ACR 7.4 disaster

I downloaded the latest version of ACR (7.4) today, not only did it NOT install but it also managed to delete the plugin in Photoshop as well as in Bridge.
I have donwloaded it again but it fails to install.
I would like a solution asap as I have a whole shoot to process and cannot do a thing!!!!
David May

This is really unfortunate, Try the way @ssprengel suggested, if it still does not work then please provide me with following log files
Camera Raw installer log file at
For Mac:
"Library/Logs/Adobe",
For Win:
Program Files(x86)\Common Files\Adobe\Installers
AAM logs:
For Mac:
/Volumes/%Volume Name%/Users/%Username%/Library/Application Support/Adobe/AAMUpdater/1.0
For Win:
C:\Users\<username>\AppData\Local\Adobe\AAMUpdater
This would help us in resolving the issue.
Please mail it to [email protected]
Thanks,
Ashutosh

Similar Messages

  • ACR is running VERY slowly.

    When using ACR's Spot Healing Brush, even on relatively small files (67mg) it is taking 5 to 10 seconds to zoom and even longer for the brush to work. This is something that has recently become a problem. I am working on .dng files. It's a Win 7 Pro 64 bit machine with 16 gig of RAM, a 4 core i7 processor running at 3.7gHz with 2gig of V-RAM. I have a 7200 RPM, 2 TB dediated scratch disk and the OS is on a comletely seperate drive. My RAM prefs in PS-CC is set to 70% with 3 cache levels and 20 history states. Any ideas?

    Personally I find all other stuff in ACR very slow and clunky and only ACR for basic development and then start processing in PS using layers and adjustment layers combined with actions.
    The adjustment brush in LR is a disaster for me and I never could get any speed at all in the same brush in ACR. Masking is much more a gamble and almost impossible while you can create a channel based mask in PS in the blink of an eye, a second blink to create an adjustment layer with layer mask and brushing your adjustment is a pleasure in PS itself, very precise and lightning fast compared to ACR or LR.  Cropping is the same disaster in ACR due to a very clumsy way of getting ratio and creating own presets (or did they changed that lately?)
    However sometimes the basic tab in filmstrip mode can work dead slow also, I think having copied settings before and then tweak them in ACR is causing this but ave yet no proof.
    Using a Mac I have no solution for Windows but handling a few large files in PS (say four 1.2 GB layered 16 bit ProPhotoRGB files) do eat up RAM  very quickly and add a lot of Swap memory to the system, ultimately slowing down everything.
    Restarting PS (and Bridge) does get rid of most Swap but sometimes I even restart the whole system.
    Reinstall Bridge is absolutely pointless because it rarely solves things, resetting prefs often solves a bunch of problems and so might be the reset of prefs for PS. A complete reinstall should be an uninstall using Adobe uninstall, then the Adobe Cleaner Tool and then a new install followed by update.
    A normal reinstall does not delete your collections btw. But to be on the safe side find the custom saved collection names in the App.data section (mostly hidden) under application Support / Adobe / BridgeCC. inhere are your custom settings regarding workspaces, keywords, AOM presets as well as your saved collections.
    Collections are a bunch of aliases referring to their original saved place, but in the long run Collections have proofed to be unstable. If you value your collections you should select the files in one collection and add a keyword (name of the collection e.g.) as a back up to recreate your collections in case of losing them.
    As for speed, restart your system and check your free space left on the disks. For HDD this would mean at least 15 % free space left. using SSD would also help increase speed.

  • Slow sliders in CS3 ACR

    I've been a long time user of ACR in CS2. I've just recently upgraded to CS3 and, while I appreciate the new functionality in the newest version of ACR, I find that moving the sliders in the new ACR is massively slower than the previous version. It is not uncommon for a slider to take 5-10 seconds before it will even respond to a mouse click or drag. This is true even with the sliders that were present in previous versions of ACR so it can't only be because some of the new functionality is more compute-intensive.
    This sluggishness really detracts from my RAW processing productivity. Is this expected behavior? Is there anything that can be done in my configuration to restore the performance I had in CS2?
    For reference, I process 12MP RAW images from a Nikon D2Xs. I have a two year old computer - single core, Pentium 4, 3GHz, 3GB RAW. I did not have any of these performance problems with CS2/ACR.
    Any help would be greatly appreciated.

    sjprg,
    What you say has some merit, but falls short of what is really needed to maximize a PC to run at the best speed you can get out of it. And, redoing your whole machine every six months is certainly effective--but doing it the hard way. Drive image backups will save a lot of work there.
    Here are my suggestions:
    My advice is to keep your boot drive (partition)small (20 gigs) and only install programs there that give you no choice of where to put them. And have another partition for a second boot drive (dual boot system)on a second hd, where you also have another small partition (8-10 gigs) for page file and virtual memory only, and use the remaining space for partitions to install programs to, and others for data, such as the LR database, including a large one for your image folders.
    Such an arrangement will offer both increased program speed (LR and ACR can use all that you can give it) and better system recoverability. Having a dual boot system allows you to be able to access one side from the other if something goes wrong, or to use one side to first test out new programs like LR or CS3, or one side that is for editing only--no internet access, etc. I personally use a triple boot system, but that is probably not necessary in most cases.
    Having your virtual memory and pagefile assigned to its own partition on a second hd will give faster access to those than having it on the same hd as you boot from, and the same reasoning applies to having your programs also on a different partition.
    Add to this, regular partition image backups with a program like Acronis True Image--everytime you install or uninstall a program, etc,-- will make you virtually invulnerable to the most common machine killing incidents--accidental or intentional. You should also have a disk image of your basic OS install made before you add programs, so that if you do have some other disaster, you can start from scratch. That will save a lot of rebuild time.
    I edit professionally, and I simply cannot afford down time. But when you get right down to the nitty gritty--no one wants a disfunctional computer to have to rebuild or slow, sluggish programs that struggle even more when installed on a non optimized computer.
    Having said all this, I still suspect that the OP has a more basic problem--conflict or poor install, etc--with CS3, if the sliders are as slow as he says.

  • Can you temporarily overexpose a pixel in ACR?

    I was working on some images the other day when it occurred to me that I was influencing some of the pixels brightness in several different ways: using the Exposure slider, the Recovery slider, using an exposure Gradient, using the Adjustment Brush, etc., each one making some exposure compensation.
    I assume the order in which the controls are laid out doesn't necessarily represent the order the different controls' process settings are applied, but what started to worry me was a scenario in which one setting pushed exposure over 100% (i.e. clipped) before another brought it back down again (still clipped).
    So, what I'm trying to ask is: is there a combination of exposure settings to avoid? For example, is it a bad idea to boost the exposure in the basic panel only to reduce it again with a gradient - or would it be better to use a negative gradient instead? That's just one example; are there any other potential pitfalls with different combinations, or does ACR work around this problem with some clever jiggerypokery?

    The preview image is re-rendered using the entire combination of settings every time you move a control.
    If you move one control (e.g. Exposure) and that leads to a block of pixels being "whited-out", then you move another control (e.g., Recovery) that undoes that condition, then you haven't "overexposed" anything.
    Move the controls around freely until you like what you see in the preview and histogram, then press Open or Save.  It's really as simple as that.
    -Noel

  • Adobe Bridge CS4 will not launch ACR

    I'm getting this message when trying to open an image from Bridge CS4 in ACR,
    "Camera raw requires that a qualifying product has been launched at least once to enable this feature"
    Any ideas how to cure this, I've downloaded the update 5.2.2., what is the correct location for this? Automatic update is just opening a box withe file in and I cant find the previous.
    By the way ACR opens fine from Photoshop CS4.
    Thanks
    Philip James

    Philip:
    This has been discussed in the Camera Raw Forum: you may need to install the new ACR 5.2 plug-in in the correct place manually.
    Eric Chan, "ACR 5.2 not installing in CS4" #1, 30 Nov 2008 9:17 am

  • Bridge CC and ACR unbearably slow

    Upon researching the issue of a slow Bridge CC I realize I am not alone nor is this a new problem. The thread I read extensively is almost a year old. Despite paying for CC for about 9 months I still use CS6. I had hopes that the new 2014 CC would solve the bridge performance issues.
    I am running a six-core system with 32 GB ram, an SSD for my OS and programs, an empty 1.5 TB drive dedicated to cache, on a win 7 - 64bit OS. Bridge CC and camera raw are so slow I can't use them.  My only comparison is CS6 and using the same settings for both programs.
    When opening bridge CC to the folder that was previously cached and loaded used it took ~51 seconds of "building criteria" before i could view the file types, ratings, and details in the filter box. In other words I do not see any information in the filters box for that time. I made sure that the thumbs were completely loaded into the cache before I closed Bridge CC and opened the program to the same folder. The same folder in Cs6 takes ~4 second to load..
    I have performance issues in ACR too.
    I batch edit in ACR like out lightroom counterparts do but Bridge CC Plus ACR are too slow to work with.
    I selected the same 20 raw files in each case.
    bridge CC camera raw 8.5 took 5 seconds of a watch icon  to load the files into the camera raw dialog after hitting CTRL R
    No edits or changes were made to the files.
    when i click to the next image in the list (still in camera raw) it takes  0.5-1 second of the watch icon to load the next raw photo in the batch.
    in CS6 I selected the same 20 unedited RAW files, CTRL R and they immediately load. I can switch from raw file to RAW file without any hiccup or delay. 5 seconds vs instant. I didn't build a six core system to wait for things to load.
    not exactly scientific but that's the disparity I am seeing. Bridge CC is death to me. To make sure I wasn't crazy I clicked on a recent folder with only 80 raw files, 80 respective small jpgs and a couple video files (4.5 gigs of data). It took so long I freaked out that I had moved the files to a backup location instead of copying them. After 30 seconds I stopped counting, opened windows explorer, browsed the backup folder, copied the files and was about to paste them to what should have been the original location and then Bridge decided that it was ready to work. For that ~ 60-85 seconds there was no watch icon, no spinning circle or "building criteria". It just looked as if I was browsing an empty folder.
    Any suggestions?

    c. Once you post something that's helpful I'm sure someone will give you a thanks, until then stop trolling these boards - your name was all over that thread with useless and unhelpful information
    Well mister Chuck 'know it al', you can congratulate yourself. With just 2 posts in the past year and no points for helpful answers at al you come in hard and call one of the most helpful posters a troll.
    This was the limit for both of us, we had to stand a lot, including no help from Adobe but a more crippled forum website after each major upgrade. No possibility to place FAQs, a lot of people screaming for help without taking the effort to look first for similar problems, almost never providing correct details, crucial for a mixed Mac/Windows forum.
    We had to suffer a lot, getting in unpaid and just plain users like all other guests, only it did cost us a lot of spare time.
    But now we can rest from this task because mister Chuck "know it al" has jumped in to the rescue.
    I wish you good luck and pity your friends and family, it must be a difficult task to live with such a nice person.
    Goodbye to you all!!

  • New update 8.7.1 CS6 ACR not working---(I own hard copy not a Trial or part of CC), I purged cache in bridge, and photoshop. NO photos will open when I double clik, or  will not open again in ACR alone.  When I double clik on raw file I get Sign In requir

    I purged cache in bridge, and photoshop. NO photos will open when I double clik, or  will not open again in ACR alone.  When I double clik on raw file I get Sign In required Notice--We will now register your TRIAL to your Adobe ID-------I am alread a SUBSCRIBER-------------Yes I get this same issue in Creative Cloud and same issue. error: Camera Raw editing is not enabled-----Camera Raw editing requires that a qualifying product has been launched at least once to enable this feature. These errors are happening inside both CS6 Bridge and CCphotoshop Bridge------NOTE----I am ALREADY signed into Creative Cloud and still get those message errors.........Need to fix ASAP.

    When you sign in to Adobe.com with the user ID and Password your using in the Creative Cloud and Photoshop does this link  https://www.adobe.com/account/my-products-services.html show that the account has a subscription?
    Also this is a user forum not a Adobe Customer Services web site.

  • Adobe XMP Files not deleted with Raw Files in ACR

    I am using Photoshop CS3 on a Windows XP platform. My camera raw files are mostly kept on a Windows 2003 file server, which has a gigabit connection to my workstation. However, I have the same problems when using PS CS3 on my Windows XP laptop.
    I take many hundreds of 'technical' photographs using an Olympus E1 and Canon G9 cameras. I usually bracket the exposures on the E1, specially when photographing white painted yachts, and then rate and select the images that I want in ACR 4.1.1. Unwanted images are deleted at this time.
    The problem I am having is that the associated *.xmp files are not always deleted with the camera raw files, with the result that I now have literally thousands of these 'orphaned' files cluttering up the server. The only options I have are to delete the files manually, which is a pain, or to leave them on the server, wasting unnecessary space.
    I have the same issue with Canon and Nikon raw files, so this problem is not specific to Olympus files.
    This is a long standing problem, and I would be grateful if anyone has any answers?
    If any Adobe programmers are watching, it would be handy if you could provide a simple utility to delete orphaned *.xmp files, or at least compress them into some kind of archive.
    Thanks,
    Nigel.

    [quote] As far as Photoshop and ACR go, ALL raw files are treated as read-only.
    Your original raw files remain untouched, no matter what you do to them.
    Any adjustments you make to a raw file are kept only as metadata (flags, if you will) in that XMP side-car file. Every time you want to re-open that raw image file, ACR will reach for the XMP file and apply the adjustments automatically, transparently. [/quote]
    That is not quite correct. Camera RAW files can be permanently deleted from within Adobe Camera Raw. The problem with ACR 4.1 to 4.4 4 was that the XMP files were left behind. This now seems to have been rectified in the latest version (ACR 4.5).
    Thank you Adobe!

  • ACR locking up i7 processor when using selective adjustments brush

    I hit a strange problem last night that I've not previoulsy encountered with ACR, which is normally fast and responsive on my PC.
    I'm running CS5 on an i7 860 with 8GB RAM and a Radeon 5850 graphics card on Windows 7 64-bit.
    I'd previoulsy made a pretty large mask using the adjustment brush with an 8.5MB raw file. I say large as it was intended to significantly darken the background of the photo; it covered perhaps as much as two thirds of the image (not something I'd normally need to do) and the adjustment was set to darken by around -2 stops of exposure. I'd set up the mask a couple of days ago, but went back in last night to tweak it as some of the edges were a bit too abrupt in the way they transitioned from the black background to the subject of the photo. When I first set it up, it didn't seem to cause any issues other than slower loading of the file (but I expected this as it will of course be having to make a lot of ajustments to the image preview due to my heavy adjustment brush use).
    Working on it last night, ACR slowed to an absolute crawl. Even zooming in could take say 30 seconds to move from 50% view to 100%. Likewise, panning around the image when zoomed in was exceptionally slow. I have that standard Windows gadget running on the desktop that gives an indication of memory and processor use, and I was astounded to see that it was running the processor at 100% (I could also hear the fan kicking in to overdrive)! In all my time using CS4 and CS5 on this PC, it's never got to that level before, including when carrying out activities such stitching around 40 images together in Photoshop, working with 3GB PSB files, etc. This was after all a single raw file. I perceviered and managed to complete the edit. When I closed the file down I went back to Bridge and tried to open another file, and again the PC locked up at 100% processor use. I noticed that Bridge was still trying to generate a preview for the troublesome image I'd completed, and when it finally managed to finish this things went back to normal speed - I could for example open multiple raw files into ACR without any issues.
    I wonder if anyone else has experienced this kind of issue? Perhaps the adjustment brush can really push a PC if used heavily? Maybe I need to tweak some settings somewhere? I was using the 64-bit ACR launched from PS rather than from Bridge, and the only other application running was Bridge (as I would normally work). I'd have thought an i7 with a decent amount of memory could handle a single raw file, even with extensive modifications being applied.
    Be very interested to hear what others think.
    M

    Many thanks for your reply.
    I have previoulsy spent quite some time looking at the various recommendations Adobe give for performance and I think I've got my PC set up pretty well in respect of this. Having said that, I haven't adjusted any of the Windows virtual memory settings, so I might take a look at that later on. However, I'm not convinved this is the root cause of the problem: my memory use wasn't at 100% (just the processor), and as it was just one raw file on an 8GB system, I can't see how it could max out in the way it did... But then I'm not a computer expert either...
    (Oh, you linked to the Mac performance page! Threw me for a minute there! )
    M

  • A Tale of a Filevault Disaster and Recovery...

    Recently, one of my customers had a major disaster with their MacBook running 10.5.8:
    It all started when they decided they needed to free up some disk space on the internal drive, and thus they began to trash a large number of files to accomplish this.
    Apparently in doing so, they must have trashed some key files because they managed to permanently lock themselves out of their Filevault-encrypted Home folder; the filevault password no longer worked when they attempted to log back in after a restart, and after numerous unsuccessful login attempts, they received the message "your filevault-protected home folder did not open and needs to be repaired. Click OK to repair the folder.." Clicking OK did nothing, and at that point they requested my services.
    Turns out also, they had no recent backup; the last backup was over 2 years old- they had misplaced the power cable for their Time Machine backup drive- a WD MyBook- and had never replaced it... (oye vay)
    When I got the machine, I used the installer cd to create a root user and look at the internal drive's status- 53G of 233G used. Over the course of several days, I took the following actions:
    1. Restarted and logged in as root, I attempted to open the user's sparsebundle with no success.
    2. Restarted to the installer CD and ran Disk Utility's Repair Disk which returned no errors. Attempted to Repair Permissions but got no result appearing to hang..
    3. Figuring "Ok, I can't open the sparsebundle yet, so I'll at least start improving the overall health of the file system"- I started up the MB in Target Disk Mode connected to my G5 Quad running 10.5.7. From my G5, I used DU and Diskwarrior against the MB's single volume internal drive. DU returned no errors but Diskwarrior returned problems in red on a directory rebuild, so I repeated with Diskwarrior until all was green (3x).
    4. After this, tried again to open the user's sparsebundle with same negative result of the password not working.
    5. At this point, running out of solutions but anticipating eventual success (against all odds) I copied the sparsebundle to a spare drive as a backup.
    6. Did a Google search and eventually found an archived Apple discussions thread which seemed to indicate a possible solution:
    http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?messageID=5881960
    To make a long story a bit shorter, what eventually totally saved my bacon was this info in a post by GuyEWhite in the archived thread:
    <<< So Guy, if you're out there- A MILLION Thanks!! >>>
    7. Type: sudo hdiutil attach /Users/username/username.sparseimage -nomount
    8. A bunch of funky things will happen, but it eventually should list a number of volumes, one with an HFS attached to it, note if it says disk1s1 or disk2s2 or whatever.
    9. Type: sudo fsck_hfs -f /dev/rdisk2s2 (rdisk2s2 being where the HFS was from step 8, adding an "r" at the front)
    If fsck_hfs bails because of too many errors, just repeat until it says the FS is fine. That irks the bejeezus out of me as well, but has always worked for me so far.
    7. Still in TDM, and working on the backup copy, I used the above commands to first "see" the sparsebundle volume, and then to run fsck against it. Sure enough, my results were similar to the above: major errors returned the first 3 or 4 times I ran it, then eventually it said the FS was OK, and then VOILA! My first success- the sparsebundle volume actually mounted in Disk Utility and Diskwarrior, both of which were running in the background.
    8. The Filevault password now worked, and I ran Diskwarrior's "Rebuild Directory" multiple times against the mounted sparsebundle volume. Numerous errors were evident and Diskwarrior created a "Rescued Items" folder.
    Obviously, whatever the client had done did a major FUBAR to her home folder. Eventually the number of errors in red was reduced to a point where it would not reduce further. About 1G of data appeared to be in the Filevaulted Home folder. This didn't square with the supposed size of the sparsebundle, but I left that issue hanging for the moment.
    9. I repeated the command line procedure against the MB's internal drive- successfully mounting and decrypting the Filevaulted Home folder. Similar results were obtained where it took multiple passes of fsck to mount the disk, then a number of passes of Diskwarrior to repair the directory as much as possible.
    10. Knowing that I had rescued at least some of the client's files, and that I had a "repaired" backup of the sparsebundle- I decided at this point to wipe the MB's interal drive and do a complete re-install of the system and all software updates- knowing I would be eventually transferring her user files back over.
    11. Back to the discrepancy of visible files in the mounted sparsebundle:
    I decided to get out the howitzers and use Data Rescue.
    A "deleted files" scan found another 28G of actual user files!
    12. The task of organizing and transferring the user files back over to the MacBook was pretty labor-intensive but ultimately pretty successful for the most part; there were however a significant number of corrupted files which could not be salvaged. These mostly included user prefs, some Pages documents, and some images. Most all of her music and movies were still intact.
    At first I tried repairing some of the corrupt image files by using Graphic Converter to re-save images that Photoshop otherwise couldn't open. This proved to be incredibly tedious and instead, I simply imported all the images en masse into iPhoto. iPhoto very nicely refused import of all the corrupted images (something like a couple hundred out of multiple thousands).
    The end result was quite satisfactory: I got the client a new power cable for their MyBook and a did a complete Time Machine backup to it. They were quite happy since I had recovered just about all their documents, music, movies, and photos...
    But without finding that post and method by GuyEWhite, the outcome probably would have been far different, so again- thanks Guy!
    <Edited by Host>

    This is the single most useful entry for FileVault problems I ever encountered! Thanks a lot!
    Just a few notes to add:
    (1) Use this to access your FileVault image:
    sudo hdiutil attach -nomount -readwrite -noautofsck -noverify /Users/(username)/(username).sparsebundle
    Reminder: "(username)" is your short username. This will prevent Snow Leopard from traing to repair while accessing the FileVault bundle.
    If your computer crashed your sparsebundle will be at "/Users/.(username)/(username).sparsebundle", not at "/Users/(username)/(username).sparsebundle", the difference is the "." in the folder name!
    (2) After repairing with fsck_hfs you should detach the sparse bundle again:
    hdiutil detach /dev/diskX
    where "X" can be anything from 0 to whatever, matching the output after the "hdiutil attach" command.
    Beswt,
    Apple*

  • Is anyone doing disaster recovery for a J2EE application?

    We generally use database log shipping to maintain a standby database for our ABAP instances.  We can successfully fail over our production application to our disaster recovery site with no real issues.  With the J2EE instances (EP, ESS/MSS, BI, etc), we have a few concerns:
    hostname cannot change, without going through a system copy procedure, so we would have to keep the hostnames in DR the same. (for example, ref: oss note 757692 - changing hostname is not supported)
    fully qualified domain name - from what I understand, there are potentially issues with changing the fqdn, for example SSO certificates, BSPs, XI has issues, etc.
    we can't keep both hostname and fqdn the same between DR and production, or we could never do a DR test.
    Has anyone implemented disaster recovery for any SAP J2EE application that has run into these concerns and addressed them?  Input would be greatly appreciated regarding how you addressed these issues, or how you architected your disaster recovery implementation.
    Regards,
    David Hull
    The Walt Disney Company

    I haven't done this personally, but I do have some experience with these issues in different HA environments.
    To your first point:  You can change the hostname, note 757692 tells you exactly how to do it.  However like the note says, "Changing the name of a host server in a production system is not automatically supported by SAP."  When it says "supported by SAP" I think it means SAP the company, not SAP's software.  So I would contact SAP to see if this configuration would be covered under your service agreement.  Then you have to think about whether you want to do something that isn't "officially supported" by SAP.  Also I'm sure you'll need some kind of additional licensing for the DR systems as their hardware keys will de different.
    To your second point:  As for SSO certs (SAP Login Tickets), I think they should still work as long as the SID and client number of the issuing system remain the same.  I don't think they are hostname or fqdn dependant.  For BSPs I would think they would still work as long as they use relative paths rather than absolute paths.  And for XI... I have no idea what kind of issues may arise, I'm not an XI guy.
    Again, I haven't done what you're describing myself.  This is just based on my HA experiences.
    Hope this helps a little,
    Glenn

  • ACR doesn't retain settings

    I'm using Photoshop CS5.1 on Mac OS Leopard. I adjust TIF and JPG files in ACR. Occasionally, the adjustments will be lost after opening in Photoshop. This doesn't happen with every file and sometimes after two or three tries the settings will be saved when they were lost the first time. Is there a way to assure adjustments will always be saved? Thanks.

    Sorry about the confusion.
    I work with JPGs and TIFs, preparing images for offset printing, sourced from stock agencies and individual photographers. I seldom work with RAW files. I really like the tools offered in ARC for adjustments because they are none destructive if I have to return to the source image for additional corrections. As I've stated above, I  make the corrections in ARC, open in Photoshop to continue my image prep. Occasionally, when I return to the source file in ARC, the adjustments are gone. I make them again and open in Photoshop. Sometimes the adjustments are saved the second time and sometimes not. So, I'm not sure what the problem may be. Hence, my post here...

  • LR 4.2RC and ACR 7.2 RC won't read SONY RX 100 ARW files

    I was at a wedding yesterday and had two cameras with me - a Nikon D800 and my little SONY RX 100.  I was using an Eye-Fi Pro card for the Sony.  I'm uninterested in the Wi-Fi capabilities when I'm away from home, but like the camera to upload pictures when I'm close to my big processing machine.  Long story short.  This was the first time I've used the LR 4.2RC and ACR 7.2RC with the Sony RX 100.  I plugged the card into both the regular Eye-Fi USB reader, and into my Hoodman USB 3.0 reader.  Of course, LR doesn't like the Eye-Fi reader, but it loves the Hoodman.  Finally, it recognized the Hoodman and the Eye-Fi card.  I have previews set to minimal and I was attempting to import all the raw (ARW) files into Lightroom.  When the initial previews come up as I start the import process, it shows about 1/3 of the previews and then tells me it can't read the rest, including MP4 files.  When I actually begin the import, it simply times out and reports that it was unable to import ANY of the ARW files, nor the MP4 files.  I have no trouble reading 63 files into Raw Photo Processor so I know there is nothing wrong with any of the files.  I can only conclude that there is something wrong with LR 4.2 and/or ACR 7.2.
    Anyone else reporting this problem?  I'm puzzled because this is the ONLY time I have ever had trouble importing files from supported cameras.
    Thanks for feedback.

    Well.  After some experimentation, I discovered what the problem seems to be.  For reasons completely opaque to me, Lightroom expects not only that the Eye-Fi card will be read from its own reader, but it also expects that the Eye-Fi helper application be installed and running.  Of course, this means that I end up with duplicate copies of every file - once to the Eye Fi directory, and again to the appropriate Lightroom Folder on a completely different set of drives.   I guess the conclusion I can draw from this is that without the helper application, the Eye Fi card is dumb and the images only partly visibible.  The Eye-Fi helper can import the .ARW files, but it doesn't display them because Apple hasn't updated its camera list to include the RX100.  Until they do, I think I'll just use regular cards and consign the Eye-Fi card to the hall of unhelpful cards.  Yikes, the darned thing is as expensive as the Lightroom upgrade.
    Sigh.

  • HELP. ............Hi folks hope some one can help me please.Having a problem in Bridge I open my images in ACR,  as I open files in a folder and lets say they are labeled in yellow  they are all going back to  the camera raw default , in other words no ma

    HELP. ............Hi folks hope some one can help me please.Having a problem in Bridge I open my images in ACR,  as I open files in a folder and lets say they are labeled in yellow  they are all going back to  the camera raw default , in other words no matter what work I have done, inc cropping they  all go back to ,as they came out of camera. What on earth is happening? I am on PS CS6. I might point out everything was working normally up to  yesterday, when this first started.
    I recently changed computer to 64bit from 32bit, not sure if this causing  the problem or not. Any help would be appreciated.

    Robert,
    Would you be so kind to rephrase your question with concise, precise information and without any "let's say that" hypotheticals?  Sorry, I can't quite follow you.
    Also please give exact versions of Photoshop CS6 (13.what.what), of Bridge and of your OS.
    Thanks.
    BOILERPLATE TEXT:
    If you give complete and detailed information about your setup and the issue at hand, such as your platform (Mac or Win), exact versions of your OS, of Photoshop and of Bridge, machine specs, what troubleshooting steps you have taken so far, what error message(s) you receive, if having issues opening raw files also the exact camera make and model that generated them, etc., someone may be able to help you.
    Please read this FAQ for advice on how to ask your questions correctly for quicker and better answers:
    http://forums.adobe.com/thread/419981?tstart=0
    Thanks!

  • Need Help In Returning to Mail; Thunderbird Creates Disaster!

    What I love about Mail is that I use multiple Macs and can keep all my .Mac and other email on the respective email servers, thus having access to all my email on all my machines wherever I might be. What I don't like about Mail is the weak spam filter.
    So, I tried Mozilla's Thunderbird and disasterous results. Whereas Mail keeps all emails on your respective email servers by default, Thunderbird yanks all messages off the servers and puts them on your local computer, by default, and without asking your permission to do so.
    Does anyone know how I can import all that Thunderbird mail back to Mail? Mozilla's instructions on how to do so don't work.
    Thanks.

    My "judgemental and condesending attitude" is a consequence of your judgemental and outrageous attitude towards other people's work. It's you who started this thread with the wrong attitude. My attitude is a direct consequence of that.
    is not helpful on a forum like this
    Well, that's debatable, especially taking into consideration that how I behave depends entirely on how the participant I'm "talking" with behaves. I can see why my attitude might appear not being helpful to someone with your attitude, though.
    and unquestionably out of the ordinary
    This I agree with. Other participants might simply have ignored you, as I usually do in cases such as this. It happens, however, that your wrong comments could mislead other users into believing that Thunderbird could cause them some "disaster", which is clearly not the case, so I felt that I had to reply to you somehow.
    You are wrong in your comments and you clearly have
    no idea what you are talking about.
    LOL. Are you sure it's me who doesn't know what is he/she talking about? Would you dare enlightening me?
    your further comments are way out of line.
    Keeping people like me from making such comments is easy. Just don't make yourself comments which are also way out of line, such as "Thunderbird Creates Disaster!" when what happened in fact is just that you didn't set up the account the way you wanted it to work.
    Perhaps you might be better served to keep your "preachy"
    opinions to yourself.
    If you don't like your way out of line comments to be refuted in a similar way, then it's you who should keep your "preachy" opinions to yourself. It's you who started this thread and chose the tone that should be used in it, remember?

Maybe you are looking for