Feature Request : Export (3rd Option)

When I re-export from a catalogue I am working on, sometimes I am exporting images I have exported before.
So . . . Lightroom asks me: Do you want to
a. Overwrite exixting files or
B. Create unique filenames.
. . . which, BTW -in my humble opinion, is flawed anyway since the unique filenames do not appear in the file listing anywhere near their companion.
Example: Img008 does not get a uniquely named copy like Img008-b, but instead gets something like copy-Img008 - which does not allow for quick side-by-side comparisons in an image browser.
(SO: Unique filename option should be fixed!)
But there should also be a third option: (the real reason I write)
C. Ignore duplicates (Do not overwrite or create new file when there is already an existing file.) This will save my computer lots of processing time trying to re-export over existing files.
Now for arguments sake, you could tell me just to not select the pre-existing exported files when I export, but in my particular case, that would involved nearly as much brain power as not doing it consumes computer time, since I have already exported selected non-sequential files for my first export, and I'll be damned if I can remember which ones they were until the export "expert" tells me which files are about to be duplicated.
-Mike

It keeps the password. Whatever issues you are having are the exception, not the rule. However, without any system info, nobody can really help. Start by reviewing these steps:
Sign in or activation errors
And since you are in a corporate environment, definitely talk to IT and have them release the necessary network ports and grant sufficient user privileges to make this stuff stick...
Mylenium

Similar Messages

  • Feature Request: Add Skype option to user name field in contacts

    Feature Request: Add Skype option to user name field in contacts
    I know skype maintains it's own names but this is so you don't lose everrything when you move from one place to another. Or need to skype someone from an internet cafe with your iphone.

    Why not simply add the field by modifying the template?

  • FEATURE REQUEST: Enhanced Texture Options in FW

    Recently, a forum user was asking how to change the color of a texture in Fireworks to red or blue. In particular, he/she was struggling with attempting to apply a texture to a white object, and it wasn't showing up.
    http://forums.adobe.com/thread/1006694?tstart=0
    The question got me thinking about textures, how they're created and how they're applied. Textures are a unique and distinctive feature of Fireworks. On the one hand, the interface for textures is very simple to use and almost magical; on the other hand, it's surprisingly limited. The concept is great, but the implementation seems only half-baked.
    With this in mind, I'd like to suggest a few simple ways that textures could be made more fluid and versatile in Fireworks.
    First, a little background...
    WHAT IS A TEXTURE?
    In the world of Fireworks, a texture is basically a type of pattern that's applied to an object. However, unlike a pattern fill, textures include transparency and integrate with the existing fill content (color, gradient or pattern). They're suggestive of textures in the real world, which are often tactile and defined visually by light and shadow.
    Texture graphics are most commonly grayscale ("black and white") in GIF or PNG format. Applied within the application, the graphics are converted "on the fly" to white-on-transparency. If the Transparent option is checked, the graphic is converted into a sort of mask, making the "textured" areas invisible instead of white.
    And that's about it.
    So what if you'd like to apply a dark texture to a white object? Sorry, it can't be done. What if you'd like to apply a texture in color? It can't be done. What if you'd like to reverse or invert the pattern of the texture? Can't be done.
    Well, in fact, these things can be done, but not directly. They require workarounds such as cloning the object and placing the clone above or beneath the original, applying textures as pattern fills (instead of as textures) and adding effects like Color Fill, Invert, and Convert to Alpha, or editing the texture file directly, saving out a new copy, etc. In short, there are unintuitive ways to accomplish these goals that lead to bloated effects lists and layers or that require extra time and care.
    HOW CAN TEXTURES BE IMPROVED?
    First of all, does it make any sense that textures are applied exclusively in white? Not really. In the real world, a texture can be defined not just by light but by shadow. And even shadows can have color. This means that, at minimum, it would make sense to allow for the application of a texture in black, and, at maximum, in any chosen color.
    Secondly, textures are relative. They represent change to an existing surface. Sometimes, it might make sense to highlight the texture itself; other times, the surface around the texture. This means that being able to quickly reverse the figure-ground relationship of a texture would be a very handy feature.
    With the above concerns in mind, I've devised three 'user interface' scenarios, presented here in order of most conservative to most extreme. The first scenario is the least powerful but still doubles the number of possible outcomes (compared to the existing interface). The second scenario may be the most logical of the bunch and represents a modest evolution of the existing interface, while increasing the number of potential outcomes even further. The third scenario allows for the application of any color to a texture but also represents the biggest change to the existing interface; that said, it's also quite compact.
    Scenario 1: Invert option
    The idea here is simply to add an Invert checkbox to the existing options. Checking this option would convert white to black, allowing for the application of dark textures to white or light-colored objects. In "Transparent" mode, this option would invert or reverse the figure-ground relationship of the existing texture.
    Scenario 2: Dropdown menu plus Reverse option
    Here, the Transparent checkbox is replaced by a dropdown menu that includes 3 mutually exclusive options: White, Black, or Transparent. Checking the "Reverse" option would invert the figure-ground relationship of the texture. This scenario allows for 6 possible outcomes in place of the existing 2, and is actually more logical than the first scenario, which conflates two options.
    Scenario 3: Color picker plus Reverse option
    Here, the Transparent checkbox is removed, and in its place, a color chip/palette is added to allow for the selection of any color to be applied to a texture. (Choosing Fill: None would create Transparency.) Again, a "Reverse" option would invert the figure-ground relationship of the texture. This scenario differs most from the existing interface but is quite compact and allows for the greatest number of outcomes.
    SO WHAT CAN YOU DO?
    I've submitted a feature request to Adobe's official site:
    https://www.adobe.com/cfusion/mmform/index.cfm?name=wishform
    When it comes to bugs and/or feature requests, every vote counts. If you care about this issue, I encourage you to submit your own feature request to the above URL, referencing this post if desired. Feel free to copy and paste the feature request below or write your own. (Be aware that there is a 2,000 character limit to the "issue description" of a bug report or feature request, and the following report is very close to that maximum.)
    FEATURE REQUEST
    Product name: Fireworks
    Product Version: 12.0.0.236
    Product language: English
    *******Enhancement / FMR*********
    Brief title for your desired feature: Enhanced texture controls, including the ability to apply textures in black and/or color (instead of white), and the ability to reverse or invert texture.
    How would you like the feature to work? Three possible implementations have been outlined in this forum posting:
    http://forums.adobe.com/thread/1042206?tstart=0
    The basic scenarios are as follows:
    SCENARIO 1: An additional "Invert" option. Checking this option would convert white to black, allowing for the application of dark textures to white or light-colored objects. In "Transparent" mode, this option would invert or reverse the figure-ground relationship of the existing texture. This scenario would allow for 4 options in place of the existing 2.
    SCENARIO 2: Replace Transparent checkbox with a dropdown menu (White-Black-Transparent) and a "Reverse" checkbox. The dropdown menu offers 3 mutually exclusive options, while "Reverse" inverts the figure-ground relationship of the texture in each case. This scenario would allow for 6 options in place of the existing 2.
    SCENARIO 3: Replace Transparent checkbox with a color chip/palette and a "Reverse" checkbox. The color palette would allow for the application of a texture in any color, while choosing Fill: None would create Transparency. This scenario would allow for the greatest number of options.
    Why is this feature important to you? Textures are unique to Fireworks and potentially very useful, but their implementation is incomplete. The use of 'white only' means that textures cannot be applied to a white object. Inverting a texture or applying a texture in color requires advanced workarounds and can lead to bloat. The suggested options would make the feature exponentially more powerful and intuitive.

    Thanks, Jim! It is a very blog-like post. (I still haven't gotten around to starting a blog but keep thinking I should.)
    I figured the clearer and more thought-out the presentation, the greater the likelihood it might get implemented. Also, I was originally stuck on Scenario 1 as a solution, and writing this helped me see other options.

  • Feature Request:  AE Collect Option in PPro Project Manager

    While PPro Project Manager collects linked AEP projects, it falls short of collecting assets embedded with the AEP project itself.  This results in the user having to re-open the AEP project, locate and copy the original embedded media to new location and relink.
    Another option is to open the original AEP Project, perform a collectioning within AEP, then having to manually import and replace the media on the timeline in the newly collected PPro.  Tedious considering the complexity of AEPs that can run several layers deep with many assets.
    Is this feature possible to add in the next round of updates?

    The feature request site appears to be down now, but you should go here when it's back up:
    Adobe - Site Area Temporarily Unavailable

  • Feature Request: Export catalog for 2nd editor/machine

    Since there isn't a shared network environment for LR, to involve multiple editors or multiple locations for the same editor on large projects, I often need to export a subset of a catalog so someone else can work on it, or I can work on it off my laptop somewhere other than the studio, using only the proxy 1:1 previews to make my decisions from and then re-assimilate those edit changes to the master catalog of that job, usually back on my primary workstation.  This process also allows me to start processing out parts of the job while other parts are being edited on other machines, or letting my primary workstation process while I use a 2nd workstation to continue editing at speed on.
    I can make this happen, but it's all on me to remember which portions of the catalog have been exported, where their destination was/is, remember not to make any changes to that portion of the library while the subsection has been exported, and an over-lengthy and complicated merging of exported and internal catalogs.
    It would be incredibly useful if LR could show the status (checked out for primary edit, checked out for client approval, etc.) of any exported catalog by mousing over that visibly different section and build in a preference for those varied conditions to potentially limit any changes to that subset of images while the export is still 'checked-out.'  A true merge would be nice to allow possible overlaps of work on the same images, but a managed lock-out would be sufficient to start with.
    As it is, the re-assimilation process for me involves removing images from the master catalog leaving the raw files in place, and re-importing the exported catalog which also necessitates the needless redundancy of bringing the 1:1 previews back in as well.  At the scale I'm doing this it's overly time consuming, compared to the speed of just bringing in the library itself.  The process also puts me in the place of deleting images from a catalog while they're essentially still in use, which is scary from a file management standpoint, usually with me having 4 and 5 copies of that library lingering around until all the manual merging actions are finished.

    That's a feature I've asked for myself Brad, in the absense of true network use.  As it's not likely to make the final release, and we wouldn't want the request to get lost in beta land, might I suggest adding it as a suggestion on the Feature Request forum http://feedback.photoshop.com/photoshop_family where it can easily be tracked?  If you post the link to your request here, others can also vote on your request.

  • Feature Request: "Show Password" option in login s...

    When I am connecting to wi-fi networks, the connection dlg box often gives me the option to show the characters of the wi-fi password, so that I can ensure that I'm putting the right chars in.  
    Can I request this same option in the login screen for Skype, as it happens too often that I fumble-finger a character and only find out about it when I can't log in, and then I can only see dots in the password field, so I have to backspace over the whole password and tap it all in again.  Would be easirer if I could just fix the incorrect character.
    Yes, I have turned on the "show temporarily the chars in the PW field as you type them" option in my device but that's not sufficient.

    Hi Rose,
    It's been there for a while:
    http://feedback.photoshop.com/photoshop_family/topics/lightroom_show_position_in_histogram _when_moving_mouse_around_on_photo
    Rob

  • Feature Request: Export Clipboard

    Currently, I keep "Export Clipboard" off because almost all of my Copy & Paste actions happen exclusively inside of Photoshop and having the option active slows down Copy & Paste actions. However, on the rare occasion that I do want to paste content into another application, I have to go to preferences, enable "Export Clipboard", perform the copy operation, paste inside the other application, go back to my Photoshop preferences and turn "Export Clipboard" off again.
    As a solution, I propose that a simple "Export Clipboard" or "Copy to Clipboard and Export" item be added to the edit menu when the "Export Clipboard" option is disabled in Preferences to make that whole workflow quite a bit easier, faster and far less annoying.

    P_werner, I'm curious...  Are you actually sensing a significant amount of time to do a Copy/Paste?
    What kind of computer do you have?  What size images do you work on?
    Your description surprised me because it's been a long time since I've sensed any delay with this operation,even with big operations.  I just copied / pasted large chunks of a 21600 x 7200 pixel image and honesty I could barely sense the time between Control C, Control V, and the layer showing up.  And yes, I have the export preference checked.
    I tend to use high-end computers, but my workstation is no screamer by today's standards.
    -Noel

  • Feature Request: Better format options Please!

    I've been using Adobe Story recently and think it's a great, competitive product that definitely rivals other products!
    However, I do think there need to be a few more output options to increase compatibility with writers and producers who may not necessarily be using the latest software. In particular, .rtf and .fdr (Final Draft 7 or older) formats are not given as options to export and this would be very handy as I know plenty of writers who have not upgraded to Final Draft 8 and therefore cannot read the new .fdx extension on files.
    Adding these two little things shouldn't be at all difficult and would allow much greater flexibility for users of Adobe Story to share material out without the need of the other party having to reformat things on their end.
    Hopefully I'm not the only one looking for this feature update?

    Hi Deepak
    Thanks for your response. Don't take this the wrong way and please don't feel like I'm shooting the messenger here, but honestly speaking I think rtf *and* fdr format compatibility should be in your frontlog considering you are making a version 1 product that's trying to compete or at least compliment industry standard tools!
    Having only fdx compatibility is like Office 2007/2010 only having .docx with no backwards compatibility for legacy formats - it renders the tool useless in the eyes of many potential customers. It great to push new and more open formatting standards but there must, must, must be legacy support too - I mean you already support import of rtf and fdr so it's nuts that it doesn't go out that way too!
    I have found that having .txt and .pdf as a bridge for the older software tends to be an inefficient workaround. There are always occasional formatting errors that crop up due to the use of some type of special character that isn't translated properly in the conversion and therefore there is always a need to spend an additional 15-20 minutes re-checking entire scripts to make sure there are no problems before sharing the material to a colleague or client who either cannot afford to or hasn't bothered to upgrade to Final Draft 8 (or Adobe Story ).
    That's just my two cents but I'm sure that many people would agree with me that this small update should be a priority to make AS (sorry, I've gone an abbreviated another one of your products - doh!) a more appealing alternative to the tools people may have been used to in the past.
    Hope you take this pledge into serious consideration for your next upcoming update!
    Thanks,
    Kaush

  • FEATURE REQUEST: 'Select Printer' option when printing envelopes or labels

    I have a Samsung laserjet printer that will not print labels properly with the default paper type setting...the toner smears. So I have created a second printer object for the Samsung device with 'Labels' selected as the default paper type and I've named
    it 'Samsung Labels'. I can select it as the printer in Word 2010 and it will print labels correctly for that session. I've read the discussion about Word 2010 only remembering the printer preferences during the current session. That is unfortunate, but I consider
    this to be even worse: when you click the 'Print' button after creating your label or envelope, Word just prints to the default printer without displaying the print control panel. This prevents me from selecting the printer object that I've created to print
    labels correctly with my Samsung. I use a number of different printers and I don't want to necessarily use my default printer for Word. I want to be able to select a different default printer for Word and also have the option to select a different printer
    for a particular print task in Word...like labels. I don't want to have to go into Word's print options every time I want to print a label and make sure that everything is set correctly. It makes no sense that I can't select a printer object when I hit the
    print button. There are a million 'features' built into Office that I would never think of using, but one that seems so obvious is missing. Arg!
    I doubt that I'll hear back from someone with a simple work around for this, but I'd love it if I did.
    Thanks in advance,
    Wayne
    Wayne S. CompTIA A+ CompTIA Network+ Microsoft MCP

    I would like to second Wayne's suggestion but I am concerned with printing envelopes, not labels. I have been a PC user (and even an instructor) since the days of VisiCalc, Lotus 1-2-3, and the first Microsoft products. It has never ceased to amaze me
    that, as mentioned by Wayne, the most fundamental needs are overlooked. It wastes a lot of my time to constantly have to change the printer just to print an envelope or to print something on letterhead. We have a lot of documents that include one letter on
    letterhead followed or preceded by several pages that need to print on plain paper. I think I should be able to tell Word that page X is letterhead, and the others default to the plain paper tray or printer. I also should be able to tell the print envelopes
    feature that envelopes are on printer X or tray X. Then every time I need to print such a document, I just click print for the doc and envelope print for the envelope (I keep an icon for this in my toolbar). We use a legal software package in our office that
    lets you specify the appropriate printer and tray for reports, general checks, trust checks, labels, receipts, deposit slips, bills and pre-bills! Super easy and convenient. Word processing should be SMART so we don't have to be bothered with these very mundane
    and never-ending printer issues!! Please, please, take this to the top! Please send your developers to actual real-world users and find out our needs!!!

  • Feature Request: Exporting to Photoshop at gamma 1.0 and 32bit resolution

    Hi,
    In terms of maximum fidelity, it'd be nice if Lightroom had a setting to tell it to hand of copies of photos to Photoshop at gamma 1.0 or Lightroom's native profile (which is apparently also based on gamma 1.0), and 32bit resolution, so that maximum fidelity is guaranteed. I feel the current settings are restrictive, and while I can retroactively change the edited image to gamma 1.0, I'm exporting a 16bit image from LR to Photoshop. Depending on how creative someone goes on the sliders and tone curve, eventual color banding may happen when converting between color profiles.
    Thanks for considering,
    -mg

    Interesting responses everybody. I do think LR is a good program as I have been using the beta as well as Aperture and comparing the two. Extensis Portfolio , although not a "developing" program from the beginning had no size limitation in its cataloging. It extracted(or created) a thumbnail, generated jpg previews and automatically updated changes to files each time the program was started. In contextual menus you could export a copy, open in PS, and various other commands right out of the program without hogging memory. Nobody has offered an educated reason for the size limitation. Can it not manage memory ? Ok, maybe not, but that doesn't mean it couldn't at least catalog the large files. If this is the case , my suggestion would be to implement a "lock out" feature that would not let you "develop" large files in LR but could still generate and update thumbnails and allow you to organize them within your filing system. Then you could at least manage versions and changes within LR with out having to switch to Bridge or the like. Making JPG versions is not a good workaround.. to assume people only have a "few" large files to keep track is very one-dimensional thinking. I personally know of several mural photographers that work exclusively with digital cameras/backs , are they not considered a valued target market for LR ?

  • Feature request - export strokes

    With the new open in Illustrator feature (which is excellent) it would be much more useful to have the strokes to refine rather than outlines. This would give so much more control when refining an illustration

    P_werner, I'm curious...  Are you actually sensing a significant amount of time to do a Copy/Paste?
    What kind of computer do you have?  What size images do you work on?
    Your description surprised me because it's been a long time since I've sensed any delay with this operation,even with big operations.  I just copied / pasted large chunks of a 21600 x 7200 pixel image and honesty I could barely sense the time between Control C, Control V, and the layer showing up.  And yes, I have the export preference checked.
    I tend to use high-end computers, but my workstation is no screamer by today's standards.
    -Noel

  • Feature Request: Export and Import all or part of vCenter configuration from the GUI

    One of the challenges we face is how to recover a large vCenter to a different VM, without having to restore any databases or use vCenter VMs and databases on replicated storage. We currently have a PowerCLI based process for exporting vCenter configurations - vCenter settings, roles/privs, alarm definitions, datacenters/clusters/hosts - to an XML file, which can then be used to import that vCenter configuration into a recovery vCenter. Three part process - export the vCenter configuration, import the settings and structure (datacenters, clusters, alarms), then import the hosts. This last step pulls in the hosts once by one from the original vCenter, complete with their running VMs and once all hosts in a cluster are imported creates the required Resource Pools and moves the VMs in to them. A subsequent script moves all the VMs into appropriate blue folders based on their CMDB classification/OS.
    The above process is OK, but has a number of faults:
    It's all or nothing for a migration, unless there is some serious editing of the XML dump to extract, for example, a specific datacenter or cluster, which could if incorrectly done result in configuration issues, hosts not being imported, etc.
    It can't (at least not in vc4.x) migrate dvSwitches. If we have those in a datacenter, we're going to have to reconfigure the hosts and VMs back onto conventional vSwitches
    We'd really like to see a native tool built in to vSphere Client or the Web Client that will allow all or part of a vCenter configuration to be exported to an XML or other flat file and then imported into another vCenter in one easy step, taking running VMs, dvSwitches - the lot. In the same way you can export host and vCenter logs with a few clicks, it should be possible to do something similar for vCenter configurations. This would be useful for a number of things - vCenter recovery, vCenter upgrade, individual datacenter or cluster migration.

    I got the answer: http://forum.java.sun.com/thread.jspa?threadID=577129

  • Feature Request  - Export Available Preview.

    Let's assume you have a library built from many separate Hard Drives, (my library is on a separate small 500g HD) and your heading out on location (cottage/holiday) for a few days and you'd like to do a rough edit of some project, it would be nice to be able to export the 1:1 previews (they are already there in the previews file) to work with.
    Just me?

    +1 vote.
    In the mean time, I use PreviewExporter for this purpose.

  • Feature request - Export Draw files from Creative Cloud to Illustrator

    It's really annoying that you can't export Draw files from assets.adobe.com to Illustrator CC, that you have to do this from your iPad. If my battery is flat, or I have left my iPad somewhere I can only export REALLY crappy low res jpgs or pngs. Coupled with the recent issues the Send to Illustrator function has suffered it's annoying that work is being locked up in this way. I understand that it's important for Adobe to protect their products, but these restrictions are making workflows really hard work. It would be ideal if we could access the mobile files using the Place tool in inDesign etc too so we could drop a drawing file in to a document in the same way we can a regular image or ai/psd file

    This is a bug. Will update this thread once it is fixed.

  • Feature request: Better keywording options

    There appears to be no improvements in keywording otpions in LR4b.
    How about:
    Larger panels of suggested keywords. (could be configuarable in options, like the number of recent files option in PS)
    Larger numbers of keywords in a set.
    Buttons to apply a complete set with one click.
    Put the keywording tools,( ie the same panels as in library module),  in the import dialogue.

    Hi Deepak
    Thanks for your response. Don't take this the wrong way and please don't feel like I'm shooting the messenger here, but honestly speaking I think rtf *and* fdr format compatibility should be in your frontlog considering you are making a version 1 product that's trying to compete or at least compliment industry standard tools!
    Having only fdx compatibility is like Office 2007/2010 only having .docx with no backwards compatibility for legacy formats - it renders the tool useless in the eyes of many potential customers. It great to push new and more open formatting standards but there must, must, must be legacy support too - I mean you already support import of rtf and fdr so it's nuts that it doesn't go out that way too!
    I have found that having .txt and .pdf as a bridge for the older software tends to be an inefficient workaround. There are always occasional formatting errors that crop up due to the use of some type of special character that isn't translated properly in the conversion and therefore there is always a need to spend an additional 15-20 minutes re-checking entire scripts to make sure there are no problems before sharing the material to a colleague or client who either cannot afford to or hasn't bothered to upgrade to Final Draft 8 (or Adobe Story ).
    That's just my two cents but I'm sure that many people would agree with me that this small update should be a priority to make AS (sorry, I've gone an abbreviated another one of your products - doh!) a more appealing alternative to the tools people may have been used to in the past.
    Hope you take this pledge into serious consideration for your next upcoming update!
    Thanks,
    Kaush

Maybe you are looking for