Lightroom and GPS encoded JPGs

Can Lightroom (3.6) read GPS data from JPG files?
I've just encoded a batch of assorted JPGs and raw images with HoudahGeo and updated the files in Lightroom by reading the metadata from the files again. As far as I can tell only the raw images are showing GPS data as a result.
I know the date is there because(a) I can see it in HoudahGeo if I look at the files again and (b) Aperture picks up the locations correctly.
Is there anyway to pick these up in Lightroom?

I've used GeoSetter to add GPS data to my scanned TIFF files, as well as to JPG files, and that shows up without any problem in LR, so in principle it should work.
Have you tried creating a copy of one of the scanned JPGs, and importing that as if it were a new photo? Perhaps the reading of the metadata isn't picking up the GPS for some reason.
Marc

Similar Messages

  • Lightroom and GIMP color issue using jpg

    Here is what I do:
    Using an iMac (Tiger) and have my monitor calibrated using the built in MacOS tool. The profile is stored in the Library/ColorSync/Profiles folder. In the GIMP settings about color management, I have chosen the monitor profile from above as the monitor profile and the RGB profile.
    I have a (Canon) RAW image mainly in a neutral, if not slightly yellowish, tone with some beautiful golden pins. Imported the CR2 into Adobe Lightroom and exported in sRGB color space, the jpg looks like this: http://www.ipernity.com/doc/18039/1283133
    Now I would love this with a nice frame, so I did a hi quality export, loaded it into GIMP 2.4.3, added a frame, and saved it as full size jpg. When I look at the resulting jpg in MacOS Preview application, it looks fine and so it does when I upload it to the web: http://www.ipernity.com/doc/18039/1284108
    But as I manage all my images in Lightroom, I also want to manage this one in Lightroom, so I imported it. And look what's coming out: http://www.ipernity.com/doc/18039/1284100
    It's all purple!
    It looks the same in Lightroom, Preview and uploaded. Purple. What am I doing wrong? Is there any hidden Lightroom setting I have scambled?
    When I am saving TIFF from GIMP, Lightroom imports with proper colors.

    The third one (reimported into Lightroom) is indeed purplish. Are you using the latest gimp? Versions of gimp before a while ago could not color manage and will probably forget about the profile. It was only recently added. You should have the working space set to sRGB (so not RGB as you wrote above) in the gimp probably for this image. Also, make sure you do NOT save as a progressive jpeg, but only using baseline compression. Lightroom tends to change the color of progressive jpegs. This is probably what is going on.

  • Colors of RAW vs JPG in Lightroom and CS3

    I am confused by this.
    When shooting RAW +JPG on my Canon 350D, the RAW and JPG have different color qualities. The RAW is more yellow, or maybe warmer. The JPG more blue or cooler.
    I think this is odd. And it is consistent in Lightroom AND CS3 and yet in Irfanview and Canon Digital Photo Professional they they are identical. Totally.
    Why would this be? And which is "right" in Lightroom? The RAW? It looks the better of the two, but hard to compare across programs. But why the difference and why not in all programs, just ADOBE?
    Thanks.
    ~Bob

    DPP uses the in camera settings as its starting point to view RAW files, so these files will appear identical to any jpegs produced at the same time. The in camera settings are attached to the RAW file and DPP reads this information when opening or loading a RAW file for the first time.
    Lightroom does not have access to this information and so it has its own starting point that it uses when you open a RAW file, thus the RAW file will look different than the JPEG and different to the RAW file opened in DPP (while the JPEG and RAW file in DPP will look the same). Most other RAW programs do not have access to this information (Capture 1, Bibble etc) and they also will have a starting point that is different to DPP. One of the significant advantages of Lightroom over DPP is that you can create your own profiles so you can tailor your "starting point" to suit your preferences and style whereas with DPP you always start where the Canon guy says you should be.
    There are a few programs that use the Canon SDK or Canon RAW viewer utility in windows to display images (Breeze Browser comes to mind). Irfranview may be one of these which is why RAW files viewed here may look te same as DPP or the JPEG.
    As to which is right. Neither, none or all of them. Right or wrong is purely subjective and based on which you prefer. If you never make any changes to the RAW file you may as well just shoot jpegs and that will be right for you. But then you loose thae ability to influence the look of your files proior to the file creation which is why we shoot RAW in the first place.
    Hope this helps
    Gordon

  • Just installed Lightroom 3 and got this message: Lightroom – opening catalog: IMG_6343.JPG.lrcat

    Hey guys, i just installed Lightroom 3 and when i tried to open it it gave me this message:
    Lightroom – opening catalog: IMG_6343.JPG.lrcat
    I have tried uninstalling and deleting it completely and it won't go past that error message! help!

    Once you follow 99jon's instructions, you should be able to get into Lightroom, however ...
    Did you try to open IMG_6343.JPG into Lightroom by using your operating system? If so, don't do that any more. Use File->Import... to get files into Lightroom, not operating system commands.

  • Script to encode jpg and mp3 into video for youtube?

    Hi!
    Sometimes I upload music and stand-up to youtube. Till now I used wine + avisynth + virtualdubmod to achieve this. Lately I realized that there is another smipler way to carry out things: ffmpeg
    I was looking for some script or one-liner which makes the encoding task, but unfortunately none of those mentioned scripts worked. They are all obsolate that are mentioned by others. Some of them works, but the resulting video are denied by youtube. Do anybody know a simple one-liner or script (or maybe a handy application) which can do the transcoding the right way?

    You don't say if you want 1 or multiple .jpg images in the video.
    http://www.ffmpeg.org/trac/ffmpeg/wiki/ … m%20images
    Script to encode jpg and mp3 into video for youtube?
    With x264/mp3 into a mp4 container? Any number of ways. Here are some examples.
    ffmpeg -r 1 -i file.jpg -i file13.mp3 -c:a copy -c:v libx264 -b:v 500k ouput.mp4
    ffmpeg -loop 1 -i file.jpg -c:v libx264 -t 30 -i file.mp3 -c:a copy out.mp4
    ffmpeg -f image2 -i file.jpg -i audio.mp3 -c:a copy -c:v libx264 -b:v 500k output.mp4
    Find out how you want to do, then if you want a script to automate it, something like
    #! /usr/bin/env bash
    echo "What image file?"
    read image
    echo "What audio file?"
    read audio
    echo "what video size?"
    echo "Example: 640x480"
    read size
    echo "Output file name?"
    read name
    ffmpeg -f image2 -i "$image" -i "$audio" -c:a copy -c:v libx264 -b:v 500k -s "$size" "$name".mp4
    exit
    If you want to use multiple images, look at ffmpeg docs.
    Last edited by teckk (2013-08-18 22:49:36)

  • Why does Lightroom (and Photoshop) use AdobeRGB and/or ProPhoto RGB as default color spaces, when most monitors are standard gamut (sRGB) and cannot display the benefits of those wider gamuts?

    I've asked this in a couple other places online as I try to wrap my head around color management, but the answer continues to elude me. That, or I've had it explained and I just didn't comprehend. So I continue. My confusion is this: everywhere it seems, experts and gurus and teachers and generally good, kind people of knowledge claim the benefits (in most instances, though not all) of working in AdobeRGB and ProPhoto RGB. And yet nobody seems to mention that the majority of people - including presumably many of those championing the wider gamut color spaces - are working on standard gamut displays. And to my mind, this is a huge oversight. What it means is, at best, those working this way are seeing nothing different than photos edited/output in sRGB, because [fortunately] the photos they took didn't include colors that exceeded sRGB's real estate. But at worst, they're editing blind, and probably messing up their work. That landscape they shot with all those lush greens that sRGB can't handle? Well, if they're working in AdobeRGB on a standard gamut display, they can't see those greens either. So, as I understand it, the color managed software is going to algorithmically reign in that wild green and bring it down to sRGB's turf (and this I believe is where relative and perceptual rendering intents come into play), and give them the best approximation, within the display's gamut capabilities. But now this person is editing thinking they're in AdobeRGB, thinking that green is AdobeRGB's green, but it's not. So any changes they make to this image, they're making to an image that's displaying to their eyes as sRGB, even if the color space is, technically, AdobeRGB. So they save, output this image as an AdobeRGB file, unaware that [they] altered it seeing inaccurate color. The person who opens this file on a wide gamut monitor, in the appropriate (wide gamut) color space, is now going to see this image "accurately" for the first time. Only it was edited by someone who hadn't seen it accurately. So who know what it looks like. And if the person who edited it is there, they'd be like, "wait, that's not what I sent you!"
    Am I wrong? I feel like I'm in the Twilight Zone. I shoot everything RAW, and I someday would love to see these photos opened up in a nice, big color space. And since they're RAW, I will, and probably not too far in the future. But right now I export everything to sRGB, because - internet standards aside - I don't know anybody who I'd share my photos with, who has a wide gamut monitor. I mean, as far as I know, most standard gamut monitors can't even display 100% sRGB! I just bought a really nice QHD display marketed toward design and photography professionals, and I don't think it's 100. I thought of getting the wide gamut version, but was advised to stay away because so much of my day-to-day usage would be with things that didn't utilize those gamuts, and generally speaking, my colors would be off. So I went with the standard gamut, like 99% of everybody else.
    So what should I do? As it is, I have my Photoshop color space set to sRGB. I just read that Lightroom as its default uses ProPhoto in the Develop module, and AdobeRGB in the Library (for previews and such).
    Thanks for any help!
    Michael

    Okay. Going bigger is better, do so when you can (in 16-bit). Darn, those TIFs are big though. So, ideally, one really doesn't want to take the picture to Photoshop until one has to, right? Because as long as it's in LR, it's going to be a comparatively small file (a dozen or two MBs vs say 150 as a TIF). And doesn't LR's develop module use the same 'engine' or something, as ACR plug-in? So if your adjustments are basic, able to be done in either LR Develop, or PS ACR, all things being equal, choose to stay in LR?
    ssprengel Apr 28, 2015 9:40 PM
    PS RGB Workspace:  ProPhotoRGB and I convert any 8-bit documents to 16-bit before doing any adjustments.
    Why does one convert 8-bit pics to 16-bit? Not sure if this is an apt comparison, but it seems to me that that's kind of like upscaling, in video. Which I've always taken to mean adding redundant information to a file so that it 'fits' the larger canvas, but to no material improvement. In the case of video, I think I'd rather watch a 1080p movie on an HD (1080) screen (here I go again with my pixel-to-pixel prejudice), than watch a 1080p movie on a 4K TV, upscaled. But I'm ready to be wrong here, too. Maybe there would be no discernible difference? Maybe even though the source material were 1080p, I could still sit closer to the 4K TV, because of the smaller and more densely packed array of pixels. Or maybe I only get that benefit when it's a 4K picture on a 4K screen? Anyway, this is probably a different can of worms. I'm assuming that in the case of photo editing, converting from 8 to 16-bit allows one more room to work before bad things start to happen?
    I'm recent to Lightroom and still in the process of organizing from Aperture. Being forced to "this is your life" through all the years (I don't recommend!), I realize probably all of my pictures older than 7 years ago are jpeg, and probably low-fi at that. I'm wondering how I should handle them, if and when I do. I'm noting your settings, ssprengel.
    ssprengel Apr 28, 2015 9:40 PM
    I save my PS intermediate or final master copy of my work as a 16-bit TIF still in the ProPhotoRGB, and only when I'm ready to share the image do I convert to sRGB then 8-bits, in that order, then do File / Save As: Format=JPG.
    Part of the same question, I guess - why convert back to 8-bits? Is it for the recipient?  Do some machines not read 16-bit? Something else?
    For those of you working in these larger color spaces and not working with a wide gamut display, I'd love to know if there are any reasons you choose not to. Because I guess my biggest concern in all of this has been tied to what we're potentially losing by not seeing the breadth of the color space we work in represented while making value adjustments to our images. Based on what several have said here, it seems that the instances when our displays are unable to represent something as intended are infrequent, and when they do arise, they're usually not extreme.
    Simon G E Garrett Apr 29, 2015 4:57 AM
    With 8 bits, there are 256 possible values.  If you use those 8 bits to cover a wider range of colours, then the difference between two adjacent values - between 100 and 101, say - is a larger difference in colour.  With ProPhoto RGB in 8-bits there is a chance that this is visible, so a smooth colour wedge might look like a staircase.  Hence ProPhoto RGB files might need to be kept as 16-bit TIFs, which of course are much, much bigger than 8-bit jpegs.
    Over the course of my 'studies' I came across a side-by-side comparison of either two color spaces and how they handled value gradations, or 8-bit vs 16-bit in the same color space. One was a very smooth gradient, and the other was more like a series of columns, or as you say, a staircase. Maybe it was comparing sRGB with AdobeRGB, both as 8-bit. And how they handled the same "section" of value change. They're both working with 256 choices, right? So there might be some instances where, in 8-bit, the (numerically) same segment of values is smoother in sRGB than in AdobeRGB, no? Because of the example Simon illustrated above?
    Oh, also -- in my Lumix LX100 the options for color space are sRGB or AdobeRGB. Am I correct to say that when I'm shooting RAW, these are irrelevant or ignored? I know there are instances (certain camera effects) where the camera forces the shot as a jpeg, and usually in that instance I believe it will be forced sRGB.
    Thanks again. I think it's time to change some settings..

  • Lightroom and using the Edit in Photoshop CS3 Options

    Today, I installed Lightroom v1.1 and Photoshop CS3 v10.0.1 I have an issue...Using Lightroom, I import a photo (JPG) into LR Library. Then, I right-click the photo and select the option to Edit In Photoshop CS3. This opens a window within Lightroom and there are three available options concerning What to Edit. Two Options reference Edit a Copy and One Option references Edit the Original. The two referencing Editing a Copy always says Lightroom cannot prepare the file for editing and that the file cannot be opened. If I select the last option to Edit the Original, that photo is brought into PS CS3 for Editing.
    This is also the situation with files TIFF and PSD.
    This is also the situation if I use a different Photo Editor other than PS CS3.
    I have read the user manual and if I read correctly, the Two Options which do not work should also work. Or does my thinking need correction?
    I would appreciate someone helping me with the understanding of this issue.
    Thanks.
    James

    Thanks to you both. I do appreciate your responses. Please keep them coming.
    I think Judith has a point.
    I believe I should be able to Import a JPG from somewhere (HD, Floppy Drive, CD Drive)into the LR Library and then call upon Photoshop CS3 to Edit that JPG. If I am not incorrect, when reading the Lightroom Documentation, I see where this action is supported.
    The action is: Right-Click a JPG (also TIF and PSD as well) in the LR Libary. From the menu presented, select Edit in the Adobe Photoshop CS3. A new Window appears from which to select either of two Edit a Copy Actions (with LR adjustments or without LR adjustments), I alway receive a Warning Window saying: Lightroom was unable to prepare the selected file at C:\Documents and Settings\My Name\My Documents\My Pictures\photo.JPG (or TIF or PSD) for editing. It will not be opened.
    If I select Edit the Original, the photo is brought into CS3 for editing. This selection is the only one which work. I wish to point out that the Copy File Options are grayed-out with the Edit Original Selection. And, the Copy File Options are NOT Grayed-out with Copy Options.
    In summary, if Copy File Options available, the JPG (or TIF or PSD) will not be prepared by Lighrooom for editing in CS3. My Copy File Options show TIFF and PSD pnly; no JPG. If I read correctly, I cannot Copy a JPG for editing into CS3. What I do not understand is if I have a TIFF or PSD in the Library, the Copy Option still fails to execute. The point John has made about RAW requires me to look into that aspect. I need to know more about that.
    Can anyone right-click a JPG in the LR Libary. Then select Edit in CS3. Then use either of the two Copy Functions Selections for the action of that JPG being prepared by LR and brought into CS3 for editing?
    This action will not work for me.
    I do plan to update my version soon.
    All replys and suggestions are welcomed.
    Regards,
    James

  • How to make colors looks same in Lightroom and Photoshop?

    The colors of JPGs with sRGB colorspace are displayed differently between Lightroom and Photoshop and other image view applications.
    I edited RAW images in Lightroom and export them to JPG files with sRGB colorspace, but their colors are eventually different from what I saw in LR.
    (I set ProPhoto as the colorspace for my Photoshop.)
    Is there anything I can do to solve this problem? Or maybe to reduce the color difference?
    What is the best I can do to manage colors for those images that I want to share on the internet?
    Thank you !!! 

    If colours look different between two colour managed applications such as LR and PS then you have either not calibrated your monitor at all or are using a corrupt monitor profile.
    If the former you require a calibration device, such as a Spyder (lots of other around). If the second then re calibrate.
    In the meantime you can set your monitor to use a colour space such as sRGB as a profile. This is not a solution, it is a temporary fix. Using a colour space as a monitor profile is not colour management, but will at least make the colour appear the same on your monitor.
    There are some useful links concerning colour management and LR here you may wish to read.

  • Why is metadata so different in Prelude as compared to Lightroom and Bridge?

    As a still photographer now shooting video, I'd like to have a similar workflow for video clips that I have for my still images for metdata entry. However, metadata seems to be completely different for video. I'd like to be able to enter common metadata entries for my still and video images at the same time. Both Lightroom 4.2 and Bridge CS6 make it look like this is possible, but the metadata only seems to be available from within those programs and doesn't transfer outside the program either in the file itself or in xmp sidecar files. I looked at Prelude and the metadata categories are completely different. I'm mostly concerned with the IPTC fields and the GPS fields that Lightroom applies using the Maps function. I understand that video has additional fields unique to video, but IPTC and GPS seem like they could be shared. My ultimate goal is to catalog the video files in our DAM, Canto Cumulus, which is accessible by hundreds of users. Photo Mechanic seems to write IPTC to an XMP file for video files, which can be read by Cumulus. It seems like Adobe should have similar functionality. Am I missing something?

    As a still photographer now shooting video, I'd like to have a similar workflow for video clips that I have for my still images for metdata entry. However, metadata seems to be completely different for video. I'd like to be able to enter common metadata entries for my still and video images at the same time. Both Lightroom 4.2 and Bridge CS6 make it look like this is possible, but the metadata only seems to be available from within those programs and doesn't transfer outside the program either in the file itself or in xmp sidecar files. I looked at Prelude and the metadata categories are completely different. I'm mostly concerned with the IPTC fields and the GPS fields that Lightroom applies using the Maps function. I understand that video has additional fields unique to video, but IPTC and GPS seem like they could be shared. My ultimate goal is to catalog the video files in our DAM, Canto Cumulus, which is accessible by hundreds of users. Photo Mechanic seems to write IPTC to an XMP file for video files, which can be read by Cumulus. It seems like Adobe should have similar functionality. Am I missing something?

  • When will Lightroom and Elements support the Nikon D600?

    When will Lightroom and Elements support the Nikon D600?  In the meantime is there a workaround so the D600 raw files can be exported to Lightroom or am I simply out of business until Adobe develops the needed patch?
    As best as I have been able to figure out I may as well rebox the 600 and go back to my older, supported camera, until whenever.

    A: What were you using before your precious D600 showed up today.
    A D90 with good glass.
    Nikon 70-200 f2.8, Nikon 24-70 f2.8, Voigtlander 58 f1.4, Tokina 11-16 f2.8.
    Now I need to get a good FF wide solution for the D600.
    Trigger on the D600 is much more stiff than my D90 so I'm having to press down a bit harder to get the AF confirmation. Just need to get used to that I guess.
    FYI, JPG files right out of the camera are looking good.
    B: Don’t you think Adobe wants to sell you the next generation product/upgrade to accommodate all of our insatiable photographic pursuits???
    I had been using Apple's Aperture and switched to Lightroom a couple of months ago. I thought the price was actually quite fair for the power of the LR software. I did have to updgrade my computer's RAM....
    C: Have a nice glass of wine tonight and enjoy your $2K investment. I’m personally looking forward to savoring a next generation photographic paradigm.
    We did enjoy some vino last night! I was thinking I would possibly jump ship to Sony A99 and just switch to all Zeiss glass with autofocus, but I'm not convinced that the EVF is for me, and I'm really not a video shooter, mostly just landscape and real estate. Also, I the Sony turned out to be priced a bit too high for me personally in comparision to the D600.
    Buenos Dias!
    EB

  • Lightroom and MAC Pro (intel) after Snow Leopard Upgrade?

    I have heard several horror stories about serious operational problems with Lightroom and MACs after they have upgraded from Leopard to Snow Leopard.
    I have been trying to get to the bottom of it, but all I have been able to glean is that yes, there are some issues, but I can't find out cause and effect.
    Since I heard of the things I have not opened any Adobe Software, and won't until I can be assured that I too don't experience the same horror story.
    Are there any people out there that have experienced any of these problems?  If so, do you know what caused them, and, more importantly, how to fix them?
    Thank you for any help and direction you can provide.

    Some users have reported that Edit in Photoshop CSx functionality is partially broken (e.g. Open as Smart Object launches Photoshop, but image doesn't actually open).
    With Photoshop (and many other applications) there are reports of the application crashing when the user tries to save a JPG file.
    Source of problem? Snow Leopard
    Is it really the problem that some would have you believe? Nope
    Are there any workarounds? Ask Apple
    BTW: I use Snow Leopard and don't have a problem recommending it to others.

  • File saveAsOpen and Base64 encoding...

    In order to send the activeDocument to a web service, i need to save is as a file image, and send in an xml format.
    Thus, i also need to encode it in Base64.
    At this point everything is OK.
    But between the saveAs of the file, its reopening, and its encoding, its corrupted.
    I receive an error on the Mongrel server.
    The Base64 encoder seems to work well, the rest of the code seem to be also ok, so I think my problem is either I do not save it correctly, either i do not reopen it correctly...
    Please save me :(
    Here is the code :
              /* STEP 1 : save current document as image file (temporary) */
              var docRef = activeDocument;
              var filepath=app.path.toString()+"/"+docRef.name+".jpg";//create the image file in the installation folder of Photoshop
              var file = new File(filepath);
              //var options = new ExportOptionsSaveForWeb();
              //options.format = SaveDocumentType.PNG;
              var options = new JPEGSaveOptions();
              options.quality=8;
              docRef.saveAs (file, options, true, Extension.LOWERCASE);
              //docRef.exportDocument (file, ExportType.SAVEFORWEB , options);
              file.close();
    /* I code here dialogBox and httpCOnenction object creation
    that do not need to be written here
    (but if you think it's important, i can give you the full script)
              var f= new File(filepath);
              f.open();
              var buffer = f.read(f.length);
              f.close();
    I build an HttpConnection object called "send"
    */                 send.request='"+f.name+""+f.length+""+base64encode(buffer)+"';
    Here is the Server error :
    Exception working with image: Not a JPEG file: starts with 0xc7 0xff `/var/folders/Nz/NzlixjchF+WAvFkZK9vVRU+++TM/-Tmp-/test599-0.jpg'

    Let's give you everything in fact, it will be more simple (by the way the code is suppose to become OpenSource)<br /><br />I work on Mac, Photoshop CS3 (10.0.1)<br />I use JavaScript<br />HTTP request received by a Mongrel server (Ruby on Rails)<br /><br />// Copyright 2008. Studio Melipone. All rights reserved. <br />// Licence GNU LGPL<br />// Send the active document to the UpShot web service (http://upshotit.com)<br />//  The document is sent as a .png file, as a draft on the user's account.<br />// Therefore you must have a document opened and Adobe Bridge installed to perform this script.<br /><br />/*<br />     <javascriptresource><br />          <name>UpShot</name><br />          <type>automate</type><br />          <about><br />          Script for Upshot <br />          Copyright 2008 Studio Melipone <br />          http://upshotit.com <br />          </about><br />          <enableinfo>true</enableinfo><br />     </javascriptresource>     <br />*/<br /><br />#target photoshop<br />#include "Base64.jsx"<br /><br />app.bringToFront();<br /><br />if( documents.length==0)// is a document opened ?<br />     alert("There are no Photoshop documents opened !")<br />else {<br />          /*********************************************/<br />          /* STEP 1 : save current document as image file (temporary) */<br />          /******************************************/<br />          var docRef = activeDocument;<br />          var filepath=app.path.toString()+"/"+docRef.name+".jpg";//create the image file in the installation folder of Photoshop<br />          var file = new File(filepath);<br />          //var options = new ExportOptionsSaveForWeb();<br />          //options.format = SaveDocumentType.PNG;<br />          var options = new JPEGSaveOptions();<br />          options.quality=8;<br />          docRef.saveAs (file, options, true, Extension.LOWERCASE);<br />          //docRef.exportDocument (file, ExportType.SAVEFORWEB , options);<br />          file.close();<br />          <br />          /********************************************************/<br />          <br />     // Only Bridge can use HttpConnection, so we test if it is installed<br />     var bridgeTarget = BridgeTalk.getSpecifier(getAppSpecifier("bridge")); <br />                    <br />     if( !bridgeTarget ) { <br />          alert("Adobe Bridge not installed, needed to continue."); <br />     } <br />     else {     <br />          preferences.rulerUnits = Units.PIXELS;<br />          displayDialogs = DialogModes.NO;<br />          <br />          /**********************************/<br />          /* STEP 2 : retrieve user's login & password */<br />          /*******************************/<br />          <br />          res = "dialog { text: 'UpShot authentication', \<br />                         info: Panel { orientation: 'column', alignChildren:'right', \<br />                                             text: 'Please Identify Yourself', \<br />                                             login: Group { orientation: 'row', \<br />                                                  s: StaticText { text:'Login :' }, \<br />                                                  e: EditText { characters: 30 } \<br />                                             }, \<br />                                             passwd: Group { orientation: 'row',  \<br />                                                  s: StaticText { text:'Password :' }, \<br />                                                  e: EditText { characters: 30, properties:{noecho: true} }, \<br />                                             } \<br />                                   }, \<br />                         buttons: Group { orientation: 'row', \<br />                                        okBtn: Button { text:'OK', properties:{name:'ok'} }, \<br />                                        cancelBtn: Button { text:'Cancel', properties:{name:'cancel'} } \<br />                         } \<br />                    }"; <br />          <br />          dlg = new Window (res); <br />          dlg.center(); <br />          dlg.show(); <br /><br />          var login = dlg.info.login.e.text;//retrieve the values given in the form<br />          var pass = dlg.info.passwd.e.text;<br /><br />          /******************************/<br />          /* STEP 3 : send image through Bridge */<br />          /***************************/<br />          var f= new File(filepath);<br />          f.open();<br />          var buffer = f.read(f.length);<br />          f.close();<br />          <br />          alert("file size "+file.length);<br />          alert("f size "+f.length);<br />          alert("BUF "+buffer);<br />          alert(base64encode("B64 "+base64encode(buffer)));<br />          <br />          // create a new BridgeTalk message object <br />          var bt = new BridgeTalk; <br />          // target the Adobe Bridge application <br />          bt.target  = bridgeTarget; <br />          //p173 of Javascript Tools Guide for CS3 for http message<br />          bt.body = "\<br />               if(!ExternalObject.webaccesslib ) {\<br />                    ExternalObject.webaccesslib = new ExternalObject('lib:webaccesslib');\<br />               }\<br />               var http = new HttpConnection('http://127.0.0.1:3000/en/users/get_id.xml') ; \<br />               var idfile = new File('"+app.path.toString()+"/id.xml') ;\<br />               http.response = idfile ; \<br />               http.username = '"+login+"';\<br />               http.password = '"+pass+"';\<br />               http.mime='text/xml';\<br />               http.responseencoding='utf8';\<br />               http.execute();\<br />               http.response.close();\<br />               http.close();\<br />               idfile.open();\<br />               var send = new HttpConnection('http://127.0.0.1:3000/en/users/'+idfile.read()+'/upshots') ; \<br />               send.method = 'POST';\<br />               send.username = '"+login+"';\<br />               send.password = '"+pass+"';\<br />               send.mime='text/xml';\<br />               send.requestheaders=['Host','http://localhost:3000'];\<br />               send.requestheaders=['Accept','*/*'];\<br />               send.requestheaders=['Content-Type','text/xml'];\<br />               send.request='<upshot><title>titleforyourimage</title><file_name>"+f.nam e+"</file_name><size>"+f.length+"</size><javafile>"+base64encode(buffer)+"</javafile></ups hot>';\<br />               send.execute();\<br />               idfile.toSource();\<br />          ";<br />          <br />          bt.onResult = function(result) { <br />               object = bt.result = eval(result.body);<br />               //file.remove();<br />               //object.remove();<br />               //bridge.quit ();<br />               return eval(result.body); <br />          } ;<br />          <br />          bt.onError = function( message ) { <br />               var errCode = parseInt (message.headers ["Error-Code"]); <br />               throw new Error (errCode, message.body); <br />          } ;<br />                    <br />          //send the message ( also launch the targetted application)<br />          bt.send(10);<br />     <br />     /**********************************************/<br />     /* STEP 4: Once all done, delete the image previously created */<br />     /*******************************************/<br />     }<br />}<br /><br />//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////<br />/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////<br />/*functions from http://www.ps-scripts.com/bb/viewtopic.php?t=1282 */<br />//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////<br />/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////<br /><br />function getAppSpecifier(appName) {<br /><br />   if (isCS2()) {<br />      if (appName == 'photoshop') {<br />         return 'photoshop-9.0';<br />      }<br />      if (appName == 'bridge') {<br />         return 'bridge-1.0';<br />      }<br />      // add other apps here<br />   }<br /><br />   if (isCS3()) {<br />      if (appName == 'photoshop') {<br />         return 'photoshop-10.0';<br />      }<br />      if (appName == 'bridge') {<br />         return 'bridge-2.0';<br />      }<br />      // add other apps here<br />   }<br /><br />   return undefined;<br />};<br /><br />function isCS2() {<br />   var appName = BridgeTalk.appName;<br />   var version = BridgeTalk.appVersion;<br /><br />   if (appName == 'photoshop') {<br />      return version.match(/^9\./) != null;<br />   }<br />   if (appName == 'bridge') {<br />      return version.match(/^1\./) != null;<br />   }<br /><br />   return false;<br />};<br />function isCS3() {<br />   var appName = BridgeTalk.appName;<br />   var version = BridgeTalk.appVersion;<br /><br />   if (appName == 'photoshop') {<br />      return version.match(/^10\./) != null;<br />   }<br />   if (appName == 'bridge') {<br />      return version.match(/^2\./) != null;<br />   }<br /><br />   return false;<br />};

  • I write both JPG and DNG files in the camera.   Camera is a Leica Monochrom.   Photo, unlike iPhoto, seems to ignore DNG files and only imports JPG files.   What am I missing here?

    I write both JPG and DNG files in the camera.   Camera is a Leica Monochrom.   Photo, unlike iPhoto, seems to ignore DNG files and only imports JPG files when both are present on the SD card.  JPGs are used for quick proofing on an iPad.    DNG RAW files are edited on a Mac Pro (2013).    Other than deleting the JPGs before importing images from the SD card,  is there any way to force Photo to select and import only the DNG images?

    Thanks Larry,
    I did see the J stacked in the lower left of the thumbnails but couldn't figure out how to get to whatever is below it.   How do you select R?  
    I use an iPad to do quick proofs of my images.   A JPG is good enough for a proof ( dust on the lens,  composition, blown out image, etc. ).   The iPad is JPG friendly and can load the images quickly.    Serious editing takes place on my Mac Pro with the DNG files.   I use the same workflow with the the Leica M 240.   iPhoto has been a quick and easy importer to the Mac capturing all of the metadata in the EXIF sidecar file ( location, date, time,  camera settings, lens type).  A quick scan in iPhoto for the "keepers" let's me export those worth editing to Lightroom/Bridge/Photoshop.  I typically shoot 50 images from three locations in a normal day.  If I'm lucky I'll get 1 worth real work to add to the portfolio.  

  • Does Lightroom create an extra JPG file?

    I'm new to Lightroom. When I import images from my camera and exit Lightroom, I notice that every JPG has been exactly duplicated with the addition of a _2 as a suffix.  The DNG files are not duplicated.  I'm quite certain my camera is not doing this, as it hasn't done this before.  This creates an extra cleanup task as I must delete all these extras.  What gives?

    Since I'm new to LR, I did an Import. One other person mentioned that maybe I imported into the same folder, thus creating dups.  I will watch carefully next time. I'm willing to give LR a chance as I know many people swear by it.  I guess if someone has tens of thousands if images, fast keyword searches can be helpful, but I "catalog" my images by discrete folders, so I know where everything is.  That might not be the case when I get many more images.
    T.N. Turner, www.TheArtfulToad.com
    Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2011 15:23:39 -0700
    From: [email protected]
    To: [email protected]
    Subject: Does Lightroom create an extra JPG file?
        Re: Does Lightroom create an extra JPG file?
        created by bobmeyerweb in Photoshop Lightroom - View the full discussion
    What is your workflow for importing images?  Do you use something other than LR to copy images from a memery card to the HD, and then import into LR?  What option (at the top of the import window are you using for import (Add, Copy, Move, etc.)?
         Replies to this message go to everyone subscribed to this thread, not directly to the person who posted the message. To post a reply, either reply to this email or visit the message page: http://forums.adobe.com/message/4077968#4077968
         To unsubscribe from this thread, please visit the message page at http://forums.adobe.com/message/4077968#4077968. In the Actions box on the right, click the Stop Email Notifications link.
         Start a new discussion in Photoshop Lightroom by email or at Adobe Forums
      For more information about maintaining your forum email notifications please go to http://forums.adobe.com/message/2936746#2936746.

  • Lightroom 4 GPS/ Country Code questions

    1.  If you import an image with GPS data, Lightroom 4 will add appropriate values for Sublocation, City, State/Province, Country and Country Code.  Is there a way to add this data to existing files while retaining history?
    You can write metadata to files ([Ctrl][S]), remove those files from Lightroom and then synch folder to reimport them.  That reimports them with all modifed settings but without their history.  Is there another way that retains the history?
    2.  Is a google map link available for a GPS location of a photograph?
    In Lightroom 3, you could click on the GPS location and that took you to a Google map page with a specific web link that you could then publish, eg on a blog.  You can copy and paste the GPS location into a Google map page but that does not give you a web link you can use.
    3. Is there a way of publishing a map?
    Is there (or will there be) any way of exporting a map page, say as a jpeg?
    Is it OK to take a screen dump of a map page and publish it, eg in a blog?

    Ian Lyons wrote:
    1. There is no way of saving history to the file.
    I've worked it out.  There is a way of updating location descriptions for existing images in Lightroom 4 from the GPS setting.
    If you select some images with the same GPS location and [Synch Metadata] for GPS, this fills in the location descriptions, even if none of the images have them to start with.
    There are then two ways of doing this for a Folder of images:
    (1)  Modifying in Library
    Select a bunch of images taken in the same place and therefore with the same GPS setting.  You can check that the GPS settings are the same because under Metadata in the right-hand tab it will show a single GPS location rather than "<mixed>".
    [Synch Metadata] for GPS. 
    Repeat for different locations.
    If you have a single image in a location, you'd need to create a virtual copy, [Synch Metadata] for GPS, then delete the virtual copy.
    (2)  Modifying through re-import
    This method is more complex but may be quicker where there are many GPS locations.
    It is probably a good idea to first ensure you have a current backup, or backup to a catalogue, in case anything goes wrong.
    Select images with no changes to Develop settings: click the Metadata filter (Library/ Grid mode) and then filter for Develop Preset = "Default Settings". 
    Write metadata for these images to files
    [Ctrl][S]
    (unless you already do this with every image change)
    Remove the selected images from the Lightroom catalogue:  click [Delete] and then select [Remove] (do not [Delete from Disk]). 
    Reimport the images:  right-click the folder for the images and select [Synchronise Folder ...].
    All the images with no Development changes will now have location descriptions.
    Now you can update the images with Development changes without affecting the History. 
    Filter for Develop Settings = "Custom",
    select an image (or several at the same location),
    filter for Develop Settings = "All" and
    synch GPS settings from an adjacent image with location descriptions.

Maybe you are looking for