P: support for un-maximized PSDs

First of all, no it cannot. It needs "maximized compatibility", which seems silly to need for another up-to-date Adobe product. Such a function seems more like something for legacy applications, like older versions of Photoshop.

Why not TIFF: because when using PSD, exporting to TIFF is yet another file to manage. And compared to PSD, TIFF is "lossy" becasue it cannot contain all the things a PSD can (so not lossy pixels, but still lossy as in loss of information).

Lightroom can read a properly saved PSD.

Why are you using PSD when a Tiff can handle it all without special hoops?

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/for...

Also, isn't it called PHOTOSHOP LIGHTROOM?

Seems all the more stupid when LR cannot properly read PSD.

It just seems silly to me that one Adobe product cannot read another Dobe product's files properly. The requirement for maximized compatibility seems like LR is crippled in its ability to PSD's to me. Adobe has the code that reads a normal PSD and it should be fairly trivial to put that code into LR.

"The engineering's already done - just copy it from Bridge! Do you speak for Adobe on "it ain't gonna change"? "

They aren't even written in the same language.

Look, here's why I think this is unlikely to be implemented. First, it's been like this since version 1 with very little complaining. Second, there are two very simple and straight-forward workarounds already (maximize and tiff). Finally, take a look at this thread. It's been around for a couple of months and it has three votes for it. Look at the "popular" page. The last one on the first page has 19 votes. This indicates to me that not a lot of people care about this feature request, likely because the workaround is so straightforward, especially now with gigabytes of hard drive storage down to 5 cents a piece.

Lightroom makes processing large numbers of images at least an order of magnitude more efficient than using PS for the same thing. Given its relatively low cost (compared to CS) and that very large return on that investment, many photographers have adopted it for handling large numbers of images. Many of us, myself included, don't even own PS (I have Elements for those very few images that I can't deal with entirely in Lightroom). For those very few images, I save them in TIFF. For those legacy images, I saved them with maximize on. No big deal and they are all editable in Lightroom.

Of course, command C, command P, why didn’t I think of that.

Hopefully that simple code will do the job of showing you the layers and even let you edit them too. You’re a genius!

Mike, I'm still on your (our) side here. Given that LR can't do anything with layered files, I suppose it seems logical to the propeller heads at Adobe to have it (nearly) ignore PSDs altogether. In fact, I read recently that initially there was not going to be any support in LR for PSDs at all. I guess something is better than nothing, but not by much.

So, being a LR newb, I'm trying to figure out how to modify my workflow to take advantage of LR's strengths but, in the meantime, I'm still not sold on the idea of converting all my legacy PSDs to tiffs just to make LR happy. For that matter, I'm not yet really sold on LR.

The jury is still out.

The engineering's already done - just copy it from Bridge! Do you speak for Adobe on "it ain't gonna change"?

For one (and I suspect many other reasons), it would have to have support for layers, their opacity, blend modes and all the stuff in Photoshop to show you this data. Huge engineering when a solution exists that not only allows you to see the compounded effect of the layers, it allows tons of other applications to do so as well (the rendered embedded TIFF data).

Bottom line is, you have to use the compatibility option, it aint going to change anytime soon if at all.

So why can't Lightroom show the image and say "no Lightroom editing". At the moment it completely ignores the file (after saying it can't read it)! Totally unacceptable.