Turn on suggestions
Auto-suggest helps you quickly narrow down your search results by suggesting possible matches as you type.
About richardplondon
since
Jul 07, 2008
Online
richardplondon
Mentor
1868
Posts
490
Likes
193
Solutions
Nov 21, 2017
06:11 PM
It may be better to say: digital images within LR possess no particular pixels-per-inch setting, nor any particular physical output size. Those things only come into play for a given usage (output) of such an image - or, may not even be a governing consideration; one may only be interested in the pixel numbers. The Print module does work in terms of a printed page. So an image box on that page has a supposed size, and the pixels of the image are "re-projected" onto the page so that they fill that box. The printed page can be expressed in one of two ways: if no particular PPI resolution is stated, e.g. when printing directly, then everything just gets passed through as it is. If a particular PPI resolution is stated, then everything gets resampled so that it will deliver that PPI at that particular physical scale (only). Alternatively one can state a pixel dimension override governing the total pixel dimensions that are output to represent the entire page; when outputting to JPG. Photos placed onto this page are re-cast to the right, proportional number of pixels to sit within that overall layout.
... View more
Nov 19, 2017
11:01 AM
If Auto Sync has in fact made a difference for the OP, then (in latest software) that must I suppose relate to Loupe view. However, older versions of LR did work differently in some respects. For one thing, whether in Grid mode images were being highlighted in the main area, or in the Filmstrip, achieved different results so far as applying change across those images. Since the OP did not state any particular LR version, an assumption of Loupe view cannot be certain IMO - besides that the original question did make particular mention of Grid view.
... View more
Nov 18, 2017
03:02 PM
Turn on "Auto Sync" (button at bottom right of screen in Library) This mode tells Lightroom to apply any changes made here, to the most-selected image, to other highlighted images also. There is another (independent) Auto Sync button available in Develop, doing much the same thing there.
... View more
Nov 13, 2017
07:40 AM
I was really referring to this Preferences setting not affecting the working area background - against which the compact / expanded thumbnails are seen - when in Grid view. But it does affect the corresponding working area background for Loupe view: either while still in Library or else when switching to Develop. That is IMO inconsistent. You are of course right that the "slide mount" surrounds to the individual thumbnails in Grid, are themselves toned according to a fixed scheme - a scheme which also applies in the Filmstrip.
... View more
Nov 13, 2017
03:21 AM
On mine (Windows), these background options in Preferences / Interface only affect Loupe view - and not Grid view.
... View more
Nov 10, 2017
09:23 AM
Try the older "Windows Photo Viewer". Alternatively, try re-importing one of your exported JPGs back into the Lightroom environment. You can then assess it directly alongside the edited Raw.
... View more
Nov 08, 2017
12:02 AM
Glad it worked. I should have added: you had probably pressed Shift+F in the first place. This shortcut cycles through the screen display modes. One of these modes temporarily hides even LR's own menu - e.g. on a small laptop screen, where every pixel of screen space counts, that may be the only tactic which keeps a usable amount of LR's panels visible. There are many key shortcuts and options in LR to show or hide bits of the interface.
... View more
Nov 07, 2017
06:26 PM
You are currently in a mode which maximises the usage of the screen for solely Lightroom's own interface. This is controlled with the Window / Screen mode menu (I'm on Windows, I assume it is similar on Mac). You can select the "normal" screen mode from this menu, restoring the usual application window surround, complete with its standard controls. Standard OS key shortcuts for switching to other applications, minimising etc should still work even so. Alternatively on Windows OS, the shortcut to do the same is Ctrl+Alt+F - I expect on Mac, this would be Cmd+Option+F. ("F" on its own without any additional keys, jumps you directly to a Fullscreen view of just your photo, and then back again to the full interface as before. That's also presented on the same menu.)
... View more
Nov 07, 2017
05:34 AM
Further to your other answers: the catalog upgrade process when you move to a new version, only happens into a new copy. The prior catalog is left untouched and remains accessible using the older software - if that older version has been left installed. To be clear, both catalogs - the prior one and the brand new one - will thereafter refer to (share in) all the same image files on disk, applying (until you change something, in one or the other context) equivalent adjustments, metadata and organisation onto those.
... View more
Nov 06, 2017
10:09 AM
I was testing this earlier via Windows 10 Pro (creators update) , but FYI that was not with LR Classic: I have Lightroom CC 2015.10.1 here (but latest version elsewhere). The folder path I was changing for Case, was not the username and did not include the username. To be honest, in any case I prefer not to store primary data (such as photo library source files) within the user area of the file system... for various reasons far too tedious to go into.
... View more
Nov 06, 2017
05:46 AM
If this is the "capitalisation" problem, "Show Parent Folder" will usually result in an error message. Hmm... interesting. I can't make my copy of LR provoke such an error message here (Windows) by changing the case of a character either in a folder which is shown, or in a parent folder which is not shown, whether before or after the second lot of images are imported. They obediently go and join the first lot of images regardless of differing cases in the folder names at time of import, if otherwise spelt the same, if given the opportunity to do that. And merely changing the case of a character in a folder name later, does not seem to make LR suddenly regard it as unavailable in the file system. So: is this folder name case issue OS specific?
... View more
Nov 06, 2017
05:07 AM
It is a worthwhile experiment to go to "Hannah Hanbury" (for example), and select from the context menu - right-click or Cmd-click - the option "Show Parent Folder". Then watch what carefully what happens. LR should extend whatever it does for this folder, automatically, to any other folders present which are in the same parental case as this one - so, not only this one but also its "siblings". Either LR will immediately realise this parent is in fact the same "Pictures" folder as that of the other nested folders shown, or it will not. If not - if it nests these folders inside some different Pictures folder - then you can tell LR to show the parent of THAT. At some point, in my experience it eventually refers to the operating system (which is case blind) rather than to its own internal folder paths which perpetuate an apparent difference. LR is continually on the lookout for direct parent-child relationships between entries in the Folders panel - so that it can nest those properly. But it does need the hint sometimes, of being told to display all the links in these relationship chains. Without that, it can only show things as if unconnected. It can't show two folders as being "brothers" unless/until their common parent is showing too. It can't show two folders as being "grandparent and grandchild" unless/until their intermediate generation is showing too. Same applies for "uncle and nephew", etc.
... View more
Nov 01, 2017
02:24 PM
It is usual at these large sizes, to work in a scaled manner rather than defining your canvas to the full physical dimensions. This avoids exceeding sheet size limits (such as PDF) as well as fitting better into the usual print and marketing etc etc workflows. People tend to be better reassured by a 300ppi image which is at 1/10th scale, so 106.8 inches long, than they would be by seeing a 30ppi image, even if that 30ppi was happening at full final scale of 98 feet. That is not always a reasoned or rational reaction; since the image content will be identical at 35,000 pixels wide, either way - which is in my opinion plenty for the case in question. But the former kind of file is, simply, easier for people to deal with. Provided that the image file clearly communicates what physical scaling has been employed, e.g. in its file naming or accompanying info.
... View more
Nov 01, 2017
10:52 AM
1 Like
When you edit a photo externally, you get a brand new image within the Lightroom database that was not there before. There is no connection between the two, except that one is derived from the other so far as the metadata which can be passed to Photoshop and then saved into the file which is then reimported to Lightroom. And membership in one or more collections, is only expressible inside Lightroom - Photoshop can know nothing about that. So the brand new external edit arrives in Lightroom possessing no collection membership as yet (as well as no editing history, etc). Yet its incidental metadata matches that of the starting image it was derived from - the new thumbnail "knows" that the photo concerned was taken with the right camera, on the right day, etc. And by default it has all the same keywords etc. Hence if the first image's attributes qualify it to appear in a particular Smart Collection then by the same token, the new image will appear there too... unless the inclusion rules discriminate these two versions somehow (by their file type, by their import date, or some other such gotcha). That is one way to achieve what you ask for. This may be as simple as starting out applying a particular special keyword which your new edit will then naturally inherit also; and employing a Smart Collection which selects dynamically on that keyword (such that your new edit will naturally show up there too)... rather than putting your starting image manually into a standard, static Collection. More than one such Smart Collection can be operating in parallel, against all the same photos' various versions.
... View more
Nov 01, 2017
01:16 AM
I think the way most Lightroom users work, is to simply click on the image to zoom in and out (switching between two standard zoom options that you use consistently). These options are presented at the top of the Navigator panel at top left of the Develop interface, and also work directly as buttons (all the time). They are then remembered until you change them - even if the Navigator panel is not then kept visible. You can choose either Fit (the default and IMO the better) or else Fill as the first of these options - and either 1:1 (which works IMO best for evaluating the image), or else one of the other pixel zooms for the second. So personally I haven't touched the Lightroom zoom slider for some years; I don't even have that displayed in the Toolbar. I haven't needed to change to different zoom options either; doing everything by alternating between Fit and 1:1. While using one or another tool, such as spot heal or local adjustments, clicking on the image does something relating to that tool rather than zooming the picture in and out. So pressing down the spacebar key in that event, suspends the tool momentarily - so that you can zoom the image between e.g. Fit and 1:1 (by clicking with the mouse) or else pan around the image at your current zoom (by dragging with the mouse). On releasing the spacebar, you go back to using the tool again - painting your local adjustment in a different part of the photo, or whatever. So even if you prefer to click on the zoom factors, you may still need the spacebar in order to pan around as you work. (edit: I wasn't even aware of the Z key shortcut! For me (Windows 7.01), that seems to operate fine even within a tool; so, the same as pressing the spacebar and clicking to toggle zoom factor as above)
... View more
Oct 30, 2017
04:58 PM
This is perfectly normal. A camera original file's photo capture date and file creation date naturally start out the same (camera Raw, camera JPG), but that does not apply for other file versions which are later derived from the same photo. The date / time an export was created / modified are accurately stated when you view the file properties, because those have only to do with the individual life history of that file. Factually, it DID come into existence only when the photo involved was exported from LR. That has nothing to do with any picture metadata also involved (such as the known date that the photo was taken, or the camera info, etc). Such picture metadata is independently recorded within the exported image and gets automatically picked up in various contexts. For example, your OS (Mac or Windows) offers some sort of a Photos gallery app. This has the option to group and sort photos by when they were taken and does this automatically, using the embedded metadata, regardless of on what accidental date they were variously exported from LR, or otherwise modified, as shown in their file properties . Or if you upload (say) to online picture hosting, it's relevant info about the photo and the camera which gets extracted and shown; not technicalities about the file. Also your OS file browser can be set to show the Date Taken for picture files, as well as various other metadata. Or you can use some sort of picture viewer utility which prioritises that sort of info. That said, it is convenient for exported files to sort chronologically by capture (not by export) and regardless of which camera they were taken with, across all contexts. One easy way to achieve this is to prefix the filenames of all exported files, with their capture dates in standard form. This can be set up via the Lightroom Export dialog and the renaming options dialog. My own exports from LR are in the form "20171030-[camerafilename].jpg" where the YYYYMMDD format sorts correctly and tells me instantly for any photo export, on what day it was shot. And the format of the [camerafilename] is distinctive of which camera was used; and the camera's image numbering that is embedded within that, makes sure the reference is unique.
... View more
Oct 29, 2017
03:53 AM
This squeezing / stretching is always in fact happening, but is not always equally apparent subjectively - depending on the picture content, and also on how slight or extreme are the adjustment values you are applying. Often when we have a lot of "architectural" structure in an image whereby dealing with convergence is the most important thing, we simply disregard how much the overall scene proportions are being pulled around. Other times, the visual priorities work the other way. And this is strongly exacerbated at wide angle view. IMO you have simply got one image here, which happens not to produce the pictorial results you want, from these particular forms of adjustment. You would almost certainly have met the exact same difficulty if using a tilt / swing back camera instead. Because it is a geometric / optical issue, not a software issue.
... View more
Oct 26, 2017
12:32 PM
The first issue, is that both the Raw and the JPG will need to be shown. This is controlled (for future imports going forward), by a checkbox setting "Treat JPG files next to Raw files as separate photos" in LR Preferences. Getting existing imported Raw + JPG pairs which currently show up as only one image, to show up as two, will require some extra steps. By sorting the images by Capture Time, you will ensure that these two versions of a given exposure are seen alongside each other. browse through the pictures and decide for each one to keep the RAW or the JPG. If choosing the RAW the JPG should be deleted and the other way round If you restate that another way: "for each one, to DELETE either the Raw or the JPG", then that's the task simplified into one action. You can mark images as provisionally Rejected with the X key, check and review, and then clean out all of the currently marked rejects in a batch. Also you can Remove these images from being imported, without deleting them from disk - which allows for a future change of mind (with reimport).
... View more
Oct 26, 2017
09:11 AM
To explain, my suggestion of using the Print module was really aimed at two different requirements: where you want a "contact sheet" type output, where you want single exported JPGs each one laid out in a constant way perhaps with border, plus (optionally) text caption etc. I have print presets to "print to JPG" a series of images, laid out one per page. Either using "zoom to Fill", which enforces a constant aspect ratio and size (cropping the excess), or else centering the image 'loose' within an overall containing image boundary of a constant size and shape. Downsides of this method include that the placement of picture info text is not controllable; that portrait / landscape is not elegantly handled; and that the output file naming is merely done sequentially, with no indication within each resulting filename, of which individual photo is shown. OTOH if Watermarking could show varying metadata tokens 'per photo', this would all be a far simpler conversation!
... View more
Oct 26, 2017
07:38 AM
1 Like
If you want metadata info (such as filename) to be visible in batch printed output, could that be done in the form of captioning underneath each photo? If so, you can use the "Single Image / Contact Sheet" page layout option of the Print module. Then layout image(s) on the page (as a grid of one or more cells within which the images are distributed, set to either rotate to fit or not, and to either zoom to fill or not). In the "Page" panel, is a checkbox "Photo Info". You can then choose which attribute(s) of the various images in your batch, should be shown as text underneath each one. Output can be direct to printer, meaning that you don't need to generate any special JPGs which include a text overlay. Otherwise output from the Print module can be to a JPG file (of the whole page layout as displayed), at a desired pixel resolution.
... View more
Oct 25, 2017
09:28 AM
This is often dependent on the order in which the various products have been installed / updated. disclaimer: I haven't needed to do this for some time - but reinstalling LR might make the software re-check which one is the latest PS available. That's so far as the automatically added "Edit in Photoshop" option is concerned, only. Using the lower part of the same dialog, you can also set up and manage any additional external editing presets you want, each pointing to whatever application (the executable program file) and equipped with workflow options such as 8 or 16 bit. That allows selectivity in the case where PS plugins only operate in one or another PS version, or where you may want to use something other than Photoshop. These named presets appear within the "Edit In:" menu underneath your main PS option, whatever that consists of. When used, these external editing presets always save and import the new derived file first, before opening that into the external editor.
... View more
Oct 25, 2017
09:18 AM
1 Like
dj_paige wrote I believe it only works in folders or collections (and not in smart collections). Yes. Custom Sort menu option is initially greyed out in those contexts too, though, if you haven't as yet dragged anything into a different order.
... View more
Oct 25, 2017
07:40 AM
If you are in a standard folder view or else in a Collection, however sorted, you can simply drag the images around in Grid view. This tells LR to begin remembering a Custom sort order, against that folder / that Collection. You can now switch your view temporarily to some other sort option, say by Capture sequence. But because there is (now) a Custom order remembered too, you will see that option presented - so you can return to it. note: a Smart Collection does not permit dragging images around into a Custom sort order. (A persisting Custom sort order wouldn't really make practical sense, in such a fluid context)
... View more
Oct 24, 2017
09:13 AM
You can call a postprocessing program as part of an Export. So for example, you might export your high res TIFF as the prime requirement from LR, but in the same Export settings which make that happen, also point to an external utility such as "ImageMagick" - including as you do this command-line instructions on what should be done by that - such as, generating and saving other derived versions working from this particular exported image. Another postprocessing option would be to encapsulate a Photoshop Action (such as, one which resizes and saves in a certain way) into a "droplet" utility file and then call that from your LR Export. The droplet will start up PS as required and then script PS to carry out the needed tasks straight away; the Action concerned would need to include for a Save IIRC. A different approach might be to define your various differently sized and saved export requirements into separate Publish setups. Then within each one, maintain a publish collection or Smart collection which picks up the images concerned - e.g., images edited within the last week that have a certain star rating. You would still need to click "go" for each different publish service, to make its own particular sort of output happen - as needed; it will not repeat images that are unaltered since last time - having accumulated a batch requiring this.
... View more
Oct 22, 2017
04:03 PM
1 Like
"Stitching" requires some sort of common features to be present, so far as the software can detect, within parts of the scene which form an overlap of (at least) two pictures. Lightroom's method requires some obviously visible features which REPEAT from one shot to the next - say, some stuff which is located towards the right side of a first shot, which is a very close match for some stuff near the left side of a second shot - such a close and distinctive match, and coordinating so well with other matching features, that the software can find a best solution for overlaying the two photos such that all such common features are satisfactorily aligned together. There are specialist stitching programs which allow setting a forced alignment even in the absence of any auto-detectable common features at all - or, in the presence of features such as repeating patterns which would otherwise confuse or throw off accurate auto detection. That is done by placing control points to define which bits in picture A should map onto which bits in picture B. But Lightroom does not provide any means of influencing the stitch, except for what shots you choose. Even Photoshop does not offer exact control points controlling stitching, in the same explicit way that e.g. PTGui does. I am not clear what exact end result you even want here, and Lightroom has got no way whatever to guess at that. If you want to show the portrait on the left side with a lot more wall next to it, this would need to be done in an image editor such as Photoshop, which can 'composite' picture layers together. This software will also need to provide a blending option. Even so there are some very difficult mismatches here of lighting and colour on the wall. In particular, shadows. You also have a different coloured strip down the extreme right edge of the first photo (a moulding on the wall?) which would need to be dealt with. Personally, I would be using Photoshop to expand the wall on the side of the single shot, using content aware scaling (masking out the person's head to remain unmodified). That should do OK, for a fairly featureless background area.
... View more
Oct 20, 2017
01:06 AM
2 Likes
kwschnautz wrote I know this is an old thread, but since no one else has bothered to address the actual question, regarding the automated process for reorganizing by date, here is the process that I used: 1) Select all photos in Catalog 2) File > Export as Catalog. Place in a folder entirely separated from your original photos. 3) For the sake of having a backup, create a brand new catalog and open it. 4) File > Import. Select the folder with the exported catalog and 'include subfolders' 5) Upon importing, all photos will be reprocessed and sorted into folders as per your current settings PLEASE NOTE: You will lose the following from your images: Virtual Copies Historical Edits Which is to say, throwing away all your work on Virtual Copies / Proofing Copies without the option. But also the new Catalog will silently LACK : Collection membership for each surviving image; Collection sets and Collections altogether; Stacking; Smart Collections; any Catalog settings you've changed away from the default Publish services and collections and image relationships; Print collections; Custom sort order within a folder Remembered filtering or sort type for particular folders plus, I think, some of your individual keywords' attributes such as synonyms or 'don't export' (their hierarchy may survive)
... View more
Oct 16, 2017
01:22 AM
3 Likes
Again, this is just Lightroom doing what you have told it to do. The radial filter is applying your current default settings, in the first instance. The new filter is lightening (instead of darkening) the area defined by the mask, because of having changed the Exposure value (if fresh adjustments are showing this now, you must have done so without any adjustment being selected), It is also continuing to reduce contrast and reduce saturation; those defaults are unchanged. (Oh, and are you asking why the radial filter's mask is applying outside the oval area, rather than inside? That is one of the Radial filter's settings (you'll probably need to scroll to the bottom of the panel to see it). Click on "Invert Mask" to switch between outside and inside.) It is likely that what you are remembering from before, are some prior local adjustment defaults which initially applied no adjustment at all - rather than, as now, applying a very visible adjustment straight away. To get back to that earlier situation, simply select one of the tools (say, radial filter) and immediately before doing anything else, set all the adjustment sliders to zero - do this BEFORE clicking on the image. Now whenever you do click on the image hereafter, each fresh adjustment that you place, will begin by doing nothing visible to the image - until you change that particular adjustment's sliders to something different.
... View more
Oct 15, 2017
06:50 PM
Your default local settings have been set to reduced Exposure and reduced Contrast, and reduced Saturation. This is the effect of moving sliders around while you have got nothing selected. You just update what starting settings will get used the NEXT time you start brushing a new local adjustment, also the NEXT time you start a new radial or graduated filter. You are going to continue to see these same settings as your starting point, unless you maybe change them to something else. But a particular local adjustment can be given different settings of its own, and will then individually remember those / allow those to be further altered. Try this: with the image in the state shown in the screenshot, change the Exposure to a higher value. The image should change accordingly. Now click New above the local sliders, and place a new radial filter onto a different part of the photo. See what Exposure is saying. Now click on the pin of the first radial adjustment again. See what Exposure is saying now. Hopefully this will make it clearer to you what is going on. This is all LR working quite normally.
... View more
Oct 15, 2017
06:04 PM
Ah, OK. (apologies for misunderstanding your aim here). Could be this: In your screenshot just after writing "It's like after i use the adjustment brush, the area is left black no matter what settings I adjust (contrast, exposure, etc.)..." you show some sliders which you say make no difference to the adjustment which has been applied. At the top of the adjustment sliders area, are buttons "New" and "Edit". "Edit" is not highlighted in your screenshot. This indicates that you do not at this time have ANY adjustment pin selected. This is the normal condition each time you go back to using this tool. But in your screenshot showing the green mask overlay, the pin IS clicked (has a black centre). So in that state, the adjustment sliders DO change the settings for this particular mask. LR does not know until you tell it, whether you now want to begin a brand new 'pin', or alter the settings / change the brushing for an existing 'pin' - and if there are several of those, which 'pin' you mean. To re-access the settings for a mask that has previously been painted on, and also in order to paint / erase its mask differently, you will need to have clicked on the "pin" that was originally placed on the image, as the first action in doing that. (In the event that you don't see existing pin(s) on opening the adjustment brush tool, those may have been set as visible "Never". Press T to open the toolbar, change the pins' visibility there to either Auto or Always.)
... View more
Using the Community
Experience League
Terms of Use
Privacy Policy
Cookie preferences
AdChoices
Language:
AdChoices
Language:
- Deutsch
- English
- Español
- Français
- 日本語コミュニティ
- Português
Copyright © 2020 Adobe. All rights reserved.