Ask Tim Grey

Today’s Question: I was intrigued by your comment [regarding Lightroom Classic] that you could “update the virtual copy to represent the original, demoting the original to a virtual copy”. How would you go about doing that, and are there any pitfalls to doing so?

Tim’s Quick Answer: You can update a virtual copy to represent the original image by selecting that virtual copy and choosing Photo > Set Copy as Original from the menu while in the Library module in Lightroom Classic. There aren’t any pitfalls, as long as you don’t discard an image that contains important metadata.

More Detail: Today’s question is a follow-up to my answer from the July 28th Ask Tim Grey eNewsletter, where I addressed a question about discarding unexpected (and potentially unwanted) virtual copies. As noted in that post, a virtual copy represents an additional set of metadata for a single original image. For example, the original image could be optimized in color, and the virtual copy could be optimized as a black and white image.

In general, it doesn’t really matter which version of an image is the original versus a virtual copy, unless you have a particular preference. For example, it doesn’t really make a difference if the original image is edited as a black and white rather than color, and the virtual copy is in color rather than black and white, and vice versa.

One scenario where it would matter which set of metadata was associated with the original versus the virtual copy, however, was if you wanted to discard the virtual copy. Let’s assume the original is in color and the virtual copy is in black and white, but you only want to retain the black and white version of the image. Discarding the original image would involve discarding the original capture, which in turn would cause virtual copies to be discarded. On the other hand, discarding a virtual copy will not impact the original image.

In the example above, to preserve the virtual copy metadata while discarding the metadata currently associated with the original image you could effectively swap metadata between the original and the virtual copy.

So, you could select the virtual copy in the above scenario, make sure you’re in the Library module, and then choose Photo > Set Copy as Original from the menu. This will swap the original and the virtual copy, so that in this case the original would be in black and white and the virtual copy would be in color. You could then discard the virtual copy if you wanted to, retaining the black and white version (and all other applicable metadata) with the original image.

In the absence of wanting to discard a virtual copy for an image, there’s no real need to convert a virtual copy to the original, as you could simply retain all applicable versions of the same image.

Today’s Question: When I want to save a copy of a layered image in Photoshop as a JPEG, I am in the habit of using the File > Save As command. However, this doesn’t allow me to save a JPEG, so I have to cancel and choose File > Save a Copy. Is there a way to make Save a Copy the default between these options, or do I just need to break my old habit?

Tim’s Quick Answer: Yes, you can simply click the “Save a Copy” button in the “Save As” dialog to switch to “Save a Copy” without having to cancel and choose the command again in Photoshop.

More Detail: In the relatively recent past, Adobe changed the “Save As” command to prevent you from saving an image in a file format that does not support the features you’ve leveraged for the image. For example, if you created a new image in Photoshop and added several layers, if you were able to use the “Save As” command to save the image as a JPEG, you would lose some of your work because JPEG images don’t support layers.

While this updated behavior is tremendously helpful when it comes to making sure you don’t lose any of your important image data in Photoshop, it can be a little frustrating when you intentionally want to save another copy in a format that doesn’t support all the features you’ve used. For example, if you just want to quickly save a JPEG version of the image for sharing, the “Save As” limitations can seem problematic.

However, that’s exactly where the “Save a Copy” command fits in. With the “Save a Copy” command you can save an image in any file format you’d like, such as being able to save as a JPEG when working with a layered file. The “Save a Copy” command won’t save the existing image in the new file format but rather will create a new derivative image without altering the original.

Since the “Save a Copy” command is relatively new, it is understandable that many Photoshop users would be in the habit of choosing “Save As” from the File menu. If you do make that mistake, you can simply click the “Save a Copy” button in the “Save As” dialog to switch to the “Save a Copy” dialog instead.

Today’s Question: In Lightroom Classic I selected a folder that now contains 500 photos, not the 250 I had originally processed. Looking at the filmstrip, I see that every other photo is now a virtual copy. I am sure that I did something but have no idea what. Do you have any suggestions? Can I batch delete all the virtual copies at one time rather than one at a time on the filmstrip?

Tim’s Quick Answer: As long as the virtual copies represent the same adjustments and metadata as the original images, and the virtual copies weren’t added to a collection you need, you can indeed easily delete all the virtual copies from Lightroom Classic.

More Detail: Virtual copies represent an additional set of metadata (which can include Develop adjustments) for an original image. Removing a virtual copy from Lightroom Classic will not delete the original image. However, removing a virtual copy could cause you to lose some metadata or adjustments, or cause a collection to no longer reflect the intended images. It is therefore worthwhile to review the status of virtual copies before removing them from Lightroom Classic.

You can create a virtual copy by right-clicking on a photo and choosing “Create Virtual Copy” from the popup menu, or by selecting an image and choosing Photo > Create Virtual Copy from the menu. You can also create virtual copies by selecting images and creating a new collection, enabling the options to add the selected images to the new collection and to create virtual copies of those images.

Because of the various ways virtual copies can be created, it is important to make sure you review the metadata for virtual copies before removing them from Lightroom Classic.

Since you aren’t sure how the virtual copies were created in the first place, I suspect there’s a good chance they were created as part of the process of creating a collection. If you remove a virtual copy from Lightroom Classic that is included in a collection, that image will be removed from the collection.

For example, you can right-click on a virtual copy and highlight “Go to Collection” on the popup menu to see a submenu that includes all collections (if applicable) that the image is included in. You can also compare the metadata (such as keywords, star ratings, and other fields) between the original image and virtual copy.

Removing a virtual copy will have no impact on the original image, other than potentially losing metadata or collection membership that were applied to the virtual copy rather than the original. As long as the virtual copy doesn’t reflect any adjustments from the Develop module, metadata updates, or collections that you are concerned about, you can indeed remove the virtual copies.

If you decide it is safe to remove the virtual copies, you can navigate to the applicable folder location, then set a filter to view only virtual copies using the Kind section of the Attribute tab on the Library Filter bar above the grid view display. The virtual copy option is the second of three buttons near the far-right of the Attribute tab of the Library Filter bar, with the virtual copy button being the middle of those buttons and represented by a rectangle with the bottom-left corner turned up.

Once you’ve set a filter to only show virtual copies in a particular location, you can select all and then right-click and choose “Remove Photo” from the popup menu. Then click the “Remove from Lightroom” button in the confirmation dialog, and the virtual copies will be removed without deleting the original images.

Of course, if there have been updates to the virtual copy that are not reflected in the original image, you’ll want to either update the original to reflect the changes that had been applied to the virtual copy, or update the virtual copy to represent the original, demoting the original to a virtual copy.

Today’s Question: Suppose I send an image from Lightroom Classic to Photoshop, work on it in Photoshop and save it. Then I edit some more to create a different version of the image and use the Save As command to create another file. Would both images appear in Lightroom Classic? Can you make multiple versions of the same image using Photoshop and have them all appear in Lightroom Classic?

Tim’s Quick Answer: While it is possible to have multiple derivative versions of the same image appear in Lightroom Classic when they are created in Photoshop, doing so is not possible by simply using the Save As command in Photoshop.

More Detail: If you send an image from Lightroom Classic to Photoshop and then choose File > Save, that derivative image will appear in your Lightroom Classic catalog. However, if you then make changes and use the Save As command to save a new copy, that additional copy will be saved on your hard drive but will not appear in Lightroom Classic. You would need to import the image (such as by using the Synchronize Folder command) to add it to your catalog.

However, you can use a different workflow to ensure that additional derivative images are all included in your Lightroom Classic catalog.

One option would be to save your original derivative in Photoshop and close that file, then return to Lightroom Classic and create a copy of that derivative image using Photoshop. For example, you could send your original raw capture to Photoshop using the Photo > Edit In > Edit in Adobe Photoshop command. When you’re doing working on that image in Photoshop, choose File > Save from the menu followed by File > Close.

You can then return to Lightroom Classic and choose the derivative created in the previous step (not the original raw image) and choose Photo > Edit In > Edit in Adobe Photoshop from the menu. Because the selected image is not a raw capture, Lightroom Classic will ask how you want to process the image. In this context you can choose the “Edit a Copy” option. This will create a copy of the first derivative image, saving it with a new filename. You can apply any adjustments you’d like in Photoshop, and then simply use the File > Save and File > Close commands to save this updated derivative copy.

If you want to open an existing derivative image in Photoshop without creating an additional copy, after choosing the Photo > Edit In > Edit in Photoshop command you can choose the “Edit Original” option to open that file directly in Photoshop with all layers and other saved options intact and ready for you to apply revisions to.

Today’s Question: With Lightroom Classic, what is the benefit of syncing some or all of my images?

Tim’s Quick Answer: The primary reason to synchronize photos to the cloud with Lightroom Classic is to make those images available throughout the Lightroom ecosystem, such as through the Lightroom mobile app or via Lightroom in a web browser. Synchronization can also provide an additional backup for important images.

More Detail: When you enable synchronization for a collection in Lightroom Classic, the images in that collection are synchronized (and backed up) via the Adobe Creative Cloud service. In other words, copies of those images are stored on Adobe’s servers.

The key advantage to synchronizing photos to the cloud is that you can then access those photos from virtually anywhere with an internet connection. For example, collections you synchronize to the cloud from Lightroom Classic will appear as albums on the Lightroom mobile app for smartphones and tablets. You can also access those albums and photos using Lightroom in a web browser (http://lightroom.adobe.com).

These options provide a great way of sharing photos on the go with others, for example. It also provides a little bit of extra peace of mind, since the cloud-based copies of your images provide an additional backup of the photos, which you could download from cloud storage later should the need arise.

For example, I synchronize some of my favorite photos via various collections from Lightroom Classic, so I can easily share those images with others. This enables me to showcase the beauty of the Palouse region of eastern Washington State, where I have led numerous workshops over the years, for example. I can also easily share some of my favorite photos from around the world, such as by showing images from an album via the Lightroom app on my smartphone, which is pretty much with me constantly.

Beyond sharing your images with others, synchronization can help expand the flexibility of your workflow. For example, before returning home from a trip you could synchronize all photos captured during that trip, so they are available on your smartphone or tablet. You can then use that smartphone or tablet to review photos, assign star ratings, and even apply adjustments (among other tasks) without needing to access Lightroom Classic on your computer to do so.

Today’s Question: I recently got my first HDR-capable monitor (Windows computer). When editing in Lightroom Classic, I have the option of using standard view or HDR in the develop module. Since my printer can’t show the full range of the monitor, in which mode should I edit?

Tim’s Quick Answer: With an HDR display, assuming you might leverage HDR output at some point, I recommend first optimizing the image in HDR mode, and then switching to SDR mode to finalize the image for output. Otherwise, there isn’t any real advantage to working in the HDR mode.

More Detail: The HDR editing mode in the Develop module in Lightroom Classic enables you to view an expanded tonal range for images, both single-capture raw images and true high dynamic range (HDR) images. With an HDR-compatible monitor this enables you to see and edit based on a wider output range.

The HDR view is only applicable if you are using a display that supports HDR, as well as if you’ll be sharing the image via HDR output at some point. If you have no intention of generating HDR output (such as sharing via an HDR display), there’s no real benefit to working in HDR mode.

So, if you’re limited to only being able to print or otherwise share images in standard dynamic range (SDR), you can simply continue to work in SDR mode rather than leveraging HDR mode. For images that you might share via HDR output, such as a digital slideshow on an HDR display, I recommend first working in HDR mode to optimize the image. You can then switch to SDR mode to finalize the image for printing or other SDR output, such as for sharing online where most users are likely not viewing your images with an HDR display.

Today’s Question: I just read your answer to question about creating thin ovals with the radial gradient tool. Somewhere in the last few Lightroom Classic updates I lost the guide handles and lines for both linear and radial gradients. How do I get them back?

Tim’s Quick Answer: You can get the controls back for the gradient options for masking in Lightroom Classic by choosing “Auto” or “Always” from the “Show Edit Pins” popup on the toolbar below the image preview area.

More Detail: There are several options for the visibility of controls for the Linear Gradient and Radial Gradient options for masking in Lightroom Classic. These are available from the “Show Edit Pins” popup on the toolbar below the image preview area. Note that you can also toggle the display on or off by pressing the “H” key on the keyboard, so you may have unintentionally pressed that keyboard shortcut at some point, causing the controls to be hidden.

If the toolbar is not visible below the image preview area in the Develop module, you can press the letter “T” on the keyboard to toggle the display. You can also choose View > Show Toolbar (or View > Hide Toolbar) from the menu to toggle the toolbar display.

At the far left of the toolbar you’ll find the “Show Edit Pins” popup. I prefer to set this popup to “Auto”, so the controls will appear when my mouse pointer is over the image, and they will disappear when I move the mouse pointer out of the image area.

You can also choose “Always” from the popup if you want the controls to always be visible, regardless of where your mouse pointer is positioned. The “Selected” option will cause only the controls for an active edit pin to be displayed, while “None” will obviously hide the controls.

Once you’ve changed the setting, it is “sticky”, meaning your choice will remain until you change it again. Just keep in mind that accidentally pressing “H” on the keyboard will hide the controls, in which case you could also simply press “H” again to make the controls visible again.

Today’s Question: Could you provide some details about how the color RGB data is factored to arrive at the areas shown in the gray for the histogram in Lightroom Classic?

Tim’s Quick Answer: The area of the histogram in Lightroom Classic that appears gray is simply the area where the individual histograms for all three color channels (red, green, and blue) overlap each other.

More Detail: As noted in an Ask Tim Grey post last week, the histogram for an image reflects the relative distribution of tonal values in the image. However, when the histogram is presented as an RGB histogram, meaning that the individual color channels for red, green, and blue are represented, the shape of the overall histogram becomes a bit more complicated.

Specifically, instead of simply displaying a single histogram chart based on the luminance (brightness) values for pixels in the image, individual histograms are calculated for each of the color channels (red, green, and blue). Those three histogram charts are then overlaid together to provide a visual representation of the distribution of tonal values for each color channel that is used to create the overall image.

In Lightroom Classic, the area where all three color channels overlap completely is shown in light gray. Taken by itself, this gray area would be completely meaningless, because it only reflects the areas where all three color channel histograms overlap. However, it is helpful to have that gray area displayed as a way to provide context for the relative shapes of the individual histogram displays for the red, green, and blue channels.

For example, by having this gray area shown, it is easier to see which colors are more dominant in the shadows versus the highlights. Those colors would still stand out reasonably well without the gray indication of channel overlap, but having the gray color representing the overlap makes the color channels that stand out a bit in terms of pixel value distribution also stand out a bit better in terms of visibility on the histogram display.

Today’s Question: I was looking at 32-inch monitors, mostly because my vision isn’t as good as it used to be and I’m hoping I can make everything in Lightroom Classic easier to see without leaning forward. On the web there are comments saying there is an issue with Lightroom Classic and a larger monitor, with significant slowing. I’m wondering if you know of any issues with Lightroom Classic not being able to work well with a 32-inch monitor.

Tim’s Quick Answer: In terms of performance, the issue would be the resolution that the display is set to, not the physical size of the display. So as long as you were not using a very high setting for resolution, the larger display would not cause any performance issues.

More Detail: Setting a display to a very high resolution can negatively impact performance in Lightroom Classic, because there are more pixels that need to be processed to update that display. However, this issue relates to the resolution setting for the display, not the physical size of the display. Furthermore, a system with high performance specifications can make up for the potential performance degradation caused by a high-resolution display.

If you’re getting a larger display to improve visibility, there’s a good chance you’re going to be setting that display to a lower-than-maximum resolution. After all, if you’re trying to make the display easier to read, using a high resolution setting would work against that goal.

For example, if the 32-inch display supports 4K resolution, but you set that display to a resolution setting closer to around 3,000 pixels on the long side, you could expect the same performance as though you were using a 27-inch display set to around 3,000 pixels on the long side.

Furthermore, if your computer has robust specifications, the display resolution won’t be too significant of an issue. That includes, for example, having a relatively large amount of video memory, leveraging the GPU to maximize performance, building 1:1 previews for all images, and other factors that can improve performance overall.

In terms of the display, the key factor affecting performance is how many pixels need to be processed, not the physical size of the display.

Today’s Question: Why would you buy a 4K monitor if you’re not going to set it to a 4K resolution? Wouldn’t be better to buy a less expensive monitor with a lower resolution?

Tim’s Quick Answer: Put simply: Improved display quality. With more pixels for a given display size compared to a lower-resolution display, a 4K monitor provides enhanced detail. That holds true even if you set the display to a lower resolution than the maximum setting.

More Detail: A monitor display can be set to a variety of different resolutions, but changing the display resolution through the operating system doesn’t change the actual resolution of the display. In other words, a monitor has a fixed number of pixels, you can just scale the display to leverage those pixels in different ways.

A monitor with a 4K resolution has approximately 4,000 pixels horizontally. In most cases that number is closer to 3,800, but the display still gets identified as “4K”.

While a 4K monitor enables you to set the display to its native resolution, with around 4,000 pixels across, you may not want to make use of that setting. At that high resolution, especially for a display that isn’t particularly large, the text and other interface elements on the screen may be too small to see effectively.

For example, I typically prefer displays of around 27 inches in part because I like to have the display relatively close to me. I feel that a 32-inch display is a bit too large for my preferences, for example. With a display of this size, I personally find that using 4K resolution is just not comfortable, with many display elements being too small.

As a result, I tend to favor a display resolution that is closer to 3,000 pixels across, give or take, in terms of how interface elements are displayed. However, I still find there is a considerable advantage to opting for a 4K display, even though I’ll generally set the display to a resolution lower than 4K.

If you compare a 4K display versus a monitor with a resolution of around 3,000 pixels across, with both set to the same resolution of around 3,000 pixels across, you’ll find that the 4K display provides a noticeably sharper and cleaner looking display. To me the difference is significant enough that once I’ve seen a 4K display running at around 3,000 pixels across, I don’t want to return to a display with a lower resolution.

Therefore, I consider it an excellent idea to choose a display that has a 4K (or even 5K) resolution, even if like me you prefer to run that display at a lower resolution setting. The elements on the screen will be scaled to the resolution setting you’ve established, but the higher resolution of the 4K display will result in smoother lines with a sharper overall appearance.