Month: April 2024

Today’s Question: Will cleaning the JPEGs out of the Raw+JPEG pairs really “move the needle” at the multi gigabyte level, or am I destined to buy another terabyte of cloud storage pretty soon anyway?

Tim’s Quick Answer: While the specific details will vary, in general I would say that deleting the JPEGs from Raw+JPEG pairs will save about 15% of storage. So, for example, if you have filled a 1TB hard drive with Raw+JPEG pairs, deleting the JPEGs would result in about 150GB of free space.

More Detail: The actual size of a JPEG image can vary significantly, based in large part on variations in the content of the photo along with the quality setting that affects how aggressive the compression is.

Because JPEG compression works by simplifying the contents of a photo, the simpler the content of a photo is to begin with the smaller the file size. For example, a photo that includes nothing but the clear blue sky will result in a JPEG file that is considerably smaller than one with very complex textures. In general cameras default to using reasonably high quality for JPEG captures, but this setting can significantly impact file size as well.

That said, with my library of almost 400,000 photos I have quite a bit of variety, so I have a reasonably good sense of the differences in file sizes. I’ve found that JPEG captures tend to be about one-sixth the size of a raw capture. There will be considerable variation among cameras and based on different camera settings, but this is a reasonably good baseline to work from in my experience.

Taking into account that you would be deleting the JPEG of a Raw+JPEG pair, the space savings represents the percentage of the total file sizes for both the raw and the JPEG. That works out to savings of around 14-15% of storage space when it comes to deleting the JPEGs from Raw+JPEG pairs.

If all your photos were captured with Raw+JPEG mode, that means you might save a total of 15% of your storage capacity, which might very well be worthwhile. If the Raw+JPEG captures represent a relatively small percentage of your overall library of photos, it might not be as worthwhile in terms of saving storage space.

Of course, if you’re like me, it might not be entirely about saving storage space, but also about reducing clutter in your workflow. Plus, in the process of going through your Raw+JPEG captures to confirm that the applicable JPEGs can be deleted, you may very well find other photos you can delete, leading to more savings in storage space.

Today’s Question: Is there a range mask that would eliminate the smoke from a picture of fireworks and, if so, what are its settings?

Tim’s Quick Answer: While a luminance range mask can potentially be helpful in this scenario, you’ll very likely find that simply using the Dehaze adjustment can greatly diminish the appearance of smoke in photos of fireworks.

More Detail: More often than not, fireworks are photographed in dark (or relatively dark) conditions. Therefore, the background including the sky tends to be quite dark, the fireworks are of course very bright, and the residual smoke is somewhere in between in terms of luminance values.

While these tonal ranges do point to the use of a range mask based on luminance in Lightroom Classic, Lightroom, or Camera Raw, in many cases a simple Dehaze adjustment will provide a great solution. I therefore suggest starting with Dehaze, which is found in the Basic section on the right panel in the Develop module in Lightroom Classic, or in the Effects section of the Edit panel in Lightroom or Camera Raw. Increasing the value for Dehaze, potentially by a large amount, can significantly reduce the appearance of smoke in photographs of fireworks.

A range mask for Luminance can also be helpful with many photos of fireworks, since the tonal range for the smoke will tend to fall well between the bright fireworks and the relatively dark background.

To use a range mask in this case go to the Masking controls and create a new mask for Luminance Range. I recommend making sure the Show Overlay checkbox is turned on so you’ll have a better sense of which portion of the image will be affected. Then drag the slider handles below the Luminance Range control inward so that the mask overlay only appears in the smoke area of the photo, not the dark background or bright fireworks. Then pull those handles back outward slightly, so there is some transition between the areas being affected versus not.

Once you’ve refined the mask, you can then apply adjustments to that area to reduce the visibility of the smoke. That would likely include increasing the value for Dehaze, reducing the value for Exposure so the smoke blends better into the dark background, and any other adjustments that help refine the targeted portion of the image.

I have covered masking for these types of targeted adjustments in my comprehensive video courses on “Mastering Lightroom Classic”, “Mastering Adobe Lightroom ‘Cloud'”, and “Photoshop for Photographers”. You can find all of these courses (and the GreyLearning Ultimate Bundle that includes them all, http://timgrey.me/atg99bundle) on the GreyLearning website here:

https://www.greylearning.com

Today’s Question: I know how to change the metadata for one photo [in Lightroom Classic], but for some reason it doesn’t change the metadata when I select multiple photos. I know I must be missing a simple step, but I have not figured out what that step is.

Tim’s Quick Answer: The simple step in this case is to make sure you are in the grid view when you want to update metadata for multiple photos in the Library module of Lightroom Classic. In the grid view metadata updates will affect all selected photos.

More Detail: The issue outlined in today’s question relates to what I refer to as the “loupe view snafu” in Lightroom Classic. If you select multiple photos but are using the loupe view display, metadata updates will only affect the photo shown in the preview area, not the multiple photos selected on the filmstrip.

The idea is that since the loupe view shows a single photo, you are always updating only that single photo even if multiple images are selected on the filmstrip. When you’re in the grid view, you’re seeing multiple photos, and so if multiple of those photos are selected then metadata updates will affect all selected photos.

When you want to update the metadata for multiple photos I recommend switching to the grid view to select those photos rather than selecting them on the filmstrip. This will help get you in the habit of switching to the grid view when you want to update multiple photos, so you won’t be as likely to have the issue where you’re not updating all selected photos.

Note by the way that it is also possible to turn on automatic synchronization for metadata when you’re in the loupe view. After selecting multiple photos on the filmstrip, you can click the toggle button (it looks like a light switch) to the left of the Sync button. This will cause the button to switch to “Auto Sync”, so that metadata updates will affect all selected photos even though you’re in the loupe view.

However, in my view using the Auto Sync option increases the risk that you’ll forget to check the status of the toggle before applying updates. Therefore, I recommend keeping the Auto Sync option turned off, and instead simply use the grid view when you want to update multiple photos or the loupe view when you want to update a single photo.

Today’s Question: What differences will be obvious in photo images when viewed on a 4K monitor vs a 2K monitor if both are 27-inch? Does it make any sense to operate a 4K monitor in 2K resolution to improve apparent sharpness / contrast?

Tim’s Quick Answer: The key difference between a 4K versus 2K monitor display is the greater sharpness on the 4K display. To me a 4K display set to 2K resolution is optimal, because the interface is a good size, but the image quality is still stunning.

More Detail: A 4K display has a resolution featuring approximately 4,000 pixels across (actually 3,840 pixels in most cases) versus about 2,000 pixels across for a 2K display (usually 1,920 pixels). Therefore, the size of the individual pixels on a 4K display will be smaller than on a 2K display, assuming monitors of the same size.

That means you can display significantly more information on a 4K display, such as being able to see more of a high-resolution image at a 100% zoom setting on a 4K display compared to a 2K display. However, a 4K display set to a 4K resolution, especially on a relatively small monitor, can result in interface elements and text that are so small it can be difficult to work with.

However, a 4K display will present a significantly sharper image compared to a 2K display. Therefore, in my view the optimal approach is to opt for a 4K display but set it to about a 2K resolution (such as 1920×1080 pixels). This will provide you with what I think is a more manageable size for the interface elements and text, while still providing the benefit of superior sharpness for the presentation of images.

Contrast and other display qualities will depend upon the specific specifications of the display, not the resolution. For example, the contrast ratio and color space support determine the dynamic range and color gamut the display can reproduce, regardless of the resolution of the display.