+ Camera Raw Feature Requests +

[Ian Lyons]

UPDATE:

We're interested in what changes you would like see in our products. Do you have an idea for a feature that would help your workflow? Is there a small change that could be made to make your life a little easier? Let us know!  Share an Idea, Ask a Question or Report a Problem and get feedback from the Product Development Team and other passionate users on the Photoshop Family product Feedback Site on Photoshop.com.

In future it would helpful if you could use this thread as a means to add

"Features" that you would like to see in future releases of Adobe Camera Raw.

Please do NOT create additional new Topics and try not to duplicate requests by other users. Also, be thorough in your description of the feature and why you think Adobe should consider it.

Oh, and if you find it necessary to comment on someone's feature request/suggestion, try not to get into a shouting match. The penalty for doing so is...

b If you're asking that a particular camera is supported in a future release or just taking the opportunity to carp that yours isn't then please do so in another thread!

IanLyons

Forum Host

[troyhark]

Bridge CS4 is much faster than CS3 [which was a dog] and CS4 is even faster if browsing using embedded images, which is what Photo Mechanic does to gain its speed - it doesn't actually process the RAW images.

Also you can clear the cached images from a folder by rebuilding cache for that folder if you've emtied it.

[_Jeff_Schewe_]

If you set Bridge to only use the embedded previews, then Bridge CS4 is close to the speed of PM. Tagging the images you need to process out should be pretty easy...picking by rank or label would allow you to keep all the files together for a project without the copying back and forth. You could even rank in PM and have that picked up by Bridge CS4. Then either use the batch Save of Camera Raw (with CS4 Camera Raw can handle 1K of images loaded) and save out selected JPEG right from Camera Raw or use Image Processor or Photoshop Batch to process out the sub-take.

I think you need to examine YOUR workflow to improve it (endless copying of files and sidecars is NOT efficient). But the motivation to produce a low overhead version of Camera Raw that operated without Bridge or Photoshop is not likely because of your use case and the business model that would be required. There's only so much engineering hours available on the Camera Raw team and they are heads down working on the Camera Raw plug-in for Bridge and Photoshop and the Camera Raw processing pipeline for Lightroom. A stripped down version just ain't in the cards.

[_PCate_]

I'd really like to see support for the chdk Canon firmware RAW format. Right now I have to use a separate program to convert the RAW files to DNG's that CR can open.

[John MacLean]

PCate,

Why don't you just convert to DNG upon importing your raw files into Bridge or LR?

[_Jozsef_Szasz-Fabian_]

I have a list of a few very missed features:

Please make ACR to remember the last used tool (I dont use zoom, instead I always use the hand tool so I have to switch to this tool always)

Please extend the zooming shortcuts with Ctrl-0 and Ctrl-Alt-0 functionality as in Photoshop.

Please make available the Color space, bit depth and Resolution settings dialog in the save dialog (too). When the folder is selected and I want to save the file and I see that it's 16bit and I want 8bit, I need to press Cancel, select the bit depth and open the save dialog again.

Please make available ACR as a standalone application. If not possible, at least please don't force it to be a "Modal dialog window".

Thank you!

[_Jeff_Schewe_]

>Please make available ACR as a standalone application. If not possible, at least please don't force it to be a "Modal dialog window".

It's a file format import plug-in to open raw files into Photoshop so Camera Raw won't be a stand alone. If you want a stand alone based on Camera Raw get Lightroom...

As for zooming, they keyboard shortcuts from Photoshop do work for zooming in and fit to window (command/control 0). The reason that the Zoom tool is by default the selected tool is that nothing you do with the zoom tool can effect the image settings. So, it's by design and you'll need to make a much stronger argument to change it. As for the Workflow Settings, nothing will be changed for ACR 5.x, but the engineers are always looking to improve things so I wouldn't be surprised to see something along these lines in the future...

[Ramón_G_Castañeda]

>If you want a stand alone based on Camera Raw get Lightroom...

Yeah!

[Dinarius]

PC/Vista x64/4Gb RAM.

I can open *any* number (OK, I've never tried more than about 70-100) of Canon 1Ds Mklll images in ACR and save them out as TIFFs in no time flat.

I can only open *one* 39Mp Hasselblad image at a time and save it out as a TIFF. If I try saving more than one, I get the dreaded "There was not enough memory." error. (I only use ACR on the Hasselblad files for the Healing Tool. All other processing/editing is done in Flexcolor and CS3, so these files are already 220Mb TIFFs when I open them in ACR.)

No one has every given me a satisfactory explanation as to why this happens.

I note a comment further up from Jeff Schewe (admittedly dated October '07) that ACR is made to handle files up to only 10Mp. So, maybe this has something to do with it.

But, whatever the reason is, it would be great if ACR could save out more than one Hasselblad TIFF at a time without seizing up.

Thanks.

D.

[PECourtejoie]

Dinarius, are you opening the file in ACR hosted in Photoshop or in Bridge?
The second option is the best, and the first depends on the amount of memory allocated to Ps: do NOT allocate too much memory.

[Mathias_DK_]

The ability to open several files into a Photoshop Stack (with same options as in File>Scripts>Load files into Stack).

[_Jeff_Schewe_]

>The ability to open several files into a Photoshop Stack (with same options as in File>Scripts>Load files into Stack).

Can you explain why the Bridge script isn't suitable for your needs? You'll need to make a pretty strong case for having the Camera Raw engineers spend the time doing something that's already possible in Bridge.

[Dinarius]

Hi PE,

Files are always opened via Bridge and *only* Bridge is open at that time.

I guess the fact that they are already full size 220Mb TIFFs (unlike the Canon files) may have something to do with it (when I open Bridge and click on the folder of Hasselblad files to open it, the thumbnails take a while to settle/load) so that when I then click on a file/files to open them in ACR, a lot of memory is already in use.

Whatever the reason, it would be nice to be able to deal with more than one file at a time.

D.

ps. I have never tried opening a bunch of 120Mb Canon TIFFs in ACR to see if it induces the memory error message. Maybe I should! ;-)

[Guest]

Wouldn't it be great if ACR could read/use the lens data from Canon lenses in the same way that Canon's own Digital Photo professional can to fine tune peripheral illumination - chromatic aberration - distortion at any setting and distance. It would be even better if the feature could be toggled on and off.
Even with Canon's top L series glass I find for utlimate sharpness there is a real benefit from the peripheral illumination - chromatic aberration - distortion corrections. I have a zillion settings for different lenses/settings combinations as ACR presets and it's still not enough, so this would be really useful and clearly the data is there to use.

[Dennis_1111]

These may have been mentioned before but here are my recommendations:

- A "Master" or "Opacity" slider for the gradient and localized brush controls. I think many folks used to using layers in PS are used to creating a mixture of effects that are a little over the top and then using opacity to back the overall effect back to a reasonable level. It would be nice to have this in ACR for the brush and gradient controls so you don't have to go back to tweak each individual control.

- There needs to be a better way to reset the localized brush and gradient controls. I know you can select the plus or minus icons on one of the controls to sort of come close to a reset but that only works if you remember to do it before you begin to use the brush or gradient. Afterwords, only a double-click on each control will reset. (If there is a trick that I am missing, please let me know).

- This recommendation may be a bit controversial since I know that different people like to set their brushes different ways but I am going to express my preference and request for change anyway: I don't like the fact that the localized brush affects the image outside of the outer circle. I think it would be a lot more useful to have the outer circle indicate the limit of the brushes effect and the inner circle either be the point at which the effect is 100% or the mid-point between 0 and 100% effect. The most bothersome to me though is the outer circle behavior. I have to guess how far it will reach when feather is applied or use a trial and error method, which is a pain.

[_Gretch_]

I have been a Adobe Photoshop supporter and fan for many years.
It is a great product and they have a fantastic team.............But Adobe are starting to remind me of Quark and others such....I had a look at CS4 and asked a number of freelance people to have a look, saying to them if you find something in CS4 which is a benefit to what we do I will upgrade.Not one person out of 5 came up with a reason and we all agreed we didnt need the upgrade for a few gimmicks.
All was going well until someone upgraded their camera to 5d Mk11 .The camera Rawe plug in require to open these files cannot be used in CS3...sure there is a work around ..but come on Adobe A$380 to upgrade 6 machine just for the Camera Raw plug in.Can I say either come up with descent upgrades that are worth while or offer the Camera Raw plug in to CS3 users and future support to the software that made Adobe.
I am looking at the Capture One software workflow, I have three copies and they upgrade free.I hope Adobe listen to their customers and work with us all on this.I think most people will agree CS4 is a very poor upgrade.
I would end by thanking Adobe for Photoshop, prior to this fantastic software I was a High End retoucher working on very expensive equipment costing hundreds of thousands of dollars....Come on guys I could give you some ideas for a better upgrade...it will cost you though so I can pay for the upgrades.

[_DaveBurns_]

Carl - Instead of upgrading to CS4 for the sole reason of converting 5DMkII images, use Adobe's free
DNG converter to convert those files to DNG. The DNG files can be read by ACR in CS3. You've now
spent $0.

[Ramón_G_Castañeda]

Carl,

Your post is very difficult to read. Try breaking your future posts into short paragraphs.

I doubt that post is going to attract many readers. :/

[John MacLean]

Carl, if you don't see the feature upgrades in PS CS4 than you may want to renew your eyeglasses prescription!

[_Gretch_]

To John MaClean,
You may enjoy the gimmicks in CS4 but for pure retouching which is what we do, there is nothing.
may be its OK for you basic users...not for the professionals.

[_Gretch_]

Dave Burns re DNG yep done that, not great for the production line its an extra step..Again maybe its good for hobby type users.
Is it so hard for Adobe to support CS3 for a year..Gunner move over to Capture One for 5 machines the quality is far better than bridge any way.Thats how we worked 2 years ago.
Thanks anyway for the info Dave.

[_Gretch_]

To I an Lyons,
It would be a good feature to support CS3 for a year with new Camera Raw..Until Adobe come up with a decent upgrade.

[John MacLean]

Carl,

Yeah that's it. hahaha!

If you're going to belittle us "basic users" maybe you should post a link and show us your professional retouching.

John MacLean
Basic Photoshop user since 1993

[Ramón_G_Castañeda]

Carl,

Professional and advanced retouchers (which I am not) in Photoshop forum the are raving abut the ability to rotate the canvas in CS4.

Any professional retoucher should recover the $198 upgrade cost in no time, conceivably in a singly job.

[Ramón_G_Castañeda]

Also for your information, Carl, every major upgrade of the ACR plug-in is based on the code for the current version of the application. Supporting older versions of the application would require writing separate plug-ins. It's just not realistic to expect Adobe to do that.

[_Gretch_]

John.
I dont want to get into stupid puerile blogs.I made my opinion on this site..I will probably update all my copies.But the upgrade is poor and I think Adobe need to do much better with their upgrades.I could give them a few ideas, based on some old paint box techniques.
Remember the program called montage, before Photoshop had layers.Now that was a good upgrade....rotating canvas....wow.
John I have just interviewed many people for a position I had ...so called experts.....lets leave it at that.Photoshop is not Rocket science, but there are so many very average retouchers out there, people who know photoshop inside out but cant see a cast or dont have an eye for detail.People who have been doing it for 15 even 20 years.
John I will let you know when my shoe lace is undone.

Ta