P: A way to alter the naming for Enhanced filename suffixes

[Sherry-port4u]

My workflow for Adobe Denoise.

1. Edit RAW image in Lightroom
2. Use Denoise AI which saves and changes my file name – adds Enhanced-NR
3. Open the DGN in Photoshop and do more edits
4. Close DGN and it saves my default LR file type as a layered TIF.
5. Delete the DGN and rename the tif.

Step 6 is a pain. I haven’t figured out a fast way to get rid of the extra words “Enhanced-NR” in the file name.

And if I use Lightroom to export the DGN as a TIF it flattens the layers created in Photoshop - not good.

[BrianOar]

Not sure how this "Enhanced" word got past the QC people at Adobe. Do they think that Pro Photogs want that in thier file names? I do like having it tagged as a such but can it just simply be EH? So Dumb. Now all my clients ask, "What did you Enhance?"....sheer stupidity of a file name, but I have to keep it to keep version control and file structure in my delivered images to clients. Comon Adobe, MAKE THIS UPDATE ASAP.

[BC_Climber]

Thanks Rikk. For everyone one of us posting here, I'm convinced there are 1,000 users yanking out what remains of their hair over this painful make-work project every time we edit a photo. Please...we really need this addressed asap. Thank you!

[danielb92063033]

Please pardon me if I'm not explaining this correctly.

When I shoot a raw file and I import it into Lightroom.

I edit the files and then I Denoise the image which creates a new original file that is a DNG file.

Is there any way to get rid of the tag (enhanced-NR) that Lightroom renamed my image and keep my original file name? I don't mind that it's a DMG file. I just need the original file name to stay intact if possible possible.

I don't want my clients to know that I enhanced their pictures.

If I batch rename or rename the file on export, the file has lost its original four-digit file name, and I need to rename it with a completely different file name that does not reference the original final name. Should I ever need to go back to the original file name. After the enhancement, the new file name becomes the original file name of the DMG file created by the denoise process. This is a real problem for me, especially with one or two of my clients. I called Adobe tech support, and there is no solution for this issue as of right now.

Again, I do not want my clients to know that the file is enhanced. Plus, I would like to keep the original file name so I can reference that in the future.

[Lumigraphics]

Your clients don't care what processes you used. And unfortunately you have to either setup a batch rename or a script. I use Bridge/ACR at my day job and have a Batch Rename preset. Lightroom kind of sucks for renaming (ok, it REALLY sucks -  why can't I rename a file in Develop mode? :RAGE:) but it is doable. :sigh:

[danielb92063033]

Of course, they don't care what the process is, but they do question the enhancements. What they don't know won't hurt me, and having to explain what enhancements I did, sucks. It takes up my time to explain. One client even said that other photographers from around the country we work with don't add AI enhancements to our pictures. Of course, I smiled and we looked at their images in comparison, and frankly, they were not as nice.

[D Fosse]

Renaming a raw file back to the original name is of course easy, if you need to send out a raw file and want to hide the fact that it's denoised. It's done the same way that we've always renamed all other files.

Of course, if they really want to find out that's easy too, because it's a demosaiced RGB, not a Bayer encoded mosaic file.

Now, I get this if they don't know what "enhanced" means, and assume you've added all kinds of AI wizardry. I can also get it if you're talking hundreds of files. But for one or a couple - just rename it, done.

But there's one more thing. Some of us have all raw files as DNGs. Then they simply can't have the same name, it's impossible. But yes, there could be a choice of what the suffix should be.

[danielb92063033]

Yes, everyone has a different process and different kinds of files. I just need the last four digits of my RAW file to be incorporated so the client and I can find it in the future.

I do so many images (at least 12 TB per quarter) and so many corporate photo shoots that one off name changing is not an option. Just need Adobe to give us a workaround.

I think most people are in the same boat as I am, regardless of whether you're doing amateur, business-to-business, or business-to-public photography. I'm business-to-business, and I have clients who are very specific and demanding about what they receive and how they receive it.

[D Fosse]

@danielb92063033 

Actually, if you have Bridge installed, you can batch rename there. Set it like this, hit go and sit back:

[Lumigraphics]

I've actually considered learning enough Lua to write a renaming plugin that would handle this and let me rename files in Develop mode. Of all the boneheaded design choices, that has to be one of the worst. I already hate the modal design but having the modes actually work differently is just &$%&) stupid.

[danielb92063033]

Bridge is a step I never use. I haven't used bridge in decades. I'm not about to start doing it now. I'm hoping Adobe fixes this.

[Kees van Surksum]

Bridge is not suitable for renaming enhanced files. If you rename imagefiles in other apllications then lightroom, your LrC-catalog won't find your imagefiles anymore...

The only way to rename them safely is in LrC, but you can do it only file by file.

[D Fosse]

Naturally, you'd copy the files over to a folder ready to send. That's where you rename.

[danielb92063033]

As all these ideas are viable in theory and application. The problem is it separates the file from the original. Hence negating the nondestructive philosophy. Nondestructive should not only be for the image itself, but for the renaming process as well.

[D Fosse]

That's why I said copy the files over to a folder ready to send. You're not sending your originals?

To be honest, I have a little trouble relating to this, because I would never, ever, ever, send away raw files. You never know what people will do with them, possibly with your name on it. But apparently there are situations where you're required to do that.