Sharing Adjustments with Photo

Facebooktwitterlinkedin

Today’s Question: Is there a way to send a DNG file with editable adjustments to someone when I want them to see what edits I have made in Lightroom?

Tim’s Quick Answer: Yes, you can export a photo as a DNG (or original raw capture format) and the Develop adjustment settings from Lightroom will be included in metadata. That file can then be imported into Lightroom or opened in Photoshop and the adjustments will be visible (and editable).

More Detail: When you export a photo as an Adobe DNG image or original raw capture format from Lightroom, the Develop settings are embedded in the metadata for the file. In the case of an image exported as a DNG file the metadata will be included in the file itself. If you export a raw capture using the “Original” setting in the Export dialog the metadata added in Lightroom (including Develop settings) will be saved in an XMP sidecar file saved along with the exported image. That XMP file will have the same base filename as the raw capture, with an “.xmp” filename extension.

If you send the DNG file (or the raw file plus the XMP file) to someone else, they can either import that image into Lightroom or open it with Photoshop. In the case of Photoshop that would actually mean the image would be opened via Adobe Camera Raw.

In either Camera Raw and Lightroom, the person you sent the photo to would see your final edited version of the image. The adjustment settings for the image would also be set exactly as you had them at the time the source image was exported. In other words, they would see exactly what adjustments you applied to the photo, and could make changes to those adjustment settings if needed.

Cropping in the Camera

Facebooktwitterlinkedin

Today’s Question: If I am using my Nikon D850 with a 24-70mm lens in FX mode, I have the obvious de facto range of 24-70mm. If I then switch to DX mode at a 1.5X crop factor, in theory I would then have extended my range to 105mm. In this scenario am I correct in saying by carrying this one lens only a steep hike up the mountain I have the equivalent of a 24-105mm lens? From an image quality point of view what am I sacrificing when I am operating the 24-70 in the DX mode? What would be the difference between an image shot with my 24-70mm at 70mm in DX mode [105mm effective focal length] versus using a Nikon 105mm prime lens in FX mode?

Tim’s Quick Answer: Put simply, when you make use of this type of option that enables you to achieve the field of view of a longer lens, what you are actually doing is cropping the image in the camera. In other words, the image captured in this crop mode will have a lower resolution. You would get the exact same result in terms of image quality if you captured in the normal full-resolution mode, and cropped the image in post-processing.

More Detail: In this case I’m addressing a question about a specific camera model that offers what is effectively in-camera cropping to a lower resolution, effectively providing a field of view of a longer focal length lens in the process. This feature, however, is available in a variety of different camera models from different manufacturers.

The key thing to keep in mind is that when you switch your camera from full-resolution mode (FX mode in this example) to a cropped mode (DX mode in this case), you’re really just cropping the image circle projected by the lens in the camera. In other words, you’re capturing an image that includes only part of the pixels on the image sensor.

In this specific example, the Nikon D850 has a 45.4 megapixel resolution. When you use DX mode, you are cropping the image that the sensor is recording, and ending up with a 19.4 megapixel image.

You aren’t sacrificing image quality at all in this case. You’re only giving up resolution. You could achieve the exact same result (of using DX mode) by capturing the image in FX mode and then cropping after the fact to the same sizing represented by DX mode (a 1.5X cropping factor in this case).

Of course, you could keep the camera in FX mode, and use a lens with a longer focal length. So you need to consider the impact on resolution in terms of the in-camera cropping.

With the full resolution of 45.4 megapixels, you could print the image at its native resolution to about 18″x28″. That is assuming a 300 ppi print resolution, and no enlargement of the original image. You could obviously print even larger with great quality if you wanted to. For comparison, the DX image would have a native print size of about 12″x18″. Once again, you could print larger if needed.

But the point is that in FX mode the native print size is about 18″x28″, and in DX mode the native print size is about 12″x18″.

In FX mode using a 105mm lens, a capture will have a larger potential output size than if you were using the DX mode with a 70mm lens (105mm effective focal length). That could also translate into slightly better detail in the FX shot, since you have more pixels to work with. But the framing of the two images would be identical. Plus, the DX shot would have a smaller file size than the FX shot.

So, if you need to be able to produce very large prints, you may want to favor FX mode with a longer lens as needed. If you want to favor smaller file sizes (because you are cropping pixels on the image sensor) and don’t mind not being able to print quite so larger, using a shorter lens in DX mode provides a great solution. What that really translates to is that if you’re not intending to ever make especially large prints, you might favor using DX mode most of the time, with shorter (and lighter) lenses to match up with the in-camera cropping. But if you want to be able to make very large prints, you may want to favor FX mode, cropping in post-processing when you need a tighter shot than your maximum lens focal length allows.

Non-Destructive with JPEG?

Facebooktwitterlinkedin

Today’s Question: Regarding the advice [from the May 7th Ask Tim Grey eNewsletter] to maintain the JPEG format instead of converting to DNG when importing an image from a smartphone [into Lightroom], is there any other disadvantage other than increased file size? I’m concerned that with a JPEG photo that’s optimized (in Lightroom) and saved through several cycles may degrade due to the lossy nature of the JPEG format.

Tim’s Quick Answer: There is not a cumulative loss of quality caused by working with a JPEG image in Lightroom’s Develop module. The only cumulative degradation in image quality would occur if you exported the adjusted photo as a JPEG, since that exported JPEG copy would have JPEG compression applied to it as well.

More Detail: When you are adjusting an image in the Develop module in Lightroom, that work is non-destructive to the original image. What that means is that you are not altering the original pixel values in the source image file.

Cumulative degradation of image quality in a JPEG image only occurs when you make changes to the actual image data, saving the result as a JPEG image (even if you are simply saving to update the existing file. So, for example, if you apply adjustments to a JPEG image in Photoshop, close the image, then re-open the image, apply adjustments, and save again, the overall image quality would suffer. That is because the compression applied to the pixel data would be performed more than once, reducing overall image quality.

Even that cumulative loss of image quality would not be significant provided you were using a moderately high Quality setting for the JPEG image, and didn’t adjust and re-save the image a very large number of times. In other words, this isn’t an issue you really need to worry about too much in a typical workflow.

This is the reason I don’t really recommend converting an original JPEG capture to a different file format that would result in a larger file size. You aren’t getting a significant quality benefit for the JPEG image, even if you convert it to a higher bit-depth and save it in a file format that avoids lossy compression. There would be very tiny differences, but in most cases not enough benefit to justify the larger file size and slower workflow.

There is certainly an advantage to capturing more data in the first place, such as by opting for raw capture over JPEG capture. But once you have a JPEG capture, the benefit of converting to a different file format in general is rather modest. That is especially true in Lightroom, where your ongoing adjustments are not causing a cumulative loss of image quality.

Moving Lightroom Previews

Facebooktwitterlinkedin

Today’s Question: I don’t recall you ever talking about the HUGE space that the full-size previews [for Lightroom Classic CC] eventually take up on one’s computer hard drive. I know how to move the catalog (not that large) to another external drive, but I could not find out how to move the previews to an external hard drive to save space on my computer. My previews take up 100 GB!!

Tim’s Quick Answer: All of the previews for your photos in Lightroom Classic CC are actually stored in a file alongside the catalog file. As a result, if you move the entire folder containing your Lightroom catalog file, the previews will come along with the catalog.

More Detail: Lightroom creates previews of your photos to speed up the process of reviewing images. There are a variety of different previews available, including the option to generate full-resolution (1:1) previews. As the number of photos in your catalog increases, the previews files can obviously get quite large. That is especially true if you generate full-resolution previews for some (or all) of your photos.

The catalog file has a filename extension of “.lrcat”. Alongside that file you will also see a file that contains the previews for your images. That file will have the same base filename as the catalog with the word “Previews” appended to it, and this file will have an “.lrdata” filename extension.

As long as the previews file remains with the catalog file, Lightroom will be able to find the previews that have already been generated. So, you can move the folder containing the catalog file to a different storage location, and the previews will be included with that transfer.

To actually move your Lightroom catalog to a different location, be sure to first close Lightroom. You can then move the folder containing your Lightroom catalog to the desired location. To quickly open Lightroom with the catalog in the new location, you can simply double-click on the catalog file (with the “.lrcat” filename extension) to open Lightroom using that catalog.

Note, by the way, that you can also have Lightroom automatically purge full-resolution previews after a set time interval, to help keep that particular previews file from getting too large. To review this setting, bring up the Catalog Settings dialog by choosing “Catalog Settings” from the Lightroom menu on Macintosh or the Edit menu on Windows. On the File Handling tab you can then select how soon you want full-resolution previews discarded from the popup labeled “Automatically Discard 1:1 Previews”.

Persistent Keywords in Adobe Bridge

Facebooktwitterlinkedin

Today’s Question: In the process of transitioning from an old computer to a new one, my keyword list in Adobe Bridge has been lost. When I select photos the keywords show up on the list temporarily, so I have to right-click and choose “Make Persistent” so the keyword will stay on the list. Is there a more efficient way to get all of my keywords onto the list?

Tim’s Quick Answer: There isn’t an option to select multiple keywords in Adobe Bridge and add them to the keyword list all at once using the Make Persistent command. However, you could export your keyword list from Bridge on the old computer, and then import it to the new computer.

More Detail: By default Adobe Bridge will show you which keywords are in the metadata of a selected image, and allows you to type new keywords that you want to add to the selected photo. However, some photographers prefer to use a keyword list to help ensure they are being consistent in their approach to keywording.

In Bridge you can maintain a list of keywords that will always be available. This enables you, for example, to add a keyword from the list to a selected image by simply turning on the checkbox for the applicable keyword. The keyword list is found on the Keywords panel in Bridge, which can be displayed by choosing Window > Keywords Panel from the menu.

If you haven’t added a keyword to the keyword list on the Keywords panel, then you can’t use the keyword list to easily (and consistently) add keywords to your photos. However, you can easily add existing keywords from the metadata for your photos to the keyword list. After selecting a photo, any keywords in the metadata for the photo that are not already on the keywords list will appear in italics on the Keywords panel. If you want a keyword to remain on the Keywords panel permanently, you can right-click on the keyword and choose “Make Persistent” from the popup menu that appears.

Of course, this could be a rather time-consuming and tedious process, since you can’t select multiple keywords to make persistent all at once. Instead, I recommend exporting your existing keyword list from Adobe Bridge on the old computer, and then import that list into Bridge on the new computer.

To export the keywords list, go to the Keywords panel in Bridge on the computer that already has your full keyword list. Click the panel popup menu button (it has an icon showing three horizontal lines) at the top-right of the Keywords panel, and choose “Export”. Save the list and copy the resulting file to your new computer. Then, in Bridge on the new computer go to the same popup menu and choose “Import”. Select the exported keyword list file, and you will have your full keyword list to Bridge on the new computer.

Mobile Capture Formats

Facebooktwitterlinkedin

Today’s Question: Recently you addressed importing files from an iPhone. I think you favored the TIFF format. I started to import from my iPhone X and the only option beside JPEG is DNG. Am I using the wrong app?

Tim’s Quick Answer: The answer you’re referring to related to a question about exporting from the Photos application on a computer, not importing photos directly from the iPhone. With an iPhone your capture format options are JPEG or HEIC with the default Camera app. You can also capture in Adobe DNG using the Lightroom mobile app.

More Detail: Photographers are accustomed to being able to use a proprietary raw capture format with most cameras, but this is not an option with smartphone photography. Most smartphones will capture using the JPEG file format by default. The iPhone now also supports capturing as HEIC images. HEIC is a variation on HEIF, or High Efficiency Image Format.

With the Lightroom mobile app, you can also capture in Adobe DNG, which effectively means you are capturing in a raw format. This will help preserve image quality right at the time of capture, and provide more flexibility in post processing.

Note that when importing photos into Lightroom you also have the option to convert the photos to the Adobe DNG format. For JPEG captures this would provide minimal benefit for your image-optimization workflow, and would increase the overall file size compared to a JPEG capture.

In other words, you can achieve better image quality by capturing smartphone photos with the Adobe DNG option in the Lightroom mobile app. When importing your smartphone captures into Lightroom, I recommend keeping those images in their original capture format, simply using the “Copy” option during import rather than the “Copy as DNG” option.

Update Process Version for All

Facebooktwitterlinkedin

Today’s Question: You have a video on updating older photos to the latest process version. Why would you not do that? It seems like a periodic housekeeping chore when a new process version comes out.

Tim’s Quick Answer: The only reason not to update all (or many) photos in batch to the latest process version is that doing so can cause a change in appearance for the photos. While that may actually be a good thing in many cases, there are many situations where you may not want the appearance of a photo to change after having previously finalized your adjustments.

More Detail: When you change the process version for a photo, it is very possible that the appearance of your photos may change. In most cases those changes will be very minor, and often the changes may actually improve the appearance of the photos. But sometimes even a change for the better may be problematic.

For example, if you sell prints for some of your best photos, consistency from one print to the next can be very important. You may want to ensure that every print will have an identical appearance to the extent possible. Changing the process version would generally mean that later prints would not match earlier prints, for example.

Again, the differences are generally relatively minor, but in some cases even a small change may be a problem. Some photographers may be perfectly comfortable updating many photos to the latest process version, and then simply reviewing the final results as needed, such as when preparing an image to be shared. Others may prefer to take a more cautious approach, only updating photos that they specifically want to work with in the Develop module to refine the overall appearance.

Note that the lesson that discussed locating (and updating) photos that are set to an older process version is included in my “Lightroom Quick Tips” course. That particular lesson was #93 from April 17, 2019. This course features a new tip every week, and you can get more details on the GreyLearning website here:

https://www.greylearning.com/courses/lightroom-tips

New Enhance Details Feature

Facebooktwitterlinkedin

Today’s Question: I’ve tried to use the new Enhance Details option in Lightroom Classic, and it doesn’t seem to do anything to the photos I’ve tested it with. Has this been your experience?

Tim’s Quick Answer: My experience has been similar, in that the testing I’ve conducted shows the effects of the new Enhance Details option in Lightroom Classic CC does not have a significant impact on overall detail levels in the photo.

More Detail: When I read the description of the new Enhance Details feature in Lightroom Classic CC, I was certainly intrigued. I set about performing a quick test, which revealed virtually no visible change in the image after using Enhance Details.

I then started searching for images that I thought might benefit from Enhance Details, testing each in turn. When you process a raw capture with Enhance Details, a new Adobe DNG file is created, with the effect applied to that DNG. This leaves the original raw capture unaltered. For the numerous photos I tested, I then loaded the “before” and “after” images into Photoshop as layers, so I could more easily test the results.

I zoomed in on various areas of the photos I was using for testing, and switched between the original raw capture and the DNG that had Enhance Details applied. While I could see some minor variation in pixel values in some areas of some of the test images, the result wasn’t what I would refer to as having had the details enhanced.

In a couple of cases the results were actually a little bit worse with Enhance Details applied, with some very minor color artifacts appearing (and some detail being reduced) in the version of the image with Enhance Details applied.

I think the concept of the Enhance Details adjustment is very interesting, and I’m sure the feature will be improved over time. In the meantime, I’m taking a “wait and see” approach to see if at some point in the future the Enhance Details feature might become an important part of my workflow.

In the meantime, however, my experience suggests it is not worthwhile to create an additional version of your source capture just to take advantage of the new Enhance Details feature. Hopefully that will change with a future update.

Deleting After Review

Facebooktwitterlinkedin

Today’s Question: I now have a bunch of downloaded new photos, each with a red label from using my ‘preset import’ for adding a red label. Then I go through them all my downloaded images and assign a 1-star rating to those with potential. When that’s done, does that mean that I can delete/remove all the remaining red label images?

Tim’s Quick Answer: In concept, yes, once you have identified your best photos from a given photo shoot, you can delete the outtakes. Of course, you’ll want to consider whether you actually want to delete your outtakes, versus simply using a filter to hide those outtakes from view when you want to review only your favorite photos.

More Detail: During one of my recent presentations as part of the GreyLearning Webinar Series, I presented my workflow for making sure I review every photo when identifying my favorite images from a given trip or photo shoot. You can view a recording of the full presentation on my “Tim Grey TV” channel on YouTube here ( https://youtu.be/2I73Eq2r7E8 ):

One of the techniques I use to make sure I review every photo is to add a color label to all photos upon import, marking the images as needing to be reviewed. After reviewing a batch of photos and assigning star ratings to my favorites, I can remove the red color label from those photos, so I know all of the images were reviewed.

At that point, any images that have been reviewed but don’t have a star rating assigned to them can be assumed to be outtakes. At that point, assuming you’re confident in your review process, you could delete all photos that have already been reviewed (those that don’t have a red color label in my workflow) and that don’t have a star rating assigned to them.

Of course, you’ll also want to consider whether you want to delete the photos, or keep them in your catalog and instead use filters to view only images with star ratings assigned to them when you want to work with only your favorite photos from a trip or photo shoot.

Editing Workflow

Facebooktwitterlinkedin

Today’s Question: After photographing with my iPhone I would like to post-process the image in Photoshop. The only way I know to do this is to export the image from Apple’s Photos application which gives me two options: “Unmodified Original” or simply as JPEG, TIFF, or PNG. Which do you recommend if extensive post-processing is intended? The unmodified file was JPG at 1.8 MB and the TIFF file was 34MB, but all other characteristics were the same, such as pixel dimension, and color mode.

Tim’s Quick Answer: In this type of scenario I suggest exporting as a TIFF image, since you will likely want to save the final result from Photoshop with various layers intact. Also note that choosing a file format rather than “Unmodified Original” will also ensure that adjustments you’ve applied in Photos will be included as part of the exported image.

More Detail: In this scenario the original capture was a JPEG image, rather than the newer HEIC format or an Adobe DNG file (such as for images captured using the Lightroom CC mobile app). That means you are starting out with 8-bit per channel data, and pixel data that has been compressed to reduce file size. In other words, you aren’t starting out with an image that was optimized for image quality.

In concept that means you could continue working with a JPEG image, since that is what you started with. However, applying significant adjustments and possibly re-opening the image several times to make revisions can have a further negative impact on image quality.

If you are going to process a JPEG capture there isn’t a significant benefit to converting to the 16-bit per channel mode, because you have already started with 8-bit per channel data. However, you will likely want to take advantage of adjustment layers and perhaps additional image layers in Photoshop, which would require a TIFF or PSD file format.

In addition, converting to something other than a JPEG image will ensure you are applying additional image compression when the image is modified and re-saved. That additional compression can further degrade overall image quality.

So, since you would likely want to save the final result as a layered image in Photoshop, to me it makes sense to convert to a TIFF file right from the point of exporting the image from the Photos app. Note, however, that you can choose to have that TIFF image in the 8-bit per channel bit depth, which will provide a TIFF image that is half the size it would be in the 16-bit per channel mode.