PART 2 to Lightroom seems too intrusive, suggestions?

[philfx]

<p>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.<br>

I'm not saying this is the fastest or latest, but it isn't slow by any means.</p>

[philfx]

<p>Ok...so back to constructive posting....</p>

<p>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.<br>

LR at this point NEEDS to sync to see the PSD file. period.</p>

[philfx]

<p>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</p>

[JRCrowe]

<p>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.</p>

[philfx]

<blockquote>

<p>Newbies who don't understand how the product acts?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Don't treat all posts as if the user is a newb, or like the user doesn't know what he/she is doing.</p>

[digitaldog]

 

<blockquote>

 

<p>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.</p>

 

</blockquote>

 

<p>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. </p>

 

 

<p>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. </p>

 

<blockquote>

LR at this point NEEDS to sync to see the PSD file. period.

</blockquote>

 

<p>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. </p>

 

 

[philfx]

<p>lol, :-) beloved Corel, hehehe.. you read too much Andrew.</p>

<p>I'll have to come back and reply </p>

[digitaldog]

<blockquote>

<p>I'll have to come back and reply</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Indeed! </p>

[philfx]

<blockquote>

<p>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). <strong>Has absolulty nothing to do with LR</strong>. </p>

</blockquote>

<p>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.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>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.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>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?</p>

[philfx]

<blockquote>

<p>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.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>No LR will not NEED any further input...<strong>IF you DON'T want to see your file</strong>! 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.</p>

[philfx]

<blockquote>

<p>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.<strong> I do occasionally make PSD's and Tiff's and then wonder where they went. <em>Then I remember to sync the folder.</em></strong> You also don't have to sync the folder if you don't want to. You can always <strong>fall back onto Bridge</strong> 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.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>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.<br /> I had played with it LR v1 and 2, but "learned the way it works"(or the way it doesn't work) since v3.<br /> 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.</p>

[digitaldog]

<blockquote>

<p>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.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Browsers are not databases Phil. For example, Bridge isn't a database. Bridge is a browser. LR <strong>is</strong> a database. You want to render from LR and NOT have that iteration become part of the database? Use the <em>Export</em> 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, <strong>that's totally possible</strong>, you're using the wrong command (but that's because you apparently don't understand how to use the product). The <em>Edit In</em> 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.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Tell me something I don't know.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Where to start.... Perhaps the above?</p>

<blockquote>

<p>What are we here... the Adobe employee fan page?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Oh I see, <strong>correcting</strong> 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.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>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.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Wrong again, you can setup as many <em>Edit In</em> 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?</p>

[digitaldog]

<blockquote>

<p>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.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Jack of all trades, master of none it seems (at least in terms of LR).</p>

[Brad_]

No iView?

[philfx]

<p>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?)<br>

You shouldn't call me jack if you don't know me and my abilities. LR or other.<br>

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.<br>

<br />So, your saying I need to Export rather than EditIn....Not sure what makes you say that.<br>

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.<br>

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.<br>

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?</p>

[philfx]

<p>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...<br>

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.</p>

[philfx]

<p>Brad...<br>

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.<br>

<br />If recommended for some particular reasons, I wouldn't hesitate to try.</p>

[digitaldog]

<p>Phil, you have to render raws in any event from LR. You have two options to do so. One is the <em>Edit In</em> command which is <strong>a round trip from LR</strong> 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. <br>

You seem to want to avoid the new iteration being cataloged. IF that's true, you can use the <em>Export</em> 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? <br>

You can build as many Export (or for that matter <em>Edit In</em>) settings as you wish. If for some odd reason, you wanted to <em>Edit In</em> 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! <br>

This has nothing to do with layers! If you export or <em>Edit in</em> and you end up in Photoshop and build layers, once you save that document, it has layers. <br>

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. <strong>You can do either. But you have to select the correct command!</strong><br>

<strong> </strong><br>

<strong>**</strong>IF you use the <em>Edit In</em> command and select Photoshop, ACR actually renders the data assuming LR and ACR are on version parity.</p>

[Uhooru]

<blockquote>

<p>No LR will not NEED any further input...<strong>IF you DON'T want to see your file</strong>! 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.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>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.</p>

[digitaldog]

<p>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. </p>

[philfx]

<p>This is a small fragment of the points I made when I suggested the original poster of his options.</p>

<p>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.</p>

[digitaldog]

<p>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. <br>

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 <strong>must</strong> render a new iteration (Export), the new file WILL show that edit. Otherwise, the 'edit' was metadata in the original document. </p>

[philfx]

<p>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.</p>

[digitaldog]

<blockquote>

<p>Yes, I likely should use the PSD as a default toEditIn</p>

</blockquote>

<p>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).</p>

[digitaldog]

<blockquote>

<p>I differentiate my flat versions vs my layer versions. Tif Vs PSD respectively.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>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 <em>"Edit a Copy</em>", 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. <br /> In terms of TIFF vs. PSD, see:<br /> http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=18965.msg134830#msg134830</p>