Conrad_C's post higher up illustrated this very nicely. In that case "retain size" / "expand" borderless alternatives are presented, besides the standard of printing with margins, in the paper selection.   With another printer / computer type: you might select (say) A4 just as the physical page, and then use a separate option to control whether the standard printable extent should apply, or whether one or another kind of borderless printing should happen. ... View more

Is bulk generation possible in the develop module?   I don't think so. It is the Library module (not Develop) where an embedded preview made by the camera is first seen, before a LrC-generated preview can be generated. A 1:1 preview may also wait until you first view that particular photo full size within Library.   But you can select a bunch of photos and manage what the Catalog does for their Library previews:   Any changed image gets its Library previews invalidated requiring their re-creation.   All of this works independently of, and I think as a background task in relation to, whatever previewing and dynamic appearance updates happen inside Develop.   Personally, I don't wait for 1:1 Library previews and such, preferring to evaluate image detail and content inside Develop - which is where I would be carrying out actions in relation to that image detail and content. ... View more

word to the wise: some very old posts in this longstanding thread contain external weblinks which since been nastily compromised - great care please! Links within Adobe / Photoshop.com forums not of the same concern.  ... View more

It seems you have selected a 'borderless' A4 page size to print onto. Typically, printer drivers add some extra enlargement (about 5%) onto each Borderless print job after receiving it from the application. This matches what the OP is experiencing.    The LrC application does not anticipate that this further enlargement will happen, so does not preview or allow for it.   Some print drivers offer an alternative Borderless (true-to-size) option - but failing that, all Borderless (with scaling) printing is deliberately inaccurate for size. ... View more

[edit: on reflection, the below is not I think the OP's issue - but I'll leave in place just for general info.]   It is not always necessary to change the main crop of the image (in Develop) to match exact image Print dimensions - though it would be, to match exact Export dimensions. You can achieve the former entirely inside the Print module..   In Print, each goes inside a containing cell. Dimensions of this cell are controllable directly. If this cell is any smaller than the physical page, then white margins must be left for that reason.   These dimensions define a printed aspect ratio: which may or may not match the current Develop crop of this image. The way the image sits inside this Print cell is controlled by two checkboxes:    The orange option sets (in English) Zoom to Fit (when unchecked) / Zoom to Fill (when checked).   FIT means: scale the image so that nothing is lost - which means further white margins must show to the extent that there is a difference between the shape of the cropped image and the shape of the containing cell.     FILL (checked) - means: scale the image as needed such that no white margins show inside the cell (though white margins may still show outside the cell). And, dynamically trim off - just for the output, not affecting the image itself - whatever picture edges are needed to achieve this. The image can be moved around to achieve the composition you want, if you don't want a centred automatic trim.     This dynamic cropping is no different in its effect, than if you had changed the main crop in the exact same way - just, it is much more convenient not to have to do this.   Furthermore, the same image can this way be printed to a variety of shapes, even on the same page and at the same time. As shown in the above screenshots: these only differed from each other, in their "Fill" checkbox setting. ... View more

Perhaps as an analogy, consider an old fashioned control panel for a power station or something, with lots of manual dials and levers and such. A preset in this analogy would be a shaped piece of wood you press against the panel which turns some of the dials to certain values. And over time, various of these shaped pieces of wood are used as well as manually turning dials prior, in between or since. Maybe you wrote on each of these pieces of wood, each date and time when it was pressed against the control board. But the only thing that can tell you is that those particular dials (but not the others) were then on certain settings (but may have since changed). And you've also kept a full log (History) of every time any change, manual or preset, was made on the control board.    Looking at this from the other side, someone could look at a dial and ask "why is it on that setting?" - so you look back at the History. This only informs you usefully about the last setting change made to that dial. Prior settings are not useful information, since they have been since obliterated - presumably, for good reason at the time. And you haven't recorded what that reason was: possibly associated also with the settings of other dials, and not just this one. Possibly specific to that one situation and not of any broader significance (as, when considering using the same setting change for a different image).    To reiterate, the past use of a preset is not any kind of  (reliable) information. That was just one way, among several equivalent ways, to change the image adjustments. The adjustments as they are now is what matters functionally. If you want to classify images by what processing decisions were taken on them, yes the presence of a given preset in that image History may be informative. Or you can note or mark images in some way.   But later adjusting the result from having previously used a preset: LrC does not work like e.g. a parametric 3D modeller (where the final result seen is due to a stacked set of modifiers that each operate on the outcome from all the modifiers appllied prior). That is because the application of a Lightroom develop preset REPLACES (it does not relatively alter) the value of each parameter affected by it. Just as any manual settings change does. ... View more

If there is a particular brushed local fix that you use a lot, and that always needs to apply the same adjustment (at least as a starting point) then you can make this on a photo as a mask - you'll need to add a brushed spot to do this, but you can then erase that - and name this mask meaningfully - and include this mask by name into a new Develop preset.   Now when you apply this Develop preset to a different photo - or to many photos - the same mask will be seen there, applying your same adjustments. You can then click to activate this mask and brush in which parts of each photo you want it to apply to.   You can make, and include by name into the preset, multiple such pre-made masks if you want.   OR you can sync or copy/paste a mask or multiple masks made for one image, onto one or more others. Same result.   So: rather than trying to repeatedly create from scratch in a way that matches how something was previously created - duplicating that already-made thing is IMO the more efficient approach.    This is not restricted to brushed masks - it can be any kind of simple or combined mask, manually made or involving some automatically detected AI selection such as "Sky". From there on not only this mask's selection, but also the adjustments it applies, remain further alterable of course. ... View more

Thanks for your diligence Johan, I shouldn't have posted that detail without checking first.  ... View more

You may be right about how the % works for presets, some time since I've experimented with that (since I make little use of presets). I would be a little surprised. It could perhaps mean that a preset which relatively lightened an image when applied at one %, might darken it when applied at another % - which seems counter-intuitive to me. I am unable to test actual behaviour just now though. I will be curious to do so!    Regardless, my focus was more on what presets are, as distinct from what adjustments are. Also, pointing out that changing the % action of a given preset - however that is implemented - is only briefly an option, immediately after applying that preset. ... View more

Presets are just a convenient and standard way to move the standard adjustment sliders to particular values. It is those adjustments, not the preset itself, that make a difference to your photo.   The same difference happens regardless whether you've manually moved an adjustment to a certain value, or copied that across from another photo, or used a preset to set it to that value.   Furthermore if any later preset or manual change has further altered relevant adjustments then it no longer makes sense to talk of the photo as "having" that preset applied any more. The record of its usage in the History has to be considered together with all the other History steps, to explain how the photo currently looks.   Some presets can be modified in their % effect immediately after they are used - before dpoing anything else - but this is again merely a matter of what setting the actual adjustments concerned are to adopt. Say a preset is going to set Exposure to -1, and then you choose to moderate that preset's action to 50%. This just means that the Exposure slider moves half the distance from whatever its present value is, to the value of -1 that is written into the preset. Exactly the same as if you had manually moved the Exposure slider to this final setting. That is what the photo goes forward with - there is no ability to later change % action of the preset. A preset is not any kind of persisting "thing" that would be further adjustable, or listable - it is a momentary past "event" in the image's History.   Analogy: knowing something perhaps from school, or perhaps from encountering that fact somehow else. We can't assess or extend our current knowledge by reconsidering what school lessons we had as a child (some of which information was later forgotten or corrected or superseded), nor by reviewing our other past experiences for that matter.   We work from, and update as needed, our present situation - which results from a combination of all that. ... View more

While the versions of LrC and ACR you've listed do look OK to me - and should work together AFAICT - the symptoms are nonetheless those seen with a version incompatibility. Perhaps more than one version of PS is (or has been) installed on your PC, and your LrC is currently looking for the wrong one. If so: a reinstall of latest PS should probably resolve that. ... View more

You don't need multiple masks, you can simply combine multiple adjustments within the single mask as applied by your (for example) brushed selection. Almost never in Lightroom Classic is one adjustment going to suffice alone!    Brown is indeed (more or less) an orangey yellow, but darkened. Thus you will need a tonal change plus a hue change. In LrC these two are kept well separated. I like to go partway towards such changes in White Balance, to maintain some of the original lighting feel, finishing off the effect with the colour overlay tool to intensify and tweak the hue. Plus for the tone aspect e.g. negative Exposure.   Another tack might be to (in local) use  Tone Curve: dropping the Blue curve quite a bit, maybe the Green slightly, with the Grey (luminance) curve brought right down to make the wall brown and not just yellowy. Both approaches shown below.         ... View more

the "-2" simply means that a prior file of that name already existed in that folder (physically on disk, and regardless of any importation to Catalog or not) before a second file was created. ... View more

Further reasons why a file saved by a PS external edit may not then re-import to the Catalog include:   For PSD, the option "Include Compatibility Preview" has been disabled perhaps to economise file size (though a TIFF will include this preview regardless, AFAIK) The image has been converted into a non-supported colour mode, for example 'Duotone'. ... View more

I don't do much at all with syncing so can't advise from experience. My suggestion for "leanness" was in case you wanted to reduce image numbers within the library. If that is not the case, it would merely be duplicating the same thing which ultimately (once new previews are generated) would end up in the same situation - all else being equal.   If it's the previews infrastructure that is concerning you, but you still want all those images in the library, as already commented the obvious first step to review Catalog and LrC settings which relate to preview generation and also to preview expiry and removal. ... View more

To help narrow things down please - since there are many many fields within LrC which report various natures of date - what specific metadata in the file does your script rewrite before import?   Where is this revised date then seen / not seen in the Catalog after import? Then, after adding the image to a Publish service, in which particular metadata field(s) is this date seen (from within the Catalog) to have been reset? Or, are you viewing attributes of the external file directly? ... View more

"Folders are meant for storage, and they're inflexible as a way of categorising pictures."   This is a crucial insight IMO. ... View more

As a tip, if one wanted to go forward with a leaner Catalog (archiving the one currently in use) it is better IMO to highlight all the images you want to take forward, and then use the Export As Catalog command. There are two important options to this: I would un-check the option "include originals/negatives" to avoid physically duplicating source files; and, check the option "include selected images only" to leave behind those images that you do not want.    This approach preserves various Catalog specific aspects that would otherwise get lost. This includes the presence of any virtual copies; your editing History for each image; stacking and flagging and custom sort etc; membership of these images in any Collections; any Smart Collections you may have set up; keywords list and sets, various stuff like that.    The option of bringing images into a different Catalog afresh, even if you have previously written out your latest edits to the source files, cannot preserve any of the above information. For virtual copies this means losing that entire version of the photo and all editing work invested in that. And in any case, losing all the virtual organisation work you've done within the Catalog. ... View more

thanks for the explanation on presets, seem Adobe is insistent that WB is one entity not two. Personally I do tend to treat it so: any correction of WB in my own practice more or less guarantees both numbers must reconsider together.   Tint slider does offer hue-shifting of sorts, but there are many other ways to achieve substantially that same effect which are not tied up with WB per se. ... View more

I apologise and stand corrected on this functional linking of the two parameters by AutoSync. Clearly I was misremembering.   Perhaps what I recall using to separately tweak Tint without affecting varying Temp, was Quick Develop. That method does still work - as you may know, it applies relatively not absolutely so in this case it also respects prior varying tint values. Probably a develop preset could be pruned down in text editor, if you just wanted to force Tint to become the same across a number of images while leaving Temp varying.   As always, further options exist such as Grading, Tone Curve, Calibration panel - and Masked adjustment - all allowing a common batch appearance change to be imposed without in doing so forcing any of the images' currently varying Basic panel parameters to any common value. ... View more

If you activate AutoSync, with several images highlighted, and then manually update just the Tint slider: this action does not touch the Temp slider on any of the images concerned.   AutoSync only concerns itself with whatever specific action you now do on the active image. Of course if that action is to click Auto for WB or use the WB eyedropper, those tools always work by reconsidering both Temp and Tint: and that must extend to other images receiving this same new edit, whichever means you use.   If you prefer using Sync (or Copy/Paste) rather than AutoSync that's entirely for you: noting, one way couples WB Temp and Tint together, the other way does not. ... View more

AutoSync can apply any edit directly onto several highlighted images. Move that one slider and you are already done.   No restrictive checkboxes, and more direct, than first editing one image then syncing this to others. ... View more

You can make a Smart Collection that searches for images depending on multiple criteria concerning the name of their folder, of course involving other attributes of the image too as you wish.   You choose whether [ALL need to be true] / [ANY need to be true] logic is used.   Thus you could require the inclusion of one text string WITH the inclusion of another text string. ... View more

Regardless whether this is Lightroom, or Lightroom Classic, or Photoshop, or any other image editing situation: the processed result that you see is a combination of what the original subject consisted of (its own tones, colours, textures and surface qualities); what the lighting / ambient situation was; technical choices made when the photo was taken (as to exposure, chiefly but also in-camera HDR or flash etc); the physical attributes of the camera itself; any processing that happened as part of the capture, such as a HDR or creative effect or 'film' simulation etc. And the output from that is a lot of pixels showing certain tones and colours. Then postprocessing comes into play and correctively changes those tones and colours in certain ways. But anything you may find out about this postprocessing, and repeat onto your own photos, will NOT deliver the same result if a different subject has been differently photographed with different lighting and equipment.   As an analogy, if I multiply A x B x C x D and then add 2, I am very unlikely to get the same answer if I instead multiply E x F x G x H and then add 2. Perhaps I may have got close to the same answer if I had added some other number instead of 2.   That can be found out by understanding how A may be different from F, and how B may be different from G, etc. Or, more straigntforwardly, you can progressively notice and learn what effect the different postprocessing adjustments have in terms of taking you closer to, or further away from, whatever "look" this sample has inspired you to try and seek.   But you may need to also address the subject, lighting, equipment etc aspects - it is unfortunately not guaranteed always feasible to attain a given "look" through postprocessing alone. ... View more

The only way to subscribe to Lr Classic with only a monthly commitment, so far as I know, is as part of an All Apps plan. This includes lots of other software too and costs IIRC $90 per monthly renewal. That's by contrast with $60 monthly payments for the same software on an annual renewal. Far better value if you don't need anything aside from Lightroom, Lightroom Classic and Photoshop is the $10 monthly payments for the Photography plan annual commitment.  ... View more

On the subject of output specific virtual copies (as with proofing): I have for some time pondered how to manage multiple crops / aspects for output from the same image. Two means suggest themselves, one more straightforward than the other. One way is to differently crop different virtual copies - but if the only reason for making these was so that the output aspect ratio could vary, that seems overkill IMO not least because it multiplies the versions that would need to receive any further editing of other sorts. So making VCs for such purposes may be a double-edged sword for the user. So, one high-tech resolution could be some concept of multiple selectable crops per image, and then that would need an interface and management and would certainly add complexity.   All this arises from different crops being needed when the output aspect ratio must vary. A slight increase of sophistication in the Export settings could resolve that far mmore simply and IMO elegantly. The precedent being how images fit into their cells in the Print module. If Export could do "Zoom to Fill" as well as "Zoom to Fit", one could impose an aspect ratio of one's choice and the image would self-crop to that on the fly. If Export could also impose a Fit shape to which the image was padded (choice of background colour) that would help too. Effectively the single live working image gains some more output processing possibilities, and at a stroke all that extra function which the Catalog would have required, simply goes away.   So, what similarly lean new function might help the OP? Just riffing here - but what if the History step that is made when an Export is carried out, and also the metadata of the output file, could show a matching export ID reference? Then what if it was possible to later scan the Catalog for a chosen export ID, and create a (disposable) Collection that includes (disposable) new VCs, each reflecting the relevant History step of a relevant image? Or, if it was faster, do basically the same thing using Snapshots (though Snapshots would also need to identify which particular Master or VC was involved, since each is held in common across all instances of an image). ... View more

One approach to consider may be the creating of a suitable Collection containing virtual copies, as a precursor to carrying out the export. Re-ordering the operations slightly. Your export then does not need to get involved in any non-export tasks, and can keep its conceptual clarity.    What I have in mind is selecting the images you want; making a new Collection suitably named, with the options "add selected images" and "as virtual copies" checked - paraphrasing the names of these options. If you want to record something about the destination, specification or purpose of this export you can add that in a batch metadata update of these export-specific virtual copies (in a comments field or whatever). Then that info can show in the exported version too. Then export the contents of this Collection using the relevant export preset.  ... View more