Lightroom Classic

Just spend a little time udating font settings and give us more control how the boxes display in library side. Show us you still plan on keeping us around in 10 years. I know it’s the idea to get everything to the cloud but problem is us old timers and maybe so now new comers are figuring it out, we don’t want our personal images on the internet on someone else’s servers. Who knows what will happen and all it takes is a wind storm to disconnect you from your entire life’s collection. Not permanently, at least not so far but shows you how easy this would be to achieve. Keep it local and keep it personal. Let us know you care about LRC please. If there was a single option like Capture One that could handle a 300k library as efficient as LRC, I’d move over in an instant. You should think about that and make that decision a little more difficult because Capture One or someone WILL eventually catch up (I Hope). 

Lightroom Classic should allow a virtual copy to be assigned to a different folder from the original photo.For example, one group photograph may belong in several separate folders. It should be possible to create virtual copies and place each virtual copy into the relevant folder, while all copies continue to reference the same original file.At present, virtual copies remain tied to the original photo’s folder, which makes this kind of organisation unnecessarily difficult. Collections are not a substitute when the workflow specifically requires folder-based organisation.This would allow one photo to appear in multiple folders without duplicating the original file.

Add High level logging, with timestamps, to a text file to record key events such as -Launched LrC version xxxLog core elements from System InfoOpening Catalog X:\parh\name.lrdataDetecting GPU, Initialising GPU, GPU Driver version, GPU settingsMajor catalog activities - compressing, checking, Edit in application (log the app, the filename)Import/Sync summaryALL failures and warningsUser launching/pausing backgroud tasksUser switching between modes (Library, Develop, Map etc)If possible - Last activity before application becomes unresponsive.Memory limitationsI am sure there are many more.I appreciate it is difficult to find a balance between too much and too little.Maybe record the number of times that certain faults re-occur.If possible, use this count to increase logging levels of certain components so that future logs can concentrate on the issue.And then :Rolling logs, so keep the last N logs, or last X days of logs.Tool to view any log.Cut-n-paste to sent to AI tool to review. or

Lightroom Classic 11.2 on MacOS Catalina 10.15.7.   In the batch file renaming feature accessed through the hamburger icon to the right of the File Name field in the Library module, I often need to search and replace particular text. I don't see a way to, for example, replace "Jan1969-" with "1969-01-", which I wanted to do this week because I had improved my file naming system and wanted to update my old files' names.   Even better would be to support entering an arbitrarily long list of replacements to make in one pass, with a "+" or "Add" button to add more "From" and "To", or "Old" and "New", boxes.  For example,   Old: Jan1969 New: 1969-01 Old: Feb1969 New: 1969-02 Old: Mar1969 New: 1969-03   A further enhancement to that feature would be to give either the whole list or each entry a pulldown like in the Library module Text Filter, specifying Contains, Starts With, or Ends With.   I could actually benefit from a full-blown regular expression matcher,

It would be great if there was a way to search/filter images for those that need their AI edit status updated? I, often, use Adaptive Color, then, of selective images, decide I need AI Denoise.  Sometimes I forget to update the AI.  When dealing with a lot of images, it is difficult to go back and check that all the updates have been done.

Individual photos in develop have an indicator whether the AI needs to be updated. There is an option to batch update photos to batch AI update required. The batch does not allow to review individual results of the AI update in case unwanted changes have occurred.   I would like to suggest adding a Filter attribute for 'AI Update Required' that would allow a manual selection of those photos needing the update. This would allow makers to individually walk through the selection to apply the 'AI Update' and review the results. 

Using an R6III with en EF 11-24 F4L via an EF to RF adapter, and I am noticing significant barrel distortion at the wide end that the profile in Adobe Camera Raw isn’t taking out.The strange thing is that I used the exact same lens and adapter on my R6 mark 1, using the same lens profile in ACR and it corrects the distortion well.Anyone have any insights?I can correct manually but it gets tedious (shooting real estate)

Please update Lightroom Classic to include “Head Detection”While I appreciate the ability to select individual aspects of a person face and body to edit, it would save me a tremendous amount of time if Lightroom was able to detect just a persons head and all facial features found within.  Often I do not wish to edit a person’s entire body as their attire does not require adjustments.  It takes too much time selecting all of the facial features in the selection panel.  The other workaround is to select an entire person and then removing the mask for a person’s clothes and body skin afterward.  Which again, takes up time when doing this hundreds of times for a particular gallery or event.  It would increase my productivity tremendously by having a face and/or head option that limits the mask to a person’s head and/or face.Also appreciated if there was an option where I did not have to manually remove the background after creating a mask for a person.  If I do not remove the background fr

Folders with images are color coded for progress through my workflow. These disappear when using Import from another Catalog.

Zoom in on the actual focus point. On the Canon R5 and certainly other models, it is possible to zoom in on the magnified view at the exact point used to focus. With the large images, you don't have to first look for where the sharpness was measured and achieved. I would also like this for Lightroom Classic. When clicking on zoom, jump directly to the point where the sharpness was measured and NOT always to the same point for each image.

Currently, Assisted Culling analyzes all photos on the memory card, which can take a long time. Please add an option in the Assisted Culling window to exclude specific photos or folders from the analysis, so only the selected images are processed. This would significantly reduce analysis time and improve workflow efficiency.

I use 11 different aspect ratios for my fine art crops and would love the ability to save and organize them as presets for a quicker workflow. Right now, the crop ratio menu feels disorganized because it shows random ratios instead of the ones I actually use.Ratios I use: 4:5 - 5:7 - 3:4 - 1:2 - 2:5 - 1:3 - 1:4 - 9:16 - 3:5 - 1:1 - 2:3

I would like to be able to name custom crops in Lightroom. Saving them as ratios is great but one step further would be the ability to give them a relative name for certain projects or uses.Perhaps also not limit me to 5 custom ratios. Image is not available

I often find myself wanting to crop an image for one of several frames I have. Or for different social media uses. But I don't always remember what aspect ratio should be used for this or that frame. Therefore, it would be very useful if it were possible to save cropping presets with a name, just like importing or editing presets.

LR 15.4 changed the representation of brush masks returned by photo:getDevelopSettings(), making it impossible for the Copy Settings plugin to provide a workaround for the numerous, longstanding bugs copying local adjustments between photos with different orientations.  A relatively simple change to the implementations of SDK methods photo:getDevelopSettings() and photo:applyDevelopSettings() would restore the ability of Copy Settings to copy local adjustments correctly, lessening the need for Adobe to fix all the bugs in Copy/Sync Settings. Details Prior to LR 15.4, the strokes of a brush mask were represented by a "Dabs" array of points: Dabs = {    [1] = "d 0.038236 0.022757",     [2] = "d 0.037902 0.025261",     [3] = "d 0.037802 0.027775",     [4] = "d 0.037799 0.030289",     [5] = "d 0.037798 0.032803",  When copying a brush mask, the Copy Settings plugin would translate these points to match the orientation of the target photo, so that the mask would appear in the correct positi

[This version of the post from the old feedback forum was updated 11/1/21.]   Lightroom has long incorrectly copied crops and local adjustments between photos with different orientations. This post provides consistent principles of how copying should behave, test results of the current broken behavior, and a guide to implementing correct behavior.   How Copying Crops and Adjustments Should Behave   Users almost always place crops and local adjustments relative to the photo's content. A Spot Removal is placed over a blemish on a face; an Adjustment Brush lightens the shadows under eyes; a crop is placed tightly around a face; a Graduated Filter darkens the sky.   So if a user copies a crop or local adjustment from a raw to a TIFF produced from that raw by Photoshop, the user expects the adjustment to appear in the exact same visual position and have the same effect. A Graduated Filter aligned with the horizon in the raw should also be aligned with the horizon in the

I think it would be very helpful to architectural photographers to allow  a grid display during Live View Tethered capture.  Or at least one vertical and horizontal line that can be positioned.  I imagine product photographers would also like this.    I've seriously thoght of moving to Capture One since they support this and it would help speed up my workflow.  I hope Lightroom will implement the feature.

When retouching photos, I’m often using the generative AI remove tool to take out distracting objects that move frame to frame across photos, enough so that the remove brush cannot be synced. Rather than wasting 10-30 seconds on each image while waiting for the removal to process, I would LOVE the ability to individually paint areas for removal across multiple photos and then hit “remove” at the end, so that the generative AI feature can process as one bulk action for 20-30 minutes across all of the photos while I step away from the computer. This would be a huge game changer and a much for efficient workflow.

Customizable keyboard shortcuts in Lightroom would be great. I just find it so confusing that crop and brush tools and things like that have such odd keyboard shortcuts in Lightroom. I understand that changing that all now would be awful for many existing users, but being able to override them like I can in Photoshop would be helpful. Doesn't anyone else out there find they use to wrong keyboard shortcuts in the wrong program?

Many of us have realised how disastrous AI is for the planet, for the species, and for the creative industries, but corporations want to force it on us, and Adobe are no different in that. It’s becoming incredibly difficult to use most Adobe apps now because they are cluttered with AI bloat, and there should be a toggle switch that moves it out of the way so that those of us that want to use ‘actual intelligence’ can move all of the clutter, and just be left with the decent tools of our trades.

See this discussion:   I tried the “convert to DNG” function and in INCREASED the file size. Settings were:Only convert Raw files (obviously) Delete originals after successful conversion Extension: dng Compatibility: CR 16.0 and later JPEG Preview: None Emebed fast load data: NO Use Lossy compression: NO Embed Original Raw File: NOWhile I do understand the benefit of DNG over proprietary raw, for long term support, I do not think it’s a good idea to allow an increase in file size without a warning.While the alleged open character of the dng format is a good selling point, I do not think it’s going to be an issue to open raw files in the future. Nevertheless, I appreciate that option. Therefore I think the main selling point of dng would be a higher compression yielding in smaller files.Note: I also know that a Lossy compression would obviously output smaller files, but that’s not the point. ==>Hi ​@Antoine HLMN,Thank you for taking the time to explain your suggestion in more detail.

In the Print Module we should be able to "Print to TIFF", at 8-bit and 16-bit.   We can already print to JPEG but many would prefer to print to TIFF.    

Please add an option to turn off the obnoxious grey transparency grid when viewing files in Develop mode. You know, like Photoshop.

Hi, Nikon has released FW 2.0 for the Nikon Zf two weeks ago, which finally enables Flexible Color on the camera (similar to the Z6III). This enables users to create "recipes"/LUTs so to speak within NX Studio, and export them as .NP3 files onto the Zf/Z6III/Z50II.    Upon importing the JPEG + RAWs to Lightroom (as of the latest release 14.3), there is no "Flexible Color" Camera Matching Profile on the Zf like there is on the Z6III. Please see the attached screenshots for your reference. I believe this should be fixed/added via an update to Camera Raw.   As someone who is 95% satisfied with my "custom .NP3 flexible color settings" on my Zf to achieve the images I want, there's only a slightly edit I want to apply to the RAWs. But, importing them into Lightroom automatically applies Camera Standard (and not Flexible Color, like it does on the Z6III). As expected, this results in a very different look and strong color shift since it isn't saving the Flexible Color inf