Author: Tim Grey

Today’s Question: You have recommended Backblaze as a good off-site backup solution, which involves “cloud” storage. Have you now seen evidence causing you to change your thinking about that?

Tim’s Quick Answer: No, not at all. I still highly recommend Backblaze as a cloud-based backup solution. What I don’t recommend is general cloud-based storage for photos, such as Dropbox, Google Drive, Microsoft OneDrive, and others.

More Detail: Today’s question is a follow-up to my answer in the May 7th Ask Tim Grey eNewsletter, where I recommended that photographers should not store photos nor the Lightroom Classic catalog in cloud-based storage. The distinction is cloud backup storage versus cloud storage for actively working with files.

The key issue with cloud-based storage for files you’ll actively work with and update is that there are risks of files not synchronizing properly particularly when you are accessing the same files from more than one computer. For example, I’ve been able to create metadata mismatches in seconds and catalog corruption within minutes by accessing a Lightroom Classic catalog stored in the cloud. I’ve similarly had Word documents on more than one occasion not update properly (or at all) across more than one computer, resulting in data loss.

The reason this type of cloud-based storage can be problematic is that it involves synchronizing files to and from cloud storage, potentially across multiple computers and mobile devices. In theory if you have reliable internet access on all devices the files will remain up to date. However, as noted above, I’ve found that it is far too easy for files to get corrupted or lost if they are accessed from more than one computer.

Cloud backup services such Backblaze are different in that they provide a one-way data transfer. The drives you’ve enabled backup for are monitored, and any new or updated files get copied to the servers. There’s no synchronization happening across multiple computers, so there isn’t the risk of files getting corrupted due to synchronization failures across devices.

Cloud storage in generally is very reliable. And cloud-based backup services offer a convenient way to have an off-site backup of your photos and other important data. But I do not recommend depending on cloud-based storage solutions where your files are synchronized via the cloud to multiple devices when it comes to photos and related data. I also recommend caution when depending on cloud storage for documents that will be modified across more than one computer, as I’ve seen numerous problems with that approach.

Note that the concerns outlined above do not apply to cloud-based photo synchronization services such as iCloud or the synchronization in Lightroom. That’s because these types of services have more of a closed loop where the photos in cloud-storage are treated as the primary data source without the need to synchronize all data to other devices.

Today’s Question: I will be getting new MacBook Pro, but I’m completely stumped about whether I should get the new Nano-Textured display or the standard display. I’m really interested in your opinion on which option you would go with if you were getting a new MacBook Pro for doing all your image processing on?

Tim’s Quick Answer: While both the standard and nano-textured displays are very good, I prefer to use the standard display for better image quality and fidelity, along with easier maintenance.

More Detail: The decision between the standard display and the nano-textured display mostly comes down to deciding between greatly reduced glare versus higher image quality and fidelity. For photography applications, to me the image quality and fidelity is more important, which is why I prefer not to use a nano-textured display.

There is obviously a considerable benefit to having reduced glare on a nano-textured display. However, considering that it is always best to work in a somewhat darkened environment when evaluating and optimizing photos, glare reduction isn’t necessarily very important for photographers. It is helpful when you’re out in the world with your laptop, but much less of an issue when you’re in a controlled environment.

The key drawback of the nano-textured display is that the colors are slightly muted, contrast appears lower with blacks that aren’t as deep, and the display is slightly less sharp. In addition, because of the textured surface of the display, if you opt for the nano-textured display you need to use the included specialty cloth for cleaning, which reduced flexibility for cleaning and maintaining the display.

To be sure, both displays with and without the nano-textured surface are very good, but all things considered I prefer the standard display rather than the nano-textured display.

Today’s Question: Is it acceptable to store photos managed by Lightroom Classic in Apple’s iCloud?

Tim’s Quick Answer: No, I do not recommend storing photos (or worse, the catalog) on any cloud storage platform if you’re using Lightroom Classic to manage your photos. Doing so can lead to a variety of potentially serious problems.

More Detail: While cloud-based storage platforms can provide excellent convenience, they can also lead to problems. This is especially true for the Lightroom Classic catalog, as well as photos managed with Lightroom Classic. I’ve also had problems with all sorts of different files being out of date or corrupted even outside the context of Lightroom Classic. The same concerns apply to other cloud storage solutions such as Microsoft OneDrive, Google Drive, and others.

The most significant risk with cloud-based storage platforms relates to the Lightroom Classic catalog. In my testing I’ve been able to corrupt a catalog in less than five minutes using various cloud storage services. There is simply too much risk in using cloud storage for the catalog, especially if you’ll ever access the catalog from more than one computer.

However, there can also be issues with photos stored with a cloud storage service. This is largely due to the common practice of maintaining primary storage on the cloud servers and only keeping copies of the photo on your own hard drive if there is adequate space. So, for example, if you’re storing your photos in the Pictures folder and enable iCloud synchronization for that folder, you’ll be able to see previews of all photos in any folder in the Pictures folder. However, the source image might not actually be there depending on how much free space you have. Instead, the file will be downloaded on demand if you try to open it.

However, accessing the image in Lightroom Classic doesn’t count as opening the source file, because Lightroom Classic doesn’t interact with iCloud storage in that way. This can lead to issues with metadata getting out of date or having a mismatch, among other potential problems.

These types of issues are not exclusive to Lightroom Classic. For example, I keep draft copies of the questions and answers for this Ask Tim Grey email newsletter in cloud storage using Microsoft OneDrive. This provides a convenient option of being able to access and update the same files from multiple computers and devices with ease. However, on multiple occasions I have updated a document in OneDrive on one device, only to later switch to another device and find that the updates didn’t get preserved.

The bottom line is that while cloud synchronization and storage solutions can be very convenient, they aren’t without their problems and shouldn’t be completely trusted with your photos and other important data. It is important to maintain a local copy of all important files (and a local backup) to avoid the problems that can occur with cloud-based storage.

Today’s Question: I am seeing a bug in the Curves adjustment layer in Photoshop when working on individual color channels. It all seems fine, except when I click on another layer and click back to the Curves layer. The Mode switches to RGB and a white curve appears in addition to the colored line from the previous color channel adjustments. The white RGB line is adjustable and changes the tone, but I can’t adjust the colored curve lines that also appear.

Tim’s Quick Answer: This behavior is by design in Photoshop. When you return to the Curves adjustment layer the RGB composite channel will be active, and you need to manually switch to a color channel to refine the per-channel curves.

More Detail: The Curves adjustment layer is one of the more powerful and flexible adjustments in Photoshop. In addition to being able to adjust brightness and contrast for specific tonal ranges in the image in variable ways, you can also apply similar color adjustments for different tonal ranges by working on the individual color channels.

The RGB composite curve enables you to adjust tonality with great flexibility. You can apply similar adjustments to the overall balance of colors by adjusting the Red (red versus cyan), Green (green versus magenta), or Blue (blue versus yellow) channels. These options are available from the popup at the top-left of the curve adjustment area on the Properties panel when adjusting a Curves adjustment layer.

When you first create a Curves adjustment layer or switch layers and return to the Curves adjustment, the channel popup will default to RGB regardless of what adjustments you may have previously applied with the layer. If you want to refine the adjustment for one of the color channels, you’ll need to select the channel by name from the popup.

In addition, you can only adjust the curve for the currently selected channel. If you have adjusted one or more of the color channels, you’ll see the curve for each of those channels when working in the RGB composite mode, along with the white curve representing the RGB composite channel. However, when you select an individual color channel, you’ll only see the curve for that channel and in turn can only adjust that specific curve.

Today’s Question: I am replacing my desktop computer with a laptop (MacBook Pro). Right now my storage via a USB hub and my external monitor via HDMI. I have four hard drives connected at each port. What would you recommend as a docking station for connecting the MBP to my monitor and external hard drives. I intend on upgrading my external drives to SSD. I do plan on removing the MacBook Pro when traveling.

Tim’s Quick Answer: Ultimately you want to get either a docking station or hub that is powered for maximum compatibility and that includes enough ports of the right type to meet your needs now and for the foreseeable future.

More Detail: In a general sense, both a docking station and a powered hub provide the same basic features, with a different form factor. There are seemingly countless options available, which can make it a little challenging to find the right product for your specific needs. But that also means there’s a very good chance that you can find something that is a great fit for your hardware configuration.

The cheaper approach would be to get a USB hub with the ports you need based on your current and anticipated future hardware. The most important thing if you’re thinking of this approach is to make sure the hub is powered, so that it will support having multiple bus-powered hard drives connected at once, for example.

In some cases, the hub might include a specific power connection, but more common with newer models is that one of the USB-C ports supports pass-through power. This enables you to connect a power adapter via a USB cable to the hub, so that adequate power is available to the devices you connect to the hub. Then you just need to find a powered hub with the right combination of ports based on the hardware you’re using.

For example, a popular hub from Belkin supports 100 watt pass-through power, includes an HDMI port, along with two USB-A ports and an SD card reader. However, you may need more ports, including possibly needing more USB-C ports depending on the drives you’re using.

You can find this hub here:

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1905657-REG/belkin_avc008fqsgy_v2_connect_usb_c_6_in_1_multiport.html/BI/5752/KBID/6629/kw/BEAVC8FQSGV2/DFF/d10-v2-t1-xBEAVC8FQSGV2

If you want to really maximize the number of ports available, I recommend opting for a docking station, which you can think of as being a larger hub with more ports of various types. In some cases, the docking station also provides a support for your laptop.

The docking station I recommend considering is the CalDigit TS5 Plus. I consider this to be more of an advanced hub rather than a docking station, since it doesn’t include a mount for your laptop to connect to. However, it provides a great range of ports. That includes five USB-C ports, five USB-A ports, Thunderbolt and DisplayPort ports, and more. While it lacks an HDMI connector in favor of the newer Thunderbolt 5 connection, you could use a USB-C to HDMI adapter to connect a display using HDMI.

You can find this docking station here:

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1890999-REG/caldigit_tbt5_ts5plus_us_amz_ts5_plus_thunderbolt_5.html/BI/5752/KBID/6629/kw/CATS5PLUS/DFF/d10-v2-t1-xCATS5PLUS

Again, the key is to make sure the hub or docking station you’re considering includes a power connection (in general a docking station will include power by definition), and that the hub includes the specific ports you need for your configuration. But be sure to also choose an option that features additional ports of the type you might use in the future. For example, you may have a number of hard drives that connect via USB-A, but as you replace those with newer hard drives they will mostly likely connect via USB-C instead.

Today’s Question: With the new Color and Vibrance adjustment layer in Photoshop, is it safe to say there’s no need to use the Color Balance adjustment layer anymore?

Tim’s Quick Answer: In general, I would say that the Color Balance adjustment layer is a bit outdated, though there are some situations where photographers might find it convenient to use.

More Detail: The Color Balance adjustment layer in Photoshop is relatively straightforward to use, and makes use of the RGB (red, green, blue) color model that many photographers are familiar with since it has been in use for such a long time. However, I consider other adjustment options to be better in most cases.

The Color and Vibrance adjustment layer provides the Temperature and Tint sliders for adjusting overall color balance in an image. While this may seem less flexible because there are only two sliders rather than the three for Color Balance, you can still arrive at the same overall color appearance with either adjustment. Also, I think the Temperature adjustment is more in line with the way photographers tend to think of color, allowing a shift between a cooler (more blue) or warmer (more yellow) color cast.

Furthermore, with the Temperature and Tint sliders now available alongside Vibrance and Saturation sliders, the Color and Vibrance adjustment layer is very convenient for adjusting the overall appearance of colors in a photo.

One of the benefits of Color Balance over Color and Vibrance is that with Color Balance you can independently adjust the Shadows, Midtones, and Highlights in an image. However, if you want to exercise such granular control, I recommend instead working with a Curves adjustment layer, modifying the individual curves for the Red, Green, and Blue channels.

Another option that I often find to be even more convenient than adjustment layers (except when using adjustment layers for targeted adjustments that employ a layer mask) is to use the Camera Raw filter. As long as you won’t be using additional pixel-based layers with an image, you can convert the Background image layer to a Smart Object using the Filter > Convert for Smart Filters command. You can then apply the Camera Raw filter (Filter > Camera Raw Filter) as a Smart Filter, which enables you to double-click on the Smart Filter for Camera Raw on the Layers panel anytime you want to return to the Camera Raw dialog to modify your adjustment settings. This provides direct access to a wide range of adjustments, including the sliders for Temperature, Tint, Vibrance, and Saturation that are also available with the Color and Vibrance adjustment layer.

Today’s Question: When getting others to send me photos from their iPhone, they love to use iMessage; which is very low quality. What do you recommend for a process that is easy for non-photographers to use and yields the best quality?

Tim’s Quick Answer: I consider AirDrop to be the best option for sharing original media (including photos) between Apple devices (including iOS or macOS).

More Detail: There are a wide variety of options for sharing photos between devices, but when you want the original file (rather than a reduced-resolution JPEG for example) and both sender and receiver are Apple devices, I think AirDrop is the best approach.

The minor caveat with AirDrop is that the security settings default to only being able to receive content from someone who is in your Contacts list if using a mobile device. So, if you’re sharing with someone who doesn’t have you in their Contacts, they’ll need to change that setting first. To do so, go to the Settings app on the mobile device and choose General followed by AirDrop. At the top of the AirDrop page choose “Everyone for 10 Minutes”.

The sender can then go to the Photos app and either open the single photo they want to share or choose “Select” at the top-right and then tap on each photo to be shared. Then tap the Share button (the icon is a rectangle with an arrow pointing upward) and choose AirDrop from the popup that appears. Then tap the name of the device to share with, and the recipient will be notified with an option to accept.

Once they accept, the recipient can find the images in the Photos app. Note that by default the sort order for photos on the Library tab in the Photos app is by capture time. To make it easier to find the photo if they had been captured some time ago you can tap the menu button toward the top of the screen (it shows three horizontal lines) and choose “Sort by Recently Added” from the popup.

Today’s Question: As a follow up to the question about cropping versus stretching a photo for printing at a specific size, would Generative Fill provide a solution for resizing without cropping?

Tim’s Quick Answer: Yes, you could use Generative Fill (or even better, Generative Expand) to expand an image to fit a particular aspect ratio, so you wouldn’t need to crop or skew the image.

More Detail: As I explained in yesterday’s answer, if you want to print an image at a specific aspect ratio, you could crop the image to the applicable aspect ratio or transform the image to stretch it to match the intended aspect ratio. Another option I didn’t mention specifically would be to use Generative AI to expand the image to match the intended aspect ratio.

In effect, this is a variation on transforming the image to fit the preferred aspect ratio, though it involves adding additional pixels using AI rather than stretching the image to fit. This isn’t something that is available in Lightroom Classic (at least not yet), but it is available in both Camera Raw and Photoshop.

For example, you could open the image in Photoshop and set the Crop tool to an aspect ratio of 8×10 (the example output size in yesterday’s question), then instead of cropping the 8×12 image inward to remove pixels, you could expand the crop box outside the image area. On the Options bar you can then choose “Generative Expand” from the Fill popup. When you apply the crop, including applying the Generative AI prompt, the image will be expanded with additional pixels added so that the aspect ratio matches your intended print size.

Keep in mind that the results of using Generative Expand will vary depending on the content of the image. For example, expanding the image in an area of sky will generally produce very good results. Expanding an area that contains more complex details such as animals or people could yield results that are less than ideal. Still, Generative Expand is another solution for sizing an image to a different aspect ratio without cropping out any portion of the image.

Today’s Question: I want to send a couple of photos to be printed in a 8×10 size. When I resize in Lightroom Classic, it wants to crop the photo to fit. I don’t want any of the photo cropped out. Is there a way to size it in Lightroom Classic to be a certain size without cropping?

Tim’s Quick Answer: Lightroom Classic doesn’t really provide an easy way to resize an image without cropping. You can perform this task in Photoshop, but keep in mind that doing so will skew the image, potentially to the point of the photo looking rather distorted.

More Detail: Most digital cameras have an aspect ratio that corresponds to an image with dimensions of 8×12 rather than 8×10, though there is some variability in this. That means that in order to produce an 8×10 print you would need to crop two inches off the long side.

If you don’t want to crop the image, there are really only two choices. You could transform the image, altering the relationship between height and width to make it fit within an 8×10 frame. However, this can create considerable distortion, causing the subjects in the photo look taller and narrower than they actually are.

The other option would be to resize the image to fit within the printed area, but then leave empty space at the top and bottom of the print. For example, you could resize the image to be 6.667 inches tall and 10 inches wide, printing that on an 8×10 sheet of paper with two-thirds of an inch of blank space at the top and bottom of the print.

If you wanted to resize the image to fit specific dimensions, you can use the Image > Image Size command in Photoshop. Set the output resolution as desired (such as 300 pixels per inch), unlock the lock between the Width and Height (with the button showing a chain link icon to the left of these fields) and set the values for Width and Height to the output dimensions (taking into account whether it is a horizontal or vertical image of course). Click OK to apply the change.

You can get a sense of the distortion effect in Lightroom Classic by first setting the crop aspect ratio to the intended output size (such as 8×10 in this case) and then increasing the slider value for Aspect in the Transform section. Even at a maximum value of +100, however, the obvious distortion in the image won’t be enough to shift the image from 8×12 to 8×10, which is why Photoshop would generally be needed for this type of change.

But again, you will most likely find that the distortion is significant enough to be problematic, so you’ll likely want to either crop the image or print with empty space on the page.

Today’s Question: I’ve been exploring the “Blend If” sliders in Photoshop, and so I reviewed the documentation on the Adobe website. Their terminology makes it very confusing such as by using both “blended” and “unblended” to describe pixels that will be visible. Can you explain what the “Blend If” sliders are actually doing?

Tim’s Quick Answer: The “Blend If” sliders found in the Layer Style dialog in Photoshop enable you to combine two image layers to create a composite where you can hide or reveal pixels on each layer based on brightness levels.

More Detail: First off, I should clarify that the “Blend If” sliders do not relate to blend modes, which can be used to combine layers such as for a multiple exposure effect based on specific mathematical formulas that use the pixel values of layers as the input. Rather, the “Blend If” sliders are used to simply determine which pixels will be visible in the composite image based on their tonal (brightness) value.

Let’s assume, for example, that you have combined two images into a layered document. The upper layer consists of a relatively dark tree set against a very bright sky, and the underlying image features scattered cumulus clouds against a deep blue sky. You could then select the upper image layer and click the “Add a layer effect” button (the “fx” logo) at the bottom of the Layers panel and choose “Blending Options” from the popup menu.

Initially, of course, the upper image layer will completely block the underlying layer from view, because the layers are opaque. But you can blend pixels from the upper and lower layers together based on their brightness values using the “Blend If” sliders.

At the bottom of the Blending Options section, you’ll find the “Blend If” sliders. The upper slider control is labeled “Current Layer”, but it would be more clear if it were instead labeled “Hide Current Layer If”. If you drag the white slider toward the left the brightest pixels in the current layer will be hidden from view. If you instead drag the black slider to the right the darkest pixels in the current layer will be hidden from view. You can also hold the Alt/Option key while clicking on one half of the slider handle to split it in two, which provides a degree of feathering for the transition between visible and not visible pixels.

The lower slider control is labeled “Underlying Layer”, but it would be more clear if it were labeled “Reveal Underlying Layer If”. If you drag the white slider to the left, you will reveal the brightest pixels from the underlying image layer. If you drag the black slider to the right, you will reveal the darkest pixels from the underlying layer. And again, you can Alt/Option-click on the slider handle to separate the controls to create a feathered effect.

With the example image layers noted above, you could, for example, drag the white slider to the left for the Current Layer control to hide the bright sky, revealing the scattered clouds in the sky image layer below. This would replace the bright sky with the more interesting cloudy sky. You could then drag the white slider for the Underlying Layer control to the left to reveal the clouds from the underlying image in all areas, making it look like the tree is enveloped in clouds or fog. You can also separate the sliders to provide some blending, such as to make the clouds revealed from the underlying image layer blend into the image more smoothly.