Lightroom 2.0 will not export to Photoshop CS3

Interesting to read all of this...

My situation:

Vista Home Premium & Service Pack 1.
LR 2 and CS3 integrated nicely - all working as it should...
Machine causing all sorts of grief in other ways.
Spent Sun eve and yesterday rebuilding machine - totally virgin build.
Where originally I had parts of Photoshop CS2 / CS3 Lightroom 1 - 1.4 / LR2 all on the hard disk, this was straight in with Vista / Office / CS3 extended suite and LR2 - virtually nothing else...

then the issue with not being able to open directly into CS3, can use the secondary editor, but not ideal... (works though)
so I followed the suggestion above to repatch CS3 (it was at 10.0.1 but the plugin was still at 10.0)
but the patch doesn't work - tried several times, including reboots etc - no luck...
so followed the instructions to manually move file (NB the various numbers of the patcher folder seem to vary - just pick the one with the correct time for the last attempted install...)
CS3 now updated correctly
LR2 now edits correctly straight into CS3, but then the ghost folder appears (no strange characters in folder...)

so - from a messed up system but with LR2 / CS3 working
to a fresh reinstall which kills the relationship
issue with external editing (bug #1 on here) fixed with manual patch, but fix of bug #1 introduces bug #2

mmm - just thought it was worth adding...

regards

Alasdair

Kevin,

I was one of the first (to my knowledge) posters on the issue of trying to open LR photos in CS3, then having CS3 load with no photo and LR telling me that CS3 did not load. I initially got around the issue by setting photoshop.exe as my additional editor and finally corrected the problem by updating ACR again. So far I have been trouble free with Windows CP SP2. Many of those posting with additional problems have XP SP3. My updater has been pestering me to install SP3 and I have avoided doing so until you come out with a fix. Do you believe that SP3 is part of the problem?

Thanks,

Jim

What Adobe should learn from this is not to release software until it is properly tested. The beta did not have a fully functioning "edit in PS feature" so this could not have been tested in beta.

We are customers paying top dollar for software that is meant to speed up our workflow. I for one do not want to act as an unpaid Adobe tester and developer. I deeply resent the hours I have spent folowing ten workarounds posted by Adobe on this forum (none of which worked apart fropm the one I posted myself as a result of assistance from a third party). I had exactly the same problems when CS3 was launched.

When you sell software at the sort of prices Adobe charges in the UK, it should work straight out of the box!

Regards

Duncan Grove ARPS

I don't know why you're saying that we've been silent on this issue; I've added a lot of posts to this thread. As I've said several times, I've tracked down (I think) all of the issues that were brought up here and we're preparing an update for these and other problems. The update is mostly finished, and we're in a testing phase now.

The only problem here that this update will not address is Photoshop not updating successfully to 10.0.1 for some users; this would have to be addressed with a new Photoshop updater, and I don't have any information at this point on the status of that.

And, no, none of these issues were uncovered during the beta period, at least not to my knowledge.

-kevin

>>I still cannot believe that none of the issues
>>discussed in this thread were picked up in the beta testing

The beta didn't have the full integration ready with CS3, so it acted a bit more like it does now with the "additional editor" workaround.

I did produce, and posted a note on, the ghost directory in the beta. But since it wasn't from a source like CS3 integration, it was rare that it happened.

From my experiences Adobe are terrible for communication.
The best way to get info from them that I have found is to get them on the phone (here in the UK). That's their one saving grace: UK based call centres.
Not even their on-line support request system seems to work (as you'd expect) or get responses.
Customers should not have to chase to find info about purchases or bugs/problems. It would only take a single email (even an auto-response is better than the nothing I've had previously) or post to the website to keep so many people happy/happier.

I still cannot believe that none of the issues discussed in this thread were picked up in the beta testing.

I agree with above post. At first I was not irritated by all the problems LR2 is giving me. I love LR2 but I am starting to feel anger growing. I can find no where any statement from Adobe as to what they are doing about the problems. Why upset your paying customers. Remember the paying customers are the ones that pay your salaries and stock options. Please let us know what is going on. Informing us would be to Adobe's advantage and to the misguided people like me who purchased right away.

Before this silence from Adobe I would have powerfully recommended buying LR2. Now I would say wait or search out other programs.

I am not mad but frustrated by this silence from Adobe. No way to treat customers who love your programs.

Robert Kupri

Well Adobe MAY already have the fix, but if so they bloody well should COMMUNICATE what is going on to make life bearable for the probably tens of thousands of people with these problems. What is the point of this kind of forum if Adobe don't use it effectively to keep poor sod users in the picture?

I have just had to read through EVERY SINGLE POST in this long thread to ensure I had the most up to date info. And then I find that the best and most up to date post about the problem that concerns me most (images not opening in photoshop; my problem because I regularly use the second open option for something else) is answered approximately 50 posts back by one Fredrick Eriksson. Not an Adobe person AFAICS, but he has the most useful post of the lot, thanks Fredrik! Your batch file worked for me, after much frustration when my reapplying the patch and re-installing CS3 then re-re-applying patch(what a waste of time) did not work.

Suggestions:

1) This is a serious matter. It affects many people. This thread is enormously long. Why can't Adobe, a PREMIUM priced software producer, ensure that one Adobe person is responsible for the simple task of maintaining a sticky at the top of this thread (and all similar threads) which summarises the latest info, to save us all having to read 282 messages (and read them in enough detail to make sure we understand the problem and which posts contain the latest useful info before we can attempt to take any informed action to solve our immediate problems?

2) Adobe is a PREMIUM priced software producer. I suggest Adobe concentrate their efforts on getting things right and making things efficient for the user rather than expending so much effort on playing with markets and clever marketing-driven strategies to maximise their already enormous income? I refer in particular to the need to separate Lightroom out from Photoshop at all. Bridge, ACR and PS between them if re-designed, cover all the functionality that we get with Lightroom + PS. Photographers only need a single, properly integrated product, "Photoshop for Photographers", with a single price, a single installation, and a single administration.

I refer secondly to the Adobe decision to buy out Pixmantec, a retrograde step for many people happy with their old software(no longer usable) which was apparently justified by Adobe's need to remove effective competition rather than any reason that would benefit users.

And I refer to the protracted and much-publicised beta program for LR2 which appears to have completely failed to pick up this glaring problem. The word incompetence springs to mind. There are expected bugs and implementation and other software problems in every endeavour which are a part of life... and then there is incompetence. This debacle appears to fall in the latter case.

Thanks again Fredrik.

They apparently already have the fix. They are waiting until the scheduled update (new cameras etc.) to release it.

> Not a very good sign.

Maybe it's because they're working on it.