PART 2 to Lightroom seems too intrusive, suggestions?

Discussion in 'Digital Darkroom' started by dave_redmann, Dec 21, 2013.

  1. In a recent thread:
    http://www.photo.net/digital-darkroom-forum/00cEgH
    I complained about some of Lightroom's behaviors and asked for suggestions. Some of you provided some helpful information and perspectives--thanks!--but I have some follow-up questions (and the original thread got rather long and sidetracked).
    Let me phrase my main questions / concerns this way: (1) Is there a raw converter that (a) delivers top-quality results; (b) includes high-quality, automated lens-correction with readily-available profiles for most lenses; and (c) is available for no more cost than Lightroom? (2) Does the version of ACR that comes with Elements include all of the tools (like lens corrections and curves) that come with Lightroom and the version of ACR that comes with PS?
    I find Lightroom's required workflow (import-export process) bureaucratic and nanny-ish for some purposes, but I could live with it to get the results I want. The high-quality lens corrections (particularly geometric distortion and chromatic aberration) through automated profiles available for my main lenses were the big draw. But high-quality basic raw conversion is a must, as is reasonable curves, white-balance, and color-correction functionality. And Lightroom's perspective distortion tools (to sort-of mimic, e.g., front rise) and noise-reduction options are a great bonus.
    In the prior thread, several other programs were suggested, but for none was it clear to me whether they met the basic functionality discussed above. So, if you have any further suggestions, I'm all ears. Thanks!
     
  2. I use Nikon Capture NX2 and it meets your (1) for Nikon cameras and Nikon lenses. ACR in PS Elements does not include all the tools in ACR for LR and PS.
     
  3. Dave, in your previous thread, already briefed about CaptureOne 7 Express. For me, on point (1), it does meet (a) and (c), and (b) depending on the lenses you have - the list of supported lenses has some (massive) gaps for sure, though. For point (1b), the best choice seems to be DxO Optics Pro, it also meets (1c), for point 1a I'll leave that to those who actually used the program :)
    For point (2), no, it does not. Adobe Camera Raw in PS Elements is simplified; you can do the missing items in the editor itself, though that also has limits compared to full-blown Photoshop (i.e. no 16-bits file editing, limited support for assigning colour profiles and some more).
     
  4. Dave,
    Reading your post Lightroom seems to do everything you want. Your only gripe is in the import - export section. Lightroom needs to import your files into a catalogue. This can be as small or as large as you want, your could have one large catalogue containing all your images or small ones for each folder of images.

    There are different ways of importing images and maybe there is an easier way than what you are currently using that you will find more to your liking. Would be worth spending some time to check out a few of these options before throwing Lightroom into the trash bin.

    Check this video out to start with.
     
  5. Dave, if you are on a Mac, I think Iridient Developer will fill your needs. A superb quality converter and apparently it's on sale this month too.
    http://www.iridientdigital.com
    $75 but there's a 29% discount till the 27th. There's also a demo you can try.
    Old review but perhaps still useful to read:
    http://www.ppmag.com/reviews/200607_rodneycm.pdf
     
  6. Apparently you want a RAW converter that is Windows Explorer based like the combination Bridge/ACR. UFRaw, DCraw or RAWtherapee seem to do the trick and these are freeware.
    Lightroom shines when you want/need to convert and organize your files. If that is not your concern indeed use an Explorer based converter.
     
  7. Photoshop CC W/ ACR 8 built in.

    By the way, in case no else has pointed it out, you can set up your own file structure in Lightroom and on top that set up sets of collections by subject, or date, or location, etc. plus use keywords and captions to find exactly the photos you are looking for.
     
  8. Spearhead

    Spearhead Moderator

    By the way, in case no else has pointed it out, you can set up your own file structure in Lightroom​

    Right, I don't get the whole "intrusion" thing. I've had the same file structure for my images since 2001, years before Lightroom. Nothing changed about it when Lightroom happened except that it became a lot easier to find images.
     
  9. Ditto what Jeff said, Lightroom just follows the structure I have come up with. Plus the advantage of using virtual copies
    containing different versions or files for different destinations, in casu clients or agencies or licenses, to me is a huge pro.
     
  10. Ditto the suggestions to keep using Lightroom and ignore the cataloging stuff. My usage of Lightroom for organizing is still pretty haphazard. But I really like the editing tools and ability to quickly compare edits to photos from the same session, or of the same subject from different sessions. It's easier to ensure a consistent look than with any other tools I've used.
    But I keep getting careless with other stuff and tend to rename or move photos outside of Lightroom. Did it again this weekend, even though I've been trying to remember to confine all edits to inside LR. Just a habit, hard to break. In part it's because the default tool for Windows when uploading photos is Windows Explorer. I'll see something I want to fix quickly, and Windows Explorer is already open. So I'll do a quick name change, add a tag/keyword, etc. And suddenly Lightroom gets confused (the dreaded "?" icon) until I tell it where to find the damned photo, even though it's in the same place. Picasa handles this more gracefully - it automagically runs in the background to find photos and add them to the catalog, without demanding a lot of resources.
    If I didn't like Lightroom so well for basic editing I'd probably consider DxO, especially because I shoot a lot at high ISOs and DxO seems to handle that very well.
     
  11. Thanks for all the responses. This has been a genuinely clarifying experience for me.
    I should have reiterated that I'm using a Sony A580, and the lenses of most interest to me are my Sony DT 16-50mm f/2.8 SSM, the Tamron SP 70-300mm f/4-5.6 Di USD, and an old Minolta AF 50mm f/1.7 (although there are others too). Sony's own Image Data Converter is not bad, but even the latest version (4.2.02) only teases me with non-functioning distortion compensation (and I doubt they'd ever support the Tamron).
    My Sony takes Capture One 7 out of the options--no lens support at all. I'm using a Windows 7 64-bit machine, so that means no Iridient Developer. As for UFRaw, DCraw or RAWtherapee--I don't think they have much of a list of lens profiles / automated corrections. Also, I've tried UFRaw, and don't really like it--it doesn't seem to do nearly as good a job as my other options. PS CS 6 / PS CC is more expensive than I can justify, and the whole cloud bit is a non-starter for me.

    Wouter, thanks for confirming my understanding / concern, that the ACR that comes with Elements does not have the full feature set.
    So ... looks like I will stick with Lightroom. Thanks all!
    00cFte-544377584.jpg
     
  12. Hi, have a serious look at DxO Optics Pro. I prefer it to LR.
    regards
    Mike
     
  13. Hi, have a serious look at DxO Optics Pro. I prefer it to LR.​
    You need to say why, Mike - "I prefer..." tells Dave nothing about whether Optics Pro will address his concerns.
     
  14. Lex, when you make changes to a photo and leave it in the same folder in Lightroom you can right click on that folder in Lightroom and click on the synchronize folder option. A dialogue box will pop up asking what you want to do. If there are new photos or versions of a photo it will ask you if you want to import them. Click on the Synchronize button and it will add those photos. It will also update metadata or remove missing photos from the catalog.
     
  15. Hi Dave,
    Don't let comments like, "Your just not using it right", "or ignore the catalog" confuse you.
    You are completely right. I still fight it as I rely on the RAW converter as my Raw is only supported for LR, or C1. So I don't have a choice. I struggle every single day!.

    For professionals that deal with editing regularly, it really is a slow process to work in LR.
    I have used ACR when it was available, as well as LR from v3, and YES it is a LOCKED system. You can't even make adjustments and save the file and find it unless you Sync the folder every time. Further you have to switch from LIB mode to DEvelop mode and it is a horrible workflow. It is slow and often frustrating to not know what files are in your folders.
    Also it doesn't support DUAL screen properly. Every time you switch views it has to switch on the other, and limited functions.
    Also the tool sets are locked in place. You can't change where your tools are.
    These are MAJOR issues for user workflow
    If you need a catalog, get a DAM. If you want a great converter, there have been suggestions, and I really like DXO.

    For DAM, there is Photo Supreme, ACDSee, Photo Mechanic, Extensis, and another dozen apps that will help you browse find your files rate them Metatag them with search keywords, and some make collection like sub sets, AND if you ever care for your files, you can keep them organized in the same FILE structure method so you are not dependednt on 1 Program to retreive your data in the future. With Adobe gone CC on PS, you never know where it is later, and it surely ISN'T the best tool...Yes most popular.
     
  16. You need to say why?
    How about htese for starters...
    1. For starters its a true browser!
    2. It has great RAW dev/adjustment tools. The quality files are great.
    3. It doesn't force a catalog within a browser, most obviouse reason.
    4. It allows tools to work freely. Customizable interface.
    5. It supports dual screen without limitations.
     
  17. Thanks, John, that helped! I'd been trying that trick incorrectly. This time it worked just fine. That should help declutter a folder I made a huge mess of earlier this year, but left as-is for fear of messing it up even worse. It's full of those dreaded "?" icons.
     
  18. Spearhead

    Spearhead Moderator

    For professionals that deal with editing regularly, it really is a slow process to work in LR.​

    Many professionals use LR because it speeds up the process. There's nothing slow about it if you learn how to use it.
    You can't even make adjustments and save the file and find it unless you Sync the folder every time.​

    This is completely untrue. There is no need to sync after adjustments.
    Further you have to switch from LIB mode to DEvelop mode and it is a horrible workflow.​

    It's a single key press. If you find that difficult, then there isn't anything that will satisfy you.
    It is slow and often frustrating to not know what files are in your folders.​

    You appear to not understand LR as this is not true in so many ways.
     
  19. Likewise, to their not being any "intrusion" when importing, there also is not in exporting either. You can export out as you want and where you want quite easily.
     
  20. I'm a working pro. I shoot commercial, industrial and some editorial work. I agree completely with Jeff Spirer's comments
    BUT also recognize that not everyone's brain works quite the same way and what seems intuitive to me may not to
    another person - and vice versa.
     
  21. "Many professionals use LR because it speeds up the process. There's nothing slow about it if you learn how to use it."
    I find it slow. After you press the single Key for Dev or Lib, it delays in allowing you to work with it. AND you are stuck in that ONE view. Unexceptable... Image editor/retoucher, photographer, 2013.... don't you use dual monitors?
    "This is completely untrue. There is no need to sync after adjustments."​
    Yes, there is a need to sync up. unless you saved the file in the same format. (unlikely) BUT, I would think MANY if not most users who open the file in PS as it defaults to TIF (as it likely should), If you do some edits with layers and want to save it as PSD then you HAVE TO SYNC... And don't tell me how I can save a layer TIF file...Thats the last thing I want to do is mix up flat TIF print ready files withs layered TIF files.
    So, yes you DO need to sync if you want to save it anything else. The likely usage.
    It's a single key press. If you find that difficult, then there isn't anything that will satisfy you.​
    See first point response.
    You appear to not understand LR as this is not true in so many ways.​
    My responses above point out how it IS true. Having a catalog and developer in the same interface is a backwards way of trying to make very different functions work under one application. This is a major FAIL. (for many production, studio, photographer users)
    Teach me oh wise one
     
  22. Spearhead

    Spearhead Moderator

    . After you press the single Key for Dev or Lib, it delays in allowing you to work with it.​

    Two seconds on my computer, at the most. Faster in LR 5 than before.
    Yes, there is a need to sync up. unless you saved the file in the same format​

    There is no need to save files in LR. This is a failure to understand. If you use Photoshop, you just save it there and it goes back into LR automatically. LR doesn't have a "save files" command.
     
  23. People who know LR a bit have this metality that all OTHER users are newbies, or don't know what they're doing. Give a person posting a little more credit.
    Where did I mention LR saves files? 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.
    So from all the points you dwindled down to 2, and one failed.
    But let me tell you about the one one you are hanging on to...
    This is not a matter of 2 seconds screen time. It is a back and forth relationship that is constantly in need of interative switching. THIS is the weak point, and is not acceptable in most fast paced editing stations. Unless you have a pipe in your mouth and have the breeze of the lake in the studio over looking the scenery, and you make 5 master prints every year, and work at a librarians pace...It doesn't cut it.
     
  24. Let me guess Jeff, you have workshops and teach people how to photograph or work in LR or something close? tell me I'm wrong...
     
  25. People who know LR a bit have this metality that all OTHER users are newbies...​
    Newbies who don't understand how the product acts?
    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.​
    Can you explain step by step what you're talking about? Because like Jeff, I don't know what you're talking about, there's need to Sync/Save there.
    Let me guess Jeff, you have workshops and teach people how to photograph or work in LR or something close? tell me I'm wrong...​
    What's that got to do with the price of cheese?
     
  26. FYI, my system is a 3.8Ghz Quad core with 240GB SSD main, 64GB SSD Scratch, 64GB SSD Pagefile, with 32GB ram. 4gb vid card with OpenGL, etc..8-12TB for image bank on Intel servers with sustained 60+mb/sec transfer speed.
    I'm not saying this is the fastest or latest, but it isn't slow by any means.
     
  27. Ok...so back to constructive posting....
    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 file.
    LR at this point NEEDS to sync to see the PSD file. period.
     
  28. OR if you launch out in PSD and save in TIF, you lose the connection there also...or JPEG..either way it is not known to LR
     
  29. There is nothing like Lightroom when you have several hundred images to process. It can get you to the finished product in very little time. I have Lightroom installed on a SSD drive on my computer and there is no delay for any changes that I make. If you are just one-at-a-timing photos you don't really need Lightroom. Once you learn to think the way Lightroom forces you to, it really isn't that bad. I do occasionally make PSD's and Tiff's and then wonder where they went. Then I remember to sync the folder. You also don't have to sync the folder if you don't want to. You can always fall back onto Bridge which I still use a lot. I sometimes browse through folders in Bridge and find a photo I like and then switch back to Lightroom and Import just the one photo and work on it. I have also found that Lightroom 5 is better at opening up the shadows with not too much noise in some low light photos I have done in the past. Photos that I didn't think were usable have now been rescued. I would suggest watching some tutorials on youtube and try the Lightroom Facebook page. Don't expect to learn it all at once and only learn what you need to know right now. It will make the whole thing go much smoother. I use the Internet like its a second brain, when I need to know or learn something I just look it up. That's because the first brain doesn't work all that well any more.
     
  30. Newbies who don't understand how the product acts?​
    Don't treat all posts as if the user is a newb, or like the user doesn't know what he/she is doing.
     
  31. 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 file.OR if you launch out in PSD and save in TIF, you lose the connection there also...or JPEG..either way it is not known to LR.​
    Phil, you made a change to the data IN Photoshop. Photoshop then saves those changes. That would be true if you opened that rendered image in your beloved Corel (which you CAN setup as an external editor). Has absolulty nothing to do with LR.
    LR is a parametric editor that doesn't save any changes to proprietary raws and only within a DNG if you set it to do so. At that, these are text files. LR has to render this data to something Photoshop can even open (or for that matter, your beloved Corel). Once in those editors, IF you change anything there, you hit Save. LR will not need any further input from you, there's no syncing or anything like it.
    LR at this point NEEDS to sync to see the PSD file. period.​
    No, it doesn't. You're confused. The round trip simply 'imports' the new iteration (it's a new file) into the Library. You'd prefer it NOT to show up in the DAM and you'd be forced to use Import to now see that iteration? IT IS A NEW DOCUMENT. People who know LR a bit have this metality that all OTHER users are newbies only when they make such statements.
     
  32. lol, :) beloved Corel, hehehe.. you read too much Andrew.
    I'll have to come back and reply
     
  33. I'll have to come back and reply​
    Indeed!
     
  34. Phil, you made a change to the data IN Photoshop. Photoshop then saves those changes. That would be true if you opened that rendered image in your beloved Corel (which you CAN setup as an external editor). Has absolulty nothing to do with LR.​
    LR is wanting to be a DAM/Catalog/Photo Manager...It has everything to do with MANAGING files, and LR being a non browser catalog it forces you to Sync to see. Why do you think most proper photo managers have browsing hand in hand with cataloging? Because it makes all sense to see what files you have.
    LR is a parametric editor that doesn't save any changes to proprietary raws and only within a DNG if you set it to do so. At that, these are text files. LR has to render this data to something Photoshop can even open (or for that matter, your beloved Corel). Once in those editors, IF you change anything there, you hit Save. LR will not need any further input from you, there's no syncing or anything like it.​
    Tell me something I don't know. (Except it has been 15+ years since I used Corel Paint, so just because I don't support Adobe CC doesn't mean I love Corel.) What are we here... the Adobe employee fan page?
     
  35. Once in those editors, IF you change anything there, you hit Save. LR will not need any further input from you, there's no syncing or anything like it.​
    No LR will not NEED any further input...IF you DON'T want to see your file! My comment applies to saving in a different format, which users with layers often have to. But to switch between formats you would have to go into preferences every time you want LR to open in TIF vs PSD.
     
  36. There is nothing like Lightroom when you have several hundred images to process. It can get you to the finished product in very little time. I have Lightroom installed on a SSD drive on my computer and there is no delay for any changes that I make. If you are just one-at-a-timing photos you don't really need Lightroom. Once you learn to think the way Lightroom forces you to, it really isn't that bad. I do occasionally make PSD's and Tiff's and then wonder where they went. Then I remember to sync the folder. You also don't have to sync the folder if you don't want to. You can always fall back onto Bridge which I still use a lot. I sometimes browse through folders in Bridge and find a photo I like and then switch back to Lightroom and Import just the one photo and work on it. I have also found that Lightroom 5 is better at opening up the shadows with not too much noise in some low light photos I have done in the past. Photos that I didn't think were usable have now been rescued. I would suggest watching some tutorials on youtube and try the Lightroom Facebook page. Don't expect to learn it all at once and only learn what you need to know right now. It will make the whole thing go much smoother. I use the Internet like its a second brain, when I need to know or learn something I just look it up. That's because the first brain doesn't work all that well any more.​
    Yes John, I have been using it since v3, and now 5.3. DAILY. Along with C1, and ACDSee as a alternate Catalog/Browser/Manager.
    I had played with it LR v1 and 2, but "learned the way it works"(or the way it doesn't work) since v3.
    Yes, if I'm applying a preset across a bunch of images great. But I hardly do that. I am more of a image maker, not just a taker. So almost all files get some PS touch-ups. (I also like doing my spot removal in PS, as LR will use the location data, and with lots of usage of this tool, it gets a bit "heavy" for LR as it has to store the info.
     
  37. LR is wanting to be a DAM/Catalog/Photo Manager...It has everything to do with MANAGING files, and LR being a non browser catalog it forces you to Sync to see. Why do you think most proper photo managers have browsing hand in hand with cataloging? Because it makes all sense to see what files you have.​
    Browsers are not databases Phil. For example, Bridge isn't a database. Bridge is a browser. LR is a database. You want to render from LR and NOT have that iteration become part of the database? Use the Export Command. Don't check the option to have the image referenced in the database. IF you want to render and not have LR catalog the image, that's totally possible, you're using the wrong command (but that's because you apparently don't understand how to use the product). The Edit In command is built to do what you say you don't want, use the correct command! The Edit In command was designed for this round trip. The Export isn't. That is WHY there are two command! But you'd understand this if you educated yourself about the product. I'm trying Phil.
    Tell me something I don't know.​
    Where to start.... Perhaps the above?
    What are we here... the Adobe employee fan page?​
    Oh I see, correcting your misunderstanding makes this an Adobe fan page. Just like correcting your incorrect statement on LuLa about Corel having PSD support (kind of, sort of). I'm sorry if when you say something that's factually incorrect, and you are educated to the proper use of that product, you find it necessary to digress into calling those correcting you Adobe fan boys.
    My comment applies to saving in a different format, which users with layers often have to. But to switch between formats you would have to go into preferences every time you want LR to open in TIF vs PSD.​
    Wrong again, you can setup as many Edit In settings as you wish. Now WHY you'd want to render into PSD one time, TIFF the other is beyond me! There's nothing PSD provides that TIFF doesn't (other than duotone support which LR doesn't support anyway). You learning something useful about LR Phil?
     
  38. Yes John, I have been using it since v3, and now 5.3. DAILY. Along with C1, and ACDSee as a alternate Catalog/Browser/Manager.​
    Jack of all trades, master of none it seems (at least in terms of LR).
     
  39. No iView?
     
  40. Ok, Ok...let me see here. Lets put the BS asside, and I sorta appreciate if your trying to help, with the sideline comments, hard to tell. Lets also leave Lula to Lula, (Yes, Corel PSD support is limited, so what?)
    You shouldn't call me jack if you don't know me and my abilities. LR or other.
    I never got on anyones case, I have simply been on LR's case about some functions that would be SUPER useful for me, and others.

    So, your saying I need to Export rather than EditIn....Not sure what makes you say that.
    I use Export when making smaller, or other derivitive files from a final image....But, lets see what you may suggest AFTER you hear my need.
    My goal would be to Make RAW edits in LR, then in Photoshop make further edits, for example today was, fixing the distortion edits I made in Lens Correction (convex), where I later fix the side edges that get warped, and save them rather than cropping. Then maybe add a hand from one frame and overlay on the other frame(from person who moved it in one vs the other good, etc). So I really like to save these layers..Including a highpass/sharp over it. Or a DeNoise from a plugin.
    THEN, I like this file to be BACK in LR, so I can give it a few adjustments /treatment on top. As I like the way LR affects my image at this stage.... Then I make an Export of a Jpeg or what have you. I do this to most files.. So would I still be better off Exporting? If yes, Why?
     
  41. I wanted to not comment such, but I don't know why you have this reciprocal and static feedback to me...But to answer why I need to use more than your beloved holygrail LR...
    I have to use C1 as some subject matters shot with PhaseOne process significantly better in C1. I have to use ACDSee as it is a Fast browser AND reads LR's ratings/color/flagging and makes managing launching, sorting metadata editing in MY opinion BETTER than LR (and catalogs if you need). No, I'm not a one trick pony.
     
  42. Brad...
    Instead of iView, I have PhotoSupreme/IDImager. I still find ACDSee "lighter" and has great batch Edit features. I have to admit, I don't remember when and if I really tried iView, but ACDSee, is nimpble, makes screen grabs/edits easy, with a somewhat simple/logical GUI...Well I should say familiar GUI, as I have used it for a long time.

    If recommended for some particular reasons, I wouldn't hesitate to try.
     
  43. Phil, you have to render raws in any event from LR. You have two options to do so. One is the Edit In command which is a round trip from LR to the editor you pick (Photoshop, Corel, whatever you desire) then back. LR renders the data and loads it into the editor of your choice** then you MUST save changes in that editor of course. After you select Save, LR catalogs that NEW iteration.
    You seem to want to avoid the new iteration being cataloged. IF that's true, you can use the Export command. It renders the data to a document type you select and saves it where you wish. You CAN select a check box to include that back into the database. No matter WHERE you save it, LR will know you selected a location and will reference that into the database. IF you uncheck this, it will NOT reference the new iteration in the LR database. Understood?
    You can build as many Export (or for that matter Edit In) settings as you wish. If for some odd reason, you wanted to Edit In and end up with a PSD in 16-bit or a TIFF in 8-bit per channel, you could. And yes, this is LR 101!
    This has nothing to do with layers! If you export or Edit in and you end up in Photoshop and build layers, once you save that document, it has layers.
    You either want LR to render and retain the edits you made elsewhere in another sofware app and catalogue that NEW document or you don't. You can do either. But you have to select the correct command!

    **IF you use the Edit In command and select Photoshop, ACR actually renders the data assuming LR and ACR are on version parity.
     
  44. No LR will not NEED any further input...IF you DON'T want to see your file! My comment applies to saving in a different format, which users with layers often have to. But to switch between formats you would have to go into preferences every time you want LR to open in TIF vs PSD.​
    If you have your external editor set in Tiff or PSD, why do you think you need to change the format to work in layers? Yes, you have to tell preferences which format you want your external editor to save in. If CC or PS is your external editor you can have it change in tif, psd or jpg when the now former raw file comes back into Lr upon saving. But I don't know what you are talking about not being able to see your file. I just did it with tif, and PSD, no problem. It comes back in with the changes made in CC clearly visible. Yes, you won't see the layers which are indeed saved to the file whether layered tif or psd, but they are there. All you have to do to work back in layers is send that file back to ps file edit in external. All the layers are still there. I'm not sure why you would want to change in different formats as both psd and tifs retain their layers. No need to change format for that.
     
  45. Phil, I have no issue if you want to use a dozen different products, that's all fine and good. At least make comments about them that are accurate. Your statements about LR are not accurate. Sorry. Your statement about Coral was half right and half wrong, sorry. I don't like being wrong either, who does, unless I end up learning something factually correct that aids in my processing of images.
     
  46. This is a small fragment of the points I made when I suggested the original poster of his options.
    Yes, I likely should use the PSD as a default toEditIn. I haven't because not ALL my files get layers in PS, and it would be odd to save a flat file in PSD. It is also a way I differentiate my flat versions vs my layer versions. Tif Vs PSD respectively. Maybe there is something I can do to help this 1 point out of my LR issues. One thing I'm trying to avoid doing is creating more folders, as I have them in use for client project managing needs, if that makes some sense. but its not impossible.
     
  47. In terms of 'not seeing' an edit, that CAN happen but only if you use LR/ACR to edit existing rendered images (TIFF, PSD) AND you don't render a new iteration.
    LR/ACR are instruction based (parametric) editors and as such, apply instructions inside rendered images. Case in point. You "open" in ACR or LR a rendered image (TIFF, JPEG etc). You apply some edits. Move say the Exposure slider. Now you do nothing else. Open that TIFF Or JPEG in Photoshop or another product. YOU WILL NOT see the edits you applied in LR (Exposure). You must render a new iteration (Export), the new file WILL show that edit. Otherwise, the 'edit' was metadata in the original document.
     
  48. FYI, I have tried Bridge, and not sure of its current standing, but it is a buggy application that I rather do without. It had great "Export" feature, that I prefer to do in LR. I hope its not seen as if I hate LR. I love it, but there is a major issue in its usage value,without it being a Browser first, then catalog feature.
     
  49. Yes, I likely should use the PSD as a default toEditIn​
    Actually no. TIFF is preferable. Again, there's nothing PSD provides a TIFF doesn't. TIFF is an open format anyone can use in their products for no fee or licesing, that's not the case with PSD. IF your goal is to archive your images in a format that has the most likelihood of being accessible in the future, you want to save as TIFF! TIFF supports layers just like PSD does. Both are owned and controlled by Adobe (after Adobe purchased Aldus last century).
     
  50. I differentiate my flat versions vs my layer versions. Tif Vs PSD respectively.​
    There's lots of ways to do this without having to resort to two file formats. You could append the file name, that's always visible in the Finder/Explorer. That would be my preference. You could use all those extra metadata fields shown in Lightroom (Caption, Title, Label), sort with a Smart Collection. You could make all layered files have a Red label etc. I would not use Keywords. Lastly, IF you use the Edit In command we've discussed and you allow LR to "Edit a Copy", that new iteration which has layers will now be stacked next to the original! You'll have your original raw and (preferably) the TIFF with layers right next to it in the DAM.
    In terms of TIFF vs. PSD, see:
    http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=18965.msg134830#msg134830
     
  51. Very interesting conversation. Well above my head. What I do know is that I took 450 pictures at a swim meet weekend before last. I selected about 100 images, put them in a collection, did synchronized edits with the 100 for things like white balance, then individually edited each of the 100, exported them to do a JPEG conversion and file and had them on the web in about two hours. I then did some prints and mailed them. I have been a PS user since almost day one. I mostly edit in LR and if I want to do, say, a big print I go to PS through edit in. I do all my other printing in LR. The print capability is there. Not taking sides because I don't know enough to do that, I have followed and respected and trusted Andrew Rodney for quite some time.
     
  52. I have had this TIF vs PSD discussion before. This maybe the time I should adopt TIFlayers, and drop PSD. I have yet to make that transition.
    I could do as suggested, and use it in the file name. (At least that would be one positive by-product of my rants:) . Force PSD out, and use TIF. I'm not sure how much of an impact this will have on the overall issues with LR, but every step forward is good.
    Barry. If you have TIF as preference, and process the Raw then Edit In PS, and work on the file, and then save in PSD, it is a new file. SInce LR has no browser feature, you have to tell it to look for a new file in the folder. A work around and using one file format DOES help this one aspect.
    Changing formats is something I have done since these file formats were introduced in a program. (as Andrew mentions Aldus- Freehand). I think I have to start the transition going forward, and on older files on a need be basis. I have 4 catalogs with 200K images being the smallest. A good chunk of them in PSD. It would be a pain if I was OCD enough to want uniformity throughout.
    Looks like Dave has moved on and is working with DxO. I think DxO has a great interface and workflow. I am recently evaluating RawTherapee which looks like another potential tool. If the Standard edition applied to me, @ $69, I would surely get it, but Elite which supports a couple of my cameras, without PhaseOne support is $199. If it supported PO, I wouldn't hesitate. One main reason I use LR is that it does support IIQ files.

    So when LR's dual monitor lock-in evolves, and perhaps it grows a browser, and allows the tool sets to dock and can be organized, LR would be my main tool. Of course the answer to that last one is that I should learn to use the tools in that specific order and no other way. ;-)...No thanks, I'm rather happy with the results I get of my images.
    We have many minds in the world, surely we can't expect one program to satisfy all. But with those changes, LR would be off to a great growth.
     
  53. Dick, Your example is a one that LR handles very well. Its just not the type of work I do. We are all people with our own experiences and knowledge. Everyone here deserves respect, to at least some degree. There are people here with great knowledge and decades of experince. No body is flaming anyone or even the program. Stating the shortcomings of a program in a perspective, which happens to be shared is no cause to shun. Just because someone knows the program like the back of the hand, doesn't mean to use that hand and push another to the sideline as if their input is wrong. Which is what can easily happen if some doesn't know the ins and outs of what they are talking about.
    Nothing I have said is wrong. These shortcomings are some of the reasons people using other programs. Should I use TIF vs PSD, perhaps things would be easier on me. It isn't that I am working incorrectly. On the contrary, it is a limitation of the program, and we have to adjust towards it. just how much of a personal limitation do you allow before you switch programs? Some of us don't have many choices as C1 and LR are the only well supported Raw Dev that support IIQ. (I hope Raw Therapee excells). So it is what it is. One can hope to have features others really can use. If LR had a Browser featrue in the LIB mode, it would be a huge improvement for many(No negative impact for added options). If the dual screen behaved independently, it would be a great improvement. If you can rearrange the tools, or dock them, I could tidy up my workflow. Nothing wrong with these suggestions.
     
  54. Phil, it will not make any difference if you use TIFF or PSD in the context of your issues with LR. TIFF is simply a better archival format.
    IF you want a browser, there are many and Bridge has hooks to other Adobe products. Like you, I don't care for it or use it. One major reason is it isn't a DAM and LR is. It sounds like a lot of your frustration (and perhaps Daves) is that LR is a DAM. If you pulled out Library (the DAM part) and just looked at Develop, you'd have ACR. Which means ACR+Bridge might be a better solution. That was suggested many, many posts ago.
    I doubt Adobe would make LR a browser and a DAM, they already have both built. It would be useful if scrolling through Library and viewing your images was as fast an experience as it is in say Bridge (or even iPhoto).
    Let's set the record straight, this statement about LR is wrong: You can't even make adjustments and save the file and find it unless you Sync the folder every time. Hopefully you now see that you have several options in terms of moving raw processing from LR to other app's and back again.
     
  55. Phil. I meant no offense. I have learned a lot from Andrew over time. As I said this is way above my head. Being a competitive swimmer I want to stay in the shallow end and out of deep end of this discussion. I wish you all the best. I have learned a couple of things from this discussion so it has been worth my while. It does take two parties to get into a productive discussion so you held up your end, IMO. One can never know enough about LR and PS and other programs. Dick
     
  56. Phil, it will not make any difference if you use TIFF or PSD in the context of your issues with LR. TIFF is simply a better archival format​
    I agree, and know that Tif/PSD won't make a big difference. I didn't focus in on that and make it a primary issue.
    It sounds like a lot of your frustration (and perhaps Daves) is that LR is a DAM. If you pulled out Library (the DAM part) and just looked at Develop, you'd have ACR. Which means ACR+Bridge might be a better solution. That was suggested many, many posts ago.​
    Yes Andrew, a lot has to do with it being a DAM, but more so NOT having a proper browser.
    And ACR is not really LR without Lib(unless CS6 ACR has changed drastically). I use CS5/6.7 is the latest Adobe lets me install as a Raw dev.
    LR tool setup is MUCH better,
    the print module is great,
    the interface customization is great,
    having the idea(DAM) folders accessible with raw edits thumbnails is great.
    the folders and seeing the raw adjustments is the great KICKER....
    (So ACR can't hang, considering)
    See I currently use ACDSeePro, but it naturally doesn't translate the Raw adjustments made in its previews. Nor do other browsers. So it is only natural to require a Adobe Browser supporting preview of the RAW conversions, and as you said Bridge would be good, as I think I remember it does show the Raw edits, but I have had it crash on me so often it was simply useless. Adobe needs a real supported Browser! And it would be a bonus if it were dockable in LR (I know the docking/interface customization part is asking for miracles). An overall issue is not knowing what files are really in your client folders.
    I doubt Adobe would make LR a browser and a DAM, they already have both built.​
    This is just not so. Library mode is not a browser(unless you mean Bridge, which had been useless for me).
    Let's set the record straight, this statement about LR is wrong: You can't even make adjustments and save the file and find it unless you Sync the folder every time.

    I was referring to the Edit In PS as TIF, then Saving in PS as PSD. (this is still true, right?)
    Although Andrew may have me convinced that I should drop PSD, which would help if I save only in the same format as I open it.
     
  57. This plugin for LR is worth looking at. It scans designated folders and subfolders for new images and updates the library with any new images that it finds. Looks like you are able to control the frequency of scans. Its practically free too.
     
  58. See I currently use ACDSeePro, but it naturally doesn't translate the Raw adjustments made in its previews. Nor do other browsers.​
    I don't know anything about that product. But IF it's a raw converter, that's going to be an issue with every such product. That is, the adjustments you make are not visible until you render an image from the raw. Again, all such raw converters, ACR/LR or otherwise show you a preview based on their engine and whatever rendering instructions you build. There is no such rendered image yet! Raw is raw. The proprietary raw processing builds on-the-fly a preview based on what the image will appear like once you render. Then, any browser or DAM will show you what the image actually looks like. Raw converters are Just In Time processors. If you import a raw in LR and apply edits, until you tell the converter: Take this raw data, take the instructions and build pixels. Until then, you'll never see this elsewhere. The image has yet to be created.
    I was referring to the Edit In PS as TIF, then Saving in PS as PSD. (this is still true, right?)
    No. And further, you can ask for a TIFF but all you've got using Edit In is an image in memory. Until you save it to disk, it isn't a TIFF or PSD or JPEG! The setup would honor what you ask for IF you select Save. IOW, you can set LR to Edit In and specify a TIFF. ACR actually renders that data and those instructions to create pixels. They are presented to you as an image. If you close the file without saving, you got nothing! If you close and save, Photoshop knows you asked for a TIFF and saves the data as such. If you selected PSD instead in the Save dialog, you'd get a PSD. The file format here is immaterial.
     
  59. I don't know anything about that product. But IF it's a raw converter, that's going to be an issue with every such product. That is, the adjustments you make are not visible until you render an image from the raw. Again, all such raw converters, ACR/LR or otherwise show you a preview based on their engine and whatever rendering instructions you build. There is no such rendered image yet! Raw is raw. The proprietary raw processing builds on-the-fly a preview based on what the image will appear like once you render. Then, any browser or DAM will show you what the image actually looks like. Raw converters are Just In Time processors.​
    Yes, that's what I'm saying, reading my post, not a selective sentence.
    I think you're still trying to teach me something as if I don't know :)
    No. And further, you can ask for a TIFF but all you've got using Edit In is an image in memory. Until you save it to disk, it isn't a TIFF or PSD or JPEG! The setup would honor what you ask for IF you select Save. IOW, you can set LR to Edit In and specify a TIFF. ACR actually renders that data and those instructions to create pixels. They are presented to you as an image. If you close the file without saving, you got nothing! If you close and save, Photoshop knows you asked for a TIFF and saves the data as such. If you selected PSD instead in the Save dialog, you'd get a PSD. The file format here is immaterial.​
    Agian, yes, I understand the concept, and workings. Except that....
    If you close the file without saving, you got nothing! If you close and save, Photoshop knows you asked for a TIFF and saves the data as such. If you selected PSD instead in the Save dialog, you'd get a PSD.​
    This last point is where LR will also cut off and not make the round trip back into LR.
    This is what I have been saying. I have lots of images to edit and Christmas is almost here and need to make sure I don't miss it. If LR had a browser, I would do better with my time. I wish you all in this thread a Merry Christmas, as we can all use something to be merry about regardless of what reason you celebrate, Cheers!
     
  60. John, thanks for the reminder about Jeffrey's plugins. I downloaded a few earlier this year and completely forgot about them. I've added that one to the list of plugins to try.
    And thanks again for the folder sync tip. I'd tried another sync method but it didn't clear up some problems. Applying that sync to a couple of the most troublesome folders finally got rid of dozens of the dreaded "?" missing photo icons after I screwed up on batch moving of photos earlier this year. And it found the photos I'd edited outside of Lightroom or renamed via Windows Explorer.
     
  61. This last point is where LR will also cut off and not make the round trip back into LR.​
    ONLY if you circumvent what you asked for! I'm still not at all certain what your point is. Certainly not the bit about: You can't even make adjustments and save the file and find it unless you Sync the folder every time.
    Let me try again. IF you select within the Edit In command that you want a TIFF, you'll get a TIFF. If you select within Edit In command that you want a TIFF and, in Photoshop circumvent what you asked LR for, you go out of your way to do a Save As... and save as a PSD, you'll get a PSD not a TIFF. Why you'd do that is totally unclear! And this disconnect in the file format you brought upon yourself is unnecessary anyway, just save as TIFF. It *sounds* like you are doing the above, asking for one format within the Edit In command and getting another, hence this idea you have to sync something? IF that is true, it's user error. IF I'm misunderstanding you, please provide a step by step process of what you are doing, what you get and what you expect.
    Bottom line: IF you use Edit In Command correctly, the round trip will work as you desire, with no further work on your part. This has really nothing to do with specific file formats, what may or may not be seen outside the raw converter browser/DAM.
    If LR had a browser, I would do better with my time.​
    How so other than you don't have to import anything? How can a database not have a step where you tell it what you want it to track? A browser doesn't track anything. It looks into a folder and shows you what's there, it has no idea what was in the previous or next folder. And what does that have to do with the idea that: You can't even make adjustments and save the file and find it unless you Sync the folder every time?
     
  62. Dave,

    I use to moan and groan about Lightroom until I purchased and read Scott Kelby's Lightroom 4 book for digital photographers. All problems solved. All file managing, storage, workflow, and printing is smooth and easy now.
    Thank you Scott Kelby.
    Marc Meeks
     
  63. ONLY if you circumvent what you asked for!​
    I'm not about to go into preferences and change how to open the file format each time I want to switch it. Besides, sometimes you think a flat TIF is all you need, and realize you make further edits and layers, so I saved them in PSD. Yes, NOT saving in PSD from now on will help a lot. I am practicing the switch already.
    How so other than you don't have to import anything? How can a database not have a step where you tell it what you want it to track? A browser doesn't track anything. It looks into a folder and shows you what's there, it has no idea what was in the previous or next folder. And what does that have to do with the idea that: You can't even make adjustments and save the file and find it unless you Sync the folder every time?
    Not only that you don't have to import anything UNTIL you want to add to the database.... It should have a step where you specify tracking in case you want to make it portable. . You lost me with "it has no idea on previous or next folder". Its a browser, just go to it. Or if you want select to show subfolders. And what does that have to do with the idea that:
    See above reply.
    _____
    Regarding file management...
    I'm sure Scott's version is great specifically for LR. He has great content.
    I also find his "partner's" Matt Kloskowski's tips most helpful.
    I'm sure for many people it is all they need.
    The DAM Book, is what I found to be pretty helpful. Having a pretty solid IT background, lots of the content is obvious to me. But for anyone not familiar with backing up and file management, I HIGHLY recommend it.
    He has one version for LR specifically. If you don't mind locking All your images to the way LR manages files, and only accessing them in a organized fashion via LR... its one way to do it.
    His original and I think still the best version is to manage files by Folder hierarchy.. That way if and when you want/need to change 1 program, or have your image database needing access without LR, you can find things rather logically. I for one don't believe in allowing 1 brand program manage something so important to me. I recommend investing the time to manage it yourself.
    I often have to send magazines PDF files and not seeing these (I have tried the 3rd party plugin) in my folders makes things hard to manage as well.
     
  64. I'm not about to go into preferences and change how to open the file format each time I want to switch it.​
    You don't have to! I told you already you can create as many presets for this as you want. For whatever silly reason you must have the rendered image set for TIFF and PSD, YOU CAN DO THIS.
    Besides, sometimes you think a flat TIF is all you need, and realize you make further edits and layers, so I saved them in PSD.​
    I'm starting to think you have a reading or retention issue. I told you that TIFF can be flat or contain layers. Same with PSD. What's your problem with that? Make a TIFF. Open without a layer. Decide you want a layer. Save it. It's STILL A TIFF. You can either (flat or then layers)!
    Not only that you don't have to import anything UNTIL you want to add to the database....​
    What?
    You lost me with "it has no idea on previous or next folder"​
    Browsers just show you what's in the folder you are peeking into at that moment. They are not database! I thought that was clear.
    For the last time, can you explain, step by step the process you use which provides a behavior you say results in: You can't even make adjustments and save the file and find it unless you Sync the folder every time?
     
  65. You don't have to! I told you already you can create as many presets for this as you want. For whatever silly reason you must have the rendered image set for TIFF and PSD, YOU CAN DO THIS.
    Please explain how you can have LR EditIn a TIF file(with TIF being the preference format to EditIN) to PShop, and then save THAT file in PShop as a PSD, or PSB, etc, and have the file appear in LR WITHOUT Syncing the folder.

    This would be helpful information.

    If it CANNOT. Please just say so, and state that "it can't do this".
    (You can further explain: That is why it is best to use TIF for layers as well as flat files. Or just say, Phil, you are WRONG, LR can save the file the way you explain, this is what you have to do....."Instructions/example here".


    This is the way I understand communication, when the actual questions ARE addressed directly, rather than avoided with giving alternate methods.
     
  66. Phil. You want to go from LR to photoshop and NOT have that file referenced in the catalog?
     
  67. So a question with a question at this point. Is my question so ambiguous?
    It is not a matter of what I want to do. It is a matter of what LR can, or can not do.
    The question is:
    Can LR EditIn a TIF file(with TIF being the preference format to EditIN) to PShop, and then save THAT file in PShop as a PSD, or PSB, etc, and have the file appear in LR WITHOUT Syncing the folder
    ?
    Yes, or No?
     
  68. Spearhead

    Spearhead Moderator

    Yes. I just did it. Took a RAW image, used Edit In (which is set for TIFF), did a Save as PSD and it's there in Lightroom. LR 5 and PS CC.

    But it's not that difficult to download LR and test it yourself.
     
  69. OK. Now we are getting somewhere. Some setting I have or even a error, that it doesn't work for me.
    Or is it unique to PS CC and LR? I use CS5 and LR5.3
     
  70. OK, just to give this a go for testing....
    Opened up a LR catalog, Did some random edits to a RAW file(Canon 5Dm2) in LR5.3, EditIn Photoshop CS5, (As mentioned in the starts of my posts), created a second layer, Saved in PSD.
    File does not show up in LR.
    This maybe a feature in LR in use with PS CC? or the RAW process versions have to be the same? (No reason there either).
    Perhaps a setting I have overlooked? possible.
     
  71. I edited the above post by adding "created a second layer", to be specific/clear.
     
  72. "Edit in" as a TIFF from LR5 to CC and CS5, then save as PSD, the PSDs did not appear in my library, although the TIFF files did, with and without "Stack with original" checked in preferences.
    Might should mention, the subsequent TIFF files created upon transfer did not show my PS edits as I only saved the edits as PSD.
    EDIT: Now it just worked in CC. Edit as TIFF, save as PSD, PSD appears in library. Let me try CS5 again.
     
  73. Spearhead

    Spearhead Moderator

    Mine saved PSD despite sending out as TIFF, as I said above. No idea what settings might apply or if versions affect this.
     
  74. Jeff, your LR behavior is even more strange, as it is defaulting to a format OTHER than what you initially launched.
    Perhaps a "default, save as PSD"? if there is such a preference in PS CC?
     
  75. Y'know, when I edit in CC the file goes right to CC. When I edit in CS5 I get the dialogue box with the edit options and the only active option is "Edit a copy with Lightroom adjustments," and the TIFF file is generated in my library while I'm waiting for PS to open.
     
  76. Sorry. Was just trying to help. I have no need for this option. I'll just let the guys who know a whole lot more than I do wrestle with it.
     
  77. Yes Phil, I get the same...to get the edits in raw/LR, you have to Render using LR. That is also what I get in CS5. I end up having to do cleanup of the TIF, when I see it obviously being the orphan dupe I created. Otherwise it just takes up a chunk of space.
    Phil and Jeff, or anyone.... This feedback is helpful. Being helpful is often not about your own need.(at least shouldn't be).
    Its the first time I am getting at a direct response. :)
     
  78. Spearhead

    Spearhead Moderator

    Jeff, your LR behavior is even more strange, as it is defaulting to a format OTHER than what you initially launched.​

    I did a "Save As" PSD, not "Save."
     
  79. Interesting. Just tried it(Save As). Not the case for me. It is not in LR.
     
  80. Jeff, Do you have CS5 or other versions?
     
  81. Phil. I'm trying to understand to answer! That's why I asked for a step by step to understand what you're doing and want.
     
  82. Spearhead

    Spearhead Moderator

    No, just CC. I have a disc for CS4 but it's not loaded on my current system.
     
  83. Well, I don't expect you to install PS just to test this. I am getting what Phil B reports.
    I understand this is not everyone's case. But it is for a lot of retouchers, and production workflow users, I'm sure a good chunk of photographers who use PSD. And it was simply ONE of the things I mentioned.
    Andrew, I did my best to explain it from the get go...
    Yes, there is a need to sync up. unless you saved the file in the same format. (unlikely) BUT, I would think MANY if not most users who open the file in PS as it defaults to TIF (as it likely should), If you do some edits with layers and want to save it as PSD then you HAVE TO SYNC... And don't tell me how I can save a layer TIF file...Thats the last thing I want to do is mix up flat TIF print ready files withs layered TIF files.
    So, yes you DO need to sync if you want to save it anything else. The likely usage.​
     
  84. Well, I don't expect you to install PS just to test this. I am getting what Phil B reports.
    I understand this is not everyone's need. But it is for a lot of retouchers, and production workflow users, I'm sure a good chunk of photographers who use PSD. And it was simply ONE of the things I mentioned.
    Andrew, I did my best to explain it from the get go...
    Yes, there is a need to sync up. unless you saved the file in the same format. (unlikely) BUT, I would think MANY if not most users who open the file in PS as it defaults to TIF (as it likely should), If you do some edits with layers and want to save it as PSD then you HAVE TO SYNC... And don't tell me how I can save a layer TIF file...Thats the last thing I want to do is mix up flat TIF print ready files withs layered TIF files.
    So, yes you DO need to sync if you want to save it anything else. The likely usage.​
    The above was quoted from an early post to the issue.
     
  85. Spearhead

    Spearhead Moderator

    I don't have to sync. I already pointed that out but you seem to want to claim that isn't the case, at least for LR5/PS CC. It loads it as PSD into the LR catalog directly from PS CC despite being sent over as a TIFF. I did a screen video but it doesn't seem to load properly as a video, so you have to download it as a zip file.
    It's a big file and takes a while to download. If anyone can give me suggestions on how to quickly convert a .mov to something more compact, I will do it.
     
  86. Yes, Jeff, and I'm apparently not alone.
    I take your word for it that CC with LR5.3 behaves the way you say it does. I don't think there are that many variables on how to do these steps for that to be a difference(in LR, rightClick the raw file, select EditIn...) You are using CC, so that is something I am unfamiliar with.
    Phil B does confirm my findings. I am HOPING it is a glitch or something that can be "fixed". Since LR v3 I have had this same behavior.
     
  87. I'm not about to go into preferences and change how to open the file format each time I want to switch it. Besides, sometimes you think a flat TIF is all you need, and realize you make further edits and layers, so I saved them in PSD. Yes, NOT saving in PSD from now on will help a lot. I am practicing the switch already.​
    Yes, there is no need to save as to a PSD to save layers. The round trip of raw file to tif in photoshop and back to LR, will preserve any layers you added in PS. LR will not have the layers available to you, but they are there. If you need to work on those layers all you have to do is take the TIF now back in LR, rt. click choose edit in PS, choose edit original at the dialogue and when it opens in PS, the layers will all her there. I do it all the time.
     
  88. Thanks Barry, this is well understood, and newly in practice.
    What you point out is surely a work around to this limitation. LR forces you to use TIF or PSD, if you want it to make the round trip. Not together without a preference change.
    What you are confirming or helping force, for some to face is that LR(with at least CS5) CANNOT do this.
    I have a hunch that saving in PSB is the same result as saving to PSD.
     
  89. I don't really consider it a work-around. I consider it a work flow. I suppose for some reason, they could put a switch in the dialogue box to allow you tell it to go into PS as either a PSD or a TIF when you go send a file to your external editor (btw, not all external editors accept PSD's) but really there's no practical reason to do so.
     
  90. The question is:
    Can LR EditIn a TIF file(with TIF being the preference format to EditIN) to PShop, and then save THAT file in PShop as a PSD, or PSB, etc, and have the file appear in LR WITHOUT Syncing the folder
    ?
    Yes, or No?​
    With that command, Edit In,no. If you do not want the iteration sent to Photoshop to be referenced, you use the Export command as it's built to do the same function as Edit In without the round trip. Edit In is a round trip by design! That's why there are differing ways to get your raws and other data out of LR in a rendered format. Export is WAY more powerful and with export presets, you can process a lot of work.
    You want iteration referenced in DAM [Round Trip]=Edit In
    You don't (or you can) [Round Trip] with way more options=Export.
     
  91. The other advantage of Export is you are using your current version of LR to render, not ACR. Now if you are getting Photoshop CC, you'll get ACR updated all the time. But if you want to stick with CS6, but move forward with LR, Export is the way to go, you'll be using the latest processing.
     
  92. Spearhead

    Spearhead Moderator

    With that command, Edit In,no.​

    It works for me. I don't know if it's possible to download the video I posted above, but it works for me.
     
  93. Andrew, When you send a file via EditInn , LR will ask, If you want the origianl file or with the LR adjustments. So it actually does use the LR settings.
    Both EditIn and Export will "cook" the file. Yes, Export does give you loads of options. None I use in preliminary editing. Just in derivatives, which is really nice and good quality conversions.
    Jeff, Maybe PShop CC is giving some additional link and compatibility? I haven't upgraded to CS6 either. It is strange.... Once LR does a EditIN to the file out to PShop, it keeps the name and extension in some "memory" to silently import to the catalog on PSHop Save.
    I was going to guess that the instruction string with CC now includes the PSD format as a variable? But that would mean the PShop is doing the push, which doesn't make sense.
    If there is some update, or additional Plugin you use, maybe that would explain it.
     
  94. When you send a file via EditInn , LR will ask, If you want the origianl file or with the LR adjustments. So it actually does use the LR settings.
    Both EditIn and Export will "cook" the file.​
    Yes or course they both will. I'm referring to the round trip! The inclusion of the iteration (cooked file) into the DAM/Catalog. That is optional with Export. Edit In includes it. And there IS a difference if the image has made the round trip or has been 'cooked' (rendered is the proper term)!
    IF you have an image with say Layers, or an image that's rendered and you make edits to it in LR, then you ask to Edit In, you'll get options (Edit Original, Edit with LR adjustments etc). But again Phil, I thought (and I asked you repeatedly to explain exactly what you're unhappy with, your specific steps), I thought the issue was, whether the iteration tracked in the DAM or not. And the last time I asked, you got huffy with me. You've taken this discussion to so many places without specifics, added terms like "cooked" that I'm as confused as ever about just what you're having issues with. I (we) are trying...
    Lastly, all this can depend on the version of Photoshop and LR! They have to be in version parity because again, either LR or ACR will render the raw when you use Edit In! That's not the case with Export. Export always uses LR. Edit In, since I believe version 2, uses Photoshop/ACR (assuming you have Photoshop installed of course). If your version of ACR is older than LR and you ask to Edit It, you'll get a warning (which you can dismiss forever) that warns you of this mismatch. But even in this case, Edit In will track what you did when you return back to LR, it will show you the image you just edited within the DAM. IS THIS THE ISSUE YOU ARE REFERRING TO?
    I'm on the road this week (shooting in Carlsbad, White Sands) with somewhat limited access to LR and the net but if you can clear up, with a step by step exactly what you're doing, then what you expect, then what happens, I might have a better idea of what's 'wrong' with LR.
    Once LR does a EditIN to the file out to PShop, it keeps the name and extension in some "memory" to silently import to the catalog on PSHop Save.​
    YES! That's the idea behind the round trip! You render the raw (using ACR behind the scene). It appears in Photoshop. You apply edits. Doesn't matter if there are layers or not. Doesn't matter if you want a PSD or TIFF. If you asked for TIFF and save after editing, the new TIFF should appear in the Catalog. IF you use Save As and set PSD, you'll get a PSD (assuming we're still talking about formats which we shouldn't need to be). It may have layers. You see it 'flattened' as LR doesn't support Layers. IF the image has Layers and you apply more LR edits (which is kind of dumb but that's another discussion), LR cannot apply it's new edits and give you back the layered image (it doesn't work with Layers). You'll be asked what to do, depending on the choice you'll get a new iteration. And that iteration should be in your catalog after the round trip. Using Export can do the same function and if so configured, NOT add the new iteration to the catalog. Is this what you've been asking about, is this the issue, is this not clear?
     
  95. The inclusion of the iteration (cooked file) into the DAM/Catalog. That is optional with Export. Edit In includes it. And there IS a difference if the image has made the round trip or has been 'cooked' (rendered is the proper term)!​
    Yes, nothing new...And yes, ok, "render" not cooked. This is a forum. As long as the term "cooked" is known in the industry, it is perfectly OK to use it as such. (Lots of lecturing for the past 11 pages of this post).
    But again Phil, I thought (and I asked you repeatedly to explain exactly what you're unhappy with, your specific steps), I thought the issue was, whether the iteration tracked in the DAM or not. And the last time I asked, you got huffy with me. You've taken this discussion to so many places without specifics, added terms like "cooked" that I'm as confused as ever about just what you're having issues with. I (we) are trying...
    I think the confusion happened when my original post which was part of even and earlier post from Page 1...
    Yes, there is a need to sync up. unless you saved the file in the same format. (unlikely) BUT, I would think MANY if not most users who open the file in PS as it defaults to TIF (as it likely should), If you do some edits with layers and want to save it as PSD then you HAVE TO SYNC... And don't tell me how I can save a layer TIF file...Thats the last thing I want to do is mix up flat TIF print ready files withs layered TIF files.
    So, yes you DO need to sync if you want to save it anything else. The likely usage.
    ....was either ignored or... missed? (I read the above a few times to make sure it is obvious and specific not just to me). The first sentence alone is specific. But I can see you are surely a teacher and writer, so instructing is your first instinct. Not helpful to me. Many other new users or adaptive users, yes, sure.
    I am glad to finally here your response of a "NO" (not possible). Your post...
    With that command, Edit In,no.​
    That is all. this "case" is closed.
    -----------------
    I originally posted to point out a few reasons why LR IS intrusive in the way some work. I think I made my point and those that have wrestled with LR, understand this.
    I am always hopeful that Adobe will enhance these areas and perhaps adopt a Browser. This of course introduces things LR doesn't want to be.
    This is not a matter of knowing how to use the program. Its how the program is limited to some photographers existing workflow. Unless you give up your workflow, LR might not work for you. These maybe small looking initially, yet are the infrastructure of how your files are available (to some degree stored and certainly accessed).
    All other points from page 1, are also issues I have in using the program to its full potential.
    We could actually delete all this in between :)
    Your last paragraph I hope is for "new" or "general audience" reading. I am sure they will find it useful.
    Unfortunately there has been nothing you have typed that I don't already know.
    You have encouraged me to use TIF more so over PSD, which is another push from one more person who understands what they are talking about. Thank you.
    This unfortunately doesn't solve the inherent problems with a closed DAM...

    I hope I was helpful to showing you where LR is limited for some uses and users. Why many prefer other editors(without a DAM) as they want a browser to see their actual files and folders.
    I apologize for getting huffy at any point. It isn't directed to anyone. Just dealing with the program, and trying to get my point across taking much longer than I thought. :)

    Further more...
    Image cataloging is not the raw developers job, but IF it can coexist without excluding some file formats for this matter, and not lock out what is really living in the folders, thus hindering existing workflows, we can all be happier...This is why we will have more than one program for all.

    I wish you the best on your shoot.
     
  96. That is all. this "case" is closed.

    The case that is closed is the incorrect, wrong statement:Yes, there is a need to sync up.
    and
    You can't even make adjustments and save the file and find it unless you Sync the folder every time.
    There is no such need if you use the product correctly and as designed. I just tested it AGAIN with a virgin catalog, LR5, CS6. IF you setup your Edit In preferences and tell LR you wish a TIFF, you get a TIFF in the catalog after saving the file from Photoshop. If you setup another Edit In preference for PSD, you get a PSD. There is no need to sync up anything, never was. Several of us reported this and the behavior hasn't changed.
    You were not ignored. As for misread? Perhaps, the writing is quite unclear IMHO.
    The first sentence alone is specific.​
    The first sentence I see is this:
    Yes, there is a need to sync up.
    That's one sentence, it's not correct. There is no need to sync up. If you setup the preferences and ask for a TIFF, you get a TIFF and if you ask for a PSD you get a PSD and if ask for a JPEG, you get a JPEG and all end up in the catalog without the need to sync.
    You can circumvent this. You can conduct a Save As and while you asked for a TIFF, you can end up with a Photoshop PDF if you select that! This has zero to do with Lightroom! The format you save the data in that doesn't match the command you selected (Save as TIFF) or for that matter, using the Save As and saving in another location will circumvent what you asked LR to provide initially. And that document will NOT be 'sync'ed' to the catalog by your own doing. You can call using the product incorrectly or from it's design as Intrusive but the fault is your own!
    Edit In sends the full resolution of the raw to Photoshop unlike Export. IF while in Photoshop you size the image down to 200x200 pixels, that's all you Alan, not LR. Once in Photoshop you are free to do whatever you wish. It is your responsibility now. If after editing the image you simply save it, the format you asked for will be honored and, that document will be sync'ed to the catalog. Period.
    I hope I was helpful to showing you where LR is limited for some uses and users.​
    No but a product used incorrectly appears to the uneducated user to be limited. If you want a certain format in the round trip from LR to Photoshop, that's provided if you use the product correctly. If you want the data cataloged, after, there is a command for that. If you don't want the data cataloged, there is a command for that too. If you want both a TIFF and PSD from Edit In, that's possible. If you select TIFF and you wanted PSD, it's your fault! Period.
    Image cataloging is not the raw developer job...​
    That's like saying Type isn't the image editors job so we should pull out the Type tool from Photoshop? IF you don't want to use a raw developer that is also a DAM, there's a product for that from Adobe. It's called ACR.
    Bottom line however is simple and yes, the case is closed. The idea that:
    You can't even make adjustments and save the file and find it unless you Sync the folder every time... Is blatantly incorrect. Can we move on?
    I think I made my point and those that have wrestled with LR, understand this.​
    I submit if they are doing as you have described to produce a document type not setup in preferences and not cataloged after, they are missunderstanding this, big difference.
     
  97. Yes, there is a need to sync up. unless you saved the file in the same format. (unlikely) BUT, I would think MANY if not most users who open the file in PS as it defaults to TIF (as it likely should), If you do some edits with layers and want to save it as PSD then you HAVE TO SYNC.

    Here's the full sentence from "page 1" with that period after "up" but it shows how you don't understand a few key points here, hence your incorrect handling and results.
    1. Of course, you don't have to sync up.
    2. You don't have to save a PSD if you want layers.
    3. There is no force of TIFF on the user within Photoshop, there's no default, it's sticky. The document rendered from LR is floating in memory and isn't any more a TIFF or PSD as it is an Illustrator or Word Doc. When you save, you get what you asked for within Edit In! You selected the format for Save within the Edit In preferences and that's exactly what you get. If you don't understand the differences between TIFF and PSD, if you think you must save PSD when you added layers but you built the Edit In asking for TIFF and now you circumvent that, and you don't get the image in the catalog, that's user error in several places (configure of Edit In preference's, misunderstanding of layer's and what formats are supported, saving in a format that wasn't what you asked for initially).
    In short, nearly all of the bolded sentence above is incorrect. Sorry. Those are the facts.
    ...unless you saved the file in the same format.
    That's what the Edit In preferences do. Set them correctly (for what you want). That's what you'll get with no sync needed.
    I would think MANY if not most users who open the file in PS as it defaults to TIF (as it likely should), If you do some edits with layers and want to save it as PSD...
    Those many users would be wrong, you do not have to save as PSD. But either way, if you want PSD, set Edit In for PSD and that's exactly what you'll get. Nothing broken here. And there is no default to TIFF, the default is what you asked for within Edit In.
     
  98. EricM

    EricM Planet Eric

    Please Phil, just let him have the last word.
     

Share This Page