need this?
-
Out of curiosity, why would you need this?
If I had a better workflow I wouldn't, but... I sometimes take a long time to process a photo - as in months. I'll get to a point to where I'm happy with it and leave it for awhile. Then a couple months later I'll go take a look and be tempted to make some changes, and I do, maybe a long string of subtle edits. Then I want to compare it to where it was before and I go take a look at the History log so I can click at the point where I was before (last month, this morning, etc.) and I can't tell where that was. If I had exported or printed at a previous stopping point then I'd be OK, but sometimes I haven't.
I suggest showing the date/time stamp as a mouse-over because there really isn't room to show it with the edit description and it would just add clutter.
-
I sometimes take a long time to process a photo - as in months. I'll get to a point to where I'm happy with it and leave it for awhile. Then a couple months later I'll go take a look and be tempted to make some changes, and I do, maybe a long string of subtle edits. Then I want to compare it to where it was before and I go take a look at the History log so I can click at the point where I was before (last month, this morning, etc.) and I can't tell where that was.
Snapshots provide essentially this functionality—and even default to assigning a timestamp as the snapshot name. To compare the parameters used for different sets of edits, just keep an eye on the slider values as you cycle among different snapshots.
-
Snapshots provide essentially this functionality...
Thank you Chris. I tried using Snapshot and it does not correlate the snapshot to a point in the History log. I want to know where in the History log the snapshot was taken. Am I missing something?
-
Thank you Chris. I tried using Snapshot and it does not correlate the snapshot to a point in the History log. I want to know where in the History log the snapshot was taken. Am I missing something?
If you're not working from the top of the history stack, you need to highlight the step within the stack that represents the parameters for the image you want to preserve before clicking the "+" snapshot button.
This is easier to do prospectively than retrospectively. Based on your scenario, when you first achieve an image that satisfies you, create a snapshot at the current top of the history stack. If you subsequently tweak the file and achieve a new image you want to memorialize, create another snapshot at the updated top of the history stack. I hope that's clear.
Lightroom's history, as I understand it, is primarily intended simply as a record of how you arrived at the current state of the image's processing. Snapshots and virtual copies are a better way to preserve alternative post-processing states than hunting around in the history stack.
If you don't already have a copy, my experience is that Jeff Shewe's book, "The Digital Negative," provides useful guidance on how best to exploit these features. (Jeff is an active contributor to this forum, by the way.) I don't know whether he plans an update when LR 6 is released, but the current version of the book probably will remain useful for quite a while.
-
Yup snapshots and virtual copies are a much better ways of doing what you want Paul.
So as soon as you get to a point you like with an image make a VC. Though it's a good idea to do a snapshot of a VC as for some bizarre reason VC's are not stored in XMP, whereas snapshots are.
So if you back up to xmp and your catalogue goes squiffy, you do not lose any develop edit variations. You should also back up your catalogue BTW.
-
The only way I can get a time stamped snapshot record to appear in my history stack is to click on the snapshot after it has been created, and then it is placed in the history stack at whatever point I am currently at, which has no correlation at all to the point at which that snapshot was originally taken.
-
The time something was done is a bit of a red herring Paul. It doesn't really matter, nor in a programme like LR does the history order matter that much. Everything is re-editable at any point and you mostly do not really need really need history unless you want to return to a specific state. So if you do a snapshot/VC at every point you think is significant or have 'finished' then you can go 'back in time' that way without worrying about when something was done. History in a programme like LR is quite different from History in a programme like PS where the order things are done can matter.
VCs and snapshots were invented as a better more versatile way of doing what you need, rahter than stepping back through history.
-
Here's an image that I have numerous variations of. Some for different looks and others are to demonstrate LR techniques.
As you can see there are an awful lot of snapshots [21] and also a selection of VCs [10] as seen on second monitor. More than usual, but this is a demo shot.
I give snapshots a name that mean something to me and I do not worry about the date or order I do something in, because it doesn't really matter anymore. But if it did, snapshots get a default name of date/time, which you can add to or modify.
-
The time something was done is a bit of a red herring Paul. It doesn't really matter, nor in a programme like LR does the history order matter that much. Everything is re-editable at any point and you mostly do not really need really need history unless you want to return to a specific state. So if you do a snapshot/VC at every point you think is significant or have 'finished' then you can go 'back in time' that way without worrying about when something was done. History in a programme like LR is quite different from History in a programme like PS where the order things are done can matter.
VCs and snapshots were invented as a better more versatile way of doing what you need, rahter than stepping back through history.
OK now I get it. I will adjust my expectations and change my behavior (take more snapshots) to adjust for this. Thank you for the explanation. :)
-
Glad I made sense.