Lightroom Classic

Why is it the the Page Numbers check box in the Book Module is a Module parameter? It seems like it should be an individual book parameter. I don't desire page numbers in all of the books I create. If I am working on a book and I want page numbers, I check the box. But then when I want to work on a book that I don't want page numbers, I have to uncheck the box.   It would be nice to set the check box for page numbering at the outset of book creation and not have to worry about checking it again if I work on a different book without page numbers. This is very annoying if I am bouncing between books and they don't all have the same page numbering scheme.   Please make Page Numbering an individual book parameter that gets saved with each individual book.

Adobe continues its practice of colluding with other corporations (AMD, Intel, Microsoft) by leaving out perfectly competent computers with AVX (up to 2013), capable of running professional programs much more demanding than LR and PS, in order to force subscribers to buy new computers with AVX2. 

I want to be able to use one monitor just for the image under development, or otherwise being viewed, full-screen, and the other monitor(s) for the other stuff, especially library + develop panels.

Hey ,    here an article :  https://www.dpreview.com/articles/3278896840/head-to-head-adobe-lightroom-classic-vs-capture-one-21   So when it comes to speed we are 5 times slower. Why?    Can we pls have the GPU use for "import" and "export" ?    These are the most painfull tasks, you cant even do anything in the app...   So GPU and something like MediaEncoder? for Lightroom.   And why can´t we use the MediaEncoder for this?    Its there and its fast. So for the export we would have a racehores.    Then we only need something like speedy prelude for Lightroom.    Who wants more speed ?    more : ______ less: ________   thanxs  Peter     

I have been teaching people Lightroom for years, and right now I am working with someone on labeling their photos for prosperity as they reach the end of their life time.  We already had to move back from Lightroom cloud to Lightroom classic since no keywords will export out of cloud.  Now we have to rekeyword photos that he has organized from the last 100 plus years, since most the face detect didn't move over.  The end result is that for his kids and grandkids to look at the photos outside of Lightroom, they still have to look at the file information to see the names of the people in the photos.  Why not allow Lightroom to export a copy of the photo as normal and an additional copy with the face detect information watermarked over the image, so you can actually see who is who in the photo.    I never thought about how useless all of my work in my catalog is for anyone else that doesn't have Lightroom. There has to be a better way to make use of all the w

Hi,I’d like to suggest an improvement for the Reference View feature in Lightroom Classic.Currently, when using this view, hovering over the image shows the RGB values for both the reference and active images below the histogram. However, this is only useful when the tones you want to compare happen to be in the exact same position in both images — which is rarely the case. My proposal is to allow users to place pairs of color sample points (eyedroppers) — one on the reference image and one on the active image.Ideally, we could place multiple pairs (e.g. up to 3–5), and click on the pair we want to activate. This would display the RGB values of those two specific points side by side under the histogram (e.g. R: 120 / 135 — G: 200 / 185 — B: 180 / 170).This would allow for much more accurate and targeted color comparisons between images, which is especially useful when trying to match color, light or white balance across a series or between unrelated shots. Alternatively —and

Please?   A keyboard shortcut to start tethered capture would be a huge help for those of us professionals doing studio work. If you continue to restrict our access to customize keyboard shortcuts in LrC (which I'll never understand), at least give us a few of the things we use and need to allow us to keep everything within Adobe.   Ryan

Hi It would be really handy to have the vertical adjusment slider active when you pick middle middle, because selecting bottom middle and moving it up with the vertical slider doesnt go up high enough.  Anyone else would find this handy?   thanks

I'd like to suggest that un-selected thumbnail images in Lightroom Classic don't darken. I know it's to show they're not selected, but this makes it difficult to see the image in it's thumbnail form. The tick already indicates that it's selected.

This annoying UI glitch has been going on way too long.    When you're in Library view and have the Index Numbering displayed (View Options --> Compact Cell Extras --> Index Numbering, the numbers appear WAY TOO BIG. Moreover, they are oriented decently (though partially obscured) by a photo when the photo is HORIZONTAL, but when the photo is VERTICAL, the index numbers don't consider the orientation, causing the index numbers to be almost completely obscured. When getting into the triple digits and higher, this becomes a guessing game.   Please fix this. It's enough now. 

Hello Adobe Team, I’d like to suggest a feature that I believe would be extremely helpful for photographers who use Adobe Lightroom, especially those working with multiple cameras from different brands. In Adobe Premiere Pro, there's an amazing Color Match tool that allows users to match the color profile of one scene to another, even if they were captured with different cameras. This functionality has been very useful for videographers, and I really miss something similar in Lightroom. While Lightroom does offer Color Grading tools, they are still quite limited in this regard. It would be incredibly helpful to have a Color Match function—just like in Premiere—that lets us copy the color profile of one image and apply it to others as a reference. This would greatly benefit photographers who work with multiple cameras in the same session and need consistent colors across all photos. Such a feature would save a lot of time and significantly improve consistency during editing, especially

Hi,i'm using a lot of synced photos in lightroom copying same edit to other photos. a lot of time i have a problem when sync/paste an edit that has "Transform" settings in it. it forces the transform from the original photo to the other photos.   the idea is having a checkbox in the sync/copy settings dialog that you can set an "Auto Update" feature to update the transform automatically on each photo and not have to click the button on each one, it will save a ton of time!a keyboard shortcut is also cool for this thing but having an "Auto update" checkbox on paste/sync will be best and easy to implement   thanks

In Edit>Catalog Settings...>Backups, it lists the stored backups.Underneith it states, "Note: The backups listed are sorted by creation date".That's great but which way is it sorted, latest first or last?On my system, the file path is too long to show the date and I can't expand the box.  I need to use the show button to see how it's sorted.  The way it,s sorted is that the lasted catalog is on the top.  AFAIK, nothing in LrC is sorted that way.  Images are sorted by date with oldest on top.  We should be consistent.

I love the new AI-powered Masking Tool in Lightroom Classic 14.3.1.   One small change would be significant. At the bottom of the list of masks, a check box for "Select All" would be a nice addition.   Thanks,   Ed

It would be incredibly helpful to have the “Auto” edit function available within individual masks in Lightroom. Right now, I can apply “Auto” adjustments to the full image, but not to a selected mask such as the background, subject, or sky.   This feature would improve editing speed and precision. For example, if I isolate the background, I may want to apply a quick auto adjustment to balance it with the subject. Doing this manually takes more time and can lead to inconsistent results across a batch of images.   Allowing Lightroom to analyze and apply intelligent adjustments within the boundaries of a selected mask would make the editing process more efficient. It would also support a more consistent and streamlined workflow, especially when working on large sets of images with varying lighting or composition.   This feature already exists for the full image, so adapting it to work within masks feels like a natural next step. Thank you for considering this suggestion.

When searching for an absent keyword to add to an image the  + icon (to add new keyword) should include the absent keyword in the dialog that comes up.  It would be very helpful, instead of having to type it once again every time one encounters a keyword that has not been used before.

As we are about to hit the new year (2025) and in light of the recent post by ADOBE describing their roadmap for productivity improvements - here are five somewhat more complex feature requests that would improve my productivity   1. There are arbitrary situations all through Lightroom where you can search, sort and filter the metadata information - but they are limited and not consistent-nor do they provide the capability to access all the different metadata tags. While this keeps the options simpler, I often run into situations where I am using a lot of the metadata fields (I run a major photo competition) and I am unable to search/sort/filter on many of the fields I have used. While many people might not need this, consider implementing a Settings/Preference that would widely expand the metadata fields for Grid Sort, Filtering, Smart Collections etc.  For example, if I am trying to search for "Toronto" then references to it pop up wherever it is used and not in the specifi

Hello, In the library module we can filter photos by metadata. There are a lot of opportunities but unfortunatelly there is no option to filter by altitude.  So now I have 3500 drone photos from photographic inventory of the 3 cooling towers on electric plant and have to manually group it into separate folders by their height. Maybe it wuold be cool to add feature like filter by "altitude range" to group photos i.e. with altitude between 100 to 120m. Pointing the range by suer would avoid ugrouping photos with small altitude differencies such 0,1 - 0,5m   I think that this option will have value for people who do a lot of technical photographs with drones.

AI tools are now common in Lightroom, such as Masking and Healing - what if there was a feature available in the crop and rotate menu that allowed the crop region to expand outside the boundaries of the original photos frame, and the blank areas are then filled in with a Healing AI. See image below.   This could give photographers more flexibility in framing images, especially if the subject takes up majority of th original frame. It would obviously only work well on low detail areas such as sky or foreground.  

Firstly, the new adpative profiles are great... but where (for me) they fall down is that they still use Adobe's look up table(s) for colours.  I have calibrated colours profiles for my camera, so what would be great would be some way in which this could be combined, equally with some of the off the shelf profiles that comes with LrC too e.g. being able to use one of the vintage profiles (for the LUT) but still using Adaptive for the balancing of the histogram.

I’d love to see a built-in way to add or edit lens metadata in Lightroom for images shot with analog cameras or with uncoded lenses on digital bodies (e.g. third-party lenses for Leica M). Right now, the only options are clunky third-party tools or workarounds that aren’t integrated into my Lightroom workflow. This feature would be a huge help for photographers who regularly shoot film or use third-party glass on digital cameras. I’m not looking for anything overly complex—just a simple way to tag lens make, model, and focal length. Perhaps Adobe could add a metadata field to indicate when EXIF data was changed manually.   I know some folks enjoy hacking EXIF data with command-line tools or plugins, but I’m not that kind of geek. I'd really appreciate a user-friendly solution within Lightroom Classic or Lightroom CC. Thanks for considering it!

I would love to see a configuration item added to Lightroom Classic.  It would allow the user to *exclude* source disk drives from consideration from the import dialog.  This would be a performance benefit.  When I click the Import button, I then have to wait about 30 seconds before I even have a chance to select a source drive for the import.  This is not because I have a slow system; rather, it's because I have several USB-connected external drives.  Many of them are backup drives which are normally sleeping, and it takes them a moment to wake up upon first access.  I'll *never* want to import files from them, so I'd love to be able to tell Lightroom to permanently ignore drives F through J, for example.  Alternatively, if it's easier to implement, it would be acceptable to turn this around and make it an *include* list, indicating to Lightroom which of my drives should be considered candidates for import sources.  Either way would work, and wo

I use the colors for particular classifications as most probably do....   If images are marked yellow and green and they are not selected, the colors are are too close and easily confused.   I understand the dulling of the colors when images are not selected is good, you don't want bright colors when you are scanning a grid or the filmstrip....but if you are looking for the yellow or the greens it is easy to get mixed up. Mix ups mean time lost, time lost means money lost.   If the yellow and green are right next each other, it is plain enough but if either of those colors not near the other one, it easy to get mixed up.  

If I edit my photos and create a curstom order (which I always do on wedding projects) and I have to denoise some of them - they are added at the end of my folder. This is very annoying since I need to move them back again to were they belong manually. This is very cumbersome on projects with 1000 or even more images.    My suggestion:  Why not put the newly added DNG files next to the original (which has the same name)? This would be so much more convenient.  The same is true btw when you edit an image in an external editor (photoshop etc).    In other threads  it has been suggested to use the order by timestamp than >> but this is definitely not a solution! Since I intentionally move images around to tell a story. 

Has anyone else taken a bunch of images they have applied the adapative colour profile to, and then used "match total exposures"?  I find that when I do this totally messes up... now the adaptive profiles obviously do a lot of jiggery pokery behind the scenes and from what I can see try to get a vaguely evenly distributed histogram (which is great btw).   So my guess is that one shouldn't really use match total exposures when using adaptive profiles, which I have no issue with, in which case should LR not pop up some sort of warning like it does if you click on the "auto" button when using the adapative profile?  Maybe an idea for an improvement?  Am using v14.3 of LrC