Author: Tim Grey

Today’s Question: Can a linear gradient affect a portion of the picture in the middle of the image? If not, could you achieve the desired effect by applying two linear gradients, one from the top and the other from the bottom?

Tim’s Quick Answer: Yes, it is possible to apply a targeted adjustment in an area defined by a gradient (or pair of gradients) for the central area of an image.

More Detail: A targeted adjustment defined by a linear gradient typically applies an adjustment that affects one side of the image, gradually transitioning to no effect on the opposite side of the image. However, there are ways to have the graduated adjustment affect a central area of an image.

In Photoshop this type of targeted adjustment can be created very easily by using the “Reflected” style for the Gradient tool when creating the gradient on the layer mask for the adjustment layer (or adjustment group). After creating a layer mask (such as by simply adding an adjustment layer) in Photoshop you can select the Gradient tool and set the colors to the defaults of white and black by pressing the letter “D” on the keyboard. You can then choose the fourth of the five style buttons for the gradient on the option bar, which is the Reflected option. Draw a gradient from the center of the image outward, and the resulting mask will be white at the center while tapering off to black in both directions based on the direction you dragged.

If you’re using Lightroom, Lightroom Classic, or Camera Raw, the same type of effect can be achieved by using two gradients to define the overall mask. You could start with a normal Linear Gradient mask, drawing a gradient that goes from the center of the image outward, such as toward the top. This will cause the targeted adjustment to affect the lower portion of the image, tapering off toward the top of the image.

You can then use the Subtract option to apply another Linear Gradient mask, to subtract in this case the bottom portion of the image from the targeted adjustment. For example, you might drag from the bottom edge of the image up toward the middle of the image.

In this scenario, the only area of the image affected by the targeted adjustment would be the central area, tapering based on the gradients both upward and downward. Naturally, the two gradients could be drawn in any direction that makes sense, not just in a vertical line as used in the example above.

Today’s Question: I have seen instructors illustrate the use of a Linear Gradient [for a targeted adjustment]. But instead of starting the gradient at the edge of a side of the image, I’ve seen the gradient begun lower or higher than the edge, though it appears the effect is the same as beginning the gradient at the top or bottom of the image. Is that correct?

Tim’s Quick Answer: Not exactly. Starting or finishing the gradient beyond the edge of the image will impact the degree to which specific areas of the image are affected by the targeted adjustment. For example, there might be no portion of the image that is getting the full effect of the adjustment, no portion of the image that is getting none of the effect, or both.

More Detail: You can use a linear gradient as the basis of a targeted adjustment with many software tools, including Photoshop, Camera Raw, Lightroom, and Lightroom Classic. The basic idea is that the linear gradient causes an adjustment to affect one side of the image completely, the opposite side won’t be affected at all, and there will be a smooth transition of the effect between the two. The two “sides” of the image can be in any direction, such as top to bottom, left to right, or one corner to another.

The linear gradient used in this manner is often presented as a white-to-black gradient, where white represents the area of the image being affected completely by the adjustment and black represents the area not being affected. The transition of shades of gray in between represents the transition between the two areas.

Let’s assume a situation where you’re focusing an adjustment on the sky but not the lower portion of the image. Based on the white-to-black model, a typical gradient for this targeted adjustment might involve a gradient that is white for the upper third of the image, a gradation from white to black for the middle third, and black for the lower third of the image.

However, you can also have the gradient start outside one or both edges of the photo. Let’s assume both ends of the gradient start outside the image area. This would involve a gradient that doesn’t go from white to black, for example, but from a light shade of gray to a dark shade of gray.

In this example, there would be no portion of the image getting the full effect of the targeted adjustment if none of the gradient mask is white. There would also be no area of the image that was not affected by the adjustment at all, since none of the gradient mask is black.

In many ways this is just an academic issue. For example, if none of the image is getting the full effect of the adjustment, you can simply make the adjustment stronger. But the point is that where the linear gradient starts and ends does impact the overall effect on the image.

Today’s Question: I updated to Lightroom Classic version 14, and was prompted to update the catalog. However, my catalog was not renamed to reflect the update. The files still reference version 13, even though I’ve confirmed I am running version 14. Should I be concerned about this discrepancy?

Tim’s Quick Answer: This is perfectly normal with version 14 of Lightroom Classic, and is related to Adobe having finally added a feature to rename your catalog from within Lightroom Classic.

More Detail: Adobe has taken various approaches to updating the name of the catalog files when you update Lightroom Classic, which has led to considerable confusion. Compounding this issue is that prior to version 14 the only way to rename your Lightroom Classic catalog was to manually update the core portion of the base filename for all catalog-related files.

Lightroom Classic version 14 now includes a command to rename the catalog, found on the menu at File > Rename Catalog. If you choose this command you can update the base filename for your catalog. There is also a “Rename parent folder” checkbox, which if you turn on will cause the folder containing your catalog to be renamed to match the new name of your catalog.

As part of this update, and to preserve the catalog name you may have specifically chosen, Lightroom Classic will now not change the filename for the catalog when the catalog is updated. The existing catalog will be backed up into a ZIP file, and the updated catalog will retain the previous filename.

That makes now a perfect time to use the Rename Catalog command. With prior variations in how your updated catalog was named, it is quite likely that you have a catalog name that includes “-2” in the filename possibly multiple times, along with a reference to the version number such as “v13-3” at the end of the filename for Lightroom Classic version 13.3. Now you can rename your catalog to something more meaningful, knowing that future updates won’t cause that updated name to be changed.

Today’s Question: I make a collection in Lightroom Classic and send it to someone. Then I modify the collection by adjusting the images in the Develop module or by removing images from the collection. Is it possible to “freeze” the original collection I made before making changes?

Tim’s Quick Answer: You could preserve the original collection by duplicating it to create another version that you apply changes to. However, you would need to use virtual copies for the images if you also wanted to preserve the original appearance.

More Detail: Preserving a collection before making changes is easy in terms of which images are in the collection. Once you’ve created the initial collection simply right-click on it and choose “Duplicate Collection” from the popup menu. This will create a new collection that includes the exact same images, and with the same name except that “Copy” will be appended to the end of the name. You can right-click and choose “Rename” to change the name of the collection.

In this way you can preserve the initial collection, but then make changes to the copy of the collection, such as by adding image to or removing images from that duplicate collection.

Things are a little more complicated if you want to preserve the original versions versus updated versions based on changes in appearance made in the Develop module. For that you would need to create virtual copies for the duplicate collection.

For example, after creating the initial collection you could duplicate it as outlined above. Then select all images in the duplicate collection, right click on one of the selected photos, and choose “Create Virtual Copy” from the popop menu. This will create new virtual copies for the images in the collection. You could then select the original images and remove them from that collection.

In this scenario you would have, for example, the original images in the original collection and virtual copies in the updated collection. This would enable you to preserve the initial state of the images in the original collection, while modifying the virtual copies in the duplicate collection.

Managing virtual copies in this way certainly has the potential to get a little confusing, but the point is that by duplicating a collection and using virtual copies as needed, you can keep track of the differences between the original collection and the updated version.

Today’s Question: Is it possible to paint a color on an image in Lightroom Classic? I had an image with strange looking color streaks and wanted to use the color picker to select another color to paint over the streaks with and couldn’t figure out how.

Tim’s Quick Answer: Yes, you can paint a color into an image using the Brush option in Masking within Lightroom Classic, using the Color option among the targeted adjustment options.

More Detail: Among the various adjustments available with the Masking feature in Lightroom Classic is the Color option, which I find is often overlooked by photographers. With this adjustment you can add a color overlay to areas of an image defined by a mask.

To get started, you could add a new mask for the Brush option, so that you’re able to paint the intended adjustment into the image. If this includes the desire to add a color to specific areas of the photo, you can click on the color swatch rectangle to the right of the Color label at the bottom of the Color section of the targeted adjustment options. This will bring up the color picker, where you can select a color. You also select a color from the image itself by clicking within the gradient on the color picker, keeping the mouse button down, and dragging to the area of the image where you want to sample the color before releasing the mouse button.

You can then paint over the applicable area of the image to paint with the selected color. After painting, you can click the color swatch again to bring up the color picker so you can refine the color. You may also find it necessary to adjust the overall tonality or fine-tune other adjustments to get the area to blend in better with the surrounding image. But painting a color into specific areas of an image can most certainly be part of that process.

Today’s Question: I know there was some convoluted (to me) process for resetting preferences in Photoshop to resolve problems, which maybe explains why I can’t remember how to do it. Can you remind me?

Tim’s Quick Answer: You can actually reset Preferences in Photoshop very easily by clicking the “Reset Preferences On Quit” button the General tab of the Preferences dialog, then quit and re-launch.

More Detail: Resetting the Preferences in Photoshop can often resolve issues where the application is behaving in an unusual way. In short, when Photoshop seems to be behaving in an odd manner, resetting Preferences will often provide a solution.

The original process for resetting Preferences could certainly be described as being perhaps a bit convoluted. It involved holding the Ctrl+Alt+Shift keys on Windows or the Command+Option+Shift keys on Macintosh while launching Photoshop. This method still works, but thankfully there is also a simple option available in the Preferences dialog.

Start by bringing up the Preferences dialog by choosing Edit > Preferences > General from the menu on Windows or Photoshop > Settings > General on Macintosh. Below the other options on the General tab you’ll find the “Reset Preferences On Quit” button. Click the OK button inn the confirmation dialog, then close the Preferences window by clicking OK. Quit Photoshop, and when you launch the Preferences will have been reset.

Keep in mind that while resetting Preferences in Photoshop can resolve a variety of issues, doing so also means that all settings in Preferences and Color Settings will be reset to the default options. You’ll therefore want to review both in detail so you can adjust the settings as needed based on your personal preferences.

Today’s Question: Do you recommend splitting photos managed by Lightroom Classic between two external hard drives? Or is it preferable to purchase a larger external drive?

Tim’s Quick Answer: In general, I would prefer to have all photos stored on a single hard drive. However, due to practical limitations that isn’t always the best solution, leading me to split my photos between two hard drives.

More Detail: I prefer (and generally recommend) a workflow that is as streamlined as possible. That means using only a single catalog for Lightroom Classic, and ideally storing all photos on a single hard drive. However, a single hard drive isn’t always the best solution.

For example, I prefer to use portable bus-powered hard drives for my data storage, in large part for convenience when it comes to traveling with my drives. However, that also means that my storage capacity options are limited. Most bus-powered external hard drives max out at around 4TB of storage capacity, any my photos take up closer to 8TB. The 8TB hard drives that are available are generally either not bus-powered, don’t have a form factor that meets my needs, or are at a price point that makes them far less appealing.

As a result, I’ve opted to store my photos across two hard drives, even though I’d prefer them to all be on the same hard drive.

In Lightroom Classic, the only issue with having photos stored on two drives is that you’ll have two hard drives (and therefore two sets of folders) listed in the Folders list on the left panel in the Library module. All other features behave normally. For example, you can add photos to collections regardless of which hard drive the source images happen to be stored on.

So, if it isn’t practical to use a single large hard drive to store all the photos you’re managing with Lightroom Classic, you can most certainly use more than one hard drive for that storage. I just recommend coming up with some logical way to define which photos are on which hard drive, so it will be easier to know where to start looking for a particular folder of photos, for example.

Today’s Question: In Bridge, if a stack of images is collapsed and dragged to another folder, only the top image moves, and the others are left behind. If the stack is not collapsed both images get moved, but in both cases, the stacking information is lost. What am I missing?

Tim’s Quick Answer: If the stack is collapsed in Adobe Bridge, you need to be sure to select the full stack and not just the top image. If the stack is expanded, you need to make sure to select all photos in the stack in order to retain the stack.

More Detail: Admittedly, I consider Adobe Bridge to be a little finicky when it comes to the behavior of stacks. This can be especially challenging when it comes to a stack that is expanded rather than collapsed.

If a stack is expanded and you select some (but not all) the photos in the stack, if you drag-and-drop the images to a different folder only the selected photos will be moved, and they will no longer be in a stack. To retain the stack, you need to select exactly the images in the stack, not just a portion of them.

For a stack that is collapsed the behavior is a little easier to manage, but there is a “trick”. When you collapse a stack the frame around the thumbnail will have two frames that overlap, resembling two images stacked atop one another. If you click on the thumbnail, only the upper frame will be selected, which actually means only the top image in the stack is selected. If you drag-and-drop the image, only that top image will be moved, leaving the other images behind.

If you instead click the lower frame, which only appears on the right and bottom sides of the thumbnail, you’ll select the entire stack. This will be indicated by both frames having a colored highlight to indicate both frames are selected, meaning all images in the stack are selected. If you drag-and-drop with the full stack selected in this way, all images in the stack will be moved and the stack will be retained.

Today’s Question: When I export images from my iPhone to my computer, if I export them as Unmodified Originals they come onto my computer as HEIC files at 1.7 MB. If I export as JPEGs they are 3.2 MB files, and if I export them as TIFFs they are 36.6 MB files. My inclination would be to export as TIFF and get the largest amount of data but I’m not sure where the data came from??

Tim’s Quick Answer: The differences in file size relate primarily to how the information is stored, not how much information was captured. In this context I recommend transferring the original capture format as the best starting point.

More Detail: The HEIC and JPEG capture formats are similar in concept, though different in the underlying technology and who created them. Both, however, enable image data to be stored at smaller sizes based on image compression technology. You can think of HEIC as being something of a more modern version of a JPEG image, providing higher quality overall.

If you save an HEIC file as a JPEG image, you can select a Quality setting that will affect file size, but in most cases the JPEG image will be smaller than the HEIC image. However, because this is achieved through stronger lossy compression, image quality will suffer to some extent.

If you save the image as a TIFF file, the file size will grow exponentially. This is because very different compression is applied with TIFF image, and in some cases no compression is used at all. Among other things, this generally means that every single pixel is described with a TIFF image, while with HEIC and JPEG images the pixel data can be described more efficiently.

While TIFF files have the potential to maintain better image quality, this isn’t necessarily worth the additional file size at least as a starting point for an image being transferred between devices. If you later decide you want to make full use of Photoshop to optimize an image, for example, you can always save as a TIFF or PSD (Photoshop document) file to preserve special features such as layers and masks.

Today’s Question: I am into star trails and wondered if there was a way to remove objects (stars/star trails) based on their intensity as I would like to remove the less intense/less bright objects and control to what extent.

Tim’s Quick Answer: Yes, you could define a mask based on brightness values to select the specific areas you wanted to affect, and then either perform cleanup or apply an adjustment to tone down or remove those areas.

More Detail: While this technique can work very well for star trail photography, the same concept could apply to a variety of situations where you can identify specific areas of an image based on their tonal value relative to the rest of the image.

In this example you could define a mask based on a luminance range, such as in Camera Raw (including the Camera Raw filter in Photoshop) or Lightroom Classic. Select the Luminance Range (under the Range option) for the mask. Then define a range that will include only the tonal values between the bright star trails and the dark night sky.

Once you’ve defined that mask, you could use adjustments to help hide the affected areas, such as by using a tonal adjustment (including possibly a Tone Curve adjustment) to darken the areas based on the mask. This would effectively hide (or greatly diminish) the areas of the image that were competing with the star trails a bit, by being darker than the trails but brighter than the night sky.

Note that if you preferred to use an image-cleanup tool to remove these areas, you could similarly create a mask based on tonal range (for Midtones) using the Color Range selection tool. That could then be used as the basis for a mask on an image cleanup layer to protect the rest of the image.