Non-XA behavior in WLS8.1 different from WLS7.0?

Hello,
I recently upgraded from WLS 7 to WLS8.1.
My code that was using EJBs with transactionAttrbute set to Required has a method
that makes calls to 2 databases: one SELECT and another UPDATE.
In WLS7.0 I was using a non-XA driver and there was no error issued.
In WLS8.1 with the same driver I get: Exception: java.sql.SQLException: Connection
has already been created in this tx context for pool named iSitePool. Illegal
attempt to create connection from another pool: GDSPool
I understood this error message when I read in the WLS 8.1 documentation
(http://e-docs.bea.com/wls/docs81/faq/JTA.html#737730) where it states that I
cannot have 2 non-XA connections to different dbs withing a distribute txn even
if EnabledTwoPhaseCommit=true.
However, what surprised me is that this exact same warning is specified in WLS
7.1 documentation also (http://e-docs.bea.com/wls/docs70/faq/JTA.html#738373).
I am not able to understand how my code worked in WLS7.1! Is it that WLS 8.1 just
tightened the screws on a warning that it issued with 7.1?
Before I move to an XA driver, I wanted to confirm that that is indeed the case.
Thanks
Pankaj

Pankaj Tandon wrote:
Thanks for that confirmation. Just to bring this topic to closure..
I found out that I had configured the wrong data source.
In WLS7 we had TxDataSources and regular DataSources, whereas in WLS8.1 there
is a 'Honor Global Transactions' checkbox which means the same thing. The upshot
is that I cannot have 2 TxDataSources in a distributed txn. So, correspondingly,
In 8.1, I cannot have two 'Honor...' set to true in the same distributed txn.Correct. You have it right.
Joe
>
>
>
Joe Weinstein <[email protected]> wrote:
Pankaj Tandon wrote:
Hello,
I recently upgraded from WLS 7 to WLS8.1.
My code that was using EJBs with transactionAttrbute set to Requiredhas a method
that makes calls to 2 databases: one SELECT and another UPDATE.
In WLS7.0 I was using a non-XA driver and there was no error issued.
In WLS8.1 with the same driver I get: Exception: java.sql.SQLException:Connection
has already been created in this tx context for pool named iSitePool.Illegal
attempt to create connection from another pool: GDSPool
I understood this error message when I read in the WLS 8.1 documentation
(http://e-docs.bea.com/wls/docs81/faq/JTA.html#737730) where it states
that I
cannot have 2 non-XA connections to different dbs withing a distributetxn even
if EnabledTwoPhaseCommit=true.
However, what surprised me is that this exact same warning is specifiedin WLS
7.1 documentation also (http://e-docs.bea.com/wls/docs70/faq/JTA.html#738373).
I am not able to understand how my code worked in WLS7.1! Is it thatWLS 8.1 just
tightened the screws on a warning that it issued with 7.1?
Before I move to an XA driver, I wanted to confirm that that is indeedthe case.
Hi. No, in both servers, you should have been stopped from involving
two
DBMSes in a non-XA transaction.. I have not heard of any other case in
7.1 where
two non-XA (jts) connections were allowed to partake in a given tx.
Joe
Thanks
Pankaj

Similar Messages

Why does a new desktop creation unexpectedly initiate with a background differing from the originating desktop? How can I control or eliminate this behavior?

Why does a new desktop creation unexpectedly initiate with a background differing from the originating desktop? How can I control or eliminate this behavior?

CT, I suspect that I either mistated the question or don't understand how to set the default back ground. In any case, with the background that I have set in system settings, and this is the background to which my sessions consistantly boot, new desktops come up for the second or up to the third background with this initially set background. Then in the third or fourth desktop creation (I seldom go beyond four), the background for the new desktop, is one that I was using one or two months ago...

Strange Behavior: VO query result shown in UI different from backend

Hi Experts,
I have an issue with one of the VOs in my application. The VO uses an expert query.
The application uses ADF faces for the front end. The UI is created by dragnDrop method from ViewCriteria(Datacontrol for this VO) to the page.
I would expect the page to always show the data which I would get when I execute the query from the backend.
But the data that comes up in the UI(through the VO and queryPanel, af:table) is different from the data set if I execute the query directly from backend. (Oracle 11G Database)
The issue occurs for one set of data and not for another set of data.
I tried the following:
In VOImpl, the executeQuery method is overridden to add additional filters.
Just before super.executeQuery, captured the getQuery() result.
The query got this way, I am running from back-end(SQLPLUS/Toad) returns expected results, whereas when the Application is run, the UI table shows duplicate data for one set alone.
Please share pointers on how to debug this issue further.
Please note that this post is not about the query but I am illustrating the query here just in case its needed.
The query is something like this:
Fetch rows from maintable that belong to either the set mapping to :bindvariable1 or the set mapping to bindvariable2. This could be represented as a union between the two selects as well.
select
col1,col2,col3...
from main_table, table1, table2
where
(main_table.idcolumn =:bindvariable1
and table1.referencecolumn =:bindvariable1
and table2.referncecolumn =:bindvariable1)
or
(main_table.idcolumn =:bindvariable2
and table1.referencecolumn =:bindvariable2
and table2.referncecolumn =:bindvariable2)
and
maintable.idcolumn2=table1.idcolumn
and maintable.idcolumn3=table2.idcolumn
Thanks for your time and help.
Ganesh Iyer

Do you have a security policy associated with the table?
Oracle 8i supports virtual private database where the server can dynamically modify a query.
The query 'SELECT * FROM EMP' could be modified by the server to 'SELECT * FROM EMP WHERE DIVISION = 'AIRCRAFT' by putting a security policy on the EMP table.
You, as a user, would never know it happened.
A security policy based on some arcane rule such as the time of day could cause the problem you are describing.
The only other way I know of is if you logged in as two different users and each user has different privileges on the table.
Good luck!
null

PS CS5 Image Display Differs From Used ICC Profile In Win 7

Hi,
on my Windows 7 Ultimate x64 machine, I just calibrated my Dell SP2309W monitor using an i1DisplayPro and basICColor 5, creating a ICC v2 profile (I am aware of the problems under Windows with ICC v4 profiles).
It created the ICC profile and applied it to be used by Windows. I double checked under COLOR MANAGEMENT that the new ICC profile is being used. Although I can see that the new ICC is being used (desktop appearance changes), there are a few issues I am experiencing:
(1.) Windows Photo Viewer
The thumbnails in Windpows Explorer look fine (they DO use the new ICC profile), when I double click a jpeg and open the image it DOES NOT use the new ICC profile. When I click the PLAY SLIDESHOW button (starting the slideshow) in the opened image in Windows Photo Viewer, the images DO use the new ICC profile.
(2.) Internet Browsers
All current internet browser (Firefox, IE, Safari and Chrome) DO use the new ICC profile and display the image correctly.
(3.) Photoshop CS 5
When I open the same image - that Windows Photo Viewer does not correctly displays (according to the new ICC profile) - in Photoshop CS5, I get the same image display that Windows Photo Viewer gives me (when not thumbnail or not in slideshow mode) - it appears to be the sRGB display.
My color settings in PS CS5 are: North America General Purpose 2 > sRGB IEC 61966-2.1.
When I go to View > Proof Setup > Monitor RGB I get the image display using the new ICC profile.
Why does the image look different in PS than my calibrated monitor should output ?
I was under the impression (please correct me if I am wrong), that the sole purpose for calibrating my monitor was to get a uniform display across (ICC aware) applications. Even when one applies different color spaces to a document in PS, I thought the output on my calibrated screen done by the graphic card should always be according to my calibration and the settings in the ICC profile being used.
What Am I doing wrong or what am I misunderstanding ?
Any help or input is appreciated !
Thanks.
- M

Hello,
A note on monitor calibration: calibrating your monitor will not guarentee that every application will display color correctly, it's more of a step along the pipeline, and for the preview part of a color workflow it's the last step. Here's how color translation follows for an ICC workflow when previewing to a monitor:
Image Color Numbers > Document Tag or Workspace Profile > Monitor Profile
For non-color managed applications, if the original document is or isn't tagged with a color profile it will be translated directly to the monitor profile anyway. This is the equivalent in Photoshop of selecting "Monitor" in soft proofing. Selecting monitor in softproofing will bypass the tagged or workspace profile to translate colors directly through the monitor profile.
For most automatic color managed applications (like Firefox), the image will be translated through the tagged profile and then sent through the monitor profile. If the image is untagged or the profile is unrecognized, the colors get sent directly to the monitor profile.
For Photoshop, a tagged document will have its profile respected and then sent to the monitor. An untagged document will be assigned the workspace profile, which acts like a temporary document profile, and then gets sent to the monitor. This is often why users will notice Photoshop behaves differently from other applications. It's usually a case of the workspace coming into play. By default the workspace profile is set to sRGB. You can change this in Edit > Color Settings.
The purpose of the workspace is originally for printing workflows, as a way of keeping consistant color translations when dealing with both tagged and untagged documents. For web output workflows it can be useful for viewing everything through sRGB, which is typical of the average monitor output (not so with newer wide-gamut monitors, another source of confusion...) combined with the fact that originally most web browsers were not color managed. Hence viewing everything through sRGB is pretty close to what most monitors see and what untagged/unmanaged docs will look like.
Monitor calibration is useful only because it brings your monitor output to a "known state". In traditional workflows the monitor was always a middle-man, a preview device which was useful for getting an idea of what the printed output would look like before you print it. Since print colorspaces are often smaller than display spaces, it's feasible and useful to narrow down the monitor/display space and calibrate it to a known state, so that even if it doesn't totally match the print, you'll get used to its differences/limitations and they'll be consistent so long as the calibration is maintained.
For web output, your final output is often another user's computer monitor, which can have any form of behavior (most standard monitors are pretty close to sRGB, or use sRGB as an operating system workspace (default monitor profile). Wide gamuts behave differently, but I'm not sure if there's a particular ICC space that they closely match, or if different wide-gamuts are even that close to each other in their display color spaces.
Hope this helps!

JPG colors different from Lightroom Display

I am aware of issues when you try to print an image without taking into account the calibrated color profiles of both the printer and your monitor, but not when it comes to displaying 2 images on the same monitor.
To put it simple: I process an image in Lightroom. I get the desired result, create a JPG out of it.
The JPG is very different from what I had in Lightroom. Much lighter among others.
What would be a potential reason to explain such behavior?

CSS Simon wrote:
You said: "I did click "Reset all default Develop settings" and reimported the JPG. Now it does look exactly the way the original RAW image looks."
So I assume you mean "why is the jpeg displayed in another program not the same as the raw (or the jpeg, for that matter) displayed in LR?". Either the other programs aren't colour managed, or the monitor isn't correctly calibrated and profiled? See Jao vdL's post.
Indeed. Now it makes sense. What totally confused me was when the JPG, reimported in LR, did not look the same as the RAW image. I thought that if LR was color managed, then both images should look the same.
After I clicked the "Reset all default Develop settings", the reimported JPG looks "correct". Not sure I fully understand what happened however
CSS Simon wrote: To your other post: Lightroom uses ProPhoto RGB as its working space during editing, so in Develop Module the image displayed is in that colour space. In Library Module, LR displays the previews which are stored in Adobe RGB, I believe. This is true whatever the colour space of the image. This is of no consequence to the user, as LR is colour managed, and whatever working space is used internally is mapped to the monitor colour space by using the monitor profile. Provided there is a correct monitor profile, that is.
Interesting. So if my monitor is not properly calibrated, it would be possible that the image in the library module could look different from the same image in the development module? Good to know
CSS Simon wrote:
Colour management to an output device uses two profiles: the profile of the image (typically sRGB, Adobe RGB, ProPhoto RGB or usually another standard profile) and the profile of the output device (monitor or printer as appropriate). The colour-managed program uses the two profiles to map the RGB data from the image colour space to the device colour space.
Is your monitor calibrated and profiled with a hardware colorimeter (Spyder, Display One, Color Munki etc)? If not, colour displayed by different programs will not always be predictable (and will usually not be correct). Even if it is calibrated and profiled, only colour-manged programs will display the right colour. Programs that are NOT colour managed (or not properly managed) include Internet Explorer (even IE9), Chrome, most Windows components pre Windows 7 (in W7 the photo viewer is colour managed, the desktop and most other components aren't)...
Not calibrated as of now. Will fix it soon now that it seems that it is the reason behind my problem
What you are saying is consistent with what I had read, and this is actually what confused me the most. Because I read that Firefox was color-managed, but the JPG looked the same in FF, IE, Irfanview and LR (JPG reimported before I clicked the "reset settings" button). So it looked to me like if color-managed (FF) and non-color managed (IE) software would display the JPG the same way, but yet my LR RAW image would look different. When Windows Image Viewer displayed the JPG the same way LR did for the RAW, this is where I got totally lost.

Siebel 8.2 Vanilla SRF different from SRF with Full Get and Full Compile

This has been an issue I've been banging my head on the wall against. Basically, I installed Siebel Public Sector 8.2 in Unix and did so without any problems. I created a Mobile Client, generated and extracted the Database and did a full get using Siebel Tools. I then did a full compile and obtained an SRF file (in my local Windows machine). I compared this SRF file with the existing SRF in the Unix Server and the two files are quite different. The full get + full compile SRF has 519 objects that are modified and new when compared to the server SRF.
Now, here's the kicker. Remember this is a new installation of Siebel, when I use the Vanilla SRF file in the server, the Contact Income View works. Now when I overwrite this Vanilla SRF with the SRF I get by doing a full get + full compile, Siebel crashes when these runtime events happen. Drilldown to a contact (create one if there's none), go to the Income tab, then go to different screen (say Cases or Home). Siebel crashes and creates an FDR file. When I revert to the Vanilla SRF, everything is fine again.
My question is, why are the two SRFs different from each other and why does the full get + full compile create a "malfunctioning" SRF?
Any guidance with this issue will be highly appreciated.
Bernhard

The extract database job ran without any problems. Here are my parameters:
Client Database encryption key: none
Client Name: <mobile client name>
Encrypt client Db password: false
The Mobile client uses the Routing Model: MOBILE CLIENT - EXTRACT ONLY
I also ran the extract database job using the following parameters:
Client Database encryption key: none
Client Name: <mobile client name>
Encrypt client Db password: false
Extract all Repositoryt Tables: true
but it resulted in a failure when I did a full compile.

Why are emails downloaded with the subject and from address different from what is actually in the email?

The subject and from address listed in the message pane are totally different from what is in the actual email, viewed either in the preview pane or when the email is opened. The emails are correct when viewed online. For example:
Email subject A from Sender A - email A
Email subject B from Sender B - email B
Email subject C from Sender C - email C
After downloading to Thunderbird:
Email subject A from Sender A - email A
Email subject B from Sender B - email B
Email subject C from Sender C - email A *** Subject and Sender for C but is actually email A
This started happening within the past month and appears to be random. Sometimes everything is correct. But more often there are a few that exhibit the above behavior. I have multiple email address downloading from the same domain but this problem seems to occur ostly with my main email account.

Try to rebuild the index file of the troubled folder.
Right-click the folder - Properties - Repair Folder

Is it possible to sort dimension values in order different from alphabetic?

Is it possible to sort dimension values in order different from alphabetic. То use this sorting in BI Beans. In 10g r2 with awm 10.2.0.2. I try to add attribute like it was show in this forum, but nothing changes.

Could be usefull if you use java AW api... here's the java code I'm using to create the sort_order attribute
Dimension myDim = yourAW.findDimension("DIMNAME");
Attribute myAttr = myDim.createAttribute();
myAttr.setName("freename");
myAttr.setClassification("DEFAULT_ORDER");
myAttr.setIsDefaultOrder(true); // TO NOT FORGET
myAttr.setDataType("INTEGER");
myAttr.Create(AWConnection);
globalAW.Commit(AWConnection);
It creates a variable - integer - that defines the default order of the dim values. I'm viewing it with AWM and BIBeans. The order is respected with Level-based and Value-based hierarchy but my hierarchies are really simple and unique for all the dimensions.
BUT !!!! Be carefull, if you don't have any hierarchy in your dimension, you must have at least one level - the default NONE level. Otherwise, it won't work ???

Portal 902. Uploaded document differs from downloaded document.

We are currently trying to set-up a portlet, which would include items (documents, images etc.). The problem we faced in that process is related to portal's storing process. We uploaded a pdf-file (Java API Guide from otn.oracle.com) as a simple file. Then, attempting to open the same file from portal, we got different errors: "the file is damaged and could not be repaired", "error reading xref entry" etc. Since these errors refer to acrobat reader and browser conflict we turned that "open in browser" option off in Adobe Acrobat. After this, the situation did not improve. Still, it was possible to download the document from the portal as a file. We downloaded the file and made a binary comparison. The result was quite intereseting since the size of both (uploaded to portal and downloaded from portal) was the same (210 Kb) but the content was different. I will add also a excerpt from that downloaded file that differed from the initial file. How could we avoid similar problems in the future? Thank you.
366 ;
Font-Weight : Bold ;
Text-Decoration : none ;
Font-Family : Arial, Helvetica
Font-Size : 10pt ;
.PortletHeading2{
Color : #003366 ;
Font-Size : 9pt ;
Font-Weight :
Bold ;
Text-Decoration : none ;
Font-Family : Arial, Helvetica ;
.PortletHeading3{
Color
: #003366 ;
Text-Decoration : none ;
Font-Weight : Bold ;
Font-Family : Arial, Helvetica
Font-Size : 8pt ;
.PortletHeading4{
Font-Weight : Bold ;
Font-Size : 7pt ;
Font-Family
: Arial, Helvetica ;
Color : #003366 ;
Text-Decoration : none ;
.PortletSubHeaderColor
Background-Color : #CCCC99 ;
.PortletSubHeaderLink{
Font-Size : 8pt ;
Font-Family :
Arial, Helvetica ;
Color : #003366 ;
.PortletSubHeaderText{
Color : #003366 ;
Font-Family :
Arial, Helvetica ;
Font-Size : 10pt ;
Text-Decoration : none ;
Font-Weight : Bold ;
PortletText1{
Color : #000000 ;
Text-Decoration : none ;
Font-Size : 10pt ;
Font-Family :
Arial, Helvetica ;
.PortletText2{
Color : #000000 ;
Text-Decoration : none ;
Font-Size :
9pt ;
Font-Family : Arial, Helvetica ;
.PortletText3{
Color : #000000 ;
Font-Size : 8pt ;
Font-Family : Arial, Helvetica ;
Text-Decoration : none ;
.PortletText4
Color : #000000 ;
Font-Family : Arial, Helvetica ;
Font-Size : 7pt ;
Text-Decoration :
none ;
.RightCurve{
.LeftSubTabid19siteid0{
Background-Repeat : no-repeat
Background-Position : left top ;
Background-Image :
url(http://192.168.87.111:7777/images/FFFFFFsl.gif) ;
Background-Color : #336699
Background-Attachment : scroll ;
.LeftTabBgSlantid19siteid0{
Background-Image :
url(http://192.168.87.111:7777/images/FFFFFFtl.gif) ;

I am having the exact same problem on 10.1.4. I have a pdf on my desktop which opens fine in Acrobat reader (v 7.0). I upload it to my portal page as a file and when I click on the link I get the "this file is damaged and cannot be repaired" message. I downloaded the portal version of the PDF and an extra 66 bytes had been added to it.
I only get this in my live environment as the file uploaded OK in user test. I have uploaded other PDF files and they can be viewed OK.
Has anyone come across and fixed this in the six years since the original post?
Thanks,
Steven.

IO 229 - Batch for serial number 1234 (BBB) differs from document batch AAA

Hello All,
We use batch management for serialized materials only at our central plant. For all other plants, there is no batch control. Sometimes we need to return materials back to the central plant but with a different batch number.
When we do two step stock transfer 303 / 305, we receive the following error message if we don't use the original batch number.
"IO 229 - Batch for serial number 1234 (BBB) differs from document batch AAA".
However, when we use one step plant to plant stock transfer 301, there is no error message. The batch number is also updated correctly in IQ02.
I wonder if there is any configuration to use 303 / 305 with different batch numbers.
Thanks,
Hakan

Thanks Arminda.
64044 recommends to use 309 to change the batch, which works but this is an additional step.
Currently 1 step plant to plant transfer i.e. 301 doesn't require this additional step. It updates the batch information with no problem.
Is there any configuration option to change the behavior of 305, so that we don't have to do an additional movement?

DB Connect - different from length in database between length in DDIC

Hi Gurus,
We use BI 7.0 SP18.
We build DB Connect to other Oracle database.
I'd like to see the database tables in RSA1/SourceSystems/DB Connect/Current connection. In Additional Functions/Select Database tables (3.x)
After the table selection Edit DataSource and I can see the field structure of the table. My problem is the following:
The Length in Database different from Length in DDIC. Why? How can I solve this problem?
The different is the following:
field1:
Type: Char
Length in Database: 200
Length is DDIC: 67
field2:
Type: Char
Length in Database: 100
Length is DDIC: 33
field3:
Type: INT4
Length in Database: 22
Length is DDIC: 4
etc.
Thanks for your helps!

It can be character code table problem? For example, the source system store data in non-unicode format, but the BI 7.0. store data in unicode format? How can I try to check or fix it?

Why does an Inbound IDoc no change and differs from an Outbound IDoc no?

Hi Experts,
This seems to be a basic question..! But can someone kindly clarify why an IDoc number gets changed when sent from one R/3 system to another R/3 system and how does this happen???
i.e., whenever an IDoc was triggered from R/3 system A to R/3 system B through XI/PI, the Inbound IDoc number (in system B) differs from the Outbound IDoc number (in system A)... Why does this happen and how???
Thanks in advance!
Br,
G@nesh

Hi Ganesh,
The IDOC numbers are always Unique,
IDOC can be generated in SAP system as a result of internal testing (WE19), or
can be posted from a non sap system (say PI).
So every time a new IDOC comes, it is assigned a new number to avoid confusion and also this plays a
critical role in the end to end testing and validation.
If you look at the control record of the IDOC you can see a element called DOCNUM. this stores to actual IDOC number.
from PI side you can use IDX5 and in ECC We02/05 to notice the idoc numbers.
Regards,
Srinivas

I talked to your guys yesterday about installing correct version of Lightroom 5 which I legally owned, and your guy provided me a download link (different from Creative cloud account), but somehow it was for Windows version not for Mac version. I would ve

I talked to your guys yesterday about installing correct version of Lightroom 5 which I legally owned, and your guy provided me a download link (different from Creative cloud account), but somehow it was for Windows version not for Mac version. I would very much like to download a Mac version, so please send my correct web link. By the way my s. number for Lightroom 5 up is [removed], and I also have s.number for 4 up and 3 full.

The latest non-CC version of LR 5 is 5.7.1 and download links are available on the Adobe Updates page:
http://www.adobe.com/downloads/updates/
Both Mac and Win links are there.
If you are asking for a LR 5 CC link, which wouldn't require a serial number, please be more clear about that.

Colours in result vastly different from preview

I've just installed the latest Photoshop CC. Whenever I go to Image → Adjustments → Anything, the result turns out to be completely different from what I see in the preview. For example, when I use Hue to colourize a picture:
If I do the same using the corresponding adjustments layer, I get the same result as in the preview on the screen, but as soon as I save the picture to a non-psd format, the colours are off again.
It is impossible to work like that. Do you have any idea why this happens? I should note that I work in the standard RGB mode, and the "Proof Colors" option is disabled (but if I enable it, the results are the same).

Well, I construed "preview" to stand for Apple's Preview Application. Not my bad this time, but yours.
Next time, please provide a lot more details when you post:
BOILERPLATE TEXT:
Note that this is boilerplate text.
If you give complete and detailed information about your setup and the issue at hand,
such as your platform (Mac or Win),
exact versions of your OS, of Photoshop (not just "CS6", but something like CS6v.13.0.6) and of Bridge,
your settings in Photoshop > Preference > Performance
the type of file you were working on,
machine specs, such as total installed RAM, scratch file HDs, total available HD space, video card specs, including total VRAM installed,
what troubleshooting steps you have taken so far,
what error message(s) you receive,
if having issues opening raw files also the exact camera make and model that generated them,
if you're having printing issues, indicate the exact make and model of your printer, paper size, image dimensions in pixels (so many pixels wide by so many pixels high). if going through a RIP, specify that too.
etc.,
someone may be able to help you (not necessarily this poster, who is not a Windows user).
a screen shot of your settings or of the image could be very helpful too.
Please read this FAQ for advice on how to ask your questions correctly for quicker and better answers:
http://forums.adobe.com/thread/419981?tstart=0
Thanks!

NIKON D5000 NEF - Lightroom 2.6 and PSE show colors quite differently from what Nikon Software show

With my Nikon D5000 DSLR camera, I took recently photos from small blue flowers. I had set-up my Nikon D5000 to create for every photo both a NEF File and a JPEG File (and had set my camera to use Automatic While Balance).
I noticed that for NEF Files Lightroom 2.6 (and also PSE 7, that uses internally Camera RAW ) shows me the blue colors of the flowers quite differently from what I see with PSE for the jpeg file. It is my impression, that it is in the Jpeg files, that the blue color is close to the reality; and that it is with the NEF Files that Lightroom and PSE show a blue color that is quite different from the reality.
I also looked at the photo files with the NIKON "View Nx" 1.3.0 Software that came with my camera. With "View Nx" the blue colors (both with the NEF file and the Jpeg File) are very vlose that what i see with PSE 7 in the jpeg file (and quite different from what I see with LR and PSE for the .NEF File).
I mentioned this problem to Nikon Support. They suggested, that Nikon Software and Adobe software use different algorithms; and that the Nikon algorithms are better/closer adapted to the Nikon cameras than the more generalized Adobe algorithms that need to support a very large number of cameras.
But ....it is Lightroom that i wish to use to process my NEF Files and PSE that I wish to use to organize my Photos. Can a LR/Camera-RAW expert help me? I would like to find a solution to see with LR and with PSE in my D5000 NEF Photo Files blue colors that are close to the reality and close to what Nikon Software shows me on my PC. Please notice that I am very far away from being a professional and that i will probably not understand complicated explanations.
Thanks a lot in advance.
An additional note, that is perhaps not relevant: I used LR to convert my NEF File into a JPEG File format and looked at the blue in the result. It looks the same as what LR and PSE show me for the .NEF File (and looks different from the jpeg file crreated by the NIKON camera).

EJ and Jim
Thank You very much for your useful feedback.
I realize, that as a neophit I am an exot among the community of photo-experts and photo-professionals addressed by LR. Therefore the wish that I will now express is perhaps inadequate. But since it is gently, that i express this wish, I am probably allowed to do so......
My wish for a future version of LR, is that LR comes out of the box with a "reasonable" interpretation of the RAW images of most important/widespread modern cameras....without requiring that non-experts like me gets confronted from the very beginning with the need to develop their own default settings.
For this wish, I will formulate a Feature Request.
You might wonder, why a non-expert like me is interested in LR instead of using those Photo-Editing Software (e.g. PSE) that are supposed to address the need of non-experts. Well..... I am coming from the PSE world. I am reasolnably happy with the PSE Organizer....but I hate the complex, inefficient, unfriendli "user-interface" (experts will probably tell: workflow-interface?) of the PSE Editor. Its really a last-century Software. LR is so much more friendly, even for non-experts...within the Library Module, i do not need to switch back and forth between one dialogue-window for each type of change.... nearly all what i need is in that one right-hand pane of the Library module.
I honestly believe, that Adobe should take a serious look at promoting/marketing LR also to the audience of non-experts. That would be a good and attractive additional marketing opportunity for LR.

Non-XA behavior in WLS8.1 different from WLS7.0?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for