Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: LR4 and Blurb  (Read 6305 times)
wolfnowl
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5744



WWW
« on: January 12, 2012, 12:31:17 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi Folks:  This may be a stupid question, but I've not yet published any photo books.  Since LR4 Beta includes both softproofing and a book plugin for Blurb, and since Blurb has its own ICC profile (http://www.blurb.com/b3info) are people softproofing their images and creating proof copies before posting them in the 'book' pages?

Thx,
Mike.
Logged

If your mind is attuned to beauty, you find beauty in everything.
~ Jean Cooke ~


My Flickr site / Random Thoughts and Other Meanderings at M&M's Musings
rvanr
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 81



WWW
« Reply #1 on: January 12, 2012, 03:32:33 AM »
ReplyReply

That certainly sounds like a good idea!
Logged

rvanr
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 81



WWW
« Reply #2 on: January 12, 2012, 03:39:35 AM »
ReplyReply

I had a quick play with the 'book' tab and it looks good. There is a show stopper for me though. Unless there is some workaround that I have not found, there does not seem to be the option to adapt template layouts, or create your own. If your needs are met by th templates available that's great, but for me that is not the case.  Don't know how hard it is to build that facility into this module, but without it this part of Lightroom is useless for me and I'll have to stick with Booksmart.
Logged

Rhossydd
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1925


WWW
« Reply #3 on: January 12, 2012, 04:08:40 AM »
ReplyReply

there does not seem to be the option to adapt template layouts, or create your own.
You're right Sad I guess they'll need that as a feature in LR5. Maybe it'll be the surprise on release of 4 ? but I very much doubt it, they haven't given us that flexibility in the print module yet, so I guess it must be too difficult for them.

On Adobe TV they suggest making non templated layouts as single jpgs and dropping them in full page.
I read on one of the reviews that it's possible to build your own templates with Illustrator.
But neither of the above will provide the utility of the current Booksmart or using a dedicated layout program like InDesign or Scribus.
So at the moment it's either take what we offer, or spend ages kludging around the restrictions.
All rather a pity as the core ability to resize and sharpen correctly would be useful.
Logged
john beardsworth
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2779



WWW
« Reply #4 on: January 12, 2012, 04:23:38 AM »
ReplyReply

Adobe have said you will be able to create your own layouts. The method will be documented and you should expect it to be similar to how one can create new web galleries - so not through Lightroom's UI and only for those with some technical knowledge. Yes, Illustrator is involved, but other apps that create PDFs may be possible. I don't think users in general will have any need to do this though.

John
Logged

Rhossydd
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1925


WWW
« Reply #5 on: January 12, 2012, 04:52:21 AM »
ReplyReply

so not through Lightroom's UI
That's the killer limitation.
There are always work rounds on these sort of restrictions, but they take away the spontaneity and creativity of being able to move images and text around on the page freely. It's also an annoyance if it needs other expensive software too.
Blurb users shouted loudly for this and Booksmart soon had the options, I hope LR will eventually catch up.
Logged
john beardsworth
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2779



WWW
« Reply #6 on: January 12, 2012, 05:13:20 AM »
ReplyReply

Maybe, but I doubt it. What's there will satisfy the vast majority - if you really can't produce very creative output with what's there now, how many more baked templates do you need? When will that argument ever stop? Instead the focus is on the convenience of having the workflow entirely within LR, adding clever hidden stuff into AutoFlow (a tip is to define a small no of favourites and use AutoFlow) and on removing pain points like two page spreads. If you want to go off-piste, you can always output the Blurb book to PDF and bring in additional PDF pages using Acrobat Pro.
« Last Edit: January 12, 2012, 05:15:36 AM by johnbeardy » Logged

Rhossydd
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1925


WWW
« Reply #7 on: January 12, 2012, 05:34:49 AM »
ReplyReply

if you really can't produce very creative output with what's there now, how many more baked templates do you need?
Having to scroll through loads of presets just isn't the way a lot of people like to work. Plus many of us want to create something unique, not something just the same layout as others use.
I'll repeat again that the Blurb community shouted very loudly for this flexibility in Booksmart, and did get it. If Blurb can offer that, for free, why can't it be in LR ? It will be eventually.

Quote
If you want to go off-piste, you can always output the Blurb book to PDF and bring in additional PDF pages using Acrobat Pro.
Which again comes back to needing extra expensive software and spoiling the workflow.
Anyone know if the PDF output specifications meet Blurb's stringent requirements ?
Logged
john beardsworth
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2779



WWW
« Reply #8 on: January 12, 2012, 06:00:46 AM »
ReplyReply

Yes, they meet them - I've done a book.

You don't need to repeat it. I just don't think it'll change or really needs to do so. As well as the built-in layouts providing plenty of scope for creativity (if anything there are too many), you'll find plenty of third party templates will appear, or you can just roll your own, or even use background images. I agree about the dependence on other programs and even if you've already got them you may have no idea how they work - I'd never previously opened Illustrator - but I think you can also create these templates using Notepad and something to create jpegs. Just as you can get 9X% of image processing done with Lightroom and need Photoshop much less, if at all, so Book will satisfy the vast majority of needs.
Logged

Rhossydd
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1925


WWW
« Reply #9 on: January 12, 2012, 06:52:38 AM »
ReplyReply

Yes, they meet them - I've done a book.
Thanks, that's good to know.
I guess that also makes you a beta tester and/or a consultant for Adobe. Which explains the party line "Adobe don't provide it so you don't need it, it won't be coming"

Free layout will be a feature, maybe not in 4, but it will arrive sometime. Adobe just seem to be out of step with demand on this both in LR and PS, most other imaging products can implement this without difficulty and people want it.
Logged
john beardsworth
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2779



WWW
« Reply #10 on: January 12, 2012, 07:06:33 AM »
ReplyReply

Not a party line, just an educated guess - but I'd bet on it!
Logged

luxborealis
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1098



WWW
« Reply #11 on: January 12, 2012, 07:10:14 AM »
ReplyReply

Rhossydd continually makes valid points here; johnbeardy - why do you feel the need to shut him down?

Let's look at it this way... If LR is being designed for the average home user, then one can accept johnbeardy's arguments - but it's not. LR is a professional, industry-standard application for creative artists, namely photography. Professionals expect their apps to be leading edge. In terms of Books, Web and Slideshow, LR4 is clearly not leading edge. Even iPhoto from 5 years ago has some better book implementations than LR4. While LR4 has some wonderful Book options for photo & text captions and customization of pages, at least two of us on this forum have noted shortcomings compared to what's already out there - that's what a Public Beta and the concept of feedback are all about.

With Booksmart being a subset of Blurb, one would expect to see those options in the LR4 implementation of Blurb, not simply the "general public let's do what everyone else is doing" options. It's the additional creativity that's missing. You can't fault creative people for wanting more creativity in their professional apps, especially from Adobe - a company that supplies the creative world with their apps.
Logged

Terry McDonald
Revealing the art inherent in nature
- visit luxBorealis.com.
Have a read of my PhotoBlog and subscribe!
john beardsworth
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2779



WWW
« Reply #12 on: January 12, 2012, 07:55:01 AM »
ReplyReply

Not shutting anyone down - just disagreeing and saying what I expect to happen. Lightroom's designed to span the range from aspirational hobby photographers to those who earn their living from it, and that's where Book is sitting, with its page/picture level control of fonts, or page-specific backgrounds, for instance. For leading edge, you have the full Creative Suite products, but just as Lightroom doesn't aim to do all that Photoshop does, so it's not going to be InDesign. If you ("one") can't be creative with what's there now, are you really that creative?
Logged

john beardsworth
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2779



WWW
« Reply #13 on: January 12, 2012, 07:57:09 AM »
ReplyReply

You'll find others agree with you - here's the best feedback thread to have your say.
Logged

Rhossydd
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1925


WWW
« Reply #14 on: January 12, 2012, 08:29:05 AM »
ReplyReply

If you ("one") can't be creative with what's there now, are you really that creative?
I don't whether to be insulted or just laugh at your naivety on that line.

Just be a user for a moment, rather than an Adobe evangelist.
It's not just about creativity, it's about ease of use, and those often go hand in hand. Just dragging a photo onto a blank page, then sizing and positioning it with the usual grab handles (like the crop function) is simple and intuitive, as is just drawing a text box that you can resize and position to suit a layout. It doesn't involve searching through lists of layouts, or complex adjustments of sliders to position things where you want them(assuming you can at all).

Using external software is just nonsense in this context. Shall we discuss this idea that building custom layouts can be done via notepad ? ie having to edit code ? please this is the 21st century, we shouldn't expect users to be coding where they want their photos on a page.

Apple offer it Aperture, Blurb offer it in Booksmart, Adobe will catch up, maybe in a while, but it's looking silly to have omitted it from the beginning.
Logged
john beardsworth
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2779



WWW
« Reply #15 on: January 12, 2012, 08:50:39 AM »
ReplyReply

Oh, so did I indicate Notepad is actually the way to do it? It sounds like you're just venting, but you've got the feedback link.
Logged

Rhossydd
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1925


WWW
« Reply #16 on: January 12, 2012, 09:07:03 AM »
ReplyReply

did I indicate Notepad is actually the way to do it?
No, but others have. Can you defend that sort of answer to this issue ?
Quote
but you've got the feedback link.
Not really the right topic, so I've started a new one there.
Logged
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9092



WWW
« Reply #17 on: January 12, 2012, 09:30:14 AM »
ReplyReply

Since LR4 Beta includes both softproofing and a book plugin for Blurb, and since Blurb has its own ICC profile (http://www.blurb.com/b3info) are people softproofing their images and creating proof copies before posting them in the 'book' pages?

You can’t soft proof using a CMYK profile in LR4, Blurb is using such a process. Then the question becomes, are they really using that profile to convert ALL the data for ALL books (paper stocks)? Kind of doubt it. What is the deltaE of the various presses used to this one profile and over time?
Logged

Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/
john beardsworth
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2779



WWW
« Reply #18 on: January 12, 2012, 09:34:39 AM »
ReplyReply

Advocate it, no. Defend it? Maybe, but just on the basis that I'd rather have definitions as a text file which you can hack rather than in some proprietary format.
Logged

wolfnowl
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5744



WWW
« Reply #19 on: January 12, 2012, 06:49:42 PM »
ReplyReply

You can’t soft proof using a CMYK profile in LR4, Blurb is using such a process. Then the question becomes, are they really using that profile to convert ALL the data for ALL books (paper stocks)? Kind of doubt it. What is the deltaE of the various presses used to this one profile and over time?

Hence the question... what do you recommend as a best process then, Andrew?

Mike.
Logged

If your mind is attuned to beauty, you find beauty in everything.
~ Jean Cooke ~


My Flickr site / Random Thoughts and Other Meanderings at M&M's Musings
Pages: [1] 2 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad