P: Capability to display embedded preview or sidecar Jpeg

[areohbee]

As it stands, there is no way to view the preview embedded in a raw file except by loading the raw file into an external app.

Many a folk has wanted to view, in Lightroom, the camera-generated preview, or preview as edited by camera manufacturer software, or even DNG preview as previously saved in Lightroom or Photoshop/ACR.

So, the 'Idea' is for some way to temporarily view the jpeg preview embedded in a proprietary raw or DNG file.

Embedded preview should be usable in before/after comparison, as well as side-by-side, as well as temporary loupe display.

Note: development resources to satisfy this request would be relatively small.

If you like this Idea, please remember to click the '+1' button below.

[areohbee]

I was certainly thinking about them independently until you planted this little seedling. Now that I think about it, I can imagine an even more integrated and comprehensive handling. Still, my guess is that Adobe will not go so all out in this area, and so far, feedback seems not to have much crossover - your call AFAIC: I'm cool either way...

[hillrg]

This is pretty fundamental to workflow. As I understand it, LR does use the embedded preview in the import module, but the performance is so-so. I can't understand why this is not a high priority for adobe.

[FeedbackCommunityMember]

How about "Import Management"?

[FeedbackCommunityMember]

I would like to be to direct LR when importing to send the Raw file to an archive and JPEG to a folder in my main library. It would be nice if LR could register the location of the Raw file but not entirely necessary as long the JPEG filename is not changed. This is what BreezeSystems Downloader Pro (DP) allows with a use of a plugin that can be turned on or off. DP also allows creating of workflow folders under the parent folder while performing the import. Again this is done with a plugin. If BreezeBrowser (BB) had catalog (search) functionality I wouldn't need LR because I would just import using DP and use BB for DAM and just use PS for editing.

[Gavin Farrington]

+1 Dorin's suggestion to split.

I'm here specifically for the purpose of getting LR to mimic PhotoMechanic in having the ability to use embedded previews for a performance boost. I'd really like to see the thread remain dedicated to this topic, so my vote would be to keep them distinct.

[areohbee]

Gavin, I've a hunch your notion most closely represents the masses.

Although I like seeing the more general case, chocked full of possibilities..., it really seems most people are thinking about these different features as being quite distinct.

Adobe can always feel free to "shoot the moon", and give us the comprehensive treatment...

[FeedbackCommunityMember]

I would like to point out that this request was filed 3 years ago and plenty of people have since confirmed they want it. There are writeups all over the Web on how to try to workaround this frustrating limitation. Yet there is no Adobe response here about what they're going to do. That's clearly poor product management. The least they can do is say what their plan is.

Lacking easy management of sidecar files -- and yes, importing them as separate pictures is simply unacceptable for a professional level application -- is the biggest pain in using this product in daily workflow. I'm always switching out of Lightroom to look at the sidecar file using another application. Why I would have to do this many years after this basic workflow feature was widely requested by users is inexplicable to me.

[areohbee]

Some of you may be interested in the script (not a plugin):

'Import Raws For Jpegs'

It finds the raw files corresponding to selected jpegs (in your raw storage area, or card if still there) and imports them:

MiscScripts

[areohbee]

The reasons for wanting Lr to support access to embedded preview and/or jpeg sidecar are many and varied, but to attempt a summary:

* Performance: embedded previews do not need to be rendered - they already are.
* Comparison: it's very common to *want* to compare one's work in Lr with what was done using a different software (including in-camera rendering). One could argue that it isn't necessary, but that won't keep people from wanting to do it. I don't do it very often anymore, but it took years of transitioning... Yeah, you can open the file in the other software, but comparing in that fashion is not as convenient as using Lr's compare view (or before/after comparison feature).
* Immediate use, in case jpeg (usually sidecar in this case), is good enough, at least for now (raw to be imported later, maybe).

Currently the options are:
* Have both on disk and in catalog as separate photos.
* Have no in-Lr access to embedded or sidecar jpeg.

People don't want to have to clutter catalog with both copies, or populate disk with raws which aren't needed yet..

Note: this is not a big deal to me, anymore, but I get that it is still a big deal for a lot of people..

[Guitarfish64]

Don't see the need for an additional module - just the ability to toggle the normal library view between RAW and the embedded jpeg....

[Guitarfish64]

I'm late to this party, but just want to add my vote. My preference is to do as much as possible in one piece of software, and at the moment, for me that is Lightroom.

My key requirement is to easily toggle between RAW and jpeg for a single image, with shared meta-data and the ability to select which one is the primary. That would allow me to use the jpeg for happy-snaps or where the quality is good enough, or switch to RAW for any serious post-processing.

Also nice to have:
- ability to toggle the grid view between all-RAW, all-jpeg and mixed user-selections.
- default initial post-import view to jpeg to avoid the need to render (or maybe user-defined preference?)
- ability to do all this from the emedded jpeg (not sure what value there would be in shooting / importing/storing both seperately if you had easier access to the embedded jpeg?)

Given the amount / length of the debate here and on other forums I'm not optimistic about progress. However, having recently made the step-up to more serious cameras, and started to explore the possibilities of RAW I've been astonished by the way I'm forced to choose one workflow or the other up-front.

Improvements in jpeg quality and growth of Micro 4/3 and other compact-ish Interchangeable Lens Cameras are blurring the boundaries between the 'point & shoot' and 'serious full-frame' worlds. I've now read many heated threads about the RAW vs jpeg, and think it's high time there was better support for working in a seemless way to get the best of both worlds.

[FeedbackCommunityMember]

I'm really considering switching to a different software if this feature won't be added in the next release ....

[Gavin Farrington]

Agreed, Chris. A simple toggle switch is all we need.

[FeedbackCommunityMember]

Everyone he is a solution http://photographylife.com/how-to-get...

[ChrisDPage]

This is a massive problem for me - I've spent money on Lightroom so that I can make the most of my decent camera and then discover that anything my camera handles in JPG format (eg the art filters) is buried unless I handle jpg & raw separately which damages the organisational capability of lightroom. This seems a very basic oversight!

[loulou1234]

hallo Chris,
i agree with you. I was coming from nx2 to lightroom and didn't understand why my nef were so noisy and ugly with respect to my jpg. i have spent weeks to try to use plugins to use nx2 from lightroom,... and corrupted several times my lr database. so i have decided to lean lightroom more and have purchased ononesoftware and topazlab suites and i am really happy now.
lightroom 5.7 is so fantastic that auto works nice with small manual retouching.
so based on my experience, i would shoot nef and add artistic with topazlab on pc.
i am sure you will spare lot of time and will be fully happy

br
marc

[areohbee]

It's not sooo bad (treating raw & jpeg separately) if you stack them. Whichever is above hides the inactive version. Also, consider RawPlusJpeg plugin to help manage (it's free, and I wrote it).

[ChrisDPage]

thanks Mark / Rob for the responses - seems I've more digging to do, I've also tried replacing effects I want in Lightroom, which isn't so easy - I guess the trick for me is remembering that I took photos in a mode that lightroom doesn't natively handle well and treating them differently to the rest - I think some practice and following your pointers is in order.

[Gavin Farrington]

Hey all. This thread has gotten wildly off course from the original intent, which was in reference to a performance enhancement that PhotoMechanic takes advantage of, where it reads the JPG that has been hidden inside the RAW file by the camera, rather than trying to process the RAW on the fly.

That said, there seems to be some confusion about what you might expect from a RAW file. For those of you who are surprised when the camera enhancements aren't applied to the RAWs - that's not a failure of LR. LR is showing you exactly the data you fed to it. RAW files are, by their very nature, not processed. They are a "container" if you will (as all files are containers) that hold the exact, unedited, unmodified, unadulterated data that the sensor captured. Those effect settings that your camera has are taking the image data, running a "photoshop filter," then storing the result as a JPG. Doing this same thing to a RAW file simply isn't possible. (If you're curious why, Google about Bayer arrays and mosaicked image data. Cambridge in Color has a great article about how your sensor works.)

So why does the image appear to be filtered when looking at the back screen, even though you're shooting RAW? Simple. As mentioned above, your camera is hiding a JPG inside the RAW file. (Don't confuse this with your RAW + JPG mode, I mean literally a JPG inside the RAW file.) When you review images on the camera, effects have been applied to those hidden JPGs, but NOT to the RAW data. This is why settings such as color space, noise reduction, special effects profiles, etc etc all appear in the preview image on the back screen of your camera, but have absolutely zero impact on the actual RAW data that you're working with in LR. That preview on your camera screen is not the RAW data. It is only the embedded JPG preview.

I would encourage you to shoot without those (questionable) in-camera special effects, and learn to get the results you like directly in LR from the RAW data you captured. Hope this helps a bit. Now let's please get back to this thread being about a potential "performance mode" for culling in LR.

Cheers!

[areohbee]

This thread is the merging of multiple (arguably related) threads which have raw+jpeg handling as their subject. I think getting back to it's original intent (exclusively) is no longer an option (if it were going to be split, it would have been done years ago, when the possibility was first broached - arguably too much water under the bridge since then). That said, you could always try to create a new (more dedicated) thread and beg for it not to get merged, but I'm not sure how much value there would be in it - I think Adobe is fully aware of both aspects of the issue now (culling performance and raw+jpeg workflow) - I could be wrong..

[Gavin Farrington]

You're probably right, Rob. Hope springs eternal.

[loulou1234]

hallo,
only nx2 was able to start from a nef identical to the jpg, continue with color efex pro3 for nx2 and save all things in the same nef except that this raw had plenty of dynamics because raw so advanced d-lighting, upoints, local dnoise with upoints made miracles.
nx2 needed to be compared with lightroom 3. now lr 5.7 has become much more powerful with its radial filter, local temperature retouching,... so i think in one "auto" click we are close from the jpg
my main complaints in lr today would be :
- need a conten aware eraser brush like nx2 or onone software
- tone enhancer and dynamic contrast like ononesoftware
- all sharpening sliders in local sharpening brush because there you use same settings than in sharpening panel and just change gain so you cannont use large radius in capture sharening and small radius in local sharpening

seeing the original jpg can be frustrating or a loss of time. i shoot raw + jpg because my girl wants the picture in few minutes for her facebook so when i launch lightroom she becomes crazy :-)

if you want artistic effect i really advise topazlab star, glow, simplify, impression, clean, adjust, clariti and restyle.with, with respect to camera effects, possibility to use layers in photoshop

br
marc

[FeedbackCommunityMember]

The ability to do this is the main reason I always used Aperture. I use DPP to convert from RAW, and then import RAW + JPEG. That way I have the JPEG for dispay, and the RAW for safety.
I don't edit my photos, and I want the result I get AT the shoot to be as close as possible to what I get at the end. Lightroom isn't capable of doing this. It seems crazy.

[Ryanide123]

The way Lightroom handles RAW and JPEG files needs some major improvement. Currently, I import my files as separate files (as checked in the Preferences). This is because I prefer to look at the JPEG files since the RAW files generally look terrible out of the camera. 

I would really like to have an Auto Stack option that will stack the RAW and JPEG file together, based on filename and capture time. Then, there should be a toggle button that allow you to switch between the RAW or JPEG file on top. Any ratings, flagging or color labels would automatically be done to both copies. 

This way, I could view my images as JPEG files that are already processed in camera (and look good), sort and label and place in collections. Then I can do basic cropping, adjustments and such to my JPEG files, and if needed, I could switch over to the RAW file, easily if I need it for a higher quality processing. 

The RAW file really needs to be treated as the Digital Negative to the JPEG file. It's there if you need it, attached automatically. 

I tell you that sorting through 25K images where each image has 2 files makes the job twice as difficult. BTW, Canon's DPP software has this type of RAW/JPEG stacking with a click of one toggle button, so it should be possible to implement.

[John R Ellis]

In the merged thread, Ryan followed up with:

I'm shooting with a Canon 1DX Mark II, which does an awesome job of processing the RAW files in camera which includes Picture Style Profiles, Peripheral Illumination Correction, Lens Correction, Distortion Control, Chromatic Aberration Correction and even Diffraction Correction. 

Even when using the Camera Matching profile in LR, the RAW files look terrible in comparison to the JPEGs that the camera produces. I have yet to be able to process a RAW image and get an exact match to the JPEG files, since LR handles individual colors, like green, yellow and red, completely different. 

So, while I may just use mostly the JPEG files, the fact is that my complaint here still stands!!!  Hear my point:

I want a better way to attach the RAW and JPEG files together. So that the RAW file is essentially a underlying digital negative to the JPEG file. This would allow me to not have to sort, flag, rate and label the two files separately. Then, when I need something more than the JPEG file offers, I can easily switch to the RAW file and process my heart out until it produces the image I want. 

This is opposite to the way that LR handles JPEG + RAW because when you have "Treat RAW and JPEG files as separate files" turned off in the preferences, it does group them, but it only allows you to see the RAW file and hides the JPEG one. 

So, I would like for LR to give us options to have the two file types grouped together, and be able to choose whether I view the RAW (as currently) or view the JPEG version and be able to toggle back and forth.