Author: Tim Grey

Today’s Question: This is a question concerning backup while traveling. My camera has two card slots. I’m going on a 2-week trip without a computer and no access to the internet. Besides having the same photos written to both cards, I’m thinking about buying a WD My Passport Wireless Pro for backup. What do you think?

Tim’s Quick Answer: I would recommend taking a look at the GNARBOX 2.0 SSD rugged backup drive (https://bhpho.to/2IjMQOD). This drive enables you do copy photos directly from an SD memory card, offers excellent performance in part because it is an SSD drive rather than a traditional hard drive, and is water, dust, and shock resistant.

More Detail: While the WD My Passport Wireless (https://bhpho.to/3leisDE) provides a possible solution for downloading photos without a computer, I’ve seen an increasing number of negative reviews indicating problems with this device. The primary advantage of the My Passport Wireless over the GNARBOX recommended above is that the My Passport is considerably less expensive.

To be fair, since this device will be used to create a third copy of your photos in addition to the two copies on the cards in the camera, one could argue that you could compromise on the reliability of the hard drive. However, my feeling is that it is best to not compromise when it comes to backing up your photos.

In particular, I feel it is important to have an additional backup when you’re otherwise only using two cards in the camera for both primary and backup storage. If something were to happen to the camera, for example, you could lose all copies of your photos. Therefore, and additional separate backup device makes sense. And when traveling without a computer, that means a storage device that you can download photos to directly without the need for a computer.

The GNARBOX device is not inexpensive, though that is in large part due to employing SSD storage. There are options for 256GB, 512GB, and 1TB, with the 1TB model selling for about US$900. However, the combination of features makes this a storage option that I think is perfectly suited to traveling with a camera but without a computer.

You can learn more about the GNARBOX here:

https://bhpho.to/2IjMQOD

Today’s Question: After opening a raw image in Photoshop I choose Layer > Duplicate Layer from the menu. I have been doing this routinely thinking it helped to preserve the original image. Is there any value to doing this?

Tim’s Quick Answer: In my view it is not necessary to create a copy of the Background image layer in Photoshop unless and until you need to perform work that requires such a layer. Creating a copy of the Background copy will double the base file size of the image, possibly without a real benefit depending on your workflow.

More Detail: I am an advocate for a non-destructive workflow in Photoshop (or any image-processing software). That can translate into a variety of different things, depending on the task being performed in Photoshop.

For adjustments, I recommend using an adjustment layer unless the type of adjustment you want to apply isn’t available as an adjustment layer (such a with the Shadows/Highlights adjustment). For image cleanup I recommend applying the cleanup on a new empty image layer, unless the cleanup tool you’re using (such as the Patch tool) doesn’t enable you to work across multiple layers to place the cleanup pixels onto an empty image layer.

In situations where it isn’t possible to apply the intended effect with an adjustment layer or work on an empty image layer, then you’ll generally need to make a copy of the Background image layer (or another layer such as with a composite image). In those cases, I certainly wouldn’t hesitate to create a copy of the full layer.

However, duplicating a layer also increases file size. For an image that only consists of a Background image layer, duplicating that layer doubles the size of the file on your hard drive. So, in general I don’t recommend duplicating a layer unless doing so is necessary. This requires, of course, that you use a layer-based non-destructive workflow, and that you are careful to make sure you have the correct layer selected at all times on the Layers panel.

Today’s Question: When I import photos to Lightroom Classic I would like to add a Shoot Name, but that option is grayed out. I have my import parameters set up with a custom naming profile. Is this the reason the Shoot Name field is unavailable?

Tim’s Quick Answer: The Shoot Name field in the File Renaming section of the right panel in the Import dialog in Lightroom Classic relates to the filename structure. In order to be able to enter a value for Shoot Name, you must have the Shoot Name field included in the template you’re using for renaming your photos.

More Detail: Lightroom Classic provides a template-driven approach to renaming a group of photos, including the option to rename photos as they are imported into your catalog. In the File Renaming section of the right panel you’ll see that there are fields for Custom Text, Shoot Name, and Start Number. However, these options are only enabled if you have the applicable option included in the currently selected file renaming template.

You can either select an existing template that includes the field you want to use (such as Shoot Name in this case) or create your own custom template for renaming photos. To edit an existing template or create your own you can choose “Edit” from the Template popup in the File Renaming section.

In the Filename Template Editor dialog, you build a renaming template using tokens and text. For example, you could click the Insert button to the right of the Shoot Name option in the Custom section of the dialog in order to add a token for Shoot Name to the current filename structure. You can also click into the field that includes the file renaming tokens and type your own text. For example, you might use something like “Shoot Name – Sequence # (4)” to have a Shoot Name that you can specify, a dash, and then a four-digit sequence number that you can specify the starting value for.

Once you’ve defined the template structure, click the Preset popup at the top of the Filename Template Editor dialog and choose “Save Current Settings as New Preset” from the popup. In the dialog that appears type a meaningful name for your template and click the Create button. Then click the Done button to close the Filename Template Editor dialog.

At that point, with the new template selected in the Import dialog, you could enter values for the Shoot Name and Start Number, and the files you’re importing will be renamed accordingly.

Today’s Question: What is the best way to convert a raw capture to a JPEG file in Lightroom Classic?

Tim’s Quick Answer: To create a JPEG image based on a raw capture in Lightroom Classic you would want to use the export feature. As part of that process, you could choose whether you want the new JPEG copy of the image to also be included in your catalog along with the original raw capture.

More Detail: In Lightroom Classic when you process a raw capture in the Develop module, you don’t actually create a derivative image file the way you typically would with Photoshop, for example. Instead, in Lightroom Classic you don’t create a new derivative image file based on a raw capture until you export to create that new file.

So, if you wanted to create a JPEG image based on a raw capture, after applying any adjustments you’d like in the Develop module, you can select the image (or multiple images) and then click the Export button at the bottom of the left panel in the Library module.

In the Export dialog you can then configure the settings for the export. First, specify the location where you want to save the copy of the image you’re creating. That could be on the desktop of your computer if you’ll be using that image for some temporary purpose, or you could select the same file as the original raw capture. You also have the option to add the exported image back to your Lightroom Classic catalog by turning on the “Add to This Catalog” checkbox. I generally prefer not to use this option, as it can create confusion in terms of which is the actual original image.

You can configure a naming structure for the new image in the File Naming section if preferred, or leave the “Rename To” checkbox turned off if you want to retain the same filename as the original image. In the File Settings section select the desired file format, which in this case would be JPEG. You can then configure the specific settings based on the file type, such as the Quality setting and color space for a JPEG copy.

You can then adjust settings for resizing the image in the Image Sizing section, apply output sharpening if you’d like, specify which metadata should be included in the exported image, apply a watermark, and choose among the options in the Post-Processing section.

Once you’ve established the export settings, you can click the Export button at the bottom-right of the Export dialog, and the new file will be created.

Today’s Question: Like many, I use Lightroom Classic and Photoshop. After I’ve sent a photo from Lightroom Classic to Photoshop and completed the edits, I use the Save command and Photoshop saves the file back to Lightroom Classic as a TIFF file, with all layers maintained. When I want to send the photo back into Photoshop for additional editing, none of the choices allow sending the file with all Lightroom adjustments while preserving the layers created in Photoshop. That may be all there is, but I would like to know if there’s a way to take the derivative image back into Photoshop with all layers and with Lightroom edits intact and visible?

Tim’s Quick Answer: No. If you have applied adjustments in Lightroom Classic to a TIFF or PSD image that includes layers, if you send that image to Photoshop the Lightroom adjustments will not be visible unless you flatten the image as part of this process. However, the Lightroom adjustments will still apply and be visible once you are back in Lightroom Classic after working on the image in Photoshop.

More Detail: When you send a raw capture from Lightroom Classic to Photoshop, the adjustments you’ve applied in Lightroom will of course be applied to the image, and visible while you’re working in Photoshop. You can then apply any adjustments you’d like in Photoshop, including adding adjustment layers, image layers, and making use of other features. When you save and close the image, the changes you applied in Photoshop will of course be visible for the new derivative image that is now included in your Lightroom Classic catalog.

However, if you want to send that layered image to Photoshop while retaining the layers in the file, you won’t be able to see the Lightroom adjustments while working in Photoshop. So, for example, let’s assume you send a color image to Photoshop and create layers as part of that editing. After you’re finished in Photoshop you convert the image to black and white in Lightroom Classic. If you then send the image back to Photoshop, if you want to keep the layers (by choosing the “Edit Original” option for example) the image will appear in color when you are working in Photoshop, but will return to being a black and white image when you get back to Lightroom Classic.

The only way you can have the Lightroom Classic adjustments applied to a TIFF or PSD image actually appear in Photoshop is if you choose the option to “Edit a Copy with Lightroom Adjustments” when sending the image from Lightroom Classic to Photoshop. However, that will also cause the image to be flattened, which is not something I generally recommend.

So, in short, if you’re sending a TIFF or PSD file back to Photoshop and want to retain the layers, any adjustments you applied to that TIFF or PSD file in Lightroom Classic will not be visible while you’re working in Photoshop.

Today’s Question: Until recently, most of the Adobe Creative Cloud applications were compatible with Windows 7. Now, with seemingly no announcement, updates to Photoshop, Illustrator and InDesign are no longer compatible. I have for some time been using a legacy version of Adobe Audition for compatibility reasons. Am I now forced to use legacy versions of the key Adobe applications?

Tim’s Quick Answer: Adobe has indeed discontinued support for Windows 7, in large part because Microsoft discontinued support for this version of their operating system in January of this year. You’ll either need to upgrade to Windows 10, or use legacy versions of the Adobe applications. Macintosh users similarly must be using MacOS Mojave or later.

More Detail: Adobe announced in 2018 that support would be ending for older versions of both the Windows and Macintosh operating systems. The changes were implemented over the course of the last couple of years. With the latest update to the Adobe Creative Cloud applications, you can no longer install the applications on older operating systems.

Windows users must now be using Windows 10, and Macintosh users must be using MacOS Mojave or later.

It is important to note that Microsoft discontinued support for Windows 7 in January of this year, which means your computer is now more vulnerable to security risks such as malware and computer viruses. I would therefore strongly recommend upgrading to Windows 10.

You can get the detailed system requirements for Adobe Photoshop, which serves as a good general set of requirements for all Adobe applications, on the Adobe website here:

https://helpx.adobe.com/photoshop/system-requirements.html

You can also read about Microsoft’s end of support for Windows 7 here:

https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/windows-7-end-of-life-support-information

Today’s Question: When I need to create a single-layer copy of a composite image in Photoshop, I’ve been using the Merge Visible command. I saw a reference to using Flatten Image instead, and they both seem to do the same thing. Is there a difference, and should I be using one over the other?

Tim’s Quick Answer: The only real difference between Merge Visible and Flatten Image (both found on the Layer menu in Photoshop) is that Flatten Image will always result in only a single layer, while Merge Visible will leave layers behind if the visibility is turned off for a layer.

More Detail: For all practical purposes with a photographic image in Photoshop the Merge Visible and Flatten Image commands found on the Layer menu will produce the same result: a flattened image consisting of a single layer.

However, if you have turned off the visibility of any layers, those layers will remain after you apply the Merge Visible command. This can be useful for situations where you want to merge some layers but not others. For example, if you have made a composite panorama you might reach a point where you want to merge the image layers together while still retaining the adjustment layers above.

To accomplish that you could turn off the visibility of the adjustment layers, leaving only the image layers visible. Then use the Merge Visible command and the adjustment layers will remain while the image layers have been merged into a single layer. With the Flatten Image command, the adjustment layers with visibility turned off would not be preserved.

Today’s Question: I hope you can help with a frustrating issue. I open a JPEG in Photoshop, crop the image, and when I go to Save (not Save As) Photoshop insists on Save As and wants me to save the image as a Photoshop PSD. Why can’t I just re-save to update the JPEG I opened?

Tim’s Quick Answer: In this case it sounds like the “Delete Cropped Pixels” checkbox is turned off for the Crop tool, causing the Background layer to be converted. If you choose Layer > Flatten Image before saving, you should be able to save the image without the Save As dialog appearing.

More Detail: Photoshop will default to the Save As dialog with the file format set to Photoshop PSD when any of the attributes of the image file are no longer supported by the existing file format.

For example, the JPEG format does not support bit depths above 8-bit per channel, layers, or saved selections or alpha channels. In this particular case, since the image is being cropped, it sounds like the “Delete Cropped Pixels” checkbox is turned off. Therefore, the Background image layer is being converted to a normal layer, so that the cropped pixels can be hidden outside the boundary of the canvas, rather than removed from the image altogether.

Flattening the image with the Layer > Flatten Image command will cause the image layer to be converted to a Background image layer (and cause the cropped pixels to be deleted in this case). That will once again enable you to simply use the Save command without seeing the Save As dialog.

In general, the solution here is to make sure the image attributes support the current file format.

Today’s Question: There is another possibility here [with respect to Monday’s question about not being able to move a file into a folder because Lightroom Classic thinks the image is a duplicate when it isn’t]. A file may have been removed from Lightroom Classic but not deleted from the hard drive. As a result, the photo is still in the folder but not visible through the Lightroom Classic interface.

Tim’s Quick Answer: Yes, indeed, if photos had been removed from the Lightroom Classic catalog but not deleted from the hard drive, it could create a situation where you can’t move a photo into a folder, even though in Lightroom Classic it doesn’t appear there is a conflict.

More Detail: When you remove a photo from your Lightroom Classic catalog, you have the option to only remove the photo from the catalog, or to both remove the photo from the catalog and delete the source image from your hard drive.

If you only remove the photo without deleting it (which is the default option), the file will remain in the folder even though you can’t see the image in Lightroom Classic. This would prevent you from moving a photo with the same filename into that folder, even though in Lightroom Classic there doesn’t appear to be a conflict.

In this case, you would probably want to delete the photo that had previously been removed from your Lightroom Classic catalog from your hard drive. You could also rename the photo to remove the conflict, or even add the removed photo back to your Lightroom Classic catalog by right-clicking on the folder in question and choosing the option to synchronize the folder.

While I wish I hadn’t overlooked this issue in my original answer, I’m grateful to my readers (thanks Bob!) who let me know when I missed a detail.

Today’s Question: I am a long-time user of Lightroom Classic. I would like to move the image files (catalog as well) to an external hard drive. In the past I have moved folders/files through the operating system and suffered the consequences (missing files in Catalog). I thank you up front for any assistance you can provide in terms of how to approach this task.

Tim’s Quick Answer: In this scenario I would make use of the “Export as Catalog” command, which enables you to effectively copy all of your photos and your catalog to a new storage location.

More Detail: You could certainly use synchronization software to copy the photos to the external hard drive, and then move your existing catalog. But Lightroom Classic includes a feature that can perform this work for you as well.

You’ll first want to select every single image in your Lightroom Classic catalog, which actually requires a few steps to make sure you don’t miss any photos. Start by clicking on “All Photographs” in the Catalog section of the left panel in the Library module.

Switch to the Grid view (“G” on the keyboard) if you aren’t there already, and make sure “None” is selected from the Library Filter bar, so that no photos are hidden based on filters. Then go to the menu and choose Photo > Stacking > Expand All Stacks, so that no images are “hidden” in a collapsed stack.

You can then choose Edit > Select All from the menu to select all photos. Then choose File > Export as Catalog from the menu to initiate the export.

In the Export as Catalog dialog, navigate to the desired location for the catalog and photo storage, which in this case would be your external hard drive. Enter a name for the catalog in the Save As field, which will become the name of the folder containing the new catalog (and your photos) as well as the catalog file itself. Make sure the “Export negative files” checkbox is turned on, which is necessary to ensure the photos are copied along with the new catalog. Click the Export Catalog button to start the export. This will take considerable time, depending on how many photos are involved.

When the process is finished, go to the new catalog folder on the external hard drive, and double-click the catalog file, which will have a filename extension of “.lrcat”. This will open the new catalog in Lightroom Classic, and all of your photos and metadata will be there, including the original folder structure. Note that the new folder structure will now be within the folder that also contains the catalog.

Once you’ve confirmed that everything appears to be in order with your new catalog and photo storage on the external hard drive and made a new backup of that external hard drive, you can of course delete the original photos and catalog from the original location.

Just be very careful that after the export is completed you only use the new catalog, and don’t accidentally open the old version of the catalog.