Option to add Virtual-Copies to DNG -exists?

Option to add Virtual-Copies to DNG -exists?
..or only "convert virtual-copy-into-DNG" ?
( ..Not what I consider acceptable option :
Evolved (history)states of virtual-copies could be copied back temporarely to the original file's history, then "save as a snapshot" (then not forget that you do have such snaphots), then come back in its history stage befor pasting/or synchronizing and perform an insifignant change -in order to keep different versions of that photo...)

Same problem here.
/usr/lib/vmware/bin/vmware: /usr/lib/vmware/lib/libpng12.so.0/libpng12.so.0: no version information available (required by /usr/lib/libgdk_pixbuf-2.0.so.0)
/usr/lib/vmware/bin/vmware: /usr/lib/vmware/lib/libgcc_s.so.1/libgcc_s.so.1: version `GCC_4.2.0' not found (required by /usr/lib/libstdc++.so.6)
/usr/lib/vmware/bin/vmware: /usr/lib/vmware/lib/libpng12.so.0/libpng12.so.0: no version information available (required by /usr/lib/libcairo.so.2)
/bin/bash: /usr/lib/vmware/lib/libgcc_s.so.1/libgcc_s.so.1: version `GCC_4.2.0' not found (required by /usr/lib/libstdc++.so.6)
/usr/lib/vmware/bin/vmware: error while loading shared libraries: libexpat.so.0: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory
However, when running as root vmware works, but browsing for a VM does not.
(vmware:7926): libgnomevfs-CRITICAL **: gnome_vfs_uri_unref: assertion `uri != NULL' failed
(vmware:7926): libgnomevfs-WARNING **: Cannot load module `/usr/lib/gnome-vfs-2.0/modules/libfile.so' (/usr/lib/vmware/lib/libgcc_s.so.1/libgcc_s.so.1: version `GCC_4.2.0' not found (required by /usr/lib/libstdc++.so.6))
Permissions/path/module issue?

Similar Messages

Virtual copies and DNG files

I may have completely misunderstood something, but I thought the metadata in a DNG file was contained within the file. The virtual copy function in LR1 is very interesting for making different versions of the same image, but if the image metadata for the virtual copies is in XMP files, does this preclude the use of this function with DNG files?
Martin

Thanks. So the XMP metadata block in a DNG file will just contain any non-destrictive edits made on the original file. The information about any edits in virtual copies are then in accompanying files (XML?). Or is this information only contained within the Lightroom database?
I am just trying to understand how the information is stored and if it is accessible to other applications.
Martin

Option to purchase lossless copies of your existing iTunes library files

Hello all-
Does Apple still offer an option in iTunes to upgrade your existing lossy MP3 files to their lossless version? I believe that I read a few years back that they offered this option. It might have been .59 or .99 cents a song--can't remember. If so, was it for songs only purchased from Apple or any song in your library?

AS far as I know Apple has never offered lossless tracks in the store, you must be thinking of iTunes plus.
There is an explanation here:
http://support.apple.com/kb/ht1711
There is a link on the page to take you eligible upgrades. At the moment, I don't see how to get there directly from iTunes but there must be a way.

Lightroom Virtual Copies when creating publish gallery

When I create a publish gallery, I have the option of creating virtual copies. However, I notice the virtual copy stays with the original image, along with showing in the publish gallery. I would have figured the copy would only show in the publish gallery. Since I can't immediately tell where the vitual copy is linked to, it makes it confusing sometimes if I go back to re-edit. I want to isolate the photo from the orignal copy so lightroom doesn't want to republish any future edits to that file. Using lightroom 3.6. I've searched on this behavior and haven't found any helpful information.
Any suggestions on how to more effectively use this in my workflow?

With "publish gallery" you mean a collection under a Publish Service?
I have not checked with LR4.2 how this behaves, but with normal collections you should get only the virtual copies as members.
But you can remove the masters from the collection, using the filter: when in the collection, choose only master files in the filter bar, no virtual copies nor videos. Then select them all and choose simple delete: this will not remove from catalog ( as a splash-delete would do), but simply revoke their collection membership. Unlock the filter and you should have only the virtual copies left in your collection.
Cornelia

Are Virtual Copies saved in Backups? How do I insert a backup into an existing catalog?

Are Virtual Copies saved in Backups? How do I insert a backup into an existing catalog
I deleted a tif image file that I didn't intend to, which had several LR virtual copies created from it. The virtual copies had a lot of important history that document my print preparation edits. Are these virtual copies saved in the LR backups?
If so, how can I insert them into the catalog I am using? I have made a lot of edits in the two days since my last backup and don't want to lose that history either. Do you suggest I make a current backup before retrieving files from my last backup? I know I'm supposed to go to the backup location and open the last backup, but how do I blend that with the current work from the last 2 days?
Any help would be most appreciated. Thanks, Tom

Rob,
That was exactly what I was after. However, I'm still having trouble getting the virtual copies imported. The master file was in my trash, I restored it to the original hard drive folder. Before I got your message I re- imported it to LR but of course LR came up with a new name since I was importing from and saving it to the same folder in LR. And of course no copies. This may have been a mistake, but before starting the procedure you described, I re-named the master file (it seemed that the import from backup would re-create it so I didn't want a conflict).
Then I did what you said and used the 'Import From Another Catalog' feature. I found the virtual copies in the backup and checked them. But when the import completed, the it gave me file names xxx/Copy1, xxx/Copy2 but there was no image or history or metadata. When I tried to find the folder containing the files, it said it couldn't be found. So I missed something in the settings. When I tried again, there was a warning saying the file(s) exists in the catalog and its settings differ. I went ahead anyway and the message I got was "No Photos in previous import"
Here's what the import from backup shows:
A box with catalog contents and all the folders and files within them, that you can check.
A New Photos section, which gives 2 file handling choices: a)add new photos to the catalog without moving them or b) don't import new photos
A Changed existing photos section with 2 replace options: a) nothing or b) Metadata and develop setting only. If you choose this you can check a box to preserve old settings as a virtual copy.
Not sure what to do. I changed the master file back to its original name, but that didn't make a difference. Suggestions? Thanks, Tom

A way to merge edits in virtual copies back the the original dng

I have a large set of images from a recent job (all with varying edits). My client if there was a way to take the final set of images an apply a variety of different lightroom edits to compare against the original set. I made selected my full set of original dng files and created several virtual copy sets and placed them in separate collections. After making a variety of tests the customer has decided on one of the virtual copy sets. Is there a way to merge the edits in the virtual copy set back to the original dng files? Is there a way to make a virtual copy set into its own set of dng files.
Jim

Is there a way to make a virtual copy set into its own set of dng files.
A very quick way is to either export originals (or as dng, which does the same thing in this case) on the virtual copy set, which will give you a folder on your harddisk with "edited" dngs (I quote this because there is no such thing as edited dngs. The RAW data is untouched, there is just a develop recipe along with a jpeg preview saved into the file). Another way is to export the collection of virtual copies to a new catalog. You can include the originals if you want, or you can simply leave them in place if you don't want to double the needed storage space. You'll get a new catalog with just the virtual copies in it, but they will be masters at that point. Then you write metadata to file from this newly exported catalog.

Find and export Virtual Copies: Easy to add and ( i would argue) Necessary

I haven't found an easy way to go back and easily select all virtual copies in a library in order to export them.
A virtual copy is easy to miss and sometimes its hard to remember where you made changes in a large collection.
There needs to be a search option for file types in LightRoom that can find the virtual copies and allow them to be collectively exported as real copies.
If not a search function, then please simply insert a "save all virtual copies" option in the export area. Perhaps it could have the option to export all to their respective original file's folder OR to a designated edits folder with some tag to refer to the original location.
I would very much appreciate an official adobe contact if at all possible :-/

You can filter out Virtual Copies using a button on the filter bar located in the bottom right corner of the Lr application window (just above the filmstrip). Click a folder (folder panel) to narrow the filter to a specific folder or subfolders or the top most folder to show all virtual copies. You'll also find the second button will show only Master photos.

'Virtual' Copies to (optionally) start all settings from 0

I would like to have the ability to make a 'virtual' copy that looks like the current image, except that all the sliders/settings start at 0. This is different from making the original virtual copies and resetting the sliders/settings, which would just bring it back to the imported version. This is like actually having a virtual copy of the current image as it is, rather than a virtual copy of the original image with the same settings applied - a subtle but very important difference.
The reason for this is so that presents would be A LOT more useful. Say you have a preset for B/W that'll kick up the exposure to +0.5 and the blacks to 20. If you had to do that in the first place just so the image looks 'normal', then applying the preset may not actually do anything for you - some shots may need a +1 exposure adjustment on their own, so that in effect the preset should result in a +1.5 exposure adjustment over the original, whereas if you apply the preset to the current implementation of Virtual Copies, you end up dropping to +0.5 instead of actually going up an additional +0.5
To get around this and to have some consistent results in my images (by using presets), my current workflow is driving me crazy. I end up importing all my RAWs, adjusting exposure, contrast, etc., and then exporting the files to JPG. Then I import them all, and apply my presets, but that's so tedious and I have to export twice.
Please, please help and implement this.
Thanks for listening. I love the product, btw
PS - Another way to get around this would be to allow the option for presets to be relative rather than absolute. Ex: The B/W preset will do an actual increase of 0.5 to the exposure and an increase of 20 to the blacks. That would be great too, and might actually be preferrable.

This seems to be a very frequently requested feature, and fo rus it would certainly be the #1 missing functionality.
We use Lightroom to work on large batches of event/wedding photographs, all taken in RAW format.
1. With current 'absolute' presets, there's no telling what it will do to any given photograph: a "antique photograph" preset will do wildly different thing to a photograph under tungsten, as to a photograph under sunlight or fluorescent or flash.
2. Similarly, our workflow is interrupted: instead of being able to colour/exposure correct all images and then apply a preset to this _fixed_, 'normalized' version, for consistency of look; we have to play with images one by one, or go to workarounds like export/import: all of which defeat the point of Lightroom as a workflow-enhancing app.

How do I add a red tag in mavericks? I deleted an existing red tag, now I don't have the option to add it back in.

How do I add a red tag in mavericks? I deleted an existing red tag, now I don't have the option to add it back in.
I tried doing this from Finder > Preferences, but there doesn't seem to be a way to add new tags.

Look in the Finder tool bar to add
MacBook Pro (15-inch Mid 2012), OS X Mavericks (10.9), i7 500GB 16GB RAM iPhone5 iOS7.0.3

Virtual Copies - Unable to add to collections

Virtual copies will not appear in either quick collections or created collections when added although the library panel (for quick collection) or collections panel indicates an image has been added. Anyone notice the problem?

I'm having the same issues.
I select a photo in the Library's grid view, right-click it (I'm running Windows XP) and select "Create Virtual Copy."
The grid's view remains the same (no new 'copy' of the picture with the little earmark appears) and on the Film Strip, I see a new gray box at the end of the strip, but no picture is in the gray box. If I click the gray box, nothing happens.
If I try to create another virtual copy (of same photo or a different photo) the same behavior happens again (no change to the grid, and yet another gray empty placeholder where a new photo should appear).
Am I creating virtual copies incorrectly???

Stacking Disabled & No Virtual Copies

I am not sure if I did this to my software or not. I can no longer stack photos - the stacking options no longer appear in the context menus and the main menus are grayed out. I can edit and work with the photos otherwise no problem EXCEPT that creating virtual copies doesn't result in a copy either in LR and no additional XMP file outside either. Anyone resolved this and/or is there an idiot box someplace where I've inadvertently shut stacking off?

Yes my VCs have keywords - checkmarks show up no problem.
In case 1. I click on a Keyword tag - 39 images show up in the grid and the number next to the Keyword reads "39". I select the last image in the grid and create VC. Number of images in the GRID reads 39 but the counter next to the keyword now reads 40. The grid is sorted by Filename in ascending order and there are no filters applied (i.e. the filter bar is disabled). When I toggle to the folder view that contains these images I see both original and VC stacked and I can unstack them - edit one and verify that the keywords match. But when I return to the Keyword view which still has the number 40 next to it I still only get 39 images in the GRID and no sign of the VC or that one even exists!
In case 2 I start by making VC in the folder view but I get the same results. My VC's won't show up in the keyword tag views stacked or otherwise. I just assumed this was connected to stacking limitations. Do people get a different result for this process?

Naming Presets for Virtual Copies and PS Edits

I'm new to Lightroom 4.1 and have been setting everything up... I'm having trouble with figuring out an efficient, clear naming system to distnguish Virtual Copies and Copies Edited in Photoshop. I tried using the "File Template Editor in the external Editing window... but I find it VERY confusing. Can anyone recommend a system and the way to enter it as a Preset in the File Template Editor.
My Image File Naming is as follows: KOBRIEN_YY_00001.dng
Thanks in advance for all suggestions!

Best to set the Rename Template from within the 'External Editing' panel of Lr Preferences. The format should be along the lines shown in screenshot. You add the custom text after the template has been saved.
Above should work OK for photos edited in Photoshop, but Virtual Copies are a different beast and can't be renamed using templates. If you do try it the master is renamed, not the copy. The thing is, VCs must have the same base name as the master. However, you can manually edit the Copy Name field in Library Metadata panel.

Virtual copies are not synchronized in a second Lightroom catalogue although metadata are written in XMP and synchronization with metadata was selected

Dear community,
I operate one Mac with Lightroom 5.7 that is configured to store all metadata in xmp files. The Lightroom catalogue is stored locally on the Mac and only contains references to the images and their xmp files that are stored on a network device. There is another Mac with the same configuration having a separate local Lightroom catalogue and access to the same images on the network device.
At a starting point, both Lightroom catalogues are identical - they refer to the same images on the network device and contain the same metadata.
When I update image properties on the first Mac, these changes are reflected in the xmp file. After using the option "synchronize" with activated "metadata synchronization" on the second Mac, the modified image properties are visible on the second Mac. This is fine.
However, when I create a virtual copy on the first Mac, I realize that the corresponding xmp file gets updated. However, even after synchronization, the virtual copy is not visible on the second Mac. I may modify image properties of the original image and get these modifications replicated to the second Mac, but the virtual copies remain on the first Mac.
What needs to be done that also virtual copies get synchronized?
Thank you very mich for your support.
Best regards,
Peter

I do not doubt that File Export / File Import will work to transfer the virtual copies.
My question was related to the fact whether the imported folder should not previously exist on the second Mac.
Consider the following situation:
time = 0:
first Mac: folder A is in a first status
second Mac: folder A is in a first status
time = 1:
first Mac: folder A is in a second status, export folder A in second status
second Mac: folder A is in a first status, import folder A in second status
My question is: What happens with these two folder A on the second Mac? Does folder A in the Lightroom catalogue of the second Mac gets overwritten? Do I receive an error message because folder A is already present in the Lightroom catalogue?
I understand your answer that everything will be fine on the second Mac if there is no folder A at all at the second Mac while I import the new folder A. Under this assumption, I can import folder A and it will show the second status. Clearly.
My question is only related to the fact that there is already a folder A on the second Mac, with the same images, but with different metadata and/or virtual copies.

Virtual Copies come first in exported files?

Is there a good reason why virtual copies, which come after the original file in the Library, are named in a way that causes them to come before in the exported set of jpegs? IE - ogfile.jpg and ogfile-2.jpg. When sorted by filename, the virtual copy is first! This totally counterintuitive. The original files should get a -1 suffix or the virtual copy should be named sequentially. Or am I missing something?

I guess we will have to agree to disagree on this!
I suppose I should add that I generally have a manually ordered final set of files - edited, complete with virtual copies, ordered, and, as a last step, batch renamed in the Library (Custom_Name + #Sequence), to take on the new order. In this case, I don't think it's unreasonable to expect the exported set to be identical to the Library arrangement. After all, I do take care in putting everything in a consistent, coherent order, so my clients can make sense of their (gigantic) image sets.
So my options to acheive this are as follows 1) add a -1 to everything (huge sets with hundreds if not 1,000+ images) 2) manually add a -1 to the original file, requiring changing (and changing back!) the custom rename settings, or renaming from Bridge and syncronizing 3) manually rearrange the exported jpegs, batch rename (again!).
Or, alternatively, Lr could 1) rename the files in such a way during the batch rename in the Library, that will hold their order after export (ie treat the VC as a unique file, at least for renaming purposes) 2) add the -x suffixes so the files hold their order after export.
Lr could do this intelligently, seamlessly, and without user intervention. And it should!
Thanks again for not ignoring me!

Can not find virtual copies in Windows folder.

I can not remember to have encountered this before, so here I go: I just created a virtual copy of some photos from my summer holiday, and all works well. But when I needed to access these photos going the Windows' way (Windows/My Pictures that is), the virtual copies do not appear in my YYYYMM folder. Going back to LR though, they will appear there with a /Copy 1 extension. RIghtclicking the VC, then "Show in Explorer" will highlight the original in the folder, the VC still not being there. Part of the frustration is that I can not remember this happening before (or maybe it has), so I'm wondering if I by accident have changed any settings.
Running LR 4.1 on Windows 7 64-bit.
Thanks in advance.

Andrew Rodney wrote:
richardplondon wrote:
My only point, was an observation that there is very little actual practical difference between a virtual copy and a "master" ANYWAY.
So you have 1 master (an actual raw) and 10 VC’s. What happens to the VC’s if the master gets corrupted?
If your master has say Adobe Standard as the DNG Profile but the VC has a custom DNG profile, what happens to the VC if that profie goes missing or gets corrupted? Try it.
If by "master", you mean the Raw file on disk, then if that is corrupted (something I have never yet experienced IIRC; although I still backup against this possibility) then certainly, all images derived from that will suffer. However adding VCs does not increase the absolute risk of that. The way I was using "master", was to refer to the one LR metadata set which, unlike a VC metadata set, currently asserts a functional link to the source file. If that LR metadata set were to get corrupted, (something I have never yet experienced either IIRC, although I still backup against that possibility too) then I might be glad of a VC which I could immediately promote to that role and status instead.
Certainly bad things may happen to a VC if a required external file is lost or changed - but these are exactly the same bad things, as if the exact same events had happened for the "master" version alongside. I do take the point that there is protection in redundancy - no question - and also that instantly written-out metadata is a useful separate backup of one's work (as I mentioned, I'd be glad if VCs could get the same thing too somehow, someday).
One-to-many dependency on a single source file can make some good things happen too,though, which may be judged worth any potential added risks. Say deliberate changes are newly made to a Photoshop edit on which several LR image versions are based. These updates will ripple through all virtual versions automatically; whereas if these versions had instead been fully independent, the same changes would need to be made repeatedly to get the same result; assuming one wants all these versions to reflect the changes; which is (should be; needs to be) the realistic expectation, when one has opted to use a cluster of VCs in the first place.

Option to add Virtual-Copies to DNG -exists?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for