Lightroom practical improvements

1. faster library previews browsing - it tends to choke cpu and hd,
2. fullscreen loading like acdsee,
3. better previews management - abillity to delete previews of ALL sizes and retain only smallest thumbnails for fast offline library catalogue-like browsing, because the library tends to grow rodicuoulosly large and occupy hard disc space.
4. OPEN file function - ability of opening and editing photos without importing to library and saving privews.
5. PLUGINS - OK layers and masking can remain photoshop only feature, but some module for loading photoshop plugins like noise ninja would be great.

+1 to all of the above especially #3, since that is exactly what I think a DAM should do (as opposed to bridge, etc.).

Similar Messages

  • Help: best Lightroom practices using a Drobo

    Hello,
    I apologize in advance for what will be a long post.  I'm a newbie when it comes to Lightroom, so forgive me if these questions seem elementary.
    Background: I have a Drobo b800fs, connected to our network via gigabit ethernet.  I have roughly 225,000 photos on the Drobo - stored by year and then by event.  We're adding roughly 30,000 photos per year to the system.  Searching for specific photos is an absolute nightmare at times.  That is why I am looking at purchasing Lightroom.  It'll be a massive project, but if we can add tags/keywords to our photos, the search feature would then be a breeze.  Not sure if it is important to note, but I dont anticpate using Lightroom to alter the images much (if at all) - it'll mainly be used a giant search tool.  Assuming Lightroom is my best option for tagging all of these photos, here are some questions I have...
    1) Can I store the catalog file on the Drobo, in the same location as the original images? My reasoning for this would be so that I could access that catalog file from any machine in our office that is running Lightroom.  If not an option, what is the best location for the catalog file to reside?  Obviously speed would be a big factor here.
    2) Can I run one master catalog for all of our photos or would that be too cumbersome?  If not, would it be better to run a separate catalog by year?  Obiviously, the more catalogs I have, the more searching I have to do... but I also don't want to wait 5 minutes for a enormous catalog to load.
    3) What happens if a drive fails on drobo and I have to insert a new one? When the drobo regenerates files, will that screw up the catalog association with the images?
    4) I currently have all original photos on the Drobo backed up to separate external WD hard drives (one for each year of photos).  To speed up the keywording project up, could I hand these drives out to my team members and have them run Lightroom and keyword all of the photos on each respective drive, and then merge all the catalogs onto the Drobo without having to copy over all the original photos (since they are already on the Drobo)?
    Thanks for any tips, opinions, and help you can provide!

    1) The Lr catalog cannot be on a network drive, but photos can. Catalog and photos do not have to be on the same drive.
    Best option for the catalog is the fastest drive that you have, i.e. an internal SSD drive.
    Lr constantly writes to and reads from the catalog. That means that the speed of the drive hosting the catalog is a big factor in Lr performance.
    2) It seems there is no practical limit for how many photos can be in one catalog. There were posts on this forum of people / organizations / companies having about 250 000 photos in one catalog.
    Having one catalog is the preferred method. For instance you cannot search across several catalogs; a search is always confined to one catalog.
    Opening a huge catalog should not take very long, since Lr does not load the whole catalog but addresses only the images opened by folder or by collection.
    If you have several catalogs, and you want to switch catalogs, Lr will close down and open up with the new catalog. That might take longer than opening Lr in the morning with one big catalog and then not having to switch catalogs.
    3) It shouldn't as long as there is no drive letter change involved. I don't use drobo , so can't say for sure. But I had one of my RAID 1 external drives rebuild one disk, and it did not screw up the catalog.
    The catalog stores - among all the other things - the name and location of the image files. As long as these two don't change, the catalog will be fine.
    4) Several people cannot access one and the same catalog at the same time. So, several people working on the keywording project would necessitate that each person creates a separate catalog.
    The keywords could then be imported into the master catalog. Since importing the sub-catalogs would create duplicate images, the best method for importing the keywords would be: Once each sub-catalog is completed with keywording, the keywords are "written to file" (via the feature <save metadata to file>), and then in the master catalog the keywords would be imported by reading the keywords from file (via the feature <read metadata from file>).
    There is one caveat with this: <Read metadata from file> overwrites the catalog data for the images in question. Thus it would be mandatory that no work is done in the master catalog before the keywords are "read from file". After that, new keywords can be added in the master catalog, or photos can be edited, etc.

  • Is Lightroom 1.3 commercial quality yet?

    I blindly rushed out and purchased Lightroom when it first came out (i.e., v1.0) -- bought Scott Kelby's Lightroom book and jumped in head first. It didn't take long to determine that Lightroom v1.0 wasn't a viable product, so I removed it from my computer and resumed using Bridge CS3. I'm still somewhat confused as to what is so much better about Lightroom than Bridge/Camera RAW, but I'm curious to give Lightroom another try -- after all, I did *pay* for this unusable software! Is it worth me reinstalling Lightroom and upgrading to 1.3 to check it out again?
    Regards,
    Greg

    Interesting responses. Sorry that I didn't provide specifics as to my workflow. Here goes:
    - I process several hundred images at a time.
    - I pull the images off my datacard with Bridge CS3, rename the files, and stamp them with metadata -- this is all automated via Bridge CS3. I'll also add keywords if necessary at this point from Bridge. I didn't see any discernable difference between Lightroom and Bridge.
    - I rank/review the pictures, delete the duds, and pick the keepers. Again, this functionality looked the same between Lightroom and Bridge.
    - I then use ACR to make adjustments to white balance, exposure, contrast, color, etc. The amount of "automation" in this step depends on the batch of photos. For example, for batches with the same lighting, I can adjust white balance on one photo and with 2 clicks I can update the white balance on the rest of the photos from bridge. As best as I can tell, ACR is the same as Lightroom's Develop module. The sliders are the same, listed in the same order, etc.
    - For pictures that require photoshop edits, I'll launch them in photoshop directly from bridge, make my edits, and save. I'd have to do the same thing if I were using Lightroom.
    - When all edits are done, I'll review them in Bridge's slideshow mode. Slideshow is primarily for me -- I don't have to show a slideshow to clients, so I don't really need a "prettier" slideshow mode than Bridge already provides.
    - I don't print very many of my pictures. When I do print, I just print them from Photoshop directly to my Epson 3800 -- they turn out great. Ironically, I've seen people that think Lightroom's Print module is amazing, and I've seen people that think Lightroom's Print module stinks.
    - I don't have a need to generate web galleries of my pictures. If I did, I know that Photoshop can do this. Maybe Lightroom's Web module is better? Again, I've seen very polarized opinions about this as well.
    - If I need JPEGs, I just convert the images from Bridge via the Image Processor command (which invokes Photoshop).
    And there you have it -- a high level view of my workflow.
    It's been a while since I used Lightroom 1.0, but I'll try to remember the specifics that led me to my comments about 1.0 not being a viable product. (Although, I suspect I wouldn't have received this same reaction back in the 1.0 days -- almost everybody was complaining about the quality of the product.)
    - Overall quality/stability was poor. I have a s/w engineering background and felt that the 1.0 release was definitely a bit premature.
    - Performance was awful. When I would drag a slider in the Develop module, it would take a few seconds for the screen to update. ACR had the same sliders, but without the sluggishness.
    - There was some other weird quirk about the linkage between Lightroom/Photoshop that escapes me at the moment. Not sure if I posted anything to this forum about it.
    Regarding the "try before you buy" comments, I find these reactions somewhat humorous. You guys are reacting as if Lightroom were your mom and I just insulted your mom. If Lightroom really is your mom, then I truly am sorry for offending you. :) My first real Photoshop experience started with CS2. My impression of Adobe was VERY high. I also happen to think very highly of Scott Kelby and his NAPP organization. When Lightroom came out, Scott Kelby was making so much noise about how amazing and groundbreaking Lightroom was -- this really caught my attention. Given this, along with my high regard for Scott Kelby, I just jumped into Lightroom. Only after using the tool for several weeks and then finally reading the reaction to 1.0 on this forum did I realize that I had made a mistake. I simply removed Lightroom from my computer and resumed using Bridge CS3. Now that there have been 2 relatively major releases to Lightroom, I'm just trying to determine if the quality/performance of Lightroom has improved to the point where I should give it another try. Yes, this is subjective; however, I can't possibly be the only person out there that was underwhelmed with Lightroom 1.0. Just looking for someone else who shared a similar 1.0 experience as I had that has maybe given 1.3 a try. Sorry if I offended anybody because I didn't like Lightroom 1.0.
    Regards,
    Greg

  • Lightroom 6 Slideshow issues

    I have been using the Lightroom slideshow features all the time, and was very excited when I saw the Lightroom 6 improvements (i.e. multiple audio files, sync with music beat, etc). I am running the stand alone LR 6.0 (Camera Raw 9.0), on my 2008 Mac Pro with 20GB ram and OS X 10.9.5. I started using the slideshow of LR6 10 hours ago and so far I had nothing but problems with slideshow. I am quite happy with the new HDR and Panorama features, and they worked very well. Just problem with the slideshow module so far:
    (1) I could not add any audio files (using only MP3 files so far) to be used as 'MUSIC'. I always received an 'ADD RESULTS' window that states " Can't add those music files to Lightroom > Muscid file format is bad (1) > xyz.mp3". Some of the mp3 field have been successfully used in LR5 slideshows. So far, I have tried about 10 different mp3 files and all received the same error message as above. It did not matter whether I tried to add a single mp3 file or multiple mp3 files. I haven' tested any other audio file formats. All those 'problematic' mp3 files play fine with iTune or my iPod, and some of them have been used to create slideshow in LR 5 before.
    (2) The "Preview" or "Play" seems to be not working. I selected only 2-3 raw files and tried to do a very simple slideshow (using the "Simple" Lightroom Templates). The "Preparing slideshow" took forever and the progress was painfully slow, if there was any progress at all. I still haven't been able to create a simple slideshow using LR 6 after hours.
    Any help will be greatly appreciated. Thank you.
    Stephen

    The standard LR 6 catalog file is not a ZIP file. Those ZIP files are Back Ups of the original catalog. Do a search of your HDD for *.lrcat (The Star(*) is a wild card character and may not be needed in Windows or Mac Spotlight search system). That will turn up the original, standard, default, LR catalog file.
    When you say you have been SAVING your LR catalog what exactly do you mean by that? Do you mean Backing it Up? You can't really SAVE the catalog. There is no Save or Save As in the File menu item and to my knowledge Ctrl + S or Ctrl + Shift + S do nothing. It saved automatically every time you add something to it, make changes to the user/program Preferences/Options or to the catalog settings.

  • Toward a Better Metadata Panel

    Thank you, Adobe, for including us in evaluating LR4. By and large it is a wonderful program full of useful improvements. I do, however, have a long-standing gripe with the "Sync Metadata" diaglogue box. Working as a news photographer, captioning is of the utmost importance and enterying metadata in bulk is often a must. I would LOVE for the caption field in the Sync Metadata dialogue box to grow automatically as lines are added, so that when I write long captions, the entire entry can be seen at once. Is this possible and is there anyone out there that would support me in requesting this feature?
    Again, thanks for letting us be a part of Lightroom's improvement.
    Tim

    Done

  • Moving Existing VM's

    Hyper-V 2012 R2 on 2012R2 core. Researching performance tuning and found this:
    http://www.altaro.com/hyper-v/23-best-practices-improve-hyper-v-vm-performance/
    Apparently we have broken some of these "best practices". Number 5 Avoid Storing System Files on Drives Used for Hyper-V Storage and number 6 is like it. So our VM and drives are on the physical server drive:
    We have a JBOD's device that we could move the drives and VM's too. How can we correctly and safely move the drives and VM's to a separate drive?

    I do not know the author and there are a few statements in the article that there is no proof have any performance impact.
    Many of the recommendations are business practices / personal preferences that I have never seen MSFT performance numbers behind (and they have tons of performance metrics for Hyper-V).
    #11 for instance - Generation 2 VMs only boot faster than Generation 1 VMs.  And the only reason is UEFI.  Just like on bare metal, it boots faster.  That is it. everything else is equivalent.
    #5 and #12 are the same recommendation stated different ways.
    Is it a necessary thing from a performance standpoint to move the VM configuration file off the OS volume of the Hyper-V server?  No, moving the configuration file is not a performance related issue.  It is a convenience issue, particularly when
    backing up and restoring, or preparing a VM for HA, or other practices.
    Moving the virtual hard disks of the VM - that is definitely a performance related issue.  And the storage migration has been mentioned already.
    My point - be critical.  Consider the reason for each change and if it fits your environment.  And then also be mindful of the true reason for making the change.
    Brian Ehlert
    http://ITProctology.blogspot.com
    Learn. Apply. Repeat.

  • Mac Mini intel Core Duo w/ Virtual racing R/C game

    Hello there,
    Im thinking of purchasing a Mac Mini I plan to partition the drive and install Windows XP as well.My question is on the windows side there is a game that I want to see if it works.
    If any one has a Mac mini with Windows XP installed can you please download this demo and get back to me to see how it works on the mac mini.
    The game is a R/C simulation game and its a demo how you control the car use the arrow buttons
    Here is the demo download:
    http://www.virtualrc.com/downloads/gamedownldetail.aspx?gdid=47&gdc=0
    and here is the Web site:
    http://www.virtualrc.com/default.aspx
    And here are the spec for the Windows XP:
    Minimum system requirements:
    - Windows 2000 or XP
    - Processor with 1 GHz or better
    - 128 MB RAM
    - Graphics card with hardware T&L e.g. GeForce 3, Radeon 9000 or similar
    - Monitor resolution 1024x768 pixels
    - Game-port
    - 56Kbps dial-up Internet connection
    Recommended system requirements:
    - Windows XP
    - Processor with 2 GHz or better
    - 512 MB RAM
    - Graphics card with hardware T&L e.g. GeForce FX5600, Radeon 9800 or similar
    - Monitor resolution 1280x1024 pixels
    - USB port
    - ADSL, DSL or cable Internet connection
    Download Basic Game Software
    Install the Basic Game Software and create your VRC account
    Purchase the Basic Game Pack from the e-shop and download the tracks
    Start practicing, improve your racing skills, compete in the online VRC events, and enjoy VRC !!!
    cane someone please try this game and get back to me thanks
    Alpha Mac g4

    alpha mac g4-
    Greetings and welcome to the Apple boards.
    Have you tried taking a look at the MacGamer.com website?
    It looks to me like you can definitely find an answer there.
    Luck-
    -DaddyPaycheck

  • Deleting in iPhoto

    My workflow involves taking RAW images and a JPEG copy. I then use Lightroom to improve the good images and save them as a JPEG in a subdirectory.
    So, when I import my photos to iPhoto, it takes all versions and I have many duplicates.
    What I'd like is to have only the finished JPEGS in iPhoto since I will only use these to post to Facebook etc and to make Photobooks. I thought I could just delete the photos I don't want but according to iPhoto help, this would mean the original files will be deleted from my hard drive too.
    What's the best way of handling this problem? I know I could just import the finished photo sub-directory but that would take a long time to do selectively compared to just importing everything.

    Well one way or another you're going to be selecting out duplicates and deleting them, whether in iPhoto or in the Finder.
    Yes you can delete the photos in iPhoto and no, this will not affect the photos in your own directories. iPhoto has no ability to delete photos from outside its own Library. Simply put the pics in the iPhoto trash and empty it. Try it on one or two to reassure yourself.
    Regards
    TD

  • Creating video stills with Lightroom 4. Suggestions for improvement.

    I have to create a lot of videos stills from videos. I am doing it with iMovie and SnapzProX right now. I would like to do it with Lightroom 4 but the work-flow has to be improved. Right now it is pretty unusable for my special purpose. I explain why.
    In iMovie I play a movie in full screen presentation mode. You can start and stop the movie with the space bar. You can navigate frame-by-frame with the arrow keys. Unfortunately you cannot jump by 10 frames if you press shift and arrow keys (like in other video apps). The video scrubbing area goes across the whole screen, so you have space enough to scrub and find the parts in the video that you like to grab. All in all this makes it pretty easy to find the exact still frames that you then can capture with SnapzProX. The down-side is that you have to organize the captured frames yourself by importing them into Lightroom.
    Now we have video import in Lightroom 4 and we can capture frames. But the handling is not really comfortable.
    You can start and stop the video with space but you cannot locate an exact frame with the arrow keys. You have to use the locator and scrub with the mouse. Since the scrubbing area is short it is pretty difficult to find the exact frame. To capture a frame you have to select the pop-up.
    Here is my suggestions to turn the video feature in Lightroom 4 into a dream for people who need to capture video stills.
    Make the video slider bigger. At least across the whole video.
    Go to next and previous frame via arrow keys
    Jump by +10 / -10 frames via shift + arrow keys
    Keeping arrow keys pressed should repeat the action
    Create a keyboard shortcut for capturing a frame
    Imagine how this would improve the work-flow.
    All videos stills would be automatically organized in Lightroom.
    You have the original video file linked and can add more stills later.
    You can color correct the stills.
    AND - you can color correct the video.
    I am just wondering how I would export the color corrected video to something like Apple Intermediate to process it further via Compressor for web delivery. I haven't tried this yet. Any ideas?
    I hope my suggestions make sense and find their way in the finished product.
    Andreas

    While in video, using captured frame – my picture is extracted at 19 20 x 10 80.
    Attempting to use this picture in the books module causes resolution problems yet the same picture when used in the print module and save to a picture file causes no resolution problems and becomes 255 0 x 3300 when using it in the book module.
    another improvement would be to set the resolution so it reacts like it does in the print module and adjust the book module similary

  • Upscale / Upsize / Resize - best practice in Lightroom

    Hi, I'm using LR 2 and CS4.
    Before I had Lightroom I would open a file in Bridge and in ACR I would choose the biggest size that it would interpolate to before doing an image re-size in CS2 using Bicubic interpolation to the size that I wanted.
    Today I've gone to do an image size increase but since I did the last one I have purchased OnOne Perfect Resize 7.0.
    As I have been doing re-sizing before I got the Perfect Resize I didn't think about it too much.
    Whilst the re-size ran it struck me that I may not be doing this the best way.
    Follow this logic if you will.
    Before:
    ACR > select biggest size > image re-size bicubic interpolation.
    Then with LR2
    Ctrl+E to open in PS (not using ACR to make it the biggest it can be) > image re-size bicubic interpolation.
    Now with LR2 and OnOne Perfect Resize
    Ctrl+E to open in PS > Perfect Resize.
    I feel like I might be "missing" the step of using the RAW engine to make the file as big as possible before I use OnOne.
    When I Ctrl+E I get the native image size (for the 5D MkII is 4368x2912 px or 14.56x9.707 inches).
    I am making a canvas 24x20"
    If instead I open in LR as Smart Object in PS and then double click the smart icon I can click the link at the bottom and choose size 6144 by 4096 but when I go back to the main document it is the same size... but maybe if I saved that and then opened the saved TIFF and ran OnOne I would end up with a "better" resized resulting document.
    I hope that makes sense!?!?!?!
    Anyway I was wondering with the combo of software I am using what "best practice" for large scale re-sizing is. I remember that stepwise re-sizing fell out of favour a while ago but I'm wondering what is now the considered best way to do it if you have access to the software that was derived from Genuine Fractals.

    I am indeed. LR3 is a nice to have. What I use does the job I need but I can see the benefits of LR3 - just no cash for it right now.

  • Best Practice(s) for Laptop in Field, Server at Home? (Lightroom 3.3)

    Hi all!
    I just downloaded the 30-day evaluation of Lightroom, now trying to get up to speed. My first task is to get a handle on where the files (photos, catalogs, etc.) should go, and how to manage archiving and backups.
    I found a three-year-old thread titled "Best Practice for Laptop in Field, Server at Home" and that describes my situation, but since that thread is three years old, I thought I should ask again for Lightroom 3.3.
    I tend to travel with my laptop, and I'd like to be able to import and adjust photos on the road. But when I get back home, I'd like to be able to move selected photos (or potentially all of them, including whatever adjustments I've made) over to the server on my home network.
    I gather I can't keep a catalog on the server, so I gather I'll need two Lightroom catalogs on the laptop: one for pictures that I import to the laptop, and another for pictures on the home server -- is that right so far?
    If so, what's the best procedure for moving some/all photos from the "on the laptop catalog" to the "on the server catalog" -- obviously, such that I maintain adjustments?
    Thanks kindly!  -Scott

    Hi TurnstyleNYC,
    Yes, I think we have the same set-up.
    I only need 1 LR-catalog, and that is on the laptop.
    It points to the images wherever they are stored: initially on the laptop, later on I move some of them (once I am am fairly done with developing) within LR per drag&drop onto the network storage. Then the catalog on the laptop always knows they are there.
    I can still continue to work on the images on the network storage (slightly slower than on laptop's hard drive) if I still wish to.
    While travelling, I can also work on metadata / keywording, although without access to my home network the images themselves are offline for develop work.
    2 separate catalogs would be very inconvenient, as I would always have to remember if I have some images already moved. No collections would be possible of images including some on the laptop, some on the network.
    Remember: a LR catalog is just a database with entries about images and the pointer to their storage location.
    You can open only 1 DB of this sort at a time.
    There is no technical reason for limiting a LR-catalog - I have read of people with several hundert thousand images within one.
    The only really ever growing part on my laptop with this setup is the previews folder "<catalog name> Previews.lrdata". I render standard previews so that I can do most of the work for offline-images while travelling.
    The catalog itsself "<catalog name>.lrcat" grows much slower. It is now 630 MB for 60'000+ images, whereas previews folder is 64 GB.
    So yes, I dedicate quite a junk of my laptop hard disk to that. I could define "standard"-previews somewhat smaller, fitting to the laptop's screen resolution, but then when working at home with a bigger external monitor LR would load all the time for the delta size, which is why I have defined standard-preview-size for my external monitor. It may turn out to be the weakness of my setup long-term.
    That is all what is needed in terms of Lightroom setup.
    What you need additionally to cover potential failure of drives is no matter of LR, but *usual common backup sense* along the question "what can be recreated after failure, if so by what effort?" Therefore I do not backup the previews, but very thoroughly the images themselves as well as the catalog/catalog backups, and for convenience my LR presets.
    Message was edited by: Cornelia-I: sorry, initially I had written "1:1-previews", but "standard previews" is correct.

  • What is the best Practice to improve MDIS performance in setting up file aggregation and chunk size

    Hello Experts,
    in our project we have planned to do some parameter change to improve the MDIS performance and want to know the best practice in setting up file aggregation and chunk size when we importing large numbers of small files(one file contains one record and each file size would be 2 to 3KB) through automatic import process,
    below is the current setting in production:-
    Chunk Size=2000
    No. Of Chunks Processed In Parallel=40
    file aggregation-5
    Records Per Minute processed-37
    and we made the below setting in Development system:-
    Chunk Size=70000
    No. Of Chunks Processed In Parallel=40
    file aggregation-25
    Records Per Minute processed-111
    after making the above changes import process improved but we want to get expert opinion making these changes in production because there is huge number different between what is there in prod and what change we made in Dev.
    thanks in advance,
    Regards
    Ajay

    Hi Ajay,
    The SAP default values are as below
    Chunk Size=50000
    No of Chunks processed in parallel = 5
    File aggregation: Depends  largely on the data , if you have one or 2 records being sent at a time then it is better to cluster them together and send it at one shot , instead of sending the one record at a time.
    Records per minute Processed - Same as above
    Regards,
    Vag Vignesh Shenoy

  • Using Lightroom and Aperture, will a new ATI 5770/5870 vs. GT 120 improve performance?

    I have a MP (2009, 3.3 Nehalem Quad and 16GB RAM) and wanted to improve performance in APERTURE (see clock wheel processing all the time) with edits, also using Lightroom, and sometimes CS5. 
    Anyone with experience that can say upgrading from the GT120 would see a difference and how much approximately?
    Next, do I need to buy the 5870 or can I get the 5770 to work?
    I am assuming I have to remove the GT120 for the new card to fit?
    Thanks

    Terrible marketing. ALL ATI 5xxx work in ALL Mac Pro models. With 10.6.5 and later.
    It really should be yours to just check AMD and search out reviews that compare these to others. You didn't look at the specs of each or Barefeats? He has half a dozen benchmark tests, but the GT120 doesn't even show up or in the running on most.
    From AMD 5870 shows 2x the units -
    TeraScale 2 Unified Processing Architecture   
    1600 Stream Processing Units
    80 Texture Units
    128 Z/Stencil ROP Units
    32 Color ROP Units
    ATI Radeon™ HD 5870 graphics
    That should hold up well.
    Some are on the fence or don't want to pay $$
    All they or you (and you've been around for more than a day!) is go to Apple Store:
    ATI Radeon HD 5870 Graphics Upgrade Kit for Mac Pro (Mid 2010 or Early 2009)
    ATI Radeon HD 5870 Upgrade

  • Disable\Remove "Check for Update" "Lightroom online" and "Adobe Product Improvement Program"

    Hi,
    I wanted to confirm if it is possible to remove\Disbale the options like  "Check for Update" "Lightroom online" and "Adobe Product Improvement Program"
    under help menu in adobe lightroom 5.3? I intend to deply this application and want these options to be unavailable for the User.
    Kindly suggest, Thanks.

    So far as I know, the only way to make these features non-functioning is to detach the computer from the internet.

  • I cannot get .arw or jpeg files from my Sony A6000 to be taken into my Lightroom 4.4 via the normal "synchronise" process.  I have updated my Pc to Adobe RAW/DNG 8.4 with no improvement.  Can you help please?

    I cannot get .arw or jpeg files from my Sony A6000 to be taken into my Lightroom 4.4 via the normal "synchronise" process.  I have updated my Pc to Adobe RAW/DNG 8.4 with no improvement.  Can you help please?

    With regards to your .arw files:
    You need to either purchase and install Lightroom 5.4 -- OR -- download and install and use the FREE Adobe DNG Converter version 8.4, did you actually launch and use the DNG Converter?
    There should be no problem importing JPG files into Lightroom from your camera, what happens when you try? Is there an error message?

Maybe you are looking for