Before and After Image Windows in CS4.

[Dinarius]

Since, for resons best know to themselves, Adobe failed to incorporate access to the 'Before and After' feature from within the Print Module in Lightroom 2 (forgiveable in LR1, unforgiveable in LR2, IMHO) I'm wondering if there is any quick and easy way to create two open windows of the same image in CS4?

Thanks.

D.

[Jeremy Payne]

unforgiveable in LR2, IMHO

Dang, you are tough.  

Never noticed myself ... but it is really only one click away ...

What's the big use case for this?

[PeterAit]

Since, for resons best know to themselves, Adobe failed to incorporate access to the 'Before and After' feature from within the Print Module in Lightroom 2 (forgiveable in LR1, unforgiveable in LR2, IMHO) I'm wondering if there is any quick and easy way to create two open windows of the same image in CS4?

Thanks.

D.

There's a Duplicate command on one of the menus, Image I think (I'm not at my imaging computer right now). Then tile the 2 windows as you like.

Peter

[Dinarius]

There's a Duplicate command on one of the menus, Image I think (I'm not at my imaging computer right now). Then tile the 2 windows as you like.

Peter

Thanks. Yes, I'm aware of that. Works OK with a portrait frame, but a landscape frame takes quite a bit of tweaking to get them sized. In LR it's just a click of a button.

Jeremy, the reason is that you can do final soft proof editing for print with a large image open.

e.g. With a final edited image open, choose Image/Duplicate and size them so that they're side by side on the sceen.

Now choose View/Proof Setup/Cutom and choose the paper profile for the paper type you're using. The active image will now change due to the affect of the profile. Now you can toggle through the Rendering Intents in the same dialog and see which one most approximates the master image (the inactive window).

Finally, you can make final adjustments to the active window to make it look identical to the master image.

Then you can print it safe in the knowledge that you will get exactly what you're seeing on the screen.

It is brainless that this is not possible in LR's Print Module.

In his excellent book Adobe Photoshop CS4 for Photographers, Martin Evening goes into this in some detail.

You can read it here>

http://books.google.ie/books?id=crkuo7fwM4...;q=&f=false

D.

[Jeremy Payne]

Ok ... so you are asking for soft-proofing in Lightroom ... fair enough.

I forgive them for not including it in LR 2.x, but I might not if they leave it out of LR 3.x.  

When I want to print, I open the image from LR as a Smart Object in CS4 *TWICE*.

I hold one steady and I proof/tweak the second ... when done, I only save the proofed version back into LR and print from there.

[Jeremy Payne]

It is brainless that this is not possible in LR's Print Module

Having worked to develop a very popular and broadly used piece of software myself, I think I have a bit more sympathy for the product management and prioritization challenges here.  They know we want this and they've done an excellent job of bringing this app along in my humble opinion.

[PeterAit]

Having worked to develop a very popular and broadly used piece of software myself, I think I have a bit more sympathy for the product management and prioritization challenges here.  They know we want this and they've done an excellent job of bringing this app along in my humble opinion.

Soft proofing in LR would be a good addition, but of limited value because some of the tools you would use to adjust the soft proof to look the way you want are not available in LR, only in PS.

Cheers,

Peter

[Schewe]

I hold one steady and I proof/tweak the second ... when done, I only save the proofed version back into LR and print from there.

Boy, sure sucks to me you bud...seriously, twice the files and twice the work?

You know that the whole reason for Smart Objects from raws are so you can always modify the actual parameters right? You really only ever need a single raw file SO (maybe a couple of copies of the SO for blending) but from what you've stated I see no reason to do this whole set of maneuvers twice...

As for the benefit of soft proofing in Lightroom being limited by it's tool sets, dooode, hush your mouth. All you really need os a tone curve and a set of hue and sat controls. At least that's what I use on 95% of the soft proofing I do.

[Jeremy Payne]

Boy, sure sucks to me you bud...seriously, twice the files and twice the work?

Yikes ... I woke the Schewe ... kinda scary, but let me try and 'Tame the Schewe' ...

It ain't twice the work and I think what I do makes sense.  Let me explain again and see if you still think I'm an idiot.

I shoot, RAW ... I import into LR ... I do my thing ... I'm happy.

Time to print ... I open that same file as a Smart Object in CS4 - from within Lightroom - twice.  This opens two copies of the file in PS with my ACR adjustments.  On one of the copies, I turn on softproofing and only make adjustments to account for the printer profile.  When the proof matches the original, I save the proof back into LR as a saved smart object with proofing adjustments and close the 'original' without saving.

Back in LR, I now have a RAW file that is 'developed' and a Smart Object with Proofing Adjustments ready to print.  I stack these and add a comment to the Smart Object that indicates what it is ...

Why is that bad and where am I doubling my work?

[Schewe]

Why is that bad and where am I doubling my work?

Ya see, Photoshop has this called LAYERS...been in the app since Photoshop 3 (you know, before the whole Creative Suite crap). Since you can open a raw as a Smart Object and add adjustment layers based on the soft proofing conditions, all you need to is save that file out as a TIFF (or less ideally a PSD). Any time you want to re-soft proof (in the event you change papers/printers) just pop open the TIFF with the SO and adjustment layers and either re-soft proof or turn on/off what ever adjustments you want to make prior to outputting in Lightroom. As long as you always "Edit Original" from Lightroom you'll always have access to the TIFF file with _ALL_ your layers...

Now, if you are referring to duplicating the original file so you can soft proof to match the original, I sure hope you choose the Duplicate Merged Layers Only option cause there is zero reason to have two versions of the SO file...the SO file is way, WAY bigger than it really should be in terms of memory footprint and you surely don't need the image there as a raw SO just to use it to compare to, right?

[Jeremy Payne]

Ya see, Photoshop has this called LAYERS...been in the app since Photoshop 3 (you know, before the whole Creative Suite crap). Since you can open a raw as a Smart Object and add adjustment layers based on the soft proofing conditions, all you need to is save that file out as a TIFF (or less ideally a PSD). Any time you want to re-soft proof (in the event you change papers/printers) just pop open the TIFF with the SO and adjustment layers and either re-soft proof or turn on/off what ever adjustments you want to make prior to outputting in Lightroom. As long as you always "Edit Original" from Lightroom you'll always have access to the TIFF file with _ALL_ your layers...

Now, if you are referring to duplicating the original file so you can soft proof to match the original, I sure hope you choose the Duplicate Merged Layers Only option cause there is zero reason to have two versions of the SO file...the SO file is way, WAY bigger than it really should be in terms of memory footprint and you surely don't need the image there as a raw SO just to use it to compare to, right?

On part A ... that's exactly what I do.  I use the default save to LR from CS4 a layered TIFF and keep the proofing adjustments in layers and the SO layer available should I desire to make RAW adjustments but keep the proofing layer.

On part B ... excellent point ... and I'll change the way I do that ... but to tell the truth, I have plenty of memory and a really fast scratch drive and I've never seen a performance issue soft-proofing that way.

You'll have to cut me some slack ... this is your profession ... but I've taught myself all this crap in between diapers and trips back and forth to India building much less useful software ... Now if you want to talk post-modern portfolio theory or theoretical finance , then I'll run circles around ya ...

So I'm only a quarter-idiot ... but I learn hella-fast and I never, ever make the same mistake twice.

[Schewe]

Now if you want to talk post-modern portfolio theory or theoretical finance , then I'll run circles around ya ...

I guess when you refer to "post-modern portfolio theory", you aren't talking about how to prepare your print portfolio to show prospective clients, huh?

I will admit that "theoretical finance" kinda gives me the creeps...although I do know more about the stock market than most photographers I've ever met–my old man started as a customer's man with a investment firm in 1929 and actually made money for clients through 1932 cause he kept telling them to sell short at every uptick–something that might have been useful a year or so ago. He taugh me about technical analysis and I got really good at being able to see head & shoulders or pennant formations, so I actually have made quite a bit of money from "investments"...as far as "finance" my goal is generally spend less than I make...is that a good approach-not too "theoretical"?   :~)

[Jeremy Payne]

as far as "finance" my goal is generally spend less than I make...is that a good approach-not too "theoretical"?   :~)

That usually works.

At the end of the day, my brand of financial expertise is about as useful for making money as a philosophy degree is for living life.

Finance is all about the time value of money ... cash today is better than cash tomorrow ... how much better?  That's where it starts to get interesting.

At the end of the day, Wimpy had it right: "I'll gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today."

I actually used to get to go on TV every now and then and talk about this cr@p ...

http://www.jeremypayne.net/2008/05/i-was-on-tv-today.html

[Schewe]

At the end of the day, my brand of financial expertise is about as useful for making money as a philosophy degree is for living life.

Buy low and sell high...that's what my dad taught me. That always seems to work if you have the time to do it with.

I actually used to get to go on TV every now and then and talk about this cr@p ...

Eeeeek! Fox News?

Isn't that where Hannity hangs out? Sorry, I don't do radical right...nice hair!

:~)

[Jeremy Payne]

Eeeeek! Fox News? Isn't that where Hannity hangs out? Sorry, I don't do radical right...nice hair!

Yeah, unfortunately that's the only one to which I have a permanent link ... not really my kind of folk either.

I'm a deadhead, not a dittohead.