Lightroom 7.3

[rdonson]

John,

I'm not quite sure how I screwed up that previous post so badly.  It should be:

Macintosh HD/Users/my machine name/Library/Application Support/Adobe/CameraRaw/Settings/

Does this look better?  I deleted my previous post.

[rdonson]

BTW John, I've been following MattK for many years and I just wanted to see what he had to offer in Profiles.  The price was quite reasonable so I bought them.  Nothing earth shattering but some reasonable starting points. 

Since I've started playing with Profiles.  I wish there was an option for "Solo" within the "Profile Browser". 

[digitaldog]

BTW John, I've been following MattK for many years and I just wanted to see what he had to offer in Profiles. 

Like his ol' buddy Kelby, lots of stuff you probably don't need <g>

[rdonson]

John, I figured out how I screwed up so badly in the now deleted post.

I did put them in the proper location to begin with but.... after doing so I went into "Preferences" and checked "Save Presets with Catalog" which alters where you go if you click on "Show Lightroom Presets".  To start with it was easy to use "Show Lightroom Presets" and then scroll up and find "Camera RAW".

I apologize for the confusion.  My excuse today is that the pollen count here is maxed out and I'm allergic to most spring pollens.  The meds work but perhaps its takes away some mental sharpness.  That's my excuse and I'm sticking with it.   

[adias]

Very long thread... but aren't these new 'profiles' just presets which include Camera Raw camera profile + editing settings?

[rdonson]

I like Andrew’s explanation:

I doubt that. There are now three types of profiles, Adobe Raw profiles, Camera Matching Profiles, and Creative Profiles.
Adobe Color is now kind of the replacement for the older (but still available) Adobe Standard. These as in the past, only work on raw data. Creative profiles work on either raw or rendered images. You alter their effect with a dedicated slider. Such profiles can contain 3D LUTs so if you have products that can build em, you should be able to now use them in the ACR engine once there are tools to make them accessible to LR/ACR.

[digitaldog]

Very long thread... but aren't these new 'profiles' just presets which include Camera Raw camera profile + editing settings?

A bit more than just that. The new XMP Profiles are built on top of .dcp profiles and they extend them in a few ways. On top of a base .dcp profile, there can be an optional LUT which is new (and potentially powerful). This was discussed in the thread. Plus these XMP profiles can specify most of the features within the UI to alter the image (camera profile + editing settings).

[john beardsworth]

Very long thread... but aren't these new 'profiles' just presets which include Camera Raw camera profile + editing settings?

I tend to think that no matter how many Adobe or 3rd party tutorials offer explanations, the technical differences are irrelevant to the user and many will struggle to distinguish between the two tools. From a user's viewpoint, they both apply "looks" or canned styles. Maybe it would have been best to merge the two concepts in the UI, whatever the underlying technical differences.

I also agree with Ron's point about a solo mode for profiles. I would have liked profiles to have their own panel, and not be in the bloated Basic panel.

John

[digitaldog]

I tend to think that no matter how many Adobe or 3rd party tutorials offer explanations, the technical differences are irrelevant to the user and many will struggle to distinguish between the two tools. From a user's viewpoint, they both apply "looks" or canned styles.

But there are behavioral differences that users need to understand even if they don't look under the hood. Users need to understand that when selecting a new profile, they do not see the current sliders change and for good reason. Not the case with a preset, what adais is calling editing settings (which isn't a profile).

if the sliders don't move, that is not a preset, it's a profile.
Presets are not profiles; they are separated in the new browser.
Presets allow editing settings to be altered, profiles don't.

[john beardsworth]

I just don't think users do need to understand those differences. It's overcomplicated, an unnecessary difference with no creative value.

[digitaldog]

I just don't think users do need to understand those differences. It's overcomplicated, an unnecessary difference with no creative value.

I will not speak for all users. But I suspect some will wonder:
Why sliders move with one, not the other.
Why the separation in the browser.
How many years have some users asked (and continue today): why don't I see my camera profiles? Answer: Because you're viewing a rendered image.
Some of us here are interested in aiding users with such questions and helping their understanding of the product. Other's are not; that's fine.
Some of us can be both creative and technically savvy and pass the later onto users.

While intelligent people can often simplify the complex, a fool is more likely to complicate the simple.  -Gerald W. Grumet

[fdisilvestro]

As John said, this isn't new to 7.3, so nothing to stop you upgrading. In fact, I think it's been going on intermittently since 7.0, but it's only just been identified in the last few weeks, too late to get a fix into 7.3. It may only affect a very small number of people, but it's a serious issue for those it does affect, and very easily prevented, so just worth erring on the safe side.

After reading this thread, I tested with an SQLite Database manager my recent backups made directly from LR in two different computers (Different catalogs, Windows 10) and all have issues, from very mild to severe ones (e.g. from incorrectly ordered or missing rows to failed integrity check), especially with large catalogs.

The current working catalogs have no issues, as well as old backups (can't confirm when the issues started) and backups made with other tools.

It seems to me that is not an intermittent issue, and I will not even bother to perform backups from LR until an official response from Adobe is made.

[Chris Kern]

After reading this thread, I tested with an SQLite Database manager my recent backups made directly from LR in two different computers (Different catalogs, Windows 10) and all have issues, from very mild to severe ones (e.g. from incorrectly ordered or missing rows to failed integrity check), especially with large catalogs.

I just did the same on several recent back-ups, and encountered no errors (MacOS 10.13.3).  But I agree with the advice not to depend on Lightroom's built-in mechanism for backing up the catalog.  Actually, I would never rely on any single back-up method to adequately preserve files I couldn't afford to use.  I always back up to multiple locations using multiple back-up methods at frequencies proportional to the preciousness of the files.

[FabienP]

After reading this thread, I tested with an SQLite Database manager my recent backups made directly from LR in two different computers (Different catalogs, Windows 10) and all have issues, from very mild to severe ones (e.g. from incorrectly ordered or missing rows to failed integrity check), especially with large catalogs.

The current working catalogs have no issues, as well as old backups (can't confirm when the issues started) and backups made with other tools.

It seems to me that is not an intermittent issue, and I will not even bother to perform backups from LR until an official response from Adobe is made.

I can confirm that all my catalogue backups made by Lightroom 7.x are affected as well. Luckily the catalogue currently in use is not affected.

It seems the problem started with Lightroom 7 since the backups made with Lightroom 6.x are not affected. I started using Lightroom 7 when 7.1 was the current release, so the problem has been there at least since that version.

The fact that only backups are affected is puzzling. I can't imagine why compressing the catalogue for backups would result in corruption. At the same time, the current catalogue regularly gets optimised, which maybe corrects errors as well.

Cheers,

Fabien

[Mark D Segal]

I can confirm that all my catalogue backups made by Lightroom 7.x are affected as well. Luckily the catalogue currently in use is not affected.


Cheers,

Fabien

Are you on Windows or OSX - I'm wondering whether the problem is OS-specific.

[digitaldog]

I use 3DLC and the most recent version of it permits a LUT made within the application to be exported as a DCP for use in LR.

Became aware of another tool today, Lattice: https://lattice.videovillage.co
Same price as the "Standard" version of 3DLC but I'm not knowledge enough to know which might be more appropriate for making LUTs for LR. Don't see a demo which is a plus for 3DLC and the UI, well from the two web sites alone, 3DLC seems a bit nicer. Anyone tried or know about Lattice?

[kirkt]

Became aware of another tool today, Lattice: https://lattice.videovillage.co
Same price as the "Standard" version of 3DLC but I'm not knowledge enough to know which might be more appropriate for making LUTs for LR. Don't see a demo which is a plus for 3DLC and the UI, well from the two web sites alone, 3DLC seems a bit nicer. Anyone tried or know about Lattice?

Lattice is more utilitarian, akin to OCIO - not necessarily limited, but more technically oriented. . 3DLC is really more of an all-around versatile and unique creative tool.

Kirk

[digitaldog]

Lattice is more utilitarian, akin to OCIO - not necessarily limited, but more technically oriented. . 3DLC is really more of an all-around versatile and unique creative tool.

Thank Kirk, that seems to align with my initial impressions and I've watched several of the video's and it looks like a winner. I think I'll have to go for the Pro version; the functionality seen in the video using various targets was most impressive. I've had some want bumps for it for awhile but didn't pull the trigger until now that ACR/LR seem to be moving into a 3D LUT fashion that looks quite interesting and useful.

[FabienP]

Are you on Windows or OSX - I'm wondering whether the problem is OS-specific.

This happens on a Windows 10 PC (x64, build 1709). The catalogue is on a dedicated internal SSD drive, so there is nothing too exotic about my setup. The catalogue is about 200 MB large and contains less than 30K photos.

In order to assess the health of the catalogue backup outside of Lightroom, I used a generic SQLite utility to perform an integrity check as explained here. (I know the page is for a different product, but this check should work for any SQLite database, including a Lightroom catalogue.)

Any entry other than "OK" as a result of the test indicates inconsistencies which might (or not) be fixed by a repair tool. In my case, some entries were related to invalid page numbers and a malformed database disk image.

Cheers,

Fabien

[Mark D Segal]

Thanks for the explanation Fabien.