GertSnijders

<p>Thanks Pascal B. - I had a similar situation as Miguel Lecuyer. I tried your suggestion and it works perfectly. The images downloaded from iCloud are exactly the same size as with the Image Capture application in OSX, not a smaller version thereof!</p>

<p>Yep Wouter, I would agree.<br> Me too, I have a hard time believing the corruption to be caused by a simple "read", however that's what the Lexar person wrote - in my understanding of it.<br> Your suggestion of testing the camera plus card would only apply to <em><strong>new</strong></em><strong> </strong>photos taken with a <em><strong>new</strong></em> or <strong><em>reformated </em></strong>card, the old ones being corrupted in some or other manner apparently.<br> My 2 cents worth of advise for doing the test, if you didn't already mean it this way...</p>

<p>Wouter,<br> "<strong><em>So, we can exclude the card reader</em></strong>"<br> IMHO, no we cannot - the cards could individually well have been damaged at the <strong>first </strong>reading attempt in the first (non-conform) card-reader. Every next time an attempt to read the same card(s) in whatever other reader (be it conform or not) will yield the same bad pictures.<br> It is my understanding the cards can get damaged the very first time reading - see the quoted text from the Lexar representative in the above ... <strong>it forced corruption on the card</strong><br> "<em><strong>Basically as I explained yesterday because you</strong></em><br /><em><strong>used a non UDMA 7 compatible card reader, (an insignia 3.0 reader) the card reader could not keep up with the speed of the card and it forced corruption on the card</strong></em>"<br> Agree?<br />Gert</p>

<p>I can only support Jerry/Gerald's story in the above!<br> Re-living the family-past through negatives/positives/prints is an extraordinary thing - even more so whilst scanning the material your self. If it is too much in volume, start by making some sort of selection. This will make it somewhat less of a job you may perceive as never being able to accomplish in full.<br> But don't miss out the fun of seeing your scans develop on your computer!</p> <p> </p>

<p>Whatever way you go, don't forget the learning-curve you have to go through that any software has.<br> Only after having made extensive use thereof it's possible to judge whether or not you really (dis-)like the software. Also IMHO, once used to (and experienced in) a specific one, it gets more difficult to accurately (read: positively) judge another one - hence probably the many comments rejecting one or other ("2nd") software ;-) ... <br> All the best with your experiences!</p>

<p>Thanks António for your insight on the issues with f.i. Lightroom and Yosemite.<br> Someone from Adobe did post on the above-referenced (by me, see the earlier link) site the following comments "... This bug occurs because Apple has changed something in their network stack in 10.10 that causes problems for the Lightroom Map module (specifically, with APE, the web engine that the Map module uses), particularly in low-bandwidth conditions. ...". However, this issue was apparently already detected <em><strong>before</strong></em><strong> </strong>Yosemite was launched to the "grand public" and normal users like me.<br> And yep, you're probably right keeping some proven systems "alive" to cope with sudden and not seldom peculiar problems for "early adopters" of new technology - for sure where it involves multiple parties, like Adobe and Apple in this specific case.</p>

<p>Unfortunately I have been experiencing Lightroom-problems after the upgrade to Yosemite and I'm not the only one - see here for more details ... http://feedback.photoshop.com/photoshop_family/topics/issue_with_lightrooms_map_module_in_os_x_10_10_yosemite?page=1 ...<br> There doesn't yet seem to be a full understanding of the reasons - and hence no solution nor workaround either. </p>