Forcing Lightroom to render rather than Photoshop

The Lens correction facility in LR3 is great, especially if ou have a fish eye. Only problem is if you have CS4 and you ask LR to export to Photoshop with lens correction enabled , CS4 is unaware of Lens correction facility and therefore fails to take this into account.
The main reason I need to export this type of image is to use Free Transform to remove some of the distortion that Lens Correction fails to do so. Idealy I'd like Lightroom to render not Photoshop, but I can't find a way to do this, Maybe there isn't a way !
I can work round this for the odd shot I need to take into Photoshop, so apart from buying CS5 is there a way to force Lightroom to render not Photoshop.
Photoshop has the latest ACR 5.7

Yes - when you do Ctrl-E (on Windows) you should get prompted - pick render in Lightroom. That's what I do 100% of the time - I have CS3.
Selby

Similar Messages

Bridge opening all .jpg in after effects rather than photoshop

I briefly used after effects earlier today and now bridge is opening all .jpg in after effects rather than photoshop. Photoshop is set as the defult and I've tried resetting preferences etc but it continues to open in after effects having to right click and opening with on every image! How can I change this back to using photoshop?

The folder view is as normal but as you can see below at the very top of bridge rather then just having the directory name it now says "Opening in Adobe After Effects..

Why aperture rather than photoshop? Please help!

Hi everybody, I have a noisy question in my mind. Today I have bought an apple pro training manual for Aperture. I work with photos, I am a photographer and today I have done my first steps into the world of aperture.
I was happy using it, learning lesson by lesson but than my friend asked me : "I do not know photographer who use Aperture. they just use Photoshop, why do you want to learn it?". I said "well...."
Now the question is : why shall I use Aperture rather than Photoshop? what does it gave me more or different than Photoshop? I know that I can easily handle RAW formats and I know the "nondestructive" thing, but...
I really would like to have an opinion from you.

rmrpix,
i have read your "5% photoshop theory" before in some
other threads, and in my (humble) opinion, this is
wrong. for me, only the combination of both, aperture
AND photoshop make it work. aperture is perfect for
managing the images etc. however before any of our
photo is used/released/printed, we run it through
photoshop. even a near perfect image can be improved.
and such changes can (to use your 95/5% theory) in
95% of the cases only be achieved with photoshop.
so for me it's the combination of both - and on a
personal note - i love aperture, but couldn't work
without photoshop.
Steebow,
Neither could I work without Photoshop, and I agree that any image, no matter how perfect, CAN be improved in Photoshop. But my point is why do that unless the image absolutely needs it? Where does a little image improvement cost too much in post-processing time and effort? Let me give you an example:
Let's say I have a shoot of 250 photos from a corporate or community event. I shoot a lot of events like golf tournaments, community and corporate functions, so that's what I'll use as my example. I recognize this size shoot (as well as the client requirements) may be far less than some posters shoot for typical weddings or other assignments, but it's still a decent batch of images.
Out of these 250 images, I might throw out 40-50 at image ingestion - they are too flawed to merit ANY post processing.
Out of the remaining 200 or so I might find 50-60% that are not "proof image quality", either because:
1) they have some flaw that is not bad enough for discard, but not good enough for "proof quality"; or
2) they are near duplicates of the same image, taken to make sure no one is blinking, or to bracket exposures, or as part of a sequence to catch a candid action/facial expression, etc.
I don't discard these images, documenting them with metadata and keeping them in Aperture for a complete record of the shoot. But I don't perform ANY post processing on them, in either Aperture or Photoshop.
The remaining 80-100 images will be submitted to the client as proofs. For proof purposes - and I make this clear to my clients - I perform ONLY global image processing - straighten the horizons, globally adjust tones and colorcast, occasionally adding a bit of highlight-shadow adjustment or sharpening (over the default Raw Fine Tuning paramaters if the image needs it.) All of this can be done quite adequately in Aperture. The proofs are submitted as low res images on contact sheets, CD/DVD, or - more and more frequently - on a private access web page. Why should I "Photoshop" the images more at this stage? What value does that add for the time expended?
A typical client for my practice is using the images for flyers, newsletters, perhaps an occasional annual report. So the client select rate is perhaps 1-in-5 to 1-in-6, possibly lower. In this example that's maybe maybe 15-25 images out of 250 taken. Many (but not all) of these client selects may require Photoshop to produce finals, depending on the clients output needs. (If they only need 1/4 page B&W images for a newsletter, I will usually do this in Aperture.) So for this type of shoot I hit Photoshop for maybe 6-10% of the original images. Even then I make extensive use of batch processing actions to minimize Photoshop "mouse time".
Everyone's business (or personal style) is different, but I'm convinced that careful workflow/digital asset management will in the end reduce, not expand Photoshop processing time. Having, like most, started out trying to "Photoshop" everything I shot, (the "After all, that is MY IMAGE and I want to make it perfect" syndrome), I learned long before Aperture was released that careful image capture, even more careful image evaluation, and always thinking about efficiency of workflow, is the best way to spend less time in front of the monitor so I can spend more time behind the camera. To me, and for my uses, that means using Photoshop when I need it and not a minute more. But YMMV.
Mike
PowerMac G5 Dual 2.0GHz, Radeon X800XT Graphics Card; MacBookPro 2.0Ghz Mac OS X (10.4.6) iMac800 and Powerbook G4 also in household

Lightroom displays colors differently than Photoshop

Lightroom (and my image previewer - IfranView) display my image colors differently than photoshop. This is very disturbing (why can't Adobe make this simple!)!
Image in question - see below. Center image is Photoshop, left is Lr 4 and right is InfranView.
Colorspace: AdobeRGB 1998
Image color (exported the TIFF file in Lr, what is shown below): AdobeRGB 1998
NOTE: when I export out as sRGB, IfranView displays it correctly (I don't know why, it can't display ProPhoto correctly, but never had a problem with AdobeRGB). Lightroom looks incorrect when viewing the TIFF, AdobeRGB JPEG and sRGB JPEG.
What is going on?? I've tried this on two computers now and it is the same problem!

The larger file is Adobe RGB and the smaller file is sRGB. I see no difference in overall tone or color between the two files in LR 3, LR 4, LR 5, PS CS5, PS CS6, PS CC 2014, or Windows Photo Viewer which is color-managed, aside from an almost imperceptible change in the darkest blacks which I'd expect since you're converting AdobeRGB to sRGB at some point.
I can make the Adobe RGB one look like it does at the left of your first screenshot if I Assign Profile: sRGB to it in PS.
Since your monitor appears to be wide-gamut and therefore similar to Adobe RGB, I think the problem you're having is that LR thinks the monitor is sRGB for some reason, perhaps due to your switching the cables from one computer to the other without rebooting and recalibrating. It's also possible that your profile is stored in the monitor rather than in the computer and one computer understands this and the other doesn't so you're getting double-profiling or no profiling occurring.
It sounds the your only issue is having two computers attached alternatively to one monitor without having a valid profile on each computer for that monitor and aren't restarting each computer to load that profile. At least that is my analysis given the limited information.
I would conclude that nothing is wrong with LR or PS just the hardware connections and the color management confusion between the two computers, not your confusion, the computers'.

In terms of organizing photos, what does Lightroom do better/different than Photoshop Elements?

Hi,
I recently purchased Photoshop Elements and Premiere Elements 12. I have many, many pictures from several years on our hard drive and would love to be able to better organize and tag them, etc. I have recently learned that Photoshop Elements can do this for me. I have also recently heard that Lightroom is good for this. Before I start importing thousands and thousands of files into PSE, I figure I should determine if I should use Lightroom instead. This would obviously come at an additional cost, so I would like this forum's help in explaining how Lightroom might be better than PSE for this function so that I can determine if it's worth the extra cost.
Thanks!

The PSE Organizer has fewer features and more bugs than Lightroom, in my opinion
Lightroom has more features for searching and more metadata fields for your use if you need them
Lightroom offers the ability to geotag your photos and display them on a map
Lightroom can streamline your workflow, so if for example you want to do the same things to multiple photos (including applying the same edits), this is much easier in Lightroom.
In general, my opinion is that Lightroom's Library Module is a superior piece of software than the PSE Organizer. In general, my opinion is that the user interface for Lightroom's Library module is a superior interface than the PSE Organizer. My opinion is that Lightroom's workflow is smoother and more efficient than doing the same things in PSE.
But some people love the PSE Organizer. It all depends on what you want to do. Your best path forward is to download the 30-day free trial of Lightroom, view some tutorial videos about Lightroom (don't skip this step), and compare for yourself the PSE Organizer to the Lightroom Library Module (and other parts of Lightroom as well).

Force used cached/local rather than download "script" each time

in my jsp , i have this
<script language="javascript" src="something.js"></script>
so each time the jsp page is loaded, the browser will gurantee go to the server and download something.js . is there anyway to force something.js to remain in user browser cache as long as possible > 30 days or so... so that the next time user visit the website, this something.js can be skipped and speed up page load time?

I doubt it. Once the user closes his browser, I image the cache is wiped out. Also, it is not likely to keep his browser open for 30 days straight. I don't think this is a good area to look into to speed up your application. Even if you could cache the *.js, I doubt it will speed things up much. In performance tuning, you normally identify the worst bottleneck, fix it, then move on to the next one. Bottlenecks often involve fetching too much data from the database at once (example: fetching all the records from a database table rather than a subset). Also, sending too much information to the display, so much that the user can't possibly use at one viewing. In code, its often creating too many objects.

Keep Preview for quick Viewing of PHotos rather than Photoshop

I just loaded Photoshop Elements 4.0 and am learning it. Unfortunately, for photos I may have on my desktop, everytime I want to view one by clicking on it, Photoshop elements loads which takes time. I really would prefer only the preview from Mac to use for quick viewing. I tried resetting preferences back but it did not work. any help would be greatly appreciated. have a wonderful new year.
Skip

From the finder, click on one photo to select it and then go to File/GetInfo. Scroll down slightly and look for "Open with..." You can set each photo individually to open with Preview or configure to open all documents of that type (jpg) to open with Preview (or any other app of your choice).

Will EdgeReflow be linked to Fireworks in the future? I prefer designing in Fireworks rather than Photoshop.

What is the future for Fireworks? Will it be able to link with EdgeReflow? I have noticed Fireworks does not have a community here.

Yes it does - Fireworks
You start at the Forums Index https://forums.adobe.com/welcome
You will be able to select a forum for the specific Adobe product(s) you use
Click the "down arrow" symbol on the right (where it says All communities) to open the drop down list and scroll
Adobe does not comment on future plans in open forums
https://www.adobe.com/cfusion/mmform/index.cfm?name=wishform for feature requests

Lightroom pulls up photoshop from backup drive rather than boot drive

I am using the latest versions of Lightroom and Photoshop for Mac.
I back up each night using super duper. In Lightroom, when I choose to Edit in Photoshop CC 2014, Lightroom loads Photoshop from my backup drive. The only workaround I have found is to dismount my backup drive. Is there a place I can go in either lightroom or photoshop to specify from which drive Photoshop should start when Editing from Lightroom. If I start photoshop first, then Lightroom "finds" the correct Photoshop, but I'd like to actually solve this rather than using a workaround. BTW, I used Adobe's instructions for uninstalling Lightroom and then re-installed, but that did not solve the problem.

ANSWER BELOW:
I discovered a work around - super duper has a way to create custom scripts which will NOT back up items you specify. I went to the backup drive of my main drive and deleted both photoshop CC and lightroom cc. After running super duper using the custom script (which they explain thoroughly in the latest super duper manual) and NOT backing up either Photoshop or Lightroom (in Applications) things are back to normal. If I need to reinstall either photoshop or lightroom, I can easily do that from the web.

How do I set up lightroom 5 to edit files in photoshop cc rather than or in addition to photoshop cs

How to set up lr5 to edit photos in ps cc rather than or in addition to ps cs6?

go to lightroom preferences. Select EXTERNAL EDITING TAB. follow instructions. you will simply locate PSCC. I am talking Mac, however.
vince

I'v just installed creative cloud 64 bit windows. How can I make bridge the default program to upload pictures rather than lightroom?

I've just installed creative cloud 64 bit windows. How can I make bridge the default program to upload pictures rather than lightroom?

Usually the default program associated with an image file extension is an image developing Program like Lightroom or an image editing program like Photoshop. If you want to change the default associated program to Adobe Bridge you would use Window's Controls Panel file association applet.

Why isn't Photoshop listed as "Install" rather than "Try"?

I had to uninstall Photoshop CC to try to fix a conflict with the latest Lightroom update, but when I opened my Adobe Creative Cloud panel to reinstall PS, the download option was labeled as Try rather than Install, as if I had to download a trial version. (Bridge was properly labeled Install and I successfully reinstalled it.)

try logging out of creative cloud and back in From preferences in the gear icon. The creative cloud app is quite flaky in my experience and often doesn't show what you have a license to install. Logging off and back in usually fixes it for me. If not quitting the app and restarting it and logging off and back in does the trick.

Lightroom 4-How to reorganize files by date when choosing to add rather than copy them to Lightroom

My photos were in disorganized folders on different hard drives. I was able to import them into Lightroom 4 using COPY, and now my folders are reorganized by year and month on my hard drive, which is how I want them. However, I now have a copy of my photos in my catalog and a copy of each photo in my photo folder on my hard drive. This is taking up too much space. Is there a way to have Lightroom automatically import my pictures and reorganize them into folders by date using the ADD option rather than the copy option when importing from my hard drive? Thank you!

You said:
My photos were in disorganized folders on different hard drives. I was able to import them into Lightroom 4 using COPY, and now my folders are reorganized by year and month on my hard drive, which is how I want them.
Meaning that they are still where they were, scattered, and not catalogued in LR. PLUS, there is a copy of each file in the place you copied them to when you imported them, and these are the versions of the files that are catalogued in LR. Right?
You said:
However, I now have a copy of my photos in my catalog and a copy of each photo in my photo folder on my hard drive.
Yes, one set, the original ones, viewable only in Explorer/Finder, the other/duplicate set viewable in LR (and/or also in Explorer/Finder).
You said: This is taking up too much space.
So just delete the original versions, as long as you are sure that you have them all in the copied-to location (where they are catalogued by LR).
You said:
Is there a way to have Lightroom automatically import my pictures and reorganize them into folders by date using the ADD option rather than the copy option when importing from my hard drive?
As jd_paige says, next time use MOVE instead of COPY. If you use ADD, they will remain where they are. Sometimes it is easier to do it this way, and then move/reorganize them once you have them in the catalogue.

Is there any way to force iPhoto to present faces by folder for identification rather than randomly? Would provide better context for identification especially if a huge number of images is involved.

Before I commit the time and energy required to load and tag faces in 25,000 images within iPhoto, I need some questions answered;
Is there any way to force iPhoto to present faces by folder for tagging rather than randomly? When so many images need tagging, over many years, the context of a folder helps with the identification. The work around is to load the images into iPhoto one folder at a time and do the tagging then.
How do I get iPhoto to present the tagged faces by last name rather than first name? When so many faces will be identified, it is much easier to find people by surname, particularly when I share the library within the family. The work around is to enter names as last name and first name. Being able to toggle the sort is much more desireable.
Is there a way to export a portion of the library including faces? I want to pass on portions of this huge 125 GB library to my family members.
Since my family members will need an Apple computer to view the images and faces, they will likely have their own photo library. So is there any way to combine two libraries and merge the faces?
About 2/3 of my images have been scanned, so the date of creation is the scanned date rather than the date the photo was taken. Will this mess up any sequencing or the retrieval of faces?

If I want to carve off part of a library, I presume the way to do this is to make a copy of the library using PLM then go into iPhoto and delete what I don't want. The result is the carved off portion.
You don't need Library Manager to delete the portion you don't want.
As a general rule: when deleting photos do them in batches of about 100 at a time. iPhoto can baulk at trashing large numbers at one go.
If I want to merge two libraries, PLM implies that it will do this but will the Faces be merged too?
I believe so.

Forcing Audition to copy media rather than reference

Hi all,
How do you force Ausition to copy media locally rather than reference it by default. So that when I drag a sound effect from my networked library on to a multitrack session it copies it, rather than referencing the original. By doing this I am safe to make modifications to the sound file and when playing back files they are playing back locally rather than over the network.
I know i can do this to individual files, but it's a pain. Ideally I want this to the default behaviour.
Thanks
R

Thanks!
Unfortuantely the iterative nature of working in sound design makes this unworkable as I'm constantly adding and tweaking new sounds; I never know when I'm finished adding/swapping out sounds so I'd be constantly having to exprot the session. I guess I'll have to stick with what I'm currently doing which is to 'convert to unique copy' (or whatever it's called) each file that isn't copied over. It's just a bit of a drag to always have to worry about this when a simple check box in the settings would fix this.
Thanks again!

Forcing Lightroom to render rather than Photoshop

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for