P: Lightroom Classic: synched brush not at the same place on a cropped copy ??

[didierc69515119]

Hello,

I just found an issue on the latest LR version:

if you select all parameters except the reframing when synching parameters to a virtual copy which is differently reframed, the brush is not copying to the right place 🙂

Didier

[johnrellis]

To understand more precisely:

1. By "reframing", you mean what LR calls in English "cropping" with the Crop tool?   

2. Did you rotate the original or the virtual copy?  Or is the original in portrait mode, rotated in-camera?

3. And to understand what you mean by "the right place", can you please reply with screenshots showing the location of the adjustment brush strokes in the source photo and the virtual copy?

[didierc69515119]

@John_R_Ellis 

Hello,

1. yes it is the crop tool

2. No rotation, just a virtual copy

3. If I start using the brush just in the center of the uncropped original, the copied brush into the cropped virtual copy will be just in the relative center of the crop whatever the crop I made, not at the absolute place of the original.

[johnrellis]

I think I understand what you're describing (and understand why Adobe considers it a bug fix, not a bug), but screenshots of the original and virtual copy showing the locations of the brush strokes would remove ambiguity.

[didierc69515119]

Here is an example with a cyan graduated filter on the left and a cyan brushstroke just in front of the model in the original version.

Second version is a cropped virtual copy and the result after synching everything except cropping.

It often happens to present a photo in another format and copying edits to a cropped version is a common thing that has always worked since the early versions of LR....

[didierc69515119]

@John_R_Ellis 

I'm amazed that there is no LR update yet to fix this awful bug.

There are also similar concerns with the spot removal tool which during sync no longer uses the same sampling area !!

Where is the best place to report bugs, here or on

https://community.adobe.com/t5/lightroom/bd-p/lightroom?page=1&sort=latest_replies&filter=all

What is the difference?

It is very annoying, with each release, some faults are corrected but new or old ones reappear, leaving us always with  a badly functioning tool for which we have to pay. This is amazing!

Didier

[johnrellis]

"Where is the best place to report bugs, here or on

https://community.adobe.com/t5/lightroom/bd-p/lightroom?page=1&sort=latest_replies&filter=all

What is the difference?"

This forum is where Adobe wants all product feedback (bug reports, feature requests, criticism, praise).  Adobe product developers often (but not always) engage here.

The community forum is primarily a user-to-user forum where users can get help, discuss techniques, and figure out if they're facing a bug or a misunderstanding of the app.  Adobe product developers rarely participate in that forum, though sometimes Adobe's contract customer support does (often not very effectively).

[didierc69515119]

ok thank you !

But how do we know if the bug we are reporting has been taken into account. Frankly I would correct this kind of bug as soon as possible and would apologize to the community as it is such a nuisance....

[johnrellis]

A bug report here will get marked Acknowledged (in the upper-right of the first post) when a product developer / tester has reproduced the problem and entered it into their internal tracking system. Often (but not always), the developer / tester will comment in the bug report at the same time.

When they start working on the bug, it will get marked In Progress (though often they don't mark bugs In Progress).  

When a bug fix is released, it gets marked as Solved.

[johnrellis]

Correct: upper-right of the first post.

[Rikk Flohr: Photography]

So If I have the steps correct:

1. Edit image including brush stroke
2. Create Virtual Copy
3. Crop Copy
4. Interrogate brush stroke 

Expected -  brush stroke is over the correct place

Actual - brush stroke has moved to a different area of the image

Is this correct?

[didierc69515119]

1. Editing an image

2. Create a virtual copy

3. Crop the copy

4. Adding a brush stroke to the original

5. Synching all except crop from original to copy

6. Interrogate brush stroke

Expected - brush stroke over the same part of the image, the eyes for instance.

Actual - brush stroke has moved to a different area, relatively to the crop, if brush was in the middle of the original, it will stay in the middle of the copy, thus not on the eyes anymore.

The same for the graduated filter, etc...

There are also issues with the spot removal tool when synching on a copy, the sampling area sometimes change !

[Rikk Flohr: Photography]

I am going to check with the team but this sounds as if it might be as-designed given the order of your steps.  Stand by.

[didierc69515119]

uh ... you have to have some common sense: i magine that you are working on a photo that you have already declined in other crops. You add a brush on the original photo you edit, it makes sense to copy this modification on the crops also.

This kind of response is starting to tire me, it's obvious that it's a bug.

The syncronization of a local adjustment (brush, graduated, radial filter) to a cropped virtual copy has always worked correctly since the first version of LR !

With the sampling area of the spot removal tool that moves sometimes for whatever reason during  synchronization it is really painfull to work with LR.

[Rikk Flohr: Photography]

The team has confirmed this is as-designed behavior. Feel free to submit a feature request or change this post to an Idea if you want the behavior changed. 

Edit 7/22:  Revising this: This is as-designed behavior for copy/paste in a non-virtual copy context. WRT Virtual copies we are looking at restoring previous behavior. 

[didierc69515119]

Okay everybody has lost common sense, I can't believe this .

Anyway I'm sure it will be fixed in a future version...

[didierc69515119]

Is there anyone with any common sense on this forum?
Here is the answer I received on a bug that I reported as soon as the current version was put into service

"The team has confirmed this is as-designed behavior. Feel free to submit a feature request or change this post to an Idea if you want the behavior changed. "

1. Editing an image

2. Create a virtual copy

3. Crop the copy (uncentered!)

4. Adding a brush stroke to the original

5. Synching only the brush from original to copy

6. Interrogate brush stroke

Expected : brush stroke over the same part of the image, the eyes for instance.

Actual : brush stroke has moved to a different area !!! I will keep the same relative position but if the crop is uncentered it will not be on the same place, the eyes of the subject for instance...

The same for the other tools (graduated, radial filter)

This is a major bug, this completely silly change appeared with the latest version !!!

https://feedback.photoshop.com/conversations/lightroom-classic/lightroom-classic-win-10-brush-not-at...

[Walt Thirion Photography]

I'm not sure I agree with you and the current behavior is what I would expect and prefer. Brush strokes are local adjustments and, in general, are not content aware. So when you sync the brush stroke across photos, all LR can do is use a relative position as it has no idea what the underlying content is. Syncing to a virtual copy you've cropped is not a workflow I'd recommend. A better workflow might be to make all local adjustments that you think will be needed across all virtual copies before you make the virtual copies or at least before you crop. Then after you've made the local adjustments you think will be required across all virtual copies, make the virtual copies, crop each as necessary and continue to make local adjustments specific to that instance of the virtual copy.

[Rikk Flohr: Photography]

This thread is being merged into an existing authoritative thread for better tracking and response. Please review the official answer (if any) in the second post on the thread for more information. 

[didierc69515119]

@walter_thirion 

This is not the behaviour of all previous versions.

The way of working is personal, often we go back to settings and resynchronizing the modification is something logical and straightfoward.
If you have to erase your crops and redo them from the modified original it becomes laborious!

Especially since this is the initial behavior of lightroom since the first version and on all versions except the latest.

[johnrellis]

As noted previously, the behavior of copying local adjustments to cropped virtual copies changed from 10.1.1 to 10.2. 

Here's an example in LR 9.4, copying a clone brush, adjustment brush, radial filter, and graduated filter. The adjustments appear over the same underlying pixels: 

LR 10.1.1 shows the same behavior:

But LR 10.2 shows different behavior, with the adjustments (except clone) shifting their location:

I agree that the previous behavior makes sense, while I can't think of any use-cases supporting the new behavior.

I believe this change was an unintended side effect of a change made in LR 10.2 to correctly handle copying of local adjustments between photos with different EXIF orientations (e.g. from a portrait raw that had been rotated-in camera to a TIF created by Photoshop editing that raw):

https://feedback.photoshop.com/conversations/lightroom-classic/lightroom-classic-local-adjustments-a...

I think both use-cases can be handled correctly, copying local adjustments to crops and copying local adjustments to different orientations.  I'll start a new conversation on that and post back here when I've done so.

[didierc69515119]

@John_R_Ellis
Thank you so much !

Finally someone with common sense 🙂

[johnrellis]

I've written a memo analyzing the problems with copying crops and local adjustments described in this thread and others and providing a straightforward method for correcting them:

https://feedback.photoshop.com/conversations/lightroom-classic/lightroom-correct-copying-of-crops-an... 

[johnrellis]

I released the Copy Settings plugin, which correctly copies local adjustments, spot removals, transforms, and crops between photos. It also lets you define presets for which settings should be copied.  I'm hoping that Adobe will fix all the bugs with Copy/Synchronize Settings soon, but meanwhile, this plugin will get the job done.

[Rikk Flohr: Photography]

@here - I've been in talks with the team and, at least for the Virtual Copy workflow we are looking at a fix. 

[Rikk Flohr: Photography]

Updating Status