1 Correct answer
LrC is not the right tool for the job, it is not designed for heavy retouching, like removing hundreds or thousands of dust spots. Do this in Photoshop before importing the scans, or use Edit in Photoshop from LrC.
LrC uses parametric editing, which is very resource intensive, but Photoshop, which works directly on image pixels, will do this effortlessly.
I have retouched hundreds of my own scans of black & white negatives, and I always start in Photoshop, where I crop, do some basic image adj
...
20
Replies
Thank you for the reply.
I Have emptied the cashe no end of times and yes its on zero and I have set the 'cashe size limit' to Maximum. I Have done that several times today, restarted Lightroom and the same thing is happening. Now it wont load up some folders, its just showing blank screens along the bottom instead of showing the photos. If I click on one of those blank screens nothing will happen. But if I leave it alone for 30 minutes EVENTUALLUY it loads up the photos but imeadiatly starts slowing down when I try to edit them.
The files I'm editing are 14.2 MB black and white scans, I have clicked 'info' on the scan and taken a photo.
I Have just checked my CPU/Memory Usage and to be honest I havnt a clue what I'm looking at!!! So I have taken a photo of both the CACHE box and the CPU Windows, maybe you can see a problem???
As it is now Lightroom is almost imeadiatly slow as soon as I open it I'm getting the Apple Revolving Beach Ball while its trying to load up, this goes on for ages.
I Have enclosed some photos, maybe someone can see the problem?
I Am only using LIGHTROOM-not Classic just normal Lightroom
By @Level42
Although I moved your post to from PS to LR two days ago, I see that someone has moved it to LRC. I'll move it back to LR since that is what you have said a couple of times that you are using.
Jane
I Just can't understand why Photoshop can do all the edits without any problems but Lightroom-which Adobe are pushing as 'The' main editing AP-can't do them?-Spot removal is one of the most imports tools in any photo editing suite, seems strange that out of three aps-that can all do exactly the same things-they have different ways of doing them, saving them, importing them and the way they process them.
By @Level42
Photoshop does pixel editing. Edits are baked into the file, and when you have closed the file, there is no way to go back to the original image. This is known as destructive editing – it changes pixels permanently.
Lightroom and Lightroom Classic (and the Camera Raw plugin for Photoshop) do parametric editing – all edits are saved as text, and are applied to a new image when you export or print. (all the work you do in Lightroom is done on previews, not the original image)
This is known as non-destructive editing. No pixels are changed, and the original remains the same.
One click with the Remove tool can generate 25 kb of text or more. So the more retouching you do, the more text Lightroom has to handle to display the preview, and this process is extremely resource intensive.
Another problem I've found is I import an 11MB scan to Lightroom, I edit it and import it to desktop and its now 7.7MB. By the time I finish the edits in Lightroom its going to be about 5MB. Is there a way of saving them without losing so many MBs? I Have the export set to as Large as possible.
The file size of a jpg depends on three factors –
- Pixel dimensions
- Quality setting when exporting
- Image content
Assuming that pixel dimensions and quality setting are constant, image content can have a huge influence on file size.
The jpg format uses lossy (destructive) compression in order to reduce the file size.
Images with predominantly flat, smooth, or out of focus areas are easy to compress, and will have a relatively small file size.
Images with lots of sharp, busy detail or noise are harder to compress, and will have a relatively large file size.
So file size is not an indication of the quality of a jpg. See examples below.
When you export a jpg from a jpg, the file size is almost guaranteed to change.
The quality setting used when creating the original may not be the same as you use when exporting, and even if it is, the file size will probably be different.
Also bear in mind that the exported file is a new file, it is not the same file as the original.
The edits you have done will also affect the file size. Sharpening will contribute to a larger file size, noise reduction will contribute to a smaller file size. But that doesn't necessarily mean that the file will be larger or smaller than the original.
There are several factors at play here.
To assess the quality of any image, view it at 100%. At this magnification, one image pixel is represented by one screen pixel. This is the only magnification that presents you with a true representation of the image.
100% is a reference point. With some experience, you will learn how a good quality image should look at 100%.
450 x 299 pixels, 85 quality, 40 kb
450 x 299 pixels, 85 quality, 141 kb
Hello, yes Level 42, superb band especially their early CDs. I Recomend 'Level 42, Level 42' 1981 the CD version with the extened version tracks!
Heres is a low rex version of one of the scans I'm trying to edit. As you can see its in a bad state, something has been spilled on the negs I think, they are almost 45 years old.
AdChoices