Gen Remove Feedback, LrC  14.2 MacBook Pro M3 Max, 64GB 1TB SSD, Sequoia 15.3.2. Experience: LrC 18 years / PS 25 years. I'm finding all the Gen AI tools immensely frustrating in both LrC and PS. Even worse is the loss of functionality we had previosuly, so I can't even just ignore them. I rarely have issues learning new software but this has ruined my workflow and caused massive loss of productivity. The remove/clone/heal tools in LrC were never brilliant, but they did have their uses for isolated areas away from high contrast elements. Now even that basic functionality has vanished and I have to go PS for 99% of heal / remove clone actions.   File 1 (attached): Task: Remove door knob from foreground. Initially tried Generative Remove but it added so many other artefacts I gave up. Returned to file later to try other tools (Remove, Heal). Results: File 2 (attached): Fill > Remove. Tried 3 x refresh, difference barely visible, so not included here. File 3 (attached): Fill > Heal (this would have worked OK previously). File 4: (immediately below) Refresh x 1 (Seriously? Why sample the curtain? It bears no reseenblance to either doorknob or cupboard and is nowhere near either in image). File 5: Refresh x 2 File 6:  Refresh x 3 File 7: Fill > returned to Generative Remove. This time it worked. Wish I'd kept all the versions with artefacts it added previously, which included adding copies of the cupboard handles in background, completely new cupboard handles it made up, more versions involving the curtains and removal of white line seperating wardrobe doors.   It took a total of ±12-15 attempts before achieving the final result. I don't have time for this.   I wish Adobe had either left the whole AI thing alone or made sure it worked reliably before integrating it it into every element of the software, and left the old tools alone so users could fall back on them when the AI fails - which is provign to be most of the time so far. It works well for very specific tasks which look great when demonstrated at shows / online, but it's failed me utterly in my everyday work).   ... View more

Photoshop 26.4.1, Mac, Sequoia 15.3.2 .   I feel yr pain. I'm having the same issues, also with interior shots. I've done this process hundreds of times, but despite 25 years experience using PS, I find the new Gradient Tool incomprehensible. Now it seems Classic Gradient no longer works with layer masks in a controllable or predictable way either. After watching every online video I could find without resolving the issue, the only soliution I was able to come up with was blending by hand with a brush - a dangerous business, but ultimately quicker than continuing to pfaff with Gradient Tools. I'm not sure I can continue using Photoshop at all now, there are so many issues. Half my reason for blending different interior shots was to remove elements on the floor that Generative Fill couldn't handle. (I do know how to use it, but results are almost always worse than what I can achieve manually). However, I couldn't clone them out due to floorboard perspective; couldn't use Vanishing Point due to lack of source material to clone from in the right perspective; returned to old friend Content Aware Fill (which used to do a great job) but unfortunately that's been 'enhanced' too, and now proves useless 9/10 times, on things that worked well before. (It couldn't recognise the direction of the floorboards and all the new Rotation options made the results exponentially worse). I'm sorry I can't offer a better solution than using Brush to blend layers. If you find one, hope you'll share it, as will I. Good luck. ... View more

I find LrC is doing this regularly at the moment, on several tools, including Stacking, Photomerge and Edit in PS. Restarting the app seems to clear it, albeit it's annoying to have to restart several times during one edit. Best regards, Julia - - - - - - - - - Velvet Beacon Ltd Digital imaging and colour management consultancy Also trading as Julia Neal Photography www.julianeal.photography Sent from phone - pls excuse any grammatical aberrations. ... View more

LrC v14.1.1 - Generative AI feedback H/W: Mac M3 Max, 64GB, 1TB SSD O/S: Sequoia v15.1.1   I find generative Ai helpful in instances where it interprets ‘Remove’ to mean ‘take away [outlined object] and replace with background’. However, it often doesn't do this, instead, adding unnecessary information that wasn’t requested, in both LrC and PS. Examples specific to LrC:   Image (1), sorry can't share: a box with clearly defined edges, with a cable hanging out to one side (which I want to keep), and the leg of my tripod (which I want to remove) on an otherwise empty cork floor. After straightening the image and centering the subject, there's also a slice of white down one side with no data. Wish LrC’s generative AI could - Fill white space by continuing the cork pattern so I don't have to edit in PS. Remove the tripod leg, replacing it with the cork background that surrounds it - without adding a bit of random cable or a weird dark shadow of a different kind some distance from original tripod leg. Image (2) is a coat hanging on a wood door, with distracting patches of sunlight. Wish LrC Gen AI could remove selected patch of sunlight, taking account of surrounding materials and restoring the visible wood grain beneath it, but without - Adding a new wood grain this of a totally different nature to the original. Adding new sun spots; I'd like Remove to remove them, not provide new versions of the same thing. (The results did gradually improve with 3 attempts (ie 9 versions), but it always retained a sun spot of some sort).   A better result was obtained manually via radial masks intersected with colour and luminance masks. ... View more

Just wondered whether there's been an update on this? I also seem to recall it being possible at some point in the past via holding down the shift or comand key, and not only in ACR (which I never use).   Just workign on some files that really highlights the frustration of having to keep repeating three steps to make a multiple Object selection for one mask (Add > Object > make section). Logically, Maskig should allow repeated selections for Objects, the way it does with Brush. The process seems so time-consuming I decided to document the steps required on the next edit, a coat with 5 metals clasps, of which 3 are open, making a total of 8 seperate Objects. They all require the same treatment (so I want them on one mask). The process to achieve this feels frustratingly lengthy due to the number of clicks required to repeat steps (and the fact that LrC keeps closing the Mask tool in between).   Mask > Create New Mask > Objects > make selection: x 11, a total of 33 steps (should only need to do this once, at the start, but LrC keeps closing the Mask tool). Select mask > Add > Object > make section: x 8 times, 24 steps (ie for initial selection of 8 objects objects with a hard outline). Select mask > Subtact > Select Object > make selection: 10 times, 30 steps (because although Select Object picks the clasp, it also picks some of the leather strips attaching it, which I don't want - but selecting with Brush > AutoMask is even less accurate). Select mask > Subtact  > Brush x 3,  9 steps.  (This (mercifully) works logically, allowing repeated actions without requiring the tool to be re-selected each time). Select mask to edit (again) > Add  > Brush x 3, 9 steps. I now have an 8 object mask consisting of 22 different sub-masks, which I estimate it took at least 105 steps to achieve - ie mouse click tool selections, not counting brushstrokes.   I searched for the comment made by an Adobe professional saying a ticket has been raised but was unable to find anything. Does anyone have any insights?  ... View more

Was a definitive answer to this issue ever agreed upon? I read through the above (and several other forums), but it seems like what's worked for one person hasn't for another.  It's half resolved for me (5.5 hours later, now works in Photoshop, but still not in Lightroom) BUT there's no rational explanation for either the problem or its resolution.   Setup: Epson P-900; M3 Mac Book Pro; O/S Sequoia v15.1.1; PS 2025, v26.2.0; LrC v14.1.1 (both latest). Background: I'm not new to color management and previously had everything working perfectly on Intel Mac. Process:  The 'clean install' fix didn't fix it for me;  my entire Adobe Install is clean; it's a new computer and printer. Neither did the process of deleting and reinstalling Epson drivers, shutting down applications and computer etc. Although visible to Epson's own print app (Epson Print Layout), when navigating manually the Epson ICC profiles do not appear in  Your hard disk name”/library/ printers/EPSON/InkjetPrinter2/ICCProfiles/ [hidden inside a “package”] [Not in the “your username”/library/ ]...  Right click on file EP2010HK1_EPSON_SC_P900_Series.profiles > show package contents > opens Contents > Resources > ... shows nothing else, just an empty window. BUT when I run a Spotlight Search, that is exactly where they are located. I navigated manually again with the same result (nothing visible).  After a few more hours searching online  (widespread problem that's been around a few years), I hit Cmd + P one last time - for no logical reason, given the number of times I'd already ascertained that ICCs weren't visible in PS or LrC Soft Proofing or Print dialogue - and inexplicably, the profiles were now visible. Between that moment and the previous attempt, the only thing I'd done was search online and type this. And it still only works in PS, LrC still doesn't see ICCs for either soft proofing or printing.   Tentative (albeit unlikely) conclusion:  in the Epson media installer app, every single action (such as downloading an ICC profile) results in the warning "this process may take several minutes." Is it possible it takes this Epson app an inexplicably long time to embed profiles where Adobe can see them? Or that PS/LrC are running goodness knows what script in the background that takes hours before they respond to tools requiring access to ICCs? (±5.5-6 hours in my case).    Finally, since writing the above, I made a test print in PS, checked LrC again (no dice). Made tea, checked LrC one last time and - again, inexplicably, through no actions taken by me - it now works in LrC as well.   If anyone has any theories, I'd be fascinated to hear them 😵‍💫!     ... View more

I'm not sure what to look for, other than the obvious contenders suich as page size, layout direction, Duplex / Dounle sided On / On short side / Off (the latter being unintuitive since I want it on, but since others have turned it Off but ended up with duplexing, I tried!). ... View more

Yep! Ad nauseum. So did Adobe support tech...  ... View more

...and the other link is for someone whose duplexing is coming out upside down. My issue is it is not duplexing at all, despite being set to On in the driver(s).   ... View more

Thanks for your swift response Abhishek, but I had already read that post and all the answers (plus all other posts related to duplexing) and it does not solve my issue; as per OP, I want it to duplex; that solution is to stop it duplexing. As detailed above, I have tried turning Duplexing On and Off  and also tried 3 different printers, with same result. ... View more

As others have explained, you can't splice RAW files in LR, but a correctly set up RAW file will look identical in .tif or .psd format once opened in PS. I'd suggest this workflow:   Set LR external editing prefs to Adobe 98 col space / 64bit / save to .tif or .psd / high res (most people choose 300ppi, but 360ppi better in many printed scenarios). Process both DNG RAWs in LR > use Reference View to ensure colour consistency > DeNoise on both > R-click > Open as Layers in PS > ensure open eyes layer on top > auto (or manually) align layers so eyes match > add inverted Mask to open eyes layer > brush in open eyes > sharpen if required (use seperate merged layer) > save > automatically reappears in LR (useful for project management / exporting multiple files in uniform format). You might want to consider a coding system to easily differentiate between PS edited files saved back to LR, and LR RAWs. (I do this by tagging blue in LR and auto-renaming external edits to denote app used, eg: name_original_file_number-PS.tif for files externally edited in Photoshop, or name_original_file_number-TPZ.tif for files edited in Topaz.   ... View more

True in that phones can't be calibrated, but LR HDR on/off does make a BIG difference to how exported images are displayed on phones - see my other response for more details. ... View more

There may be 2 issues here, one of which can be addressed through colour management (see A) and the other may be a  setting in LR (B).   A) Calibrate both laptop screen and BenQ. The accuracy of colours displayed and whether or not screens match each other depends on the color space and display uniformity of each screen. However, any monitor shows more reliable colour once calibrated and the two screens will be closer than before. Repeat regularly. (How often depends on colour drift, which is in turn dependent on screen quality. £500 screen? Calibrate weekly. £1500 Eizo? Monthly is fine). Choose maximum number of colour chips and calibrate at night with the lights off, using a decent colorimeter (eg Calibrite Display Pro). Download a known colour management reference image to provide a visual baseline. (Search Photodisc PDI test Image to download high-res version of  licensed freeware image attached). Pay special attention to whether your screen displays the skin tones accurately and shows separation between sections on Kodak GreyScale.. Set Lightroom to work in Adobe 98. (Lightroom defaults to ProPhoto colour space which is larger, but since your screen can't display that range, it won't help you with postproduction colour accuracy. NB Do not work in sRGB; it's a small colour space and you are immediately reducing the amount of data available for post production. However you are correct to export files to sRGB for the best colour reproduction on internet and mobile devices).   (B) In LR > Light section, is HDR activated? if so, try turning it off, or hit Preview for SDR. Is the resulting colour change similar to what you're seeing on your smartphone?   If you edit using HDR, the resulting colour looks fine in LR but inaccurate and strange in apps or devices that can't display HDR - ie most at the moment... LR's HDR feature is currently pretty niche. Solution: either keep HDR off and edit for SDR, or edit in HDR but use SDR Rendition Settings to make a version for apps and displays in capable of displaying HDR.   If you do (A) + (B) and the issue persists, suggest pursuing the problem with Adobe. ... View more

@antoniod84162112did you find a solution? I wanted to do the same but process is horribly designed resulting in easy confusion / duplication / deletion, especially if you have a lot of phone pics + professional work to manage. Unwilling to believe the illogical process I was being advised of* I spoke to several people at Adobe and found confusion and conflicting views on how it works. The upshot is the process I couldn't believe was real is indeed real. (Horrible workflow for profesional users - but effective means of railroading us into buying cloud storage).   I concluded the only safe solution was to do the following, which may/ may not work for you.    Set up a new, dedicated LrC Lrcat for cloud sync / LR Web edits. Empty the cloud storage completely (making room for pending files / prevent later confusion as to what's located where). In main LrC Lrcat, use File > Import from Another Catalogue to manually select what I want from the cloud. (It brings all the edits but thankfully does not sync back to cloud b/c Sync only works with one catalogue). I'll never allow Cloud Sync in my working LrC LRCATs again; it's a two-way file sync which you can't stop or reverse*, with horrible implications: LR cloud / mobile / web (I'll call it LR Web for clarity) will always ingest ALL files from ALL LrC Collections into the cloud, stop syncing when full and and harrass you to buy more storage. Once LrC files have been synced - even if they originated in LrC on your local drive - you can't un-sync them. (You might imagine that clicking UN-sync in Collections would UN-sync existing files, but it doesn't; the two-way sync is a one-way ticket. Worse, if you delete from Cloud to make space, any photos in LrC catalogue that originated in the LR web (so 99% of my mobile phone pics) as opposed to local Lrcat will be deleted from LrC unless you have manually downloaded them. It's a great way to lose data.   PROCESS to safeguard images already in LrC Install Adobe LR Downloader App > download all from LR web to local drive for  backup / to find files you are not yet aware you may have lost from LrC. (It respects date folder structure, but not groupings such as albums and folders made on tablet / mobile). LrC > Cloud > Pause Sync LrC > Library > Catlogue > All Synced Photos > select all LrC > make a new local / NAS folder adding all selected files. (Don't try to do other things while this is happening; a click in the wrong place and you're fried; LrC crashed 3 times whilst moving 13k+ cloud images...). LrC > Collections. UNSYNC every Collection (double arrow on left) to stop it syncing new files. (Don't imagine you can now turn Sync back on to download files that were stuck when Cloud full. See next). When download finished: select all files > R-click > Remove from All Synced Photos. At this point photos vanish from All Synced Photos in LrC. Next message indicates files will only be deleted from the cloud once LR Web once Sync resumes - but don't be misled!! If you resume Sync it will immediately re-ingest all the files you've just removed. Check LR Downloader app finished and you now have a copy of all web files stored locally. File > Import > go to LR Download and have it import all files with 'Don't import suspected duplicates'. This picked up a number of files that had been lost along the way. Close LrC. LR web > delete all files > permanently delete. You now have a clean slate from which to keep track of future uploads and downloads. Make new folder for downloading files from LR web and NEW LrC catalogue for use with LR Web. Point LR Sync to new folder and start syncing files stuck due to previously full cloud storage.   * It didn't used to be this way. Originally, you could just un-sync a collection in LrC and that was the end of it but at some point around 2016?17? Adobe changed this simple, logical process for the one we have now. ... View more

I feel your pain; I have the same problem with Illustrator which I use just now and again. However there are plenty of alternatives to both Illutrator and LR/PS for casual hobbyists. If - as is your right - you choose to use pro tools for a casual hobby, you can’t expect the vendor to subsidise this. Nor can you expect other users to; as a pro, I find it interesting that a casual hobbyist (whilst whining about the cost of a pro tool) suggests that Adobe could actually charge pros more, whilst charging casual hobbyists less. For the same tools. Hmmm ... View more

Not working on this Mac.  ... View more

Are you referring to 'As shot' under WB settings? (I don't know of another place). If so, I don't think this has anything to do with 'As shot' vs another white balance setting since it affects all colour settings including those generated by the user in LR (ie not jjust Temp/Tint) these are by definition not 'as shot'. I have also found it makes no difference whether WB changed from As shot to Custom once this problem starts. Even if it did, why woulkd it be by design? What's the advanatage? I think it still points to a bug because an extra step required to make a previously working feature work again is a bug, particularly if it is intermittent. Given the variation in timeframe for people finding this probelm - e.g. dphershman reported this 10 months ago, but I've only had it a month or two - there must be some action that triggers it...I wonder what? ... View more

Update Aug 2018: I'm still having this problem and finding it affects ALL colour settings (e.g. monochrome, split tone, colour adjustments) not just white balance - but I agree it also affects paste settings. ... View more

Alas it's not workiing on my Mac! ... View more

I have the same issue, but it only started for me with latest LR CC upgrade 7.4. I find it makes no difference whether or not the colour balance has been changed, but it's intermittent and when it starts, it affects every attempt to Sync any colour settings (whether White Balance, Black & White, or Split Toning) on any file, even though it may be clear from the source file's history that that file itself had a monochrome or other colour mix synched successfully from another file. I find it sometimes works OK for a few files only to stop working again at some point. I wonder whether it's to do with the process version; sometimes Synch offers the Black and White Mix option and other times it doesn't. Whatever the trigger, come on Adobe, how could you let this upgrade out with such a huge bug that months on still isn't resolved? The only 'solution' I've found (inverted commas because this is a pain and a workaround, not an answer) is to switch to another monochrome source file that synched succesfully before; this usually works - at least unitl the point where it doesn't and I have to choose a new source file. ... View more

I'm experiencing something similar - and changing the colour temperatiure makes no difference - which even if it did, still constitutes a bug. I'm trying to Sync the Black and White treatment of one file to another and it simply doesn't respond, or, it freezes. ... View more

I agree the pricing structure is too complex. I also get annoyed that it costs so much more in the UK than the US - but I believe that's down to our government and its import taxes, not Adobe. (If it is Adobe though, it should be addressed). I do think the software offers good value though. Yes, it hurts when you have to pay for it yourself, but then all artists and professionals have to pay for their tools. A violinist pays a fortune for a violin! A career mechanic needs to buy expensive spanners, but if it's just for DIY you buy cheaper tools and it doesn't hurt as much. I suspect that on the whole we expect to pay for tangible goods, but most people aren't aware of what it costs to develop and distribute slightly intangible stuff like software. PS Elements is amazing for the price, but if you're a pro and need a more sophisticated package, bite the bullet and put it against tax. The Cloud subscription option looks like decent value to me - h**l, the monthly cost is cheaper than my mobile phone, works a whole lot better and doesn't deliver any nasty financial surprises at the end of the month. It worked out cheaper to subscribe to the entire suite than just upgrading the 3 apps in CS Standard, and you get a whole lot of extra stuff on top. Plus it's all tax deductible. The only thing that would make it better would be if I could suspend the subscription when I'm on holiday (but telecoms companies don't let you stop payments while you're on holiday either). Software IS expensive, because it costs a lot to develop it! No I don't work for Adobe, but I've spent decades working with companies who develop digital imaging software for other markets that cost around £10,000 per license (it was double that in the 90's). Why? Because it costs a fortune to hire the kind of brains and the manpower required to make such products. Photoshop offers a great deal of functionality for less than a tenth of the price - which is only possible because its market is so huge. If Adobe were forced to bring the price down, there would undoubtedly be a negative effect on future upgrades, not to mention the next product. (Yes, there will one day be a new product - it's probably happened already a few times. Software has a life-cycle and eventually has to be re-written from the ground up - and that ongoing development can't happen without massive investment. (*The 2 e's are missing from the middle of this word because the site considers the word for the opposite of heaven to be a profanity. Sigh...) ... View more