Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 16 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: LightRoom6 Must have!  (Read 54561 times)
rogan
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 135


« Reply #40 on: August 28, 2013, 08:06:34 PM »
ReplyReply

Here's a huge request. Work on the import dialog box.

For example, if I have already imported 200 images into a folder from a card reader and renamed them "test_photo_0200.jpg" shouldn't the next number default to 201? No it defaults to 1 and gives you the name "test_photo_0200(1).jpg" instead. Huge fail thats been around since v1.
Logged
vulture
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 19


« Reply #41 on: September 10, 2013, 03:06:11 PM »
ReplyReply

<LR 6 ought to auto-synch catalogues across devices - laptop-desktop-tablet (if Adobe follows through with the potential created by Smart Previews) amongst other things already mentioned (improved book, slideshow, print modules).>

+1!
Logged
jjj
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3649



WWW
« Reply #42 on: September 11, 2013, 05:36:42 AM »
ReplyReply

I never met another photographer in person that use multiple monitors. I believe it's still a very rare configuration, outside of geeky forums like this.
Even I don't use LR across both of my monitors any more.
Most, if not all I know do. Using multiple monitors is a great way to improve efficiency, so why hobble yourself by using just one? And if doing film editing 3 is even better.

And I've often wished the second monitor could have library panels/functionality whilst in develop mode. Even being able to to filter one's shots whilst in grid view in Dev mode would be a good workflow improvement. And yes I do know all the shortcuts to move back and fore between modules. But at times it seems pointless, particularly when to use some shortcuts I have to use another shortcut first to get to Lib module for it to work like filtering as already mentioned. Now if that particular key was already used in say Dev Module, I could understand that. But in LR I sometimes hit a shortcut key, wonder why nothing has happened and realise I have to change modules to get shortcut to work.

« Last Edit: September 11, 2013, 05:47:19 AM by jjj » Logged

Tradition is the Backbone of the Spineless.   Futt Futt Futt Photography
jjj
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3649



WWW
« Reply #43 on: September 11, 2013, 05:57:39 AM »
ReplyReply

<LR 6 ought to auto-synch catalogues across devices - laptop-desktop-tablet (if Adobe follows through with the potential created by Smart Previews) amongst other things already mentioned (improved book, slideshow, print modules).>

+1!
+10
Logged

Tradition is the Backbone of the Spineless.   Futt Futt Futt Photography
hjulenissen
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1712


« Reply #44 on: September 11, 2013, 06:33:46 AM »
ReplyReply

It seems that custom color profiles can only be connected with "known" cameras. I'd argue that the best use-case for custom profiles is when a camera is not yet supported.

At least LR 5.0 allowed me to export via x-rite passport plugin for my Sony RX100M2 just fine, but the profile did not appear for RX100M2 images, even after restarting LR. Upgrade to LR 5.2RC ("preliminary" RX100M2 support), and the same worked w/o a hitch.

I'd rather not work on my full database using a release candidate. If there was a possibility to apply any known profile to any image (even well-hidden), I might be able to work-around this until the final release. If there is some unique property identifying unknown cameras, Adobe might even be able to connect my profile choices made for an unreleased camera, in future versions (whenever the camera was fully supported).

-h
« Last Edit: September 11, 2013, 06:36:36 AM by hjulenissen » Logged
iluvmycam
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 353


WWW
« Reply #45 on: September 11, 2013, 07:24:45 AM »
ReplyReply

o Phil I dodn't care anyhting about your OP suggestions. i would just like LR to take the right sample when spotting tool is used. Other than that I'm happy with LR as is.
Logged
tommm
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 77


« Reply #46 on: September 11, 2013, 07:40:16 AM »
ReplyReply

How about combining the Gradient, Brush and Radial filter tools into one "Selective adjustments".

Within this Selective adjustments "tool" you could use any of the three previous tools to create and adjust as many selection masks as you liked (e.g. create a gradient then use a brush to add to or delete an area of the selection).

In an ideal world you could also restrict this selection mask to certain tones - usually to protect highlights and shadows (i.e. like adjusting the Blend If sliders in Photoshop). Imagine how much better Clarity would be if you could apply it truly just to the midtones.

In an even more ideal world you could do this with access to all the development panel adjustments (including sharpening - and not linked to the capture sharpening).

Wishful thinking but how good would that be!!

Tom
Logged
hjulenissen
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1712


« Reply #47 on: September 11, 2013, 07:58:43 AM »
ReplyReply

How about combining the Gradient, Brush and Radial filter tools into one "Selective adjustments".
I suggested that (for Schewe?), and got the impression that certain underlying implementation aspects made this unlikely.

I do agree that for the user, they are just different geometrical approaches to defining a parameter-controlling mask, and it makes no apparent sense to distinguish between them. We just want to define some area (with soft or hard limits) where e.g. exposure is up +0.3 Ev. If Lightroom continue adding Gradient, Brush, Radial, Rectangular, Triangular, Line etc tools it will become silly at one point.

Painting in the red overlay using any combination of brush, "GND", radial/rectangular/... helper functions seems like the most user-friendly approach. I am not sure how after-the fact re-editing (adjusting the graduated width or angle of the Gradient) would be presented in a unified manner, though. Just producing a static red blob might not be ideal.

-h
Logged
Robert-Peter Westphal
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 281



WWW
« Reply #48 on: September 11, 2013, 10:59:50 AM »
ReplyReply

Hello,

if possible, it would be a good idea to add some additional possibilities to the local adjustments like
a radius slider for the sharpening, so that creative sharpening can be done with different perimeters than choosen in the details panel and
color corrections constrained to a local area of the image.

Additionally my wishes still contain the ability to merge several images to one 32bit image and combine several images to one panorama.

Robert
Logged

'visit my completly renewed gallery at http://www.naturfotografie-westphal.com '
ihv
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 83


WWW
« Reply #49 on: October 15, 2013, 03:57:53 AM »
ReplyReply

* Full 3rd party plugin integration in Develop module, even if in the simplest form i.e. only full image actions allowed (for different clarity processing, colorisation, grain, scratches, vignette etc) - that should be very viable as opposed to selective image areas processing.
* Book module, complete flexibility.
* Web export has got no attention in recent releases. Hierarchical collection to a full website with sub galleries? Current workarounds are clumsy. There are also weird restrictions for the number of columns and rows as to minimum and maximum in the default galleries.
Logged
hjulenissen
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1712


« Reply #50 on: October 15, 2013, 04:13:17 AM »
ReplyReply

Once you have chosen to softproof an image, why not stick to soft-proofing mode when choosing to print it? Even better, have some options for simulated passepartout/framing.

The multi-package print options are bad. If you cannot make the tabulated/default stuff work intuitively, why not let everything "free float" (this is true for many parts of LR: fixed function drop-down menus is bad. WYSIWYG direct interaction with the graphical objects is good)?

When switching between different papers in softproof mode, the image momentarily flickers in an in-between state (non-proofed?) just long enough to wipe out my memory of how the previous image appeared.

Why not embed custom camera profiles in the .lrcat database? This way, your database can be recreated with only that file + the raw files.



-h
Logged
Robert-Peter Westphal
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 281



WWW
« Reply #51 on: October 15, 2013, 04:25:51 AM »
ReplyReply

* Full 3rd party plugin integration in Develop module, even if in the simplest form i.e. only full image actions allowed (for different clarity processing, colorisation, grain, scratches, vignette etc) - that should be very viable as opposed to selective image areas processing.
* Book module, complete flexibility.
* Web export has got no attention in recent releases. Hierarchical collection to a full website with sub galleries? Current workarounds are clumsy. There are also weird restrictions for the number of columns and rows as to minimum and maximum in the default galleries.

Hello,

I was told by a developer of NIK that it is not possible to store all development settings of third party programs within Lr because of the compatibility with DNG files. They, the DNGs, simply don' t offer enough space to save all perimeter of 3rd party programs.

I'm not sure if this issue still exists, though this info is a few years old.

Robert
Logged

'visit my completly renewed gallery at http://www.naturfotografie-westphal.com '
john beardsworth
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2892



WWW
« Reply #52 on: October 15, 2013, 04:38:12 AM »
ReplyReply

I was told by a developer of NIK that it is not possible to store all development settings of third party programs within Lr because of the compatibility with DNG files. They, the DNGs, simply don' t offer enough space to save all perimeter of 3rd party programs.

I'm not sure if this issue still exists, though this info is a few years old.

The ability to store settings to DNG isn't what prevents a plugin being integrated in the Develop module, Robert. In any case maybe you misheard him, because DNGs have always allowed anyone to add extra metadata fields, and if they wanted to do so Nik could add their own development settings to a DNG's XMP data (the X stands for extensible).
Logged

madmanchan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2110


« Reply #53 on: October 15, 2013, 08:01:10 PM »
ReplyReply

when I can go to a true full-screen mode (not what Adobe thinks is full screen mode either) in a single keystroke

FYI:  This was implemented in Lr 5.  Press F to enter/exit fullscreen mode.
Logged

madmanchan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2110


« Reply #54 on: October 15, 2013, 08:12:15 PM »
ReplyReply

I suggested that (for Schewe?), and got the impression that certain underlying implementation aspects made this unlikely.

I do agree that for the user, they are just different geometrical approaches to defining a parameter-controlling mask, and it makes no apparent sense to distinguish between them. We just want to define some area (with soft or hard limits) where e.g. exposure is up +0.3 Ev. If Lightroom continue adding Gradient, Brush, Radial, Rectangular, Triangular, Line etc tools it will become silly at one point.

Painting in the red overlay using any combination of brush, "GND", radial/rectangular/... helper functions seems like the most user-friendly approach. I am not sure how after-the fact re-editing (adjusting the graduated width or angle of the Gradient) would be presented in a unified manner, though. Just producing a static red blob might not be ideal.

This depends on how you think about factoring the controls. 

Currently the controls are factored first by tool type (brush, gradient, radial filter), then by the type of adjustment (exposure, contrast, saturation, etc.).  So essentially you pick a tool to make/change a mask, and then you decide which subsets of adjustments to apply.

Another way we could have factored the controls is by type of adjustment first, and then by tool type.  For example, you want to lighten an area by 1/2 a stop; then you use any of the available tools to help you define that area.

Both approaches have their advantages (Ps has both), but currently ACR/Lr implements just the former.
Logged

madmanchan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2110


« Reply #55 on: October 15, 2013, 08:17:51 PM »
ReplyReply

Once you have chosen to softproof an image, why not stick to soft-proofing mode when choosing to print it? Even better, have some options for simulated passepartout/framing.

This was considered but ultimately (unfortunately) abandoned.  The image view in the Print module is based on the same preview system that the Library module is based on.  This means that it doesn't really support the image re-rendering needed (a la Develop) to show a soft-proofed image.  I was hoping we could modify the Print module to enable support of soft proofing there, but ran out of time.  In the end, we had to decide between putting the effort to implement SP in Print module, or implement SP in Develop.  We decided that it would be more useful in Develop, since SP is useful for guiding output-specific adjustments.

We may look again at this in the future, but honestly it's a long shot.
Logged

davidedric
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 41


« Reply #56 on: October 18, 2013, 09:48:16 AM »
ReplyReply

A simple one.   The ability to create a virtual copy containing all the editing steps to date (I.e. not appear as a new import with all the earlier steps baked in)
Logged
Simon Garrett
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 395


« Reply #57 on: October 18, 2013, 11:24:06 AM »
ReplyReply

A simple one.   The ability to create a virtual copy containing all the editing steps to date (I.e. not appear as a new import with all the earlier steps baked in)
+1.  That's a really good idea.  I hope Eric Chan reads this. 

I would have thought it's only a matter of how how edits are shown.  I mean: all the edits before the vc was created are still there - albeit merged and without the individual steps.  For example, suppsoe you increase exposure by +10, then by another +10, then create create a virtual copy.  You now have a virtual copy with +20 exposure stored in metadata, but the steps to get there aren't stored.  I'd love an option to copy the individual history steps as well as the agregate of the edits into the new virtual copy. 
Logged
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9225



WWW
« Reply #58 on: October 18, 2013, 11:27:53 AM »
ReplyReply

This was considered but ultimately (unfortunately) abandoned. 
I'm not sure it's really necessary. We have a 'soft proof' mode or preview in Photoshop's Print dialog and I don't see the point either (although I'm fine with it being there). By the time you're ready to print, is it really necessary to see a soft proof? I'd suspect you'd have figured out what rendering intent you wanted for that image and you'd have built your output specific edits in Develop (or with Layers in Photoshop) prior to even thinking about making a print. I'm not against having a soft proof in the Print module but I don't think it deserves the engineering resources anytime soon.
Logged

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

Posts: 1712


« Reply #59 on: October 21, 2013, 07:22:27 AM »
ReplyReply

I'm not sure it's really necessary. We have a 'soft proof' mode or preview in Photoshop's Print dialog and I don't see the point either (although I'm fine with it being there). By the time you're ready to print, is it really necessary to see a soft proof? I'd suspect you'd have figured out what rendering intent you wanted for that image and you'd have built your output specific edits in Develop (or with Layers in Photoshop) prior to even thinking about making a print. I'm not against having a soft proof in the Print module but I don't think it deserves the engineering resources anytime soon.
WYSIWYG seems like a sensible principle for something like Lightroom. When you "know" how an image will be printed, you should show it like that. I had assumed that once you had a soft proofing module, re-using it else-where would not be that complex.

In sharp contrast to the "display before printing" option of my Canon printer driver that makes me sick to my stomach when viewed on my wide-gamut display.

-h
Logged
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 16 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad