Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Adobe Lightroom Q&A => Topic started by: pcgpcg on October 04, 2014, 11:14:57 pm
-
I’ve encountered an odd problem with the proofing feature of Lightroom 5.6 with large files. I normally work with files under 20MP and don’t have a problem. However, with a 60MP panorama this is what happens…
When I first load the file in Develop mode, select Soft Proofing, and do a side by side comparison, everything is fine. The image on the left is labeled Current and the one on the right Proof Preview. When I click on Create Proof Copy, I then see an image on the left labeled Master and one on the right labeled Proof Preview. The problem is that the color temperature of the image labeled Master is shifted substantially, back to where it was many dozens of edits in the past.
What’s going on? Has anyone else encountered this problem?
-
If your image to be softproofed has/is one or more vitual copies with different color balances, the non-softproof image may not be the image from which the proof copy was made, and may then have a different white balance.
I've had this happen a couple of times in the past.
Alan
-
You nailed it Alan. That is exactly what was happening. It had nothing to do with file size, but with the fact that I was soft proofing a virtual copy that I had made and edited some time earlier. When I soft-proofed the "copy" and asked for another copy, LR made a copy of the original and not of the copy which I was soft-proofing. Thank you for the quick response and for salvaging my evening!
Paul
-
So the concclusion is not to use virtual copies to create and work on final print versions but always work from the original instead?
-
Or to make the VC the master: Library/Photo/Set Copy As Master.
-
Yes to the above solutions. LR actually tells you what you are doing when this happens. I just wasn't thinking about what it was telling me.
-
So the concclusion is not to use virtual copies to create and work on final print versions but always work from the original instead?
I didn't find that necessary. As soon as I was alerted to the possibility, it became second nature to note that the original image is or is not the intended master in the softproof dialog.
Alan
-
Now I'm totally confused. Would someone please summarize simply what's happening?
-
Now I'm totally confused. Would someone please summarize simply what's happening?
The OP was working with a VC on screen, although he was not aware that it was a VC because it had been made some time ago and he had forgotten. When he soft-proofed it, LR referred back to the master as the basis for generating the proof and because the master and the VC were edited differently, the soft-proof was not appropriate for the VC.
-
That's why it's useful to make a smart collection that only contains VC's (Copy Name isn't Empty).
-
The OP was working with a VC on screen, although he was not aware that it was a VC because it had been made some time ago and he had forgotten. When he soft-proofed it, LR referred back to the master as the basis for generating the proof and because the master and the VC were edited differently, the soft-proof was not appropriate for the VC.
Hi,
I fail to see the benefit of that Lightroom behavior, it's just waiting for errors to be made. The question is not if, but when...
Why doesn't it soft-proof the VC (or whatever one wants to soft-proof) when that is what one wants to soft-proof in the first place?
Cheers,
Bart
-
Hi,
I fail to see the benefit of that Lightroom behavior, it's just waiting for errors to be made. The question is not if, but when...
Why doesn't it soft-proof the VC (or whatever one wants to soft-proof) when that is what one wants to soft-proof in the first place?
Cheers,
Bart
I do this all the time, so i do not see the problem. VC's are always created at some point in the delvelopment history of its master. I do softproof VC's.
-
I do this all the time, so i do not see the problem. VC's are always created at some point in the delvelopment history of its master. I do softproof VC's.
Yes, I understand the benefits of using VCs, but why softproof them based on another source image?
Cheers,
Bart
-
Yes, I understand the benefits of using VCs, but why softproof them based on another source image?
The soft proof is based on the VC's rendering (not something else). If you start with Appearance A then make a VC and edit that VC, it's current edit is applied to the soft proof, not Appearance A. If you are mixed up between the two, that could be an issue. There's a Virtual Copy and a Proof Copy which are not exactly the same in some odd places. You can have a Proof Copy with the soft proof part applied to that VC or you can Proof Copy Appearance A.
-
I fail to see the benefit of that Lightroom behavior, it's just waiting for errors to be made. The question is not if, but when...
I agree.
I do this all the time, so i do not see the problem.
That's because you are aware of the behavior and have learned how to easily avoid a mistake.
The only reason I became aware of this is because the master that LR reverted back to had a noticeable different color temperature. Now that I'm more aware of how LR operates, and have learned how to soft proof a VC, I'll (hopefully) never do it again. It would be nice, though, to have some sort of warning for those who aren't LR experts like...
CAUTION - You are not soft proofing the image you were working with when you decided to soft proof it. You cannot soft proof a virtual copy without first converting it to the Master.
-
The soft proof is based on the VC's rendering (not something else). If you start with Appearance A then make a VC and edit that VC, it's current edit is applied to the soft proof, not Appearance A. If you are mixed up between the two, that could be an issue.
Umm...
In my case the soft proof was NOT based on the VC's rendering. It was based on "Appearance A" from several months ago, and not on the edited VC, which was the image I was viewing when I clicked on Soft Proof.
-
All my VC's soft proof as the VC's color appearance. Not the master. Then while in Develop, Soft proof, I make an edit, that itself creates a proof copy.
-
All my VC's soft proof as the VC's color appearance. Not the master. Then while in Develop, Soft proof, I make an edit, that itself creates a proof copy.
Andrew, being unsure just what you are saying here, I performed the following experiment:
1. Chose a previously unedited raw image
2. created a VC from it and made a number of gross edits, so that it was clearly different from the master copy
3. created a VC from the image in step 2, changed the color mode to B&W, again, clearly different from both the master and copy 1.
4. entered softproof mode on copy 2 and created a proof copy
5. selected the Before/After Left/Right display. The right image was the proof copy, the left image was the master image, the unedited image, rather than copy 2.
This was done on a Windows 7 system, perhaps the Mac versions work differently or perhaps I really don't understand what you've said.
Alan
-
5. selected the Before/After Left/Right display. The right image was the proof copy, the left image was the master image, the unedited image, rather than copy 2.
We're on the same page up to step 5 which is what I see too (and just wrong in terms of what you're editing). The Proof Copy is what goes to the print module or exported. Seems to me the before preview there is wrong and to be ignored IF set to Master Photo, it's showing you that. It can be changed to Before, Current State on the left side below that preview.
-
Right. I do just change master copy to the proper VC.
Thanks
Alan