"Lightroom-type" image editing in Premiere?

Hi!
I use Adobe Lightroom a LOT and I absolutely LOVE the way you can edit the image in the Develop Module. I was wondering if there is any plugin out there that allows you to edit clips in Premiere the way you would in Lightroom? I think this would be the greatest thing in PR!
Thanks!
Martin

There are quite a few, such as Magic Bullet Looks, Colorista, Boris, etc. and plenty of Effects already in PrPro (and AE). Now, because you are dealing with many images (the "Frames"), things are a bit different than just dealing with a single image, even if you are going to use settings to batch process a folder.
That difference between Video and Still Images will likely be where PrPro (and AE) parts ways with Lightroom.
Good luck,
Hunt

Similar Messages

Should I convert my MTS (AVCHD) file to another file type before editing with elements 10

I know premiere elements 10 has project settings for working with AVCHD footage but after doing a bit of reading about how AVCHD (MTS) files are a lot harder for your computer to work with I'm thinking it might be better to convert my raw video files to another video file type before editing with premiere elements 10.
I have a reasonably good computer, but it's only a laptop with 361gb free memory, radeon graphics card, core i5 processor and 8GB ram.
If I should convert these files first what file type should I convert them to without loosing too much video quality and where can I find a program to convert them.
Many thanks
Sally

I have a reasonably good computer, but it's only a laptop with 361gb free memory, radeon graphics card, core i5 processor and 8GB ram.
My granddaughters and I have been using one of those to edit videos taken in (two) Sony and (one) Panasonic cameras. The computer is a mid grade Toshiba laptop that is about three years old. The cameras were purchased after the computer. Our computer does not have a graphics card, but the other specs are about the same.
I know premiere elements 10 has project settings for working with AVCHD footage but after doing a bit of reading about how AVCHD (MTS) files are a lot harder for your computer to work with I'm thinking it might be better to convert my raw video files to another video file type before editing with premiere elements 10.
I didn't read that until after we had made videos. The issue is the project preset that is set when you open a new project. If you guess wrong, PrE10 tells you so when you slide the first clip to the timeline.
There is confusion about AVCHD because there is a 1.0 and a 2.0. The "high" setting for many cameras the last couple of years was 1080p60. That did not become part of AVCHD until last July. Now it is and is called 2.0. PrE10 specs include AVCHD 1.0, so the 1080p60 is "officially" unsupported. I didn't know that, so I tried a few presets when my files were 1080p60. A preset of 720p60 worked best.
The "work harder" part primarily has to do with the preview window during editing. If it is not going smoothly there will probably be a red line above the clip. Pressing "Enter", getting a cup of coffee and patience will make the red line go away and the preview will be smoother. The relationship between project presets and final output is a mystery. My experience is that the presets have only to do with real time preview and little to do with output. Output requires an entire re-encoding for the chosen viewing platform. PrE10 seems to ignore the project presets, uses all the markers set in editing and builds the final products from scratch.
If I should convert these files first what file type should I convert them to without loosing too much video quality and where can I find a program to convert them.
Steve and Bill invest a lot of time here helping people like you and me. But, my experience is that they are wrong. I see no need to convert the files. Conversion always has the risk of loosing a little picture quality. PrE10 seems to handle AVCHD fine. Let it do the final render using the actual source clips.
Sally, consider upgrading to version 11 where AVCHD 2.0 and 1080p60 is included. I have. Processing is a little smother.
Bill
PS: Please, with all due respect to Bill and Steve who work hard here, I disagree based only on experience with 3 cameras and one computer. User experience varies!

How do I convert a bitmap/jpg type image to vector graphics/editable outline?

Corel Draw 5 did this very nicely but it's obsolete and I can't load it onto this machine (HP all-in-one Pavilion desktop with Windows 8).
I am working with hand-drawn images but since I need to manipulate the outline/s with a 4 - 12 pixel tool, it would be great to just be editing nodes instead. Creating the image from scratch as a vector graphic would be a horrible large amount of work and is not feasible at this time.
Is there any way other than Corel Draw 5 to make the conversion from bitmap-type images to editable vector graphics, ie: editable nodes?
Thanks.
PS - I don't have $700 - $1000 to spend on software at this point but do have Photoshop Elements 11, Premiere 11 and Lightroom, plus GIMP and the usual. Where should I start?

For occasional conversions, did you consider 'online bitmap to vector' conversions ? Do a Google search for that.
For more advanced and free solution, consider inkscape. It's a real vector drawing tool and can convert bitmaps.

Images edited in Photoshop not showing up correctly in Lightroom after saving

Hi,
I recvently got Adobe cloud and upgraded from Lightroom 3 to 4. Since the upgrade I have been having issues with Lightroom not correctly displaying images edited in Photoshop. Instead of the photoshop image it creates a new jpeg and displays that in the library. the PSD does not get loaded into the library.
I am taking a jpeg from my library and shoosing the edit in Photoshop function. I am selecting edit a copy, but have tried it with original and with edit a copy with lightroom adjustments as well with the same results.
In Photoshop I am duplicating the base layer, upscaling the image, running some filters, adding dsome adjustment layers.
I save the image in Photoshop format back to the original folder where the initial jpeg was in the Lightroom library. I save it with maximize compatibility on.
When I go back to Lightroom, the catalog displays two files, the initial jpeg and an identical copy to it, NOT the new photoshop file with alterations. If I go to the folder the images are housed in in Finder using the show in Finder command both images link to the same original jpeg. The photoshop edited file is there in the folder but does not show up in Lightroom unless I drag and drop it.
I have turned off all filters and made sure the sort is sorting by name. The image does not automatically show up in Lightroom after editing. Any suggestions?
Thanks for any help!
PS. I did search the topic and there are threads from 2007 and lightroom 2 but their solution was to start from scratch essentially and I have a carefully tagged, starred, and labeled catalog of 30,000+ images and really don't want to do that

Images that are edited in Photoshop will be displayed automatically in Lr only when the image-file saved in Photoshop is the same as the one opened from Lr.
You say you open a JPG from Lr, then edit it in PS by - among other things - adding some layers. Layers are not supported in the JPG-format so you have to either save it as a psd or as a jpg-copy.
In either case this is not the same image file as the one opened in Lr, so it will have to be imported into Lr to show up. If you would flatten your image after editing in PS and then do a <save> to your JPG - not a <save as> - it will show up in Lr.
PS: the only exception is when you open a Raw image from Lr in PS and you save it in PS in the file format specified in Lr for external editing. The saved file will automatically show in LR.
Message was edited by: web-weaver; PS added

Lightroom 5 file edited in photoshop cc 2014 does not appear back next to original after save. Is anyone else having this issue? If so what is the fix. The edited image appears back in lightroom in a new folder.

Lightroom 5 file edited in photoshop cc 2014 does not appear back next to original after save. Is anyone else having this issue? If so what is the fix. The edited image appears back in lightroom in a new folder.

I'm performing a normal "Save", not "Save As". Work flow I'm using is as follows: Select photo in Lightroom 5.7 >" Edit In" Photoshop CC 2014 > (after working on photo is PS) > Save > close PS. Photo returns to Lightroom 5.7 in a new folder rather than next to the original. Prior to purchasing the monthly plan and upgrading to PS CC 2014, I performed this same work flow using Lightroom 5.6 and Photoshop CS6 without any issues.
Just for fun... I attempted to move the edited file back into the original folder. I received a prompt that said the file already existed in the original folder, however I can't see it except the new folder that LR created. I tried several different sort orders, etc without any success.
*** Follow up: Was unable to resolve the issue using Photoshop CC 2014. Uninstalled PS CC 2014 and went back to using Photoshop CS6. Return trips from LR 5.7 to Photoshop is now performing as it should: returning edited photo back to the original folder in LR 5 and placing next to the original image.
Should anyone have a suggestion on getting Photoshop CC 2014 to do the same, I would love to be educated.
Thanks for the help, dj_paige.

How do I save Lightroom image edits in source file?

My experience with the trial version of lightroom is very positive in terms of the convenient and powerful capabilities for editing images and the associated metadata. But I can't find a way to save the "develop" edits to images into the source file for the photo I am working with. So far, I am able to save the metadata into the file but not the image editing. From what I read, I fear this is not possible without silly round about exporting to new files then copying / moving multiple copies around, etc. Without this ability, I am pretty sure I will not purchase lightroom and will miss out on all the powerful features. Without an OPTION that turns on the equivalent of a SAVE button, managing my photos collection would be a nightmare.
So my question is: How do I save the edited (i.e., developed) version of a photo back into the same file where the original photo was stored?
Please, please spare me all the reponses telling me how stupid I am for wanting to do this and that the cognisenti and professionals would NEVER do this. But please just tell me there is a secret place to turn on this option in lightroom.
Thanks in advance.

I had the same requirement to save in JPEGs files all non-metadata edits performed in Lightroom, in order to share modified pictures without duplicating files. By the way, I think it’s going to be more and more required by casual Lightroom users, as people get used to instant photo sharing in many situations where quantity matters more than quality
Here’s a nearly automatic (at least, scalable) solution that works, although it slightly lowers the quality by re-compressing the original pictures.
Once for all:
Download and install the wonderful Lightroom plugin “jf Run Any Command”, provided as donationware by Jeffrey Friedl here: http://regex.info/blog/lightroom-goodies/run-any-command. This “export filter” plugin allows you to run a command of your choice with each exported file, as part of the export while it’s going on. (You may also browse Jeffrey’s blog to find many other useful and beautiful things.)
In Lightroom, pre-define an export settings as follows:
Export to the hard drive, to the original picture folder, without adding the exported file to the catalog
Name the exported file “EXPORTED-{Filename}” (or anything different from the original file name)
JPEG format, 76% quality (see An Analysis of Lightroom JPEG Export Quality Settings at http://regex.info/blog/lightroom-goodies/jpeg-quality)
Keep all metadata
Here’s the interesting part, the Run Any Command settings:
Command to execute for each exported picture: copy "{FILE}" "{Path}\{LIBRARYFILENAME}" (this replaces the original file with a copy of the exported file)
Command to execute upon export completion: del {FILES} (this deletes all exported files).
NB: One could wonder why not directly export with the original file name and silently replace the original files (I believe Lightroom would allow this). It’s just a matter of error handling: in case the export goes wrong, no original file is changed at all.
The easy part: each time you want to save edits:
In Lightroom, select the pictures to save, and export them with the pre-defined settings. You're almost done. The JPEG files are ok, but inside Lightroom you see the modification effects doubled, as their specifications remain in the catalog database and they apply on modified JPEG instead of the original files.
While the entire set of "saved" pictures is still selected, in the Develop module switch Autosync on and click Reinit to erase all modification specifications from the catalog for all pictures, then press CTRL-S to write down to disk any metadata updated by Lightroom -and accept if required to confirm that Lightroom values should replace externally set values.
Stephane
PS: Papa Ben, I'm curious about the decision you finally made

I am having problems opening images renerated in lightroom5 into cs6. Cs6 bridge does not see the lightroom libarary. If I open lightroom and right clik the image, edit in cs6, 6 opens but the picture doesnot follow. What is going on? Give me a hand.

I am having problems opening images renerated in lightroom5 into cs6. Cs6 bridge does not see the lightroom libarary. If I open lightroom and right clik the image, edit in cs6, 6 opens but the picture doesnot follow. What is going on? Give me a hand, thanks.

What edition of LR 5? What edition of ACR does PSCS 6 contain. If they are not parallel (same edition number x in [5 or 8].x ), is LR making a tiff or psd rendition of the image?

Image editing and type

Hope this is probably quite straightforward. First of all,
when you use Captivate to record your screenshots automatically, am
I right in thinking that these images are not stored anywhere as
individual files? Secondly, if you want to edit the images, what is
the best way to take them out and replace them within your
presentation, and should the replaced file be a .bmp or .gif - or
something else?
To confirm the image replacement, all of my images are
'background' so i've currently used the 'Copy Background' command
and pasted into Photoshop. Now i've completed my image editing what
type of file should I save as and how do I get that to be the new
background in the relevant slide?
Thanks,
Richard.

I often use Copy Background, paste into Photoshop, make
edits, flatten,
save as Index (8bit), copy, Paste as Background.
I've not had a problem with unreasonable file sizes with that
method,
but should I, will just save the bmp then import into the CP
project.
Erik
richard.adams wrote:
> Hope this is probably quite straightforward. First of
all, when you use
> Captivate to record your screenshots automatically, am I
right in thinking that
> these images are not stored anywhere as individual
files? Secondly, if you
> want to edit the images, what is the best way to take
them out and replace them
> within your presentation, and should the replaced file
be a .bmp or .gif - or
> something else?
>
> To confirm the image replacement, all of my images are
'background' so i've
> currently used the 'Copy Background' command and pasted
into Photoshop. Now
> i've completed my image editing what type of file should
I save as and how do I
> get that to be the new background in the relevant slide?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Richard.
>
Erik Lord
http://www.capemedia.net
Adobe Community Expert - Authorware
http://www.macromedia.com/support/forums/team_macromedia/
http://www.awaretips.net -
samples, tips, products, faqs, and links!
*Search the A'ware newsgroup archives*
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=macromedia.authorware

Lightroom not showing edits made in ACR

I edited photos in Adobe Camera Raw from Bridge, but when I look at the same files in Lightroom, they do not appear to include the edits. I did verify that xmp files were created when I edited the files in ACR. Why is Lightroom not reading the xmp file and showing the edits?

I appreciate the detailed response. I have been told by a photography instructor that it makes sense to use both Lightroom and Photoshop together and that Lightroom is for end-to-end workflow (which Photoshop is not capable of). I was not aware that Lightroom is only designed for front-end workflow. Is there any formal documentation on this that I can read to understand the purpose of Lightroom?
The Adobe website has some good introductory videos. I think this is a great place to start:
http://tv.adobe.com/watch/george-jardine-on-lightroom/the-lightroom-catalog/
but the other videos can be found behind the Products and Channels links toward the top of that video's webpage.
The recommendation to use Lightroom with Photoshop, rather than LR on its own, is somewhat akin to recommending Bridge + ACR + PS, except it makes less sense to even think of using Bridge+ ACR on thier own without Photoshop. You can do a lot with LR on its own but not quite everything. On the other hand, those specific tasks which you cannot do in LR may be done using some other editing software than PS, including many cheap and even free alternatives, or using older versions of PS even if they are not ACR-compatible with your camera.
When you use Bridge, the Raw conversion and similar types of parametric editing are assigned to ACR and the rest is passed to Photoshop. Bridge cannot directly print or export without calling on another program or utility to do that. It can only view preview thumbnails and manage metadata and issue instructions to other software. ACR cannot paint, warp, use layers, etc - because it belongs to the same basic class of software, as Lightroom's Develop module capabilities.. in fact there is a very close functional correspondence between these two, and deliberately so; so that the image adjustment parameters involved can be inter-compatible.
When you use Lightroom, the Raw conversion and parametric editing can be very efficiently taken care of internally by LR so ACR does not need to be involved. This works especially well for dynamically applying edits across batches of images on the fly, previewing the effect of processing presets (recipes), making use of a full history of the changes applied to each image, and so on, You can print or export directly without leaving the parametric realm, a little as if you were able to do so from inside ACR.
But when an image editing task is required that is not of this parametric kind (such as compositing, detailed retouching other than a little dustspotting, etc) then just as Bridge can pass an image into PS that will be saved as a new file version, Lightroom can also do the same using its own workflow that does not involve Bridge.
The method is very simple: a new LR image version is created based on a brand new working file saved to disk. Ctrl+E or right-click and select "Edit in... Photoshop". and your image as it currently appears in LR, is automatically opened inside PS. Save when you are finished, and the PS-edited changes appear inside LR transparently. Then you carry on working with that, in the same way as for any other image inside LR,
RP

A realistic assessment of your experiences of hardware needed for the type of editing I do please.

Introduction:
I apologise for the length of this post but from experience of reading here, I'm working on the principle of the more I explain about myself now, the less anyone willing to help me will have to ask later.
I have lurked around this forum on and off for a few years, read the various threads in the FAQ section, particularly PPBM5 and What PC to build thread and other related topics around what system to build. I have found them very useful and in particular have enjoyed reading about Harm Millaard's experiences First Ideas for a new system. For about about 12 months I've been delaying upgrading my PC but in Mr Millard's latest updates on his PPBM6 site he talks about new systems and provides a link to Intel's time line which suggests they are in no rush to replace the i739xx series CPU chip - which has I believe amongst other things 2 cores disabled. Normally bitter experience has taught me not to rush out and buy the latest technology but let others "test" it first and then benefit from reduced prices as that model is replaced. However, it now seems like last years technology is going to remain as this years technology and probably the first 2 quarters at least of next year and, if anything, the price of the i739xx series is at best staying at it's existing launch price or even rising. So it's time to take the plunge for me and upgrade.
My current hardware for editing:
I started with Premier 6.5 after I bought it as part of a bundle with a Matrox RTX 10 card - one of the most temperamental pieces of hardware I've had the misfortune to work with. I later upgraded to Premiere Pro 1.5 and edited with that using a Pentium 4 2.6 (overclocked to 3.2), 3 hard drives (no raid) and 4G of memory. The video footage used was avi recorded using a Canon MVX 30i and Panasonic NVGS27 and now I've added the Casio Exilim EX -FC100 (mpeg format) and a Panasonic HDC S90 (AVCHD).
My PC coped with the editing I did with avi footage but couldn't handle AVCHD format and this convinced me to upgrade to Premiere Pro CS5.5. At the same time I switched to editing on a Dell XPS M1530 (Centrino duo chip) - I upped the memory to 4GB, put Windows 7 64 bit home edition on and replaced the existing hard drive with a faster one. In addition I use a SATA Quickport duo attached to my laptop via an eSATA card. However, either the Quickport, eSATA card or XPS is extremely temperamental - I never see two external hard drives, 50% of the time see 1 external drive or none at all - when that happens I edit around it doing things I can with just the one internal drive - but this problem is not my question.
The type of editing i do:
I know people usually say around here not to try editing on laptops and believe me, I understand why, but using this setup I have been able to edit lots of videos - see here for examples of the type of editing I currently do:
http://www.youtube.com/user/PathfinderPro
The equipment test videos place the biggest strain on the hardware when editing. And, to do this editing I have to convert my AVCHD footage in to it's YouTube format before editing and even after I've done that it can be tediously slow to edit and playback even with premiere set to play at 1/4 normal quality. To convert the AVCHD footage to the YouTube format I edit in has to be done over many nights.
Now I am not a professional, I typically edit with up to 4 tracks of video with additional tracks for titles and my target audience is YouTube - which is why I can get away without editing in my prefered option of native AVCHD video format. However, I'm tired of all the waiting, stuttering, and many many days and hours of converting videos into a format I can use so I'm looking to upgrade. My problem is though I'm uncertain what path to take. The PPBM results are dominated by overclocked chips, and whilst the motherboard make and model is listed, the hard disks used, graphic card makes and models and memory modules are not. This is not a criticism of the PPMB tables (big thank you to Bill Gehrke & Harm Millaard for taking the time and effort to pull this much information together) but for me, I am not interested in being in the top 1000 in the world, nor overclocking like mad, and having had horror experiences of using matrox products and compatibility and stability issues with other hardware I'm more interested in compatability and practicality than speed when deciding what to build. I've also read the threads about marvel controllers, dual and quad channel memory support, the pro's and cons of SSD or standard drives, raid setups, the heat problems with overclocking the newer ivy bridge chips and general build advice etc so I'm not coming here without having done some reading first.
The type of system I'm thinking of:
So far based on what I've read here, I've come to the conclusion - but I'm open to suggestion:
- Chip - regrettably due to the cost and unlikely successor anytime soon - a 39xx (with appropriate cooler) because I want to edit in native AVCHD which seems to require the warrior type chip as opposed to the "economical" build regardless of what my target audience is and this suggests
- X79 motherboard (which must have an old PCI slot such as the Asus Sabertooth and which has room for the cooler I'm considering). As I will be carrying over my old terretec DMX 6 fire 24/96 soundcard - all my videos have their audio mastered in Audition using this card - best piece of advice I read was the audience will watch a bad video with good sound editing but not the other way round)
- 4 hard drives plus additional hard drive for operating system using onboard raid controllers (not sure whether the operating system drive will be WD caviar black or SSD and can't justify cost of external raid controller for either my type of use or number of hard drives being used)
- Video card - I can now buy a GTX 580 for less than the 670 - so not sure on the card especially based on Harm Millards observations that memory bandwith seems to be as important as CUDA cores
- Case - I have an Akasa 62 case with room for 5 hard drives - I won't be exceeding that, and if I overclock it will only be by a little so is it really necessary to replace it for a Tower Case - although I would prefer a case with a front connection for esata so I may have to change the case regardless
- Maximum memory 32G - so is it necessary to upgrade to windows 7 professional?
- Power source - I'll work out when I've decided on my components.
Help please:
For me it's video source/dictated software chosen and hardware/audience(youtube) dictates format edited in. As I don't intend to change my camcorders format (AVCHD or mpeg) in the next couple of years and I'm not interested in having the "fastest" system around what I'm really interested in learning is:
what system setups people use now for doing similar editing to me
what make/models of the component parts in your system work well together
and if you do have a bottle neck in terms of hardware, where is it and what hardware would you change to (not a dream model change, just a practical and realistic one)
I have deliberately not given a budget for the changes I'm intending because budget should not be the deciding factor in determining what I "need" to upgrade to for the "type of editing I do" - especially bearing in mind I've got by so far (admitedly at a tortoise pace) with by todays standards a standard spec laptop. Basically I don't want a Rolls Royce to go shopping at Wallmart but I'm tired of walking there and carrying everything back by hand!
Thank you very much for any help / experiences people can share.

Thank you both for your prompt and helpful replies.
Mr Millaard, regarding your excellent article Planning and Building an NLE system, I have read it a couple of times now and it was your article which finally convinced me the time was now to upgrade but within it you said for good reason "Initial choice of CPU: i7-39xx with the intention to overclock to 4.6 - 4.8 GHz", hence my uncertainty about the CPU to use. I have seen a video you posted here - I think it was based on your cats (which I incidently enjoyed) so working on the editing done there (but not remembering if you mentioned what video format you used) and others who have mentioned many pro's for the i7-39xx I was leaning towards that - but I'm financially relieved at least - if the i3770 will do, although now with the possible recommendation by JEShort01 (sorry not sure of the forum etiquette for use of names) of the 2600K overclocked I'm a little bit back in the position of which is more suitable especially with the update to the i3770 being nearer than i7-39xx. This still makes me lean towards the i7-39xx.
Regarding the editing, the match play you can see on the channel is indeed 1 camera basic edits - multiple titles used to provide the score board. However, the coaching videos use mulitple cameras - 3 to 4 sometimes (another reason for upgrading to CS5.5 for the multi cam editing support) and the equipment testing video can use 3 or 4 tracks layered on top of each other other with each track having opacity settings and multiple motion effects and titles with occasional keying video effects added. For example this video at approx 2 mins 50 and 5 mins 10 seconds.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T1E5T7xo57c&list=PL577F7AB5E31FC5E9&index=13&feature=plpp_v ideo
Monitor wise I use dual monitor setup. My laptop screen and I link out to an LG M2394 D for widescreen and I sometimes use an old Neovo F-419 for 3 / 4 editing. I won't be using more monitors than 2. If the 580 drops a bit more I'll probably go for that - although I'll have to make sure it's size isn't an issue for the motherboard combo setup. Interestingly there is a thread shown on the forum home page which discusses the 570 vs the 660ti and the opinion was go with the 660ti which surprised me a bit.
Windows 7 professional it is then - I should have known that too - apologises for asking a question already asked.
"Accepted, your correct criticism of the lacking hardware info on the PPBM5 website. That is the overriding reason that for the new site http://ppbm7.com/ we want to use Piriform Speccy .xml results to gather more, more accurate and more detailed hardware info."
No criticism intended Mr Millaard - more an observation and I really look forward to that evolution with PPBM7. I'm assuming the .xml results will use pre populated drop down lists people can select their hardware from - that way you can control and ensure consistent entries - downside being the work required by you to populate the lists in the first place and maintain them.
Thanks again for your help but I'm still unsure a bit about the CPU and video card though.

How do I move all my 25,000 Lightroom 5 images from an external HD to an internal (ssd) drive on a mac?

I have all my Lightroom (LR) image folders on an external hard drive which is getting full and was always too slow in use.
I want to keep my existing LR catalogue but move ALL the images, previews etc onto my laptop with nice fast ssd.
How??
Any suggestions?
This should be really basic information but I've trawled through pages and pages of comments, tutorials, videos, books but damned if I can see a clear relevant explanation, anywhere!
I have copied the the whole folder containing everything to my laptop drive.
But when I open LR I get no option to locate images, folder etc.
When I open the new folder on my laptop drive I can see all the contents but .lrcat items are not selectable.
What am I doing wrong?

Brilliant ssprengel!!
Sorry for slow reply -hectic.
Your suggestion: Double-click the catalogname.lrcat file to open it in LR.
Perfect, this was THE vital piece of information that I needed!
I couldn’t find this anywhere -or at least failed to see it if I did…
Could authors please, please include this absolutely vital information in their LR guides.
I now have my complete image library working on my laptop -bliss.
It IS faster.
How much I don’t know yet until I get stuck into my next editing task...
Many thanks

A different version of the problem loading raw images edited in LR 3.3 to CS4

I have recently upgraded LR2 to LR3 (now up to 3.3). I have CS4 extended and ACR 5.7. Haven't printed for some months now because I have moved overseas (UK to Malaysia) until yesterday. The printing was a disaster because the colours printed are not as the finished print files. So I have been investigating (calibrated my monitor etc) and then I noticed any LR3 edited Nikon raw file when edited in CS4 carrying across the LR3 settings was so bad and very different to the LR3 version. The nice vibrant LR3 image was dull with inaccurate and toned down colours as though a piece of grey glass had been put in front of it.
So I have read as many of the forum questions on the related issue and have not found an answer or more to the point a solution. I run a MacPro with the latest Snow Leopard OS but all of the fixes I have tried don't change the problem. Is it a compatability problem or an error by me due to some obscure setting or something else? Never had the problem with LR2 and the same Photoshop CS4 software.
I also lost most of my LR2 edit setting for a good percdentage of the edited files when I upgarded to LR3. Don't know if this is related or another problem as now I have to redo all of the files that have lost their edited changes.
I would appreciate any help in solving this/these issues.

The question posted by me has not been answered and I am pulling my hair out trying to have my Lightroom/CS4 image processing work flow that has worked for nearly 2years back to normal.
I might as well not have lightroom as opening a lightroom 3.3 edited image in CS4 removes all of the editing done in lightroom. This appears to be true since I upgraded to v 3.3. As one person who posted in another theme suggested I tried saving a Tiff of the lightroom changes which I did via Nik Efex (I do not know how to save a raw file as a Tiff in LR as I don't do it as part of my normal workflow) but it reverted to the totally unedited version of the raw file when it opened in CS4.
Is there a problem with LR3.3 that Adobe are keeping quiet on. There was no warning when I picked uop the 'updated software' message when I opened LR a short while back. Now I am unable to use either as the processing route I use in LR is very fast compared to CS4 (in my view) and I do not have the time to completely change my work flow. I could revert back to LR3.2 but that may lose all of my editing and cause me no end of problems.
As this is an Adobe forum I thought these problems would be discussed with a lot more answers.

Offline editing in Premiere CS6

Hi!
I'm thinking about to edit a feature film in Premiere putting together all the episodes of my webserie. It's an action webserie and has a lot of cuts. It is in H.264 from 7d so is very difficult to play in real time.
Are there any way to make proxies of the sequence for a more fluid edit and reconnect later with the original files (as you can do in Avid or FCPX)?

Yes indeed!
But you will have to use the fonction "replace with" to files one by one. Then it will relink the low res files to HD files into your timeline.
Denis
Sent from my iPad.
Le 31 mai 2013 à 16:20, JF_Calero <[email protected]> a écrit :
Re: Offline editing in Premiere CS6
created by JF_Calero in Premiere Pro - View the full discussion
Hi Denis, thanks for your help.
Yes, right now I have one of the last MacBook Pro (no retina) but only with 4Gb of RAM. But I originally edit the series in my Macpro (with 24Gb and quadro 4000) and the action sequences still had problem to play well in H.264.
My problem is that I have every episode already edit, although I'll probably change it when I mix all together.
So, I think in this solution following your advice:
•Make a Project manager of the sequences to one folder.
•Batch transcode the resulting clips to a proxy version in another folder, with different name but maintaining the original name of the clips
•Relink the sequences to the new ones
In this way I can easily switch from offline to online version, right?
Please note that the Adobe Forums do not accept email attachments. If you want to embed a screen image in your message please visit the thread in the forum to embed the image at http://forums.adobe.com/message/5368172#5368172
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/5368172#5368172
To unsubscribe from this thread, please visit the message page at http://forums.adobe.com/message/5368172#5368172. In the Actions box on the right, click the Stop Email Notifications link.
Start a new discussion in Premiere Pro by email or at Adobe Community
For more information about maintaining your forum email notifications please go to http://forums.adobe.com/message/2936746#2936746.

Why do I get Media Type "image/ipeg" when uploading a PDF?

I am getting this strange "image/ipeg" media type when uploading with FF (33.0.2 on Mac OS X 10.9.4), instead of "application/pdf." Viewing the request sent using Developer Tools, I get the following headers:
Content-Disposition: form-data; name="test"; filename="test.pdf"
Content-Type: image/ipeg
Looking at mimeTypes.rdf in my that profile, I see
<RDF:Description RDF:about="urn:mimetype:image/ipeg"
NC:value="image/ipeg"
NC:editable="true"
NC:fileExtensions="pdf"
NC:description="Document">
<NC:handlerProp RDF:resource="urn:mimetype:handler:image/ipeg"/>
When creating a new profile and uploading a PDF, I correctly get "application/pdf", and sure enough, mimeTypes.rdf states:
<RDF:Description RDF:about="urn:mimetype:application/pdf"
NC:value="application/pdf">
<NC:handlerProp RDF:resource="urn:mimetype:handler:application/pdf"/>
</RDF:Description>
I have disabled all Add-ons to see if any of them was causing this, but no luck. I suspect it's either some add-on or OS app association (like OS X Preview) that's causing this, but I can't find the culprit.
Has anybody ever encountered this? It's very straightforward to fix, but I would like to understand exactly what is going on because it sounds somewhat wrong to send "image/ipeg" as the Media Type for PDF.

One way that odd content types can be added to the mimeTypes.rdf file is when you are presented with the download dialog (Open/Save/Cancel) for a novel content type and you associate it with a known application. But tracking down the exact site that caused this (assuming it was a misconfigured server) could be impossible.
On Windows, bizarre things also could be incorporated from the Windows registry, but I don't know whether there is anything equivalent on Mac.

Aperture, Photoshop, and Apple's possible direction for Image Editing

All,
After using Aperture now for several days, and reading many different forum topics, in particular this one which speaks of desired enhancements to Aperture:
http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?threadID=253594&tstart=0
there is one thing that really sticks out on my mind. While all of us photographers have slightly different specifics to our workflow, in general they are very similar. And with respect to Aperture, there is one huge area where most of us seem to be hitting the brick wall: image adjustments, and by extension, image file management. Let me explain what I mean.
I think it is a fair generalization to say that the vast majority of serious digital photographers are using Photoshop (or some other image editing app, but I'm just going to refer to Photoshop for convenience) for post-processing of some kind. In using Aperture, and figuring out how to fit it into workflow, we've got this situation of how to move from organization and image library management to the full gamut of image adjusting functionality (photoshop) and back again to library management. The need to use photoshop then exposes the issue of how files are stored on the filesystem, etc. Stay with me here...
I have found myself thinking, and it is pretty clearly demonstrated in the forum topic mentioned above where folks are making suggestions for improvements to Aperture, that there's this barrel people are over in knowing whether Photoshop and Aperture should live in the workflow together, or whether Aperture should (or is intended to) replace Photoshop in the workflow. This got me to thinking about the fundamental question -- what is the intent, i.e. the vision for Aperture? Is it meant to replace Photoshop, or restated, is Aperture meant to be the app in which all image adjustments are to be made, OR is Aperture meant to just ease workflow, and is it intended not to be the primary app for image adjustments, but rather integrate with the primary image adjustment app?
The reason I bring this up is that the answer to this question makes all the difference in what enhancement requests and what people should expect from Aperture now, and in future versions. If Aperture is the primary place for image adjustment, then its obvious that there are some very significant additions that need to take place to Aperture, and likewise, the issue of putting images on the filesystem becomes much less important. However, if Aperture is a workflow-easer, then such image adjustment improvements are minimally important if at all, and filesystem / Photoshop / PSD file integration becomes paramount.
I know what Aperture does, what features it provides, etc. But I can't help but realize that its not really that clear (or I just don't understand yet) what the full scope of Aperture now and in the future is intended to be, and the forum topics are pretty decent documentation of the fact that the user base at this point is fairly cloudy on that too.
I can't help thinking that in the midst of the Apple pro line of tools, where we have tools that edit: video, audio, DVD creation, text effects, and now digital photography workflow, that there's one glaring hole: static image editing, i.e. a direct Photoshop competitor. I went through the Aperture video demos before Aperture shipped, and watched these photo pros talk incessantly about how "now there's an app that addresses how I work -- Aperture". That's great, but Apple has to know the role that Photoshop plays in present photography workflow -- for those pros too. So I'm sitting here thinking to myself, why would Apple roll out such a product with some clear workflow hurdles to common Photoshop usage.
Ok, here's the punchline: does anyone else here have a sneaking suspicion that Apple is not to far off from releasing their own image editing application that's a direct Photoshop competitor? I mean come on, Final Cut Pro, Motion, Sountrack, and by extension of the CEO to Pixar, Renderman. How can you not have a static image adjustment application entering the scene at some point?
I'm curious what others think. I'm just trying to make sense of how to fit the neat stuff I see in Aperture into a workflow that doesn't play very nicely with Aperture at some points (because I'm using Photoshop).
Brad
Powerbook G4-1.33GHz-17" / Powermac G4-1.4GHz Mac OS X (10.4.2) PB: 1GB RAM, Radeon 9600-64MB / PM: 1.25GB RAM, Radeon 9000Pro-128MB

So Apple adds curves adjustments,
we'll need noise reduction, greater sharpening
capability, etc., etc., and then when we have all
those features, surely we'll need masking and select
capability to perform those adjustments selectively,
etc. Where does it end?
Actually that could be a good cut-off point - add a few more/better 'global' adjustments but leave all mask, selection and layer based tasks to external editors. Personally, I used to swear by curves, but haven't really touched them in PS for a year since shooting more RAW and learning how to use the shadow/highlight adjustment properly. Sometimes for overall colour for JPEGs, but that bit can be done just as well in levels.
My workflow isn't particularly typical, but here goes.
Type of photography - stitched panoramas as a professional, plus general snapshots/nature/landscape as hobby. Single user with no network storage.
Currently I use a very organised folder structure in the Finder, along with aliases in DragThing docks for easy access to final stitched files, all with their own unique ID. RAW conversions are done in ACR/PSCS2, or Bibble if I'm in a hurry on the laptop. About 40% of the panos are shot in RAW, 40% are bracketed JPEG and the remaining 20% are 'single' JPEG. The panoramas go through quite a lot of post-processing in PS using a whole series of actions and AppleScripts.
I'm expecting my workflow to look something like this:
1) Download directly into Aperture, possibly with added help from Automator/Applescript when it comes to proper date-based names.
2) Divide download into a new album for each panorama.
2a) If it is a people pano there will be quite a lot of duplicate shots for each panohead position - make a stack for each position and choose picks - this bit will speed things up enormously by itself. Reorder stacks to fit correct order of images going around the scene.
3) Export to TIFF (sometimes JPEG) and stitch using PTMac (sometimes Realviz Stitcher). Oh, and any people who think Aperture is limited, buggy and bad value should go and look at Stitcher - it costs the same, has a far more limited feature set, is on version 5 and by comparison makes Aperture look bug-free.
4) Bring stitched panorama into Photoshop to adjust seams through layers if needed, flatten, final tone adjustments (usually using shadow/highlight), possibly some colour tweaks, sharpen. For bracketed shots I will blend together the three exposures at this point using a custom action - this kind of thing is unlikely ever to make it to Aperture.
5) Bring final print-ready file into Aperture for cataloguing/backup.
5a) If file is too big for Aperture, make a smaller version for cataloguing and store original file in Finder. This gives me a good file for 90% of purposes, with the huge file available with a bit more work.
Too big? I've found that Aperture gets sluggish with files over 18-20,000 pixels wide, and chokes totally somewhere between 25,000 and 32,000 pixels wide - 'image format unsupported'.
To summarise - organise and convert in Aperture, stitch in specialist software, do PS-specific stuff then bring final image back in to join the source images.
Ian

"Lightroom-type" image editing in Premiere?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for