White balance selections, Quick Develop and Develop...let's talk

One thing that isn't well-known is that the adjustments in Quick Develop and the adjustments in Develop are *fundamentally different* from each other.
Develop is basically designed to provide *absolute* adjustments to RAW images. It can be used for JPEGs too, but in that case, the white balance setting is not absolute as it's already been corrected in-camera. So the WB settings are meaningless since you don't know where to begin and the temperatures are removed for the same reason. You just start where you are and get warmer or cooler.
Quick Develop is designed to provide *relative* adjustments to all images. What this means is, if you have many images selected and hit the right exposure arrow ">" you'll increase the effective exposure of all of those images from wherever they are now to that plus 1/3 stop. If you hit the ">>" you'll get 1 stop increments.
Since QD is always making *relative* adjustments, it may be reasonable to assume that you have a known, corrected starting point from which to make relative adjustments. That may be why the daylight and other options are available in QD. I personally think this is a bad assumption as you don't know what corrections have been applied in-camera. Thus, I think those options shouldn't appear in QD just like they don't in Develop.
Comments?

The relative vs. absolute of the QD vs. Dev modules is something I'm not familiar with LR enough to dispute. However isn't the point of LR's non-destructive nature, that all actions on an image are relative to the initial baseline, whether it is a RAW or JPG (or Other).
Granted applying a preset WB set of values against a JPG does not make a lot of sense in the development of a repeatable workflow, but if a set of WB values improves a JPG image, who cares. Its all non-destructive and I can reset at any time.
I tend to not like operating in applications that are too stringent in keeping me walled into the "right" way of doing things. Particularly based on the super intelligent decision of the software developer because they know how it is supposed to work. (I have license to berate this group because it is my vocation) Changing the user interface from one module to another (if they both do the same thing) or from one file type to another is not a good thing. Consistency is paramount to user freindliness. If indeed the QD and the Dev modules work differently then it is expected that the controls be labeled differently to express this difference. If a selection is detrimental to the image or will cause application issues it is better to leave the selection visible (for consistency) and disable it (gray out) to keep it from being selected.
The abreviation of White Balance: to WB: in the application is also bad form. It is jargony and does not assist new users to understanding. Screen real estate is scarce and I understand the inclination to do this, but there is a cost.
- Morey

Similar Messages

RGB % values no longer visible in white balance selection tool loupe

When using the white balance selection tool in LR3.3 RC the RGB values no longer show in the loupe window while moving the tool around the picture. The only way I can get the values to show is to stop moving the tool and then click any one of several keys (e.g. Ctrl, or Shift, or Alt, or \, etc.) As soon as I then move the tool the RGB values again disappear until I stop and again click one of the keys. It had worked fine previously in LR3 (?before I updated from 3.2 to 3.3 - that is, the values would show continuously as I moved the tool around the image. Any thoughts about what to do?
Thanks.

Tom Hogarty wrote:
We did catch this bug and it will be fixed in the final Lightroom 3.3 release. Thanks for posting your experience.
Regards,
Tom Hogarty
Lightroom Product Manager
Nice to see you here Tom.. Thanks for the update. Is it somehow related to some of the other issues being reported about the TAT tool, just thinking they are both perhaps "pointer" related?
Jay S.

Photoshop 10 crashes when I select quick edit and get no response when guided edit selected

PS Elements 10 crashes when I select quick edit and I get no response when guided edit is selected. Auto edit is working. Help???

It would help to have more information, but try this: Quit the editor, then restart it while holding down ctrl+alt+shift (command+option+shift on a mac). Keep the keys down till you see a window asking if you want to delete the settings file. You do.

Word document, developer and developer server

I must develop a form that can handle word document, it must read/write/update a DOCUMENT that must be stored in database for example in a BLOB field.
Can someone tell me how i can do it?
Thanks

You can define MS Word as your system_editor for the form. For details refer to 'Editor Property' topic in the Oracle Dev. Help.
null

Image contains camera White Balance setting; LR 5.5 only shows "As Shot", "Auto", and "Custom"

I have a new, Panasonic DMC-GX7. I shot a bunch of photos as JPGs. When viewing their Exif data using Exiftool, I can clearly see the camera's White Balance setting, as well as the Color Temp Kelvin, WB Red Level, WB Green Level, and WB Blue Level. However, Lightroom 5.5 only shows "As Shot", "Auto", and "Custom" when I click White Balance under Quick Develop on the Library tab or WB under Basic on the Develop tab. Exiftool shows the Exif Version as 0230 and the Panasonic Exif Version as 0405. Is LR looking for the white balance information in some other field? Do I need to configure it somehow for my camera? I am new to LR (but not to image processing), so could use some help figuring this out.

The whole question is not so simple as converting to DNG. Yes DNG is openly documented, yes the file can be read, but that does not mean it can be correctly interpreted by other software in the future and the best you can then do is starting the PP of your images from scratch. Imagine a DNG with LR adjustments that in some years you open the file in another software, possibly non-Adobe. Even if the file can be read it will not look the same, as the Adobe specific developing instructions could not be strictly followed. Even if all software manufactures agreed on a common set of adjustments, let's say everybody had a Highlights slider and a Clarity slider and so on, which is unlikely, the results would still be different as the underlying algorithms would be different.
Disclaimer: I only shoot raw and firmly believe it is the best option, but one must be conscious it has some shortcomings related to the future of our images.

Sunrise/Sunset and White Balance

I have a question about overriding Automatic White Balance when photographing sunrises and sunsets. A few days ago, I got my first DSLR, an EOS 5D Mk III. I know the ISO triangle after shooting film on my Canon A-1 that I bought 34 years ago, which still works). However, this white balance thing is a fourth dimension. Films are balanced for daylight and the ISO is also dictated. For photographing a sunrise or sunset, to me, it makes sense to set the white balance to 5200 Kelvin (daylight). I got one response from a camera club member who said his photos were all in the 5000 range. Others have said "Shoot in RAW and fix it in post processing". The second response of "Fix it later" just doesn't ring my bell. What about getting it right the first time? Should I set white balance to daylight or some other setting? I can always experiment with changing white balance; after all, I'm not wasting film. Below are a series of sunrises that I took using Kodak Portra 400, -2/3 stop, on my Canon A-1. http://www.flickr.com/photos/ralphhightower/sets/72157633079358301/ Thanks, Ralph
Solved!
Go to Solution.

It might be helpful to just think of the digital camera's white balance capabilities as a built-in and very complete set of color conversion and color correction filters, such as we used to use with film. Now, for your convenience, all those filters are right there, inside the camera.... much easier to carry around and use!
If shooting during Golden Hours, the camera's Automatic White Balance (AWB) can tend to overcorrect and remove some of the lovely golden nature of the light. One solution is as others have recommended, to shoot RAW and make your adjustments later. This is no different from making the adjustments in-camera, at the time of exposure, and can make for much greater control and precision. It's not really a "fix it later" thing... It is more a matter of doing fine-tuning and optimizing the image (more on this below). RAW simply retains all the data from the original capture and is a good thing to use, anyway.
All digital cameras essentially capture a TIFF image file with a lot of proprietary data attached and an embedded "preview/review" JPEG... that's what the RAW file is. If you make JPEGs in-camera, a lot of data is thrown away, following the directions laid out by the settings in the camera. If, instead, you save the entire RAW file, you can change those directions later in post-processing... or just make a JPEG from the image "as shot", using the exact same set of instructions as were set in the camera at the time of exposure. One of the beauties of RAW is that so long as you store the original image file, you can always go back and re-process it another way, if you wish. This is particularly helpful when new to digital and uncertain about your settings. Something you might want to do is shoot RAW+JPEG initially. That way you have both the full data stored, along with the potential to make changes if you wish, plus the JPEG produced according to your camera settings. The JPEG can serve as a post-processing learning tool, using it as a point of comparison with your own RAW file conversions.... and as feedback about your camera settings. (Don't trust the image display on the camera's LCD screen... it's not calibrated and is too subject to ambient light variations. The histogram display is generally more informative, but even that is subject to the camera's settings, since it's done from the embedded JPEG and not directly from the full RAW file.)
But, I agree, it's also good to "get it right the first time". Or at least come as close as possible.
The most ideal way to do that would be to set a Custom White Balance for every shot. Use a standardized target, bathed in the same light as your subject/scene, and take a shot of it... then tell the camera to use that as reference. However, it's just not practical to do that.
Nor is it a good idea to set one particular color temp and use it for everything (i know photogs who do that and have had to work with their images.... it makes for a lot of extra work!)
Thus there are all the "presets" you can choose among, looking for one that's most appropriate for your particular situation... And there is AWB, which allows the camera to try to choose for you. Outdoors in daylight I've found Canon AWB to be pretty darned good. Shots in the shade can be a little overly cool. And indoor shots with tungsten or other artifical light are when a Custom WB is most likely to be needed.... especially with weird, uncalibrated lighting such as sodium vapor and mercury vapor lamps.
To set an accurate Custom WB, get yourself a gray card or similar (I use Lastolite EZ Balance targets, which are sort of like a foldable/flexible gray card). This also can be helpful arriving at an accurately metered exposures. Something else I use in certain circumstances are Warm Cards... these have slight tints that "fool" the camera into slightly tinting the image.... a light blue/cyan target will cause the camera to render a slightly warm color balance. Warm Cards would be particularly helpful shooting during the Golden Hours, if wanting to retain some of the warmth of the light at those times of day. It's more accurate doing this than simply manually setting a particular color temp, although that's possible too.
And, yes, you should spend some time getting to know how your camera handles color. Each model can be a bit different. You'd do well to shoot a bunch of test shots with AWB, Custom WB and, if you wish, the various presets... to see how they perform.
Of course, you don't always have time to think about or make settings... sometimes to catch fleeting light you have to run to catch an image quickly, shoot RAW and "fix it later" in post-processing!
If you haven't already done so, you might want to calibrate your computer monitor. As concerned as you are about rendering accurate color or manipulating it the way you want it, in case you are unaware of it... your computer monitor is lying to you. All computer monitors are different, none are really very accurate and virtually all are way too bright. If you make prints using an uncalibrated monitor, you will usually find them coming out too dark. This is because an overly bright monitor causes you to adjust the image too dark. If you don't already have them, you might want to get computer calibration software and hardware and use them regularly (about once every month or two, usually... monitors change over time and with use).
The way the calibration device works is by first running a test on your particular monitor, and then providing a profile that the computer will use when rendering images on the display. Some of the more sophisticated calibration suites can also be used to develop printing profiles (unique for each ink/paper/printer combination), projectors and other viewing devices. (I use a Datacolor Spyder, one of several different calibration devices/softwares available).
Hope this helps!
Alan Myers
San Jose, Calif., USA
"Walk softly and carry a big lens."
GEAR: 5DII, 7D(x2), 50D(x3), some other cameras, various lenses & accessories
FLICKR & PRINTROOM

JPEG and White Balance

When Aperture imports JPEGs it offers the same white balance options as it does for RAW files.
My understandiing from using Lightroom which does not use temperature in it's white balance Develop module for JPEGs, is that there is no data associated with a JPEG that tells the program where to start with white balance.
I'm curious as to what assumptions Aperture makes with regard to white balance when importing JPEGs and what goes on in the background as you change the temperature with a JPEG.
Thank you.

Aperture assigns a temperature of 5000k to all jpg and tif files.
I don't know what goes on in the background but the temperature changes are useful, if not correct.
Cheers,
Terry

Separate luminance and color white balance

I know this is a quite peculiar idea, but i roundtrip to Photoshop a lot just for this..
we all know white balance affects how contrast and luminance of different image areas are interpreted by the software, and at times, especially in low or mixed light, I find that the 'color wise correct' white balance is often different to the 'luminance wise best' one..
i hope this doesn't sound too tortuous, and i really don't know if it would be hard to implement, but it would definitely help a lot with image quality..

ok..
I usually do this for low light portraits or mixed light situation, but it really works for everything, and is quite similar to the "tone" part of topaz detail plugin, for example..
we always choose WB to have a pleasant or correct color rendition, right?
but if we are in black and white, different WB settings affect different areas of the image, lightwise..
and i find out that there is always a sweet spot, depending on the lighting, where noise is better and shadows are better distributed, and and that usually doesn't match to the color WB sweet spot..
this is the original auto wb image
and its bw equivalent
here wb is tweaked to better balance shadows and contrast
but you can see colors are way off..
to give a better idea..
original:
two wbs, obtained with layers color blend mode of original onto bw tweaked
i realize at this size the difference may look small, but it really changes the balance of light, especially with low light or underexposed or mixed light shots..
hope now it's more clear..
cheers
Tommaso

Lightroom 4 and white balance tool

In Lightroom 4 i use the whtie balance tool and find point that give as high as 99% reading and it would work to set it as the reference point. Today i did the same thing and got a message that said Lightroom could not obtain white balance from that spot and to try again. i've never seen this before. even if i used a spot that was 100% reflective. It would just render colors off.
Today i did the same thing and a message came on the screen that Lightroom couldn't obtain white balance from that spot and i should try again. i was only able to obtain white balance if i used a spot that reflected no more than approx. 90%.
what has changed?
thank you

The White Balance Picker sample area in LR4 can now be adjusted using the 'Scale' slider, so yes it has changed from LR3:
http://feedback.photoshop.com/photoshop_family/topics/white_balance_eyedropper_tool_option
The readings you see in the LR Histogram in no way reflect the actual raw data values. The White Balance picker needs a sample area that has no raw data clipping in any channel (i.e.All four R,G, B, G2 channels 99% or less). I suspect the 99% area you are sampling has raw data clipping in one or more channels. If interested you can download RawDigger to examine the image file to confirm:
http://www.rawdigger.com/
I suggest choosing a sample area that is well below 99%, such as 85% to 95%.

How do I save a file after altering white balance?

Adobe has previously supplied incorrect advice. Adobe has now told me to use this forum to seek the correct advice. I am trying to alter white balance on some shots. The originals are in RAW (actually Sony's ARW). So I alter the shots in Photoshop and save as a DNG file. This requires me to save to a new location- no problem. However, when I open the altered shot (saved as DNG), it has always reverted to the old (uncorrected) white balance. I have tried various ways of saving but this keeps recurring. Please does anyone know how I need to save the altered shots to "hold" the altered white balance. NB I have no need to retain the unaltered versions of the shots. Thanks

The originals are in RAW (actually Sony's ARW). So I alter the shots in Photoshop and save as a DNG file.
As Jon points out there's no reason to use DNG if your camera is supported by your version of the Camera RAW plugin:
Camera Raw plug-in | Supported cameras
The point of Camera RAW is to let you save color adjustments in a non-destructive way—the adjustments are saved as instructions rather than permanently applied to the image pixels. It's the digital version of an analog negative.
So you don't make the adjustments in Photoshop, you make them in Bridge or Lightroom and the adjustment instructions are saved either to an xml sidecar along with the file or in the Camera RAW database depending on your preferences (Bridge>Camera RAW Preferences). In Bridge you can make the adjustments, click either Done or Open, and the adjustments will be saved for that .CR2 image.
Here I've set a custom white balance, adjusted the exposure and clicked Done to save the settings. When I open the image now or in the future the "negative" will be "developed" using the saved white balance and exposure.
You can make additional adjustments in Photoshop, but those adjustments would not be saved with the .CR2 "negative". To use the image in other applications it has to be saved as a separate file (as a "positive")—.psd, .tiff, .jpg, etc. You can not place raw images in other apps like InDesign or Illustrator.

808 flashlight = white balance red?

Dear friends,
I just buy a pureview 808. When I take photo indoor with daylight lamp at night, the flashlight is on. However, the photo is incredibly a red one, nothing like the scene. I believe it is a wrong white balance. I do not find an option for "flash light" in the white balance selections. All options result in a red colored photo with the coldest one (bluest one) as weaker.
Any walkthrough or walk arounds?
Thank you!

Cheers for replying
Being a long term DLSR photographer I always use creative mode and started out using AWB. Even in AWB mode there shouldn't be so much variation as in my sample pics, so I decided to use fixed white balance with the intent of forcing the colour balance ot be the same. but you're right, often with a dynamic scene there's not time or place to mess about trying different settings to correct waht a fixed AWB shoudl get right in the first place
I think there's a bug, but it's not an easy thing to get manufacturers to always admit this. I will soon twitter Damian Dinning, the guy who was heavily involved with the development of the 808's camera and see if he has some comment.
I appreciate the 808 is the first Pureview model, but that shouldn't mean a lack of after-release updates to fix problems.
Another weird scarnio I've come across is that when setting manual ISO to something higher in order to force a faster shutter speed, the 808 still choose s toexpose with lower shutter speeds. For example on my DSLRs if I use auto mode and it selects something like. ISO 100 / 1/50s. For the same scene, if I preset ISO400 the speed jumps to 1/200s as it should. This doesn't happen on the 808. The speedwill remain at 1/50 on many shots, and unwanted motion blur remains
There's some weird stuff going on
When the 808 getr's it right it takes amazing pics for a phone, and in fact that's the reason I bought it. I still ahven't put a SIM card in it :

Can you remove the camera white balance setting in Aperture

I have a Canon 7D and use Aperture for processing and storing my images.
With the Canon I shoot both video and still and frequently adjust the white balance in the camera. I make a frequent mistake in leaving the wrong white balance setting on - eg when taking video indoors in the evening I set the white balance to indoors (the Canon seems poor at white balance decision making on video) and then I forget I'm not using auto white balance and switch to taking a photo with flash. The result is a horrible blue photo - which if I don't spot the problem at the time seems very hard to correct afterwards.
I use the Aperture white balance adjustments frequently but unless there is a patch or white or grey I an use the dropper on, I find this particular situation seems to be right off the scale of what I can fix in Aperture. I end up with sliders at the extremes of the scales and no intuitive sense of what numbers to type in manually to try and get realistic colour - so I often end up discarding these photos even if the shot itself is something I'd like to use.
So my question is given I'm importing RAW, is there a way to show the phoo without the (wrong) white balance setting I applied in the camera, to let me choose white balance from scratch?
Or if not, do you have any advice about how to adjust from this very bluey unrealistic colour of image?

Kirkby - thanks for the quick reply.
Didn't know you could drag inside a value field - that's helpful.
But being able to get different numbers on the slider isn't the root of my problem.
In a specific example I have two photos - one taken with white balance set to flash and the photo was with flash, where after a bit of tweaking to get the colour I want the temp slider is at 5000K (and tint 0). The second photo has my shooting error with interior lighting white balance but taken with flash. The two shots were taken from almost the same point of the same view (but different people in frame). The shot with the white balance error comes off camera horribly blue coloured. I can fiddle with the two sliders - I take temperature to 20000K and tint to 40 to do the best with it I can, and with those settings one of the two faces is approaching flesh colour but the wall behind the subjects (which is a light blue in reality) is now appearing light yellow in places. I just can't get a good looking colour effect no matter ow extreme the slider settings.
I may have phrased my question badly - as I totally agree you can't show a raw without a colour setting - so maybe I'm better asking to be able to use a different colour setting on the raw data rather than having to start with adjustments on top of my white balance mistake.
Given the two shots were in the same place against the same background and the same lighting (both with flash) it seems to me I ought to be able to get a similar colour effect on both and I just can't. To illustrate here are the two photos (the one on the left was shot with flash wb and in Aperture I'm viewing it with 5000K and 0 tint, the one on the right was shot with indoor wb and in Aperture I'm viewing it with 20000K and 40 tint and it looks terrible!)
https://www.box.com/shared/qle3t6ovyhrd1egez3vc

Mass unset an adjustment (white balance), aperture 3

Hi all,
I upgraded to Aperture 3 and everything went smoothly, even the library upgrade.
Except for a small adjustment thing: After "reprocess masters" every image I had white balance set manually (most of my tens of thousands of images), looks now green. Not only slightly, everything is green. When I unclick the white balance adjustment, the picture returns to pretty much what I expected it to be (camera is Canon 5D, raw images).
Seems that Aperture 3 processes this generally better and pictures look fine without adjusting white balance.
Now the question is: how do I mass unset white balance setting for each and every image inside a project? With lift and stamp I can change white balance, but I didn't find a way to unset it completely. Manually I can uncheck the box before white balance and that does the trick, but I don't plan to click 42000 images manually.
Is there a way to batch change this? It would be easier to just unset everything, then go through the previews quickly to see if some of the photos need WB adjustment and do those few manually. I've now gone through five projects manually and have left the manual adjustment to only about ten photos with a slight modification towards purple.
/hv

Yes 5D can do that but I don't use the feature.
These are albums created ages ago with first Aperture 1 and then Aperture 2 for the newer ones. Actually, this pointed me to the right direction.
The greenness problem seems to trouble only old photos processed with Aperture 1.0 or 1.1 RAW settings. I've been processing the oldest albums first and didn't even think about this.
For 2.x photos, the reprosessing doesn't cause any greenness or other problems, and also, curiously, the "stamp default from jpg" trick works for these images just as suggested here, in case I wanted to remove the WB settings, which seems to be unnecessary.
But for 1.x raw processed photos, there is a desperate need to do something and the lift & stamp trick doesn't work.
Weird, but the problem seems to be in the fact that I never converted anything when I migrated to Aperture 2. There was no need to do anything so I just let the old ones be as they were. I tested moving to 2.0 raw with a couple of photos and I wasn't happy with the result as something in the colours and/or white balance changed and some minor adjustments would have been needed.
So thanks for your help and ideas once again. I'll leave the old ones for now as they are and hope Apple fixes this. They obviously haven't tested the migration at all with a library containing photos processed with the ancient 1.0 raw processing.
/hv

White Balance NOT Synchronizing in Bridge CS5

Instead of LR3 I use Bridge CS5 and the camera raw tool for my edits (it's all the same tools and runs faster.) ANyways, a strange problem i noticed recently after SEVERAL job edits.. I noticed the white balance was not the same on all my files. THIS IS A HUGE *** PROBLEM FOR ME! I tried everything but for some reason Bridge is not synchronizing the white balance, even if I just have white balance selected.. I need to have all my files the same.. I doesn NOT work in the camera raw module and it does NOT work when you right click, go to settings, copy settings and then paste settings..
Any one else experienced this?
I have ACR 6.1 installed

Is the WB As Shot, perhaps? Synchronizing As Shot as your WB does exactly that, sets the WB to whatever the camera was set to, which if it is Auto WB in the camera, then the Temp/Tint values will be different for each photo. If you want all the WB settings to be the same Temp/Tint values you must change the WB to Custom or use one of the built-in WB selections that has a constant set of Temp/Tint numbers.
What I usually do is modify the As Shot WB to something slightly different by changing the Tint value and then set the Tint value back to what it was if necessary, which will make it say Custom instead of As Shot, and then synchronize with this Custom value.

Bridge CS5 applies wrong white balance during thumbnail extraction (raw files only)

Hello to all Adobe Wizards,
Hobbiest photographer here. I use a Canon T2i and I have been shooting raw with auto white balance.
After I upload the CR2 files to Bridge, Bridge begins thumbnail extraction. This is when the problem begins: I watch Bridge extracting thumbnail photo after photo, turning them into wrong white balance one by one. After Bridge is done, I open one of these photos in Camera Raw, it shows the photo in "custom white balance". I was able to change it back to "As Shot". But every photo in Bridge now has custom white balance and is difficult to view in Bridge. This screenshot shows what my Bridge looks like after thumbnail extraction....
Yesterday, just out of curiosity, I took some photos with different white balance settings on the camera. I uploaded them to Bridge and Bridge over-wrote all the white balance settings. I then imported the same photos (from the same files) to iPhoto, they show up with correct write balance. Please see the second screenshot.
The third screenshot shows a unedited photo I opened from Bridge to Camera Raw, and the same photo as it appears in iPhoto, both unedited.
Again, this only happens to CR2 files. All tif, jpeg files are fine.
Any ideas?
Thanks!
-Wolfie

Any ideas?
First of all, shooting Raw has the benefit of changing the color temperature (Whit Balance) to what ever you like from whatever you shot in camera.
To me it seems you once have saved a custom white balance as default setting and this is been applied to every new file because you told Bridge to do so. The easiest way to get out of this is open a raw file in ACR and in the basic tab at the right side you see a small icon for sub menu (next to the word basic). Click on it and from the row choose 'Reset Camera Raw defaults' at the bottom.
Also decide whether you want to stay in 16 bit mode (as you are now as shown in the blue line under the preview). If you want to chance it back to 8 bit just click on that blue line and choose your options from that menu. You only have to do this once for the files from that same camera, ACR remembers the settings for you.
Using 16 bit mode has advantages when using critical color corrections (but then you also should change the color mode to ProPhoto in my opinion). The disadvantage is that 16 bit doubles the file size compared to 8 bit
Having set the ACR defaults should effect your thumbs immediately by building new thumbs and previews but if not you must choose purge cache for folder from the menu tools / cache/ purge cache for folder. Now the new settings will be applied.
It may take some time so let Bridge do its work properly before starting other jobs in Bridge (see the activity bar bottom left to check if Bridge is still caching).

White balance selections, Quick Develop and Develop...let's talk

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for