Lightroom image management - ready for professionals?

Hi
I have a client, which is doing professional gardening photography for various magazines in this topic. Her business ranges from magazine reports about individual gardens to delivering single images to different publishers as requested (for example by flower type, color etc.). The main thing is that her image portfolio isn't organized so much in individual shoots or contracts. An image can be sent to many publishers at any time. She needs to kepp track of this. She needs to know, which image has been published when and where.
Before moving to digital recently, she kept track of here jobs with cumulus, which had more database capabilities, but much less possibilities in image adjustment. Shooting only raw with a Canon 1 series camera, she choosed Lightroom as here image editing and managing tool. Beeing pleased with the friendliness of the user interface and many of its image editing and managing capabilities, she (actually we) are astonished, that even in a version 2 it is still not really possible to keep track of what happens to the images in a professional environment (despite the claim of Adobe that the product is made for professionals).
In essence the program isn't really capable of managing image data, which has a one to many relationship to the image (i.e. the instances of cases an image is sent to a customer). We experimented with virtual copies, which can carry individual metadata, collections (which cannot carry metadata) or storing the required data in the large description field. None of these possibilites were really satisfying. The most promising solution in using virtual copies, ended up in a maintenance nightmare, because it was too easy to forget, where to do which data management (at the master raw file or at the virtual copy).
Then, I learned that with Lightroom 2 there is a possibility to extend metadata, but, unfortunately with the usual limitation of not supporting one to many data (in the SDK-documentation called "spreadsheet type data"). The rest of the SDK documentation did not reveal any other helpful way of solving the problem as the SDK deals mainly with export plugin programming or web stuff, which is of no use to the client. It is rather disappointing that Lightroom's extensibility is still so limited. Where is the programming interface, that allows the development of complete new modules?
Given the slow pace, Lightroom development takes (I can expect that "breakthrough" extensions to the SDK will take even longer), I guess that my client can wait for another 3 or 5 years until anything close to true image management will come up.
So we have to look for some intermediate solutions. Whereas other software (expression media, idimager, cumulus) may have better database capabilities, they lack in raw editing completely and are often more awkward to use. Therefore, I would like to ask the community here, how they handle the tasks described above with Lightroom or with other tools? Perhaps we have overlooked a Lightroom capability?
One thing I thought of is to develop a special keyword hierarchy for contracts, but this also would not allow, all the images tracking needed.
Any ideas? I guess there aren't any plugins, which can deal with one to many data.
Kind regards
Thomas

Actually, we haven't ruled out keywords yet, in fact, at the moment it seems to be the only realistic possibility. However, I wonder if a growing keyword hierarchy can become unwieldy at the end, so I am sceptical, if this idea would deliver.
In general, I think that Lightroom should more move into the direction of beeing a platform for other vendors. The limitation to web stuff and export solutions isn't enough. I hope to see third party vendor modules, eventually one which provides more professional image management and tracking capabilites, exploring the fact that Lightroom has a database underneath it.
I would like to see a DxO raw conversion module or a lens correction module, fields where I think Lightroom and ACR are still not the best in its class (I think LightZone and DxO are the better raw processing engines).
Unfortunately, I do not see Lightroom going much into this direction. Probably this is already too late for the version 3 release, due in 2010 (?), so we need to wait until v4 (in 2012 ?) until the situation improves?
I believe many customers (especially professionals with precious time) need a fully integrated system, which can do image management and image adjustment at the same time. Lightroom is the right platform for it, if Adobe let it be.
Kind regards
Thomas

Similar Messages

  • Image Management System

    Is it possible to employ photoshop album starter edition as an image management system for our College staff? The system would require to be searchable over out Intranet and contain many images.

    It depends exactly what you want to be able to do. I doubt very much whether you could really get the functionality you'd need, as it's not was PSA SE 3 was designed for.
    The paid-for versions have slightly more flexibility, but they are not designed to be multi-user. There are other products designed for such purposes, but they tend to be a little costly.

  • I have CC lightroom 5.7 . LR catalog 5  when I'm downloading updates it shows LR 5 as an "install" option... why would LR 5 be ready for install if I already have LR 5.7?

    ok... LOL>.. so this is confusing... it tells me to ask a question... I did... then find out that "question" is the topic subject...
    so here it is again:
    I have CC lightroom 5.7 / LR catalog 5  when I'm downloading updates on CC it shows LR 5 as an "install" option... why would LR 5 be ready for install if I already have LR 5.7?

    Can you zip up a few of your GoPro images, upload them to dropbox.com and post a share link, here, so others can experiment with them, or do you mean this issue is global to all camera models?

  • Help- how do I make images ready for web gallery??

    Hi,
    I am trying to create a photo gallery of images within Bridge using the Adobe Web Gallery feature. I have the images I want to use in a folder.What steps do I need to take to get the images saved in the correct format and file size? Also, what files sizes do you recommend for a web gallery? I need to make medium to large thumbnails & large images (when clicked). Here's what I am thinking I need in terms of getting this right:
    use Adobe Photoshop/Bridge to create the gallery
    jpg for photos
    gif for solid colors
    file size under 2MB (full image), under 20-30K for (thumbnails), total size of all images under 50K (no more than 50 sec. to download)
    screen size: 984x728
    screen resolution: 72dpi
    If you could help me in any way, shape or form concerning making my images ready for a web gallery that would be most helpful. And if you can refer me to any resources on making a web gallery that'd be awesome. Thank you!
    ashmic19

    Thanks for the link Curt Y that video is really helpful. After looking through some materials I had I figured out how to optimize my images. So I don't need any help anymore. But thanks to all who viewed this and thanks Curt Y for the video!
    ashmic19

  • I am looking into Lightroom (Creative Cloud) to allow a Team Member access my Catalog to keyword search which images will work for our Social Media platforms.

    I am looking at LR Creative Cloud to allow a Team Member access my catalog so she can keyword search which images will work for our social media campaigns. My catalog has both personal and business images (which are in separate folders), however, I only want them to access the business images. What is the best way to do this?
    and a second question as I am new to the Cloud LR product. I am assuming that my images still stay on my external drive...how am I or her able to view these images if I am out of town on another computer?

    My catalog has both personal and business images (which are in separate folders), however, I only want them to access the business images. What is the best way to do this?
    I think the only way in Lightroom to make this happen is to use two catalogs, one for business and one for personal, and then prevent access to the personal catalog via putting it on a disk or location that your team member does not have access to.
    I am assuming that my images still stay on my external drive...how am I or her able to view these images if I am out of town on another computer?
    Situations like this require you to put the catalog file AND photos on the external HD and then move the external drive to whatever location and whatever computer is needed. An alternative is to put the photos on a network drive and the catalog file on a local disk and access the catalog locally and the photos via network, but that limits you to using a single computer.
    I am looking at LR Creative Cloud to allow a Team Member access my catalog so she can keyword search which images will work for our social media campaigns.
    As far as I know, this does not require Creative Cloud, nor does Creative Cloud help in this situation. Furthermore, if you are thinking about a situation where you and your team member have simultaneous access to the catalog(s) of interest, this is not possible in Lightroom. Lightroom is a single user application.
    If you are interested in a true multi-use application, where more than one individual can access a catalog at the same time, you might want to look at Daminion. Note: I am not endorsing or recommending Daminion, as I have never used it; I simply point out the that it has the feature being discussed.

  • Downloading Windows Update Packages for inclusion with System Image Manager

    Is there a tool other than WSUS or SCCM that can download all Windows 8.1 updates for use with System Image Manager? I would like to deploy the updates along with the OS, custom drivers, and custom applications.
    www.annabooks.com / www.seanliming.com / Book Author - Pro Guide to WE8S, Pro Guide to WES 7, Pro Guide to POS for .NET

    Hi Sean Liming ,
    The main purpose is to download all the updates for specific system version image ,right ?
    I haven`t heared about such an official released tool to do this .
    As for the API ,I have found a tool based on this API developed by our MSDN guys to install the updates ,but I am afraid it doesn`t meet your need.
    Searching, Downloading, and Installing Specific Updates
    https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/aa387101(v=vs.85).aspx
    Get-WindowsUpdates.ps1
    https://gallery.technet.microsoft.com/Get-WindowsUpdatesps1-7c82c1f4
    Best regards
    Please remember to mark the replies as answers if they help, and unmark the answers if they provide no help. If you have feedback for TechNet Support, contact [email protected]

  • Just downloaded the Maverick OS and ARCH...my image manager (Advance Direct dashboard for website) has lost the Insert

    Just downloaded the Maverick OS and ARCH...my image manager (for Advance Direct dashboard for website) has lost the Insert & Cancel buttons so I'm stuck in Image Manager without an option to move forward HELP!

    HI,
    You can order the HP Recovery Discs online or by calling HP Tech Support...Hp Recovery discs will not require any product keys..
    Here is the link that will guide you to order the discs online..
    Ordering your Recovery Discs!
    Note:
    If you have HP Support Assistant installed on the computer(The Blue Question Mark) then open it ==> Complete all pending Updates & Tuneups==> Restart and Check. It may solve your problem
    Although I am an HP employee, I am speaking for myself and not for HP.
    **Click on “Kudos” Star if you think this reply helped** Or Mark it as "Solved" if issue got fixed.

  • My Canon Rebel is no longer recording RAW images but set for RAW in manual mode.

    I've tried changing memory card. My card's been recently formatted. I tried setting quality as RAW only not both RAW + Jpg...but still not getting RAW images in upload. Lightroom settings are fine and able to upload RAW from my Canon G12. I tried clearing setting but no affect. Is a factory reset a possible solution?

    Debbie wrote:
    Tahdah, tahdah and just plain dahhhh!!! I figured it out and if I share the answer I'll sound just plain stupid. But here goes in case someone else has the same problem, or should I say the same misunderstanding. In short, as it turns out I didn't have the quality set on RAW. I had checked, and rechecked the menu>quality window several times and each time misread it until I was just looking in the manual. In it the list of quality options is in a single column. In camera RAW is in a second column next to L with a quarter circle. I thought I had RAW selected. I'd been saying that the letter L was there. The manual, thank goodness, had the single column and said that was a JPG. Here I was reading about battery checks etc and there it was. I had been checking settings a while back and managed to change from RAW to JPG and not figured that I'd not changed back correctly. Whew!!! Call me dumb but I'm stupidly delighted right now ;o) Thanks to all those who tried to help.
    OK, Debbie, maybe you'll feel better after I confess to doing something every bit as stupid. Recently my wife and I were driving home from a visit to our daughter's house in Philadelphia, and I used the opportunity to drop off my two 7D's and a couple of lenses at Canon's Jamesburg service facility for their usual cleaning and inspection. (I'm a CPS Gold Member, so it's an included perk.) I knew from previous experience that this would result in a partial clearing of the camera's user settings. Some items, like my name and copyright notice, would be left intact; but others, like my autofocus microadjustment settings, would be wiped. I was ready for that, had long since committed the AFMA's to a spreadsheet, etc.
    But alas, I overlooked the fact that the quality setting that you cite above was one of those that would revert to its factory default. And the default is high-resolution JPEG, not RAW. (I always use RAW, and my favorite photo editor, Digital Photo Professional, does a crummy job on JPEGs.) So a week later I blithely walked into a moderately important photo shoot with one of my cameras set to JPEG. Fortunately, the other camera I was using, an almost new 5D Mark III, hadn't been to Jamesburg and was correctly set to RAW. But about two thirds of the photos I took were JPEGs, so I'll have to block out a few hours, sit down with Irfanview or some other editor, and try to fix things up. It doesn't much matter when I get it done, and the world won't come to an end, but it's pretty damned embarrassing.
    So there you have it. We all make mistakes. 
    Bob
    Boston, Massachusetts USA

  • Photo manager/organizer for Photoshop?

    Does Photoshop (current version) come with an Organizer for managing photos?  Photoshop Element has the built in Organizer (or program). Or is Lightroom considered the organizer for Photoshop and must be purchased separately.  From other forums I have read, I believe I understand the differences between Lightroom and PSE for editing (especially for raw images).   I just do not understand is Photoshop has any type of organizing, tagging, etc. software built in?
    Thank you... Patrick

    The whole issue of “digital asset management” is pretty complicated.  The needs of consumers, prosumers, and professionals vary greatly, and it’s pretty clear that no one program or class of programs currently available in the market is sufficient.  If you search for “digital asset management”, you’ll get a pretty good feel for the issue.
    Most users of Photoshop Elements want it primarily for the Editor, not the Organizer.  The Organizer has a tangled history, and since PSE 6, Adobe has greatly ramped back development, and its quality is now so bad that I can’t recommend it to anyone. Free or inexpensive products like Picasa, Windows Live Photo Gallery,  or iPhoto are easier to use and faster and better meet the needs of many PSE users.
    With respect to Photoshop, its users have such different workflows that no single product or class of product could meet everyone’s needs.  Many Photoshop users find Bridge useful, but I’d guess that many more don’t go near Bridge.

  • In PS C6 I'm getting a warning that "No color management" setting for printer isn't supported. Why?

    I'm using Photoshop Extended CS6. I'm printing to either an Epson Stylus Pro 9900 or an Epson SP4900. In the print dialog, I get a warning I haven't seen in a long time. It says the setting "No Color Management" at the printer is not supported. This is patently false. I am given a link to download the Adobe Color Print Utility (which gives abominable results; I know this from repeated uses in the past), and a service note saying this issue is for Photoshop CS5. Clearly there is a problem, possibly a bug.
    I have never had CS5 installed on this machine. I do have PS CS5.5 and PS CS6 on this machine (I have used all versions of CS in various suites from the start of the product line).
    Can anyone explain this annoying intrusion on my workflow? Of course "no printer management on printer/Photoshop manages color" works... There must be an explanation.
    Thanks.

    An excellent question, and worthy, in fact of an essay, if not a chapter in a book on color management and proofing issues. And as you suggested earlier, it's a philosophical question (not strictly conceptual to my way of thinking).
    It's also a question I can't answer, in terms of practicality and a personal sense of efficacy in dealing with a monolithic process (producing a print). That is, I can't answer for you, or anyone else I'd venture to say.
    Stepping back for the briefest of moments, we should remember we live, on computers, in a virtual world. Whatever we see is a simulation, or if you prefer a simulacrum. Plato would probably say, not much better than the play of shadows on the cave wall from the flickering flames.
    It's called soft proofing for a reason. The only hard proof is a print. I am old enough to remember the days when producing a color print from a chrome (requiring an internegative) or even directly from negative images, was an art, best left to skilled technicians in a lab. And even then it was an iterative process. Making an image ready for accurate color rendition in lithographic reproduction was the same things, maybe times ten. And required sometimes a whole team of skilled technicians, the last of them being the press operator. You can't appreciate the full impact of these facts of life back then unless you have been "on press" in some plant, invariably in the hinterlands, looking at actual press proofs under 6500K calibrated proofing lights, comparing them against the original chrome, the separation proofs used to make the plates. You had to understand not only the physics (and biology) of RGB imaging, but the intricacies of subtractive technology, aka CMYK. As in so much else in life, less is more, and so you had to understand that sometimes the least adjustment was the best (because you were also dealing with the physical constraints of layers of ink on paper), so if an image looked too green on the press sheet, it might be best to throttle up on the magenta just a touch, rather than cut back on the yellow and cyan. You balanced one against the other, because of the possible effects on other parts of the image.
    This long-winded, probably tiresome if not boring, anecdote is meant to be illustrative of the analogous situation in which we find ourselves printing images with digital technology, combined with electromechanical devices spraying pigmented fluids in drops measured in picoliters of volume on substrates of varying physical properties related to absorbency, refractive index, contribution to an arcane phenomenon known as metamerism.
    We can't hope to see anything but a, pardon the expression, simulacrum of the combination of the effects of these phenomena (and other phenomena as a result of the interdigitation of these different technologies, at the software level, and even more so at the hardware level), at least not on a screen (which introduces a whole other set of variables). We can't see what we will get unless we actually go through the ordeal and expense of producing a hard proof. And then using our experience and deductive skills to make adjustments, not unlike maneuvering a rover on the moon from a control station on earth, that will produce the desired outcome within a very narrow (I assume) set of parameters.
    Personally, I prefer working in Lightroom and in Photoshop in order to produce the image I would like to see in an ideal, if you like a Platonic, world. If what was on the screen could somehow be transferred magically to the surface of a lovely unsullied sheet of Arches cold press watercolor paper, 350g/m^2 coming out of an Epson 9900... (I've done it). Not so easy.
    What the soft proofing capabilities of Photoshop are good for, from my point of view, is to show me how far off the image I am looking at as ideal will fall short on the intended target substrate. I must always remember, it is not a wholly accurate rendition of what the printer will do with a sheet of paper from a particular production run, with the particular combination of inks (with varying dates of origin of manufacture), never mind the vagaries of temperamental nozzles in the printhead, not to mention conditions of humidity, temperature, etc.
    What the softproof tells me is that the red in that scarf on my subject really needs bumping up, if I expect the level of vibrancy I see I need in the ideal rendition. And I make the adjustment in the RGB representation on the screen, etc. When I have made my by guess and by gosh adjustments to all problem areas as suggested by the soft proof (it is only as accurate after all as the RGB image is in depicting any realistic expectation of a final result—the only assurance I have is that if I really want people to see my image as I see it on the screen I had better show them the screen...), I make a print. Sometimes I have to make two or three until I am satisfied this is truly the best I will get from the beautiful, but arcane, surface of the paper I have chosen.
    In short, it's a risky business, and expensive.
    If you want fast and affordable, frankly, stick to premium grade high gloss surfaces, preferably from Epson, in your case, or the manufacturer of your printer in general (Canon, incidentally, produces spectacular results on their Pixma Pro series printers and their own papers, especially the Pro Luster surface... I don't even bother with soft proofing... so there is an exception even to this rule I am taking a lot of time to point out to you). High gloss papers tend to have the widest gamut, give the deepest blacks, and the best renditions of saturated color, red and blue particularly, for some reason often the hardest spectral colors to render with the level of saturation you might like. Especially if you tend to shoot vividly colored subjects.
    If you regularly use matte surface, or so-called fine art or watercolor surfaces, I think even if you adhere to the workflow implied in your question... Just set the computer and screen to "soft proof" in effect in Photoshop and work from their, and hope for the best... you are in for massive chronic dissatisfaction.
    One last thing, I produce what I consider a basic working image in Lightroom, add further effects using a battery of third party effects software (from Google Nik, OnOne, Imagenomic, AlienSkin, etc.) and then go to work further on the image in Photoshop, but I never save the image, except as a revised file, once I'm done with Lightroom adjustments (which are never applied to the RAW file, but kept as meta-instructions separately in the LR database). So any effects added produce a new file. Any changes in Photoshop produce a new file. And when I am working, finally on an image to make into a committed hard print, I NEVER save the settings I use to produce a print, including a print I deem acceptable for exhibition. If nothing else, I can honestly tell a print buyer they are getting a unique "hand-made" image. I don't feel I'm operating a factory after all, but a studio. Further, changes in technology occur dynamically and continuously. I don't know what I would do with the settings I derived from working solely in the "soft-proofing" mode you think you might prefer in your workflow, if a new paper or ink set, or printer came along that solved the problems I had to fudge around to get a decent print with the existing technology at the time. At least if I work solely in RGB trying to achieve an "ideal" rendition, I will always be able to start from that same point, the next time I want a print worth saving of that image.
    We've gone, or I've gone, way off topic here, and I beg the indulgence of anyone else who might be reading this, hoping for a simple fix to the original simple problem.
    H

  • Offline Image Management

    All of the other Digital Asset Management (DAM) software packages that I have used manage offline storage. Some have built-in capability to burn CD/DVD's; others just recognize that it has been done. However, all of them track the offline media by serial number, and allow the user to assign a more friendly name to the disk. This allows one to locate the disk containing an image. Without this, support for offline images is not particularly useful.
    So far as I have been able to determine, Lightroom does not provide any capability for this. In particular, when I import images from a CD (leaving them in place), Lightroom recognizes the drive on which the CD is mounted. When I attempt to reference the images later, with the CD unmounted, Lightroom provides the standard Windows dialog box to find a missing file.
    Is there some capability for Lightroom to manage offline images that I have not found? If not, has anyone looked into coordinating it with a real DAM package? I like Lightroom's workflow and raw conversion, but I need image management, too.
    Thanks,
    David

    Thanks for that pointer. I have a PC rather than a Mac, but that may be effective on a PC, too.
    However, what I'd really like Lightroom to do is integrate with iMatch. It tracks offline images, and names of mountable media (i.e., CDs and DVDs). It also scales very well, and is quite fast.
    The problem I have had with iMatch is that it is not integrated into my workflow, and I tend not to enter relevant metadata for my images for relatively long periods of time. Then, of course, I have a lot to do, and it's a chore. If I were able to enter metadata - categories, keywords - in Lightroom, as I process my images, and then easily import that metadata into iMatch, I would be much happier.
    I'll look around in the iMatch forum some more. Most of the discussion I saw there looked a little backwards to me - it was about moving images and metadata from iMatch to Lightroom.
    David

  • Need photo cataloging/management solution for small business

    Hi,
    I'm about to be tasked with setting up a way to manage thousands of high res images coming in from various photo shoots for our upcoming projects. We are a Mac-based office, and have an Xserve as our local file/web server which we will install something on.
    - Ideally it'd be something hosted locally from the Xserve so that it's easily updated via the file server. Easiest would be an app that helps import batches of new images, or has a folder where we can drop new batches directly. Online web services are not ideal as we'd like to house all the data locally.
    - Could be software-based, ie if there's a package that has a server app we can install on the Xserve and run client apps on local machines to access, OR could be web-based, ie image gallery software I install on the Xserve, which we could access in or out of the office (external access would be most helpful). Web based may be the way to go.
    - Main thing is that it's easy to browse and search thumbnails, view larger preview on screen, then download full size image when ready
    - Ideally individual users would be all be able to tag/organize content
    - Super extra bonus points if users can create their own lightbox/favorites to select images for a particular project, and save their settings etc.
    - Simple, clean, easy to use interface would be excellent. We don't need something that does 1000 things, just the above things really well.
    Thanks for any and all suggestions!

    There used to be a good program that did just that: iView MediaPro (worked on a Mac). But Microsoft bought them in 2006, changed the name and upgraded the product, and I'm not sure if you can find a version that will do just that anymore.
    They call it Microsoft Expression Media and they have several different flavor of it.
    Here is a link to the iView MediaPro website that will refer you to the Microsoft site for Expression Media http://www.iview-multimedia.com/
    Not sure if that will help you.

  • - Lightroom Color Management Hints & Tips -

    Summary
    If you have a profiled monitor and you experience that Lightroom 2.1 renders the image
    very different from the way Photoshop renders it, or that the Library and Slideshow modules render the image
    very different from the way it is rendered by the Develop module, chances are that this can be solved by re-profiling your monitor and saving the new profile as a matrix-based profile rather than a LUT-based profile.
    The full article
    Read the full article at: http://photo.bragit.com/LightroomColorManagement.shtml, which describes the background, the problem, the solution and the results. There are also some hints on the use of test patterns, choice of gamma, color temperature and luminance.
    I am sure many people may have opinions on these issues, so please run any discussions about the article in this forum.

    To Richard Waters:
    For normal mid-tone images (excluding shadows) viewed at 1:1, there should be no (significant) differences between Development and Library modules (and Photoshop). If you do see significant differences, there is something wrong with the calibration.
    As for Photoshop vs Lightroom: Photoshop is better for printing because it has a proofing systems. What one can do is to open it in Photoshop (with Lightroom adjustments), then do the proofing, and perhaps some extra adjustments to compensate for the paper, and then print the result either from Photoshop or from Lightroom. Printing from Lightroom has the advantage that it does the resampling and sharpening automatically.
    Choice of gamma when profiling is not very critical. 2.2 is reasonably okay (and the most common), although the sRGB gamma (if you have the choice) may be more optimal, especially for deep shadows. Color management works so that, in principle, if the bit depth from the graphics card to the monitor was infinite, it would compensate for whatever gamma you choose. Thus, in principle, you could choose any arbitrary gamma, and the image would look and print exactly the same. The only reasons to choice a "suitable" gamma are: (1) the bit depth is limited to 8 bits which makes it necessary to use a "reasonable" gamma so as to avoid banding and posterizations; (2) when viewing images from the internet that are not tagged with a profile, or using a lousy browser that does not understand CM, then the choice of gamma is critical since it directly affects the contrast of that image.

  • Logic of Lightroom Color Management

    There are, I know, endless posts about Lightroom color management issues. This question, I hope, will be somewhat different, as I don't have a specific problem, yet, but am trying to understand the logic of the software in the hope of avoiding problems down the road (as when I add file types, e.g.) I am also reading a book on color management, but it is on general theory with specific references to Photoshop CS3 (or 2), not to Lightroom. So here are my two questions and I'm hoping that the answers, should I be fortunate enough to receive any, will help not only me but other neophytes.
    First, the Adobe online manual says this: "For rendered files such as TIFF, JPEG, and PSD files, Lightroom uses the images embedded color profile to display the image, histogram, and color values. If the image doesnt have a profile, Lightroom assumes the sRGB profile, and the image may not look as expected on your monitor." Clear enough, but what does CS3 do when it is launched from Lightroom to do pixel editing on an image primarily managed in Lightroom? That is, if CS3 is used essentially as a Lightroom plugin does CS3 adopt the Lightroom color management or does CS3 independently have to be set appropriately for the image to appear the same in CS3?
    Second, the online manual says this: "Raw photo files generally dont have embedded color profiles. For raw files, the Develop module assumes a wide color space based on the color values of the ProPhoto RGB color space. ProPhoto RGB encompasses most colors that cameras can record." This is confusing, at least to me. Consider the paragraph above in this post, where the manual explains (or at least intimates) that if you create a file with values of a broad gamut such as Adobe RGB but don't embed that profile Lightroom will think it has a narrower gamut, sRGB file and the display will be off (unsaturated and washed out, I presume). That makes perfect sense. But why, then, does Lightroom assume for RAW files the wide Prophoto RGB color space when a camera might not record across this gamut? Wouldn't a camera that records in a narrower gamut cause the same problems for the display as does an Adobe RGB file read as if it were an sRGB file?
    Thanks in advance.

    >For rendered files such as TIFF, JPEG, and PSD files, Lightroom uses the images embedded color profile to display the image, histogram, and color values. If the image doesnt have a profile, Lightroom assumes the sRGB profile, and the image may not look as expected on your monitor.
    Funny but if this came from the manual it is actually incorrect. For tiff, jpeg and psd files, the image is rendered into the linear lightroom color space using the embedded profile or assuming sRGB if there is no color tag on the image. The histogram Lightroom shows is always based on the Lightroom color space with a gamma 2.2 toning curve applied no matter what the source of the file. To answer your question, if you do an "edit in CS3" from Lightroom a copy of the file is rendered in the color space that you requested in the dialog and CS3 uses that space if your Photoshop is correctly set up to respect embedded profiles.
    >Raw photo files generally dont have embedded color profiles. For raw files, the Develop module assumes a wide color space based on the color values of the ProPhoto RGB color space. ProPhoto RGB encompasses most colors that cameras can record.
    The manual is again not correct here! Embarrassing. I have never seen a RAW file with an embedded profile so generally is incorrect. Also, for RAW files, the module DOES NOT assume prophotoRGB color space. The actual primaries are actually stored in a internal database that is based on calibrations that Thomas Knoll and other ACR engineers did of the specific type of camera. They ARE not the prophotoRGB primaries. The RAW files are rendered into MelissaRGB using those primaries. MelissaRGB has ppRGB primaries but a linear gamma instead of 1.8.
    >hat makes perfect sense. But why, then, does Lightroom assume for RAW files the wide Prophoto RGB color space when a camera might not record across this gamut? Wouldn't a camera that records in a narrower gamut cause the same problems for the display as does an Adobe RGB file read as if it were an sRGB file?
    See above, the manual is wrong. Lightroom knows the actual gamut of your camera and uses that, not prophoto.

  • Recommended workflow-way to manage exports for stock sites

    Dear All,
    Is there an efficient workflow - way that someone came up with, that could recomend to manage exports for stock site photography easily?
    The main problem, is that if you upload 10 images for instance, to 3 different sites you most propably will face different accepted images and different rejected from each site.
    Then you have to modify adjustments to reupload the rejected images for a second try, or even a third one.
    And this is the exact point where the problem occures.
    There must be an efficient way to have in different folders (or smart albums or whatever)  the same images with different status (rejected or accepted for instance, or red or green or whatever) and at the same time those images with differenet settings (those you had to make in order to get images accepted) keep also in mind that the images may also have different keywords aswell (in case an image gets rejected due to keywording).
    Its important to  mention that in the end, the folders must match the real status of the images at the stocksite submitted, regarding state (accepted or not) and of course settings.(its important in the end to know that in  site ''A'' you have exactly those images and in site ''B'' the others, and so on.)
    Its more than sure that those 3 different folders (or smart albums or whatever) will eventually have the same images, but most of them will have different status, settings and keywords.
    The only way i found to manage it, is by creating export folders using virtual copies at the publish services section of LR. Note that for publish services i used my hard drive.
    But the drawbacks of this way are:
    1. You double - triple (depending the stock site number) files (at least they are virtual ones)
    2. When an image is rejected from a stock site and you mark the coresponding image as ''marked for republish'' even thow in lr it is clear which files were rejected and should be edited and republished, in the export folder you cant track them, you must export to a new folder evry time creating double - triple jpg files. I think it would be better if LR could sync automaticaly  the folder showing somehow images marked for repubplish.
    Sorry for long post, but how could it be smaller????
    Thanks in advanced.
    Vasilis

    The point of Publish is not that the image disappears afterwards, but that it remains there afterwards, after moving between the categories into which the publish window is divided. IIRC you can collapse the parts you are not interested in... (?) I don't have LR in front of me just now. Pictures then move categories again, the moment you make further changes. It's an ongoing relationship between the Catalog and the publish location, and you use Publish when this is what you want.
    It is not very easy AFAICT to terminate this relationship, using the built-in Publish function, without also marking the externally published file for removal. However some 3rd-party LR plugins offering a Publish facility, can do this for you cleanly.
    Personally, I have concluded that the standard one-off (but repeatable, via named preset) Export inherently meets my needs better than Publish does, for this very reason - and have therefore ducked fully dealing with this Publish life-cycle issue. So often, a change is made to an image which is not really substantive and does not justify re-publishing.
    But I definitely suggest looking into plugins, if you like the idea of Publish but find it restrictive currently, including (in no particular order and not comprehensive)
    http://www.photographers-toolbox.com/
    http://regex.info/blog/lightroom-goodies
    http://www.robcole.com/Rob/ProductsAndServices/PublishServiceAssistantLrPlugin/

Maybe you are looking for

  • New 2011 MB Air 4,2 - Spurious trackpad clicks (many)

    Hi, I just upgraded from my old Macbook Air 2,1 (late 2008) to a new 2011 Macbook Air 4,2 (13"). This new unit has the glass trackpad which acts as a button when you press it. I have been getting a great many spurious mouse clicks while swiping over

  • [SOLVED] What are those theme and font?

    Can someone tell me what is the gtk and pekwm theme? And I also want to know whats the font. Thanks in advance for you help. The screenshot is here Last edited by froli (2009-05-29 07:55:09)

  • Migrating Oracle Reports to Publisher in 11g

    Greetings! We are developing a project with the purpose of migrating some Oracle Reports files to Oracle BI Publisher 11g. We know that there is a tool called BIPBatchConversion available in Bi Publisher 10.1.3.4.1 but I couldn't find this utility in

  • Decimal in forms

    Hi, In one of the procedure i have to check for the decimal, eg. amount can be 100.25 or 100.00. How do i trap the decimal only. Thanks in advance

  • User interface for the CAF project

    hi              to make  user interface for the CAF  i  have  written  a simple    webservice application for storing the data in the database using JDBC operation    i have  imported the webservice in the  EXTERNAL SERVICE  and  mapped   in the requ