Ask Tim Grey

Today’s Question: Lightroom Classic shows 502,248 for the “All Photographs” in the Catalog panel but when I highlight “All Photographs” and look at the bar above the filmstrip, it shows “500,434 of 502,248” being displayed. Why not the full number in the catalog? Can you explain this? I do not knowingly have any filters enabled.

Tim’s Quick Answer: In this case I am quite sure the “missing” photos are really just images that are not being displayed because they are in stacks that are collapsed. If you expand all stacks, the total number of photos displayed should once again match the total number of photos in your Lightroom Classic catalog.

More Detail: The information display above the filmstrip on the bottom panel in Lightroom Classic indicates how many photos are currently being displayed, based in part on which folder or collection you have selected for browsing. If only a subset of all photos are being displayed from the currently selected folder or collection, there will be an indication of how many photos out of the total available are currently being displayed.

For example, let’s assume you have a folder that contains 1,000 photos, and you’ve assigned a five-star rating to three of those photos. If you set a filter for a star rating of five stars, the information display above the filmstrip would show “3 of 1,000 photos” to indicate there are 1,000 photos in the currently selected folder, but only three of them are being displayed.

Understandably, if you don’t have any filters set, it would be confusing why Lightroom is indicating that not all of the photos in the current folder or collection are being displayed. But keep in mind that when a stack of photos is collapsed, all of the photos in the stack are represented as a single thumbnail. In other words, not all images in the current folder or selection would actually be displayed if one or more stacks are collapsed.

Fortunately, you can easily expand all stacks in the current folder or collection. Simply go to the menu bar and choose Photo > Stacking > Expand All Stacks. This command will only affect the current folder or collection, so if you want to expand all stacks for the “All Photographs” collection you would need to select that collection first, and then use the Expand All Stacks command.

Note, by the way, that I’ve added commas to the larger numbers above to make it easier to read them. Lightroom Classic does not display commas in the numbers for the count of photos, which in my opinion makes it a bit difficult to read those numbers.

Today’s Question: Is this issue [regarding a security exploit of the Picture Transfer Protocol for certain Canon camera models] something I should be concerned about?

Tim’s Quick Answer: While I don’t consider this security issue to be a major concern, I do recommend that photographers with affected cameras update their firmware promptly to address this issue. As a general rule I consider it a good practice to check for firmware updates somewhat frequently, and to be sure updates are installed somewhat soon after they are released.

More Detail: Digital cameras, just like computers, smartphones, and other digital devices, have software that controls their internal functions. In the case of hardware such as a digital camera, that software is actually referred to as “firmware”.

Just like any other connected device, cameras can have security issues. In addition, there may be bugs and other issues in firmware that can lead to problems with various functions of your camera. Therefore, it is a good idea to keep the firmware for your camera updated somewhat regularly.

Canon recently released firmware updates for a variety of cameras that include support for the Picture Transfer Protocol (PTP). There is a risk with earlier firmware versions that the camera could be compromised. There aren’t any known exploits of this issue, but it is still best to install these types of security updates relatively quickly.

If you have a Canon camera that supports Picture Transfer Protocol, I highly recommend downloading and installing the latest firmware update. But really, this is a good reminder for all photographers to check for firmware updates for all of their cameras, if they haven’t done so recently.

Canon users can find the latest firmware update for their digital camera by locating their camera model on the Canon support page here:

https://www.usa.canon.com/internet/portal/us/home/support

Today’s Question: What am I missing by not using Lightroom Classic, perhaps in concert with Photoshop, instead of Adobe Camera Raw, Bridge, and Photoshop?

Tim’s Quick Answer: There are two key benefits that in my mind might cause a photographer to consider Adobe Lightroom Classic over Adobe Bridge when it comes to managing photos. The first is that Lightroom Classic provides what I consider to be a more streamlined workflow. The second is that Lightroom Classic can make it much faster to locate photos when you aren’t exactly sure which folder that photo is contained in.

More Detail: When you use Adobe Bridge to manage your photos, you process raw captures using Adobe Camera Raw and perform additional optimization work using Photoshop. With Lightroom Classic the organizational and raw-processing tasks can be performed directly within Lightroom Classic. For more complex work, you can send the photo to Photoshop, with the resulting derivative image being managed right alongside the original capture within Lightroom Classic.

These differences do not represent a dramatic difference in terms of the overall workflow, but I do prefer the more streamlined workflow within Lightroom Classic.

The more important issue in my mind relates to the catalog that is really at the core of how Lightroom Classic manages your photos. Admittedly, the catalog used by Lightroom Classic has also lead to confusion among many photographers, causing them to create a bit of a mess in their catalog (which also led to me creating my “Cleaning Up Your Mess in Lightroom” course, https://timgrey.me/mess29).

The primary advantage of having a central catalog is the ability to search quickly across your entire Lightroom catalog. For example, I can quickly see all photos I have ever captured that I have also assigned a five-star rating to. Because Adobe Bridge is a browser without a central catalog, this type of wide-ranging search would be extremely slow.

I feel that Lightroom Classic provides a more streamlined, efficient, and flexible workflow compared to the use of Adobe Bridge (along with Camera Raw and Photoshop). That said, many of my readers understandably prefer to stick with a workflow that revolves around Adobe Bridge. Among other reasons, continuing to use Adobe Bridge means you don’t need to worry about trying to learn a completely different software application for managing your workflow.

I suspect Adobe will continue to update all of the core applications photographers are currently using. While that does mean continuing to support multiple applications rather than a single core application, it also means photographers have more options to choose from when it comes to the software at the heart of their workflow.

Today’s Question: I have clients for whom I photograph their artwork. My usual method is to have the standard 45-degree orientation of two lights far enough away from the artwork to provide uniform illumination. Often, when the paints are shiny and have a texture, that shiny texture forms a reflected image of the light source, which are small white spots all over the image. However, if I scan such artwork on a normal desktop flatbed scanner, these white reflections disappear. I would like to know the secret of how they achieve that. Is it due to using polarizers in the light path, or is it due to some feature of the light/detector system in the scanner?

Tim’s Quick Answer: Flatbed scanners can still produce glare on scanned artwork, but in general do a relatively good job because the light source is well diffused. Diffusing and polarizing the light can help minimize the appearance of such visual artifacts when photographing or scanning artwork.

More Detail: Glare is caused, of course, when a light source is reflected at just the right angle to create a bright spot in an area of the object being photographed or scanned. With a perfectly flat print you might be photographing or scanning, of course, it is relatively easy to avoid glare by setting two lights pointing from a 45-degree angle on either side of the print.

With something like an oil painting that has a variable texture and relatively high reflectivity, it can be much more difficult to illuminate the object in a way that there will be no reflections at all.

The first thing I recommend is to make sure the light source is diffused. To begin with, you’ll want a diffuser of some sort (such as an umbrella or soft box) in front of the light, so that the light is scattered to minimize glare. You also want the light source as close to the subject as possible to soften the light further. I realize this may seem counterintuitive, but the further a light source is the more directional (and therefore not diffused) it will be. Keep in mind, of course, that if the light source is closer to the subject, you may need to reduce the strength of the light source.

With this approach you may still need to fine-tune the position of the lights to ensure the softest overall light and minimal glare. In most cases with a highly diffused light source you can create photos without any visible glare.

Another great option is to use polarizing material in front of the lights, and on your lens, so that you can effectively filter out the glare that could otherwise result, even with very careful setup of the lights. You can obtain linear polarizing material in sheets, similar to gels you might use to add color to a light source. You can then use a polarizing filter on the lens as well, so that you’re able to prevent glare altogether.

Today’s Question: I’m using Photoshop CS6 and I can’t seem to figure out how to make an inch in View > Print Size to equal an actual inch. Is there a way to do this?

Tim’s Quick Answer: The key to having the Print Size view option match the actual print dimensions in Adobe Photoshop is to set the Screen Resolution value in Preferences to the actual physical pixel-per-inch resolution of your display.

More Detail: The default setting for screen resolution virtually guarantees that the Print Size view (and the Ruler display) will not be accurate. Furthermore, the setting that controls these options is labeled in a way that wouldn’t make it obvious to most users that it would affect these view options.

You can find the Screen Resolution setting in the Preferences dialog. Start by choosing Edit > Preferences from the menu if you are using the Windows version of Photoshop, or Photoshop > Preferences if you are using the Macintosh version. From the Preferences submenu you can then choose Units & Rulers.

Choosing this command will bring up the Units & Rulers page of the Preferences dialog. There you will find the Screen Resolution setting in the New Document Preset Resolutions section. This is where you will want to enter the actual pixel-per-inch resolution for your display.

Of course, that also means you need to determine the correct setting for your display. Start by measuring the width of your display as accurately as possible. You want to measure only the actual display area for your operating system, not the total width of the physical monitor. For example, on my laptop the width is 14-inches.

Next, determine the resolution setting for the display, so you know exactly how many pixels there are across the width of the display. For example, let’s assume my display is set to a resolution of 1920×1080 pixels. The first (and larger) number indicates the number of pixels across.

To calculate the actual pixel-per-inch resolution, you simply need to divide the number of pixels by the number of inches. So in this case 1920 divided by 14 gives me a value of 137 pixels per inch.

So, in this example I would change the Screen Resolution setting to a value of 137 from the default of 72, and make sure the popup to the right of that value is set to “Pixels/Inch” (rather than centimeters). Click OK to apply the change in Preferences. Now when you enable the rulers display (View > Rulers) or the Print Size view option (View > Print Size), the sizes will be accurate on your monitor relative to the final printed output.

Today’s Question: Do you have any tutorial on Nik Software by DxO?

Tim’s Quick Answer: Yes, indeed, I have a course in the GreyLearning library with chapters on getting started with the Nik Collection, Color Efex Pro, Viveza, Silver Efex Pro, Analog Efex Pro, HDR Efex Pro, Dfine, and Sharpener Pro.

More Detail: The Nik Collection has gone through several iterations over the years. It was first released by Nik Software, which was eventually acquired by Google. More recently the Nik Collection was acquired by DxO (https://nikcollection.dxo.com).

I do have a video course that covers the Nik Collection by DxO, which you can get at half price by using this link to get started:

https://timgrey.me/nik50

The Nik Collection includes some great software, especially when it comes to applying special effects to photos. For example, I think Silver Efex Pro and Analog Efex Pro are excellent. Some of the other tools in the collection are a bit more dated, and not as good as other applications that are available.

For example, my software of choice for creating high dynamic range (HDR) images is Aurora HDR, which you can find here:

https://timgrey.me/hdrtrial

Today’s Question: My question relates to workflow with HDR panoramas. I am a big fan of Aurora HDR 2019 and use it as a plug-in to Lightroom Classic. I am NOT a big fan of the HDR Panorama merge tool in Lightroom, however, because the deghost function is disabled. Should I use the HDR merge in Lightroom for each bracketed image, stitch them together using the Panorama merge in Lightroom, and then send the HDR panorama image to Aurora? Or, should I first use Aurora for the bracketed images and after sending them back to Lightroom, only then use the Panorama merge tool in Lightroom? Or, is there some alternative option that would work better? Let me add that many of my HDR images have movement in the image, which is why I need the deghosting capabilities of Aurora.

Tim’s Quick Answer: My recommendation would be to assemble the HDR images for each frame of the panorama first in Aurora HDR, being sure to use the same settings for all HDR images that will be used for a single panorama. You can then assemble the resulting HDR images into the composite panorama using Lightroom Classic.

More Detail: While I appreciate that Lightroom Classic is capable of assembling high dynamic range (HDR) panoramas in a single step, I agree that it can be problematic that you aren’t able to take advantage of the full set of features that would otherwise be available if you assembled the HDR frames and the composite panorama as two separate processes. Therefore, I do prefer assembling the HDR images first, and then merging those HDR frames into the final panorama.

Obviously you could assemble the HDR frames in Lightroom Classic first, but I agree that Aurora HDR (https://timgrey.me/hdrtrial) often produces a result I am happier with. I recommend using the original raw captures to create the initial HDR, which is why I recommend creating the HDR images in Aurora HDR as the first step in creating an HDR panorama.

To ensure the final panorama will go together smoothly, I also recommend using the exact same settings for each HDR image you are creating for the panorama. That might mean simply using an existing preset for all of the frames, or creating your own custom preset based on the refinements you make to the various settings for the first HDR you assemble for the panorama. For the other frames of the panorama you would want to use the exact same settings so there aren’t any variations across the panorama. When all HDR frames have been created, you can use Lightroom Classic to merge those into the final HDR panorama.

Today’s Question: I have a question about the Export settings that I saw from your recent webinar. I noticed that you set up your export preset for Instagram so the long edge of your photos would be 2000 pixels. I am curious about the best settings for other sites such as Facebook. Or is there a good setup for all web sharing?

Tim’s Quick Answer: When sharing photos digitally the pixel dimensions are the only resolution setting you need to concern yourself with. In general, somewhere around 2,000 pixels on the long edge is more than adequate for any online or digital sharing.

More Detail: In the case of Instagram, 2,000 pixels on the long edge is actually larger than you need. Instagram will scale the image down to 1,080 pixels wide and up to 1,350 pixels tall. The reason I use 2,000 pixels for the long edge is that I synchronize the exported photos to my phone, so I can share the images via Instagram as well as directly on my phone.

For digital sharing the key consideration is the resolution of the display being used to present the image. I feel that 2,000 pixels on the long edge is a good setting in general. For more monitor displays or mobile devices, this will provide more than enough resolution to ensure good quality for the image.

Even for displays with a higher resolution, such as high-end 4K monitors, a resolution of 2,000 pixels on the long edge will provide good image quality. Each display configuration may be different, of course, but I feel that 2,000 pixels on the long edge is a good general-purpose setting for digital sharing.

For those interested in seeing the photos I have shared on Instagram, you can find my feed by pointing your web browser here:

https://www.instagram.com/timgreyphoto/

Today’s Question: I am not using Lightroom and was wondering about keywording in Photoshop or Bridge? Or is that a lot more complicated or even available?

Tim’s Quick Answer: You can indeed add keywords (and other metadata) to your photos using Adobe Photoshop or Adobe Bridge. If you later decide to use Lightroom Classic (or other software), those keywords will be available in that application as well.

More Detail: Most software that enables you to manage your photos in some way also enables you to add keywords, as well as update other standard metadata fields. As a result, most of the updates you make to metadata for your photos will be available if you use other photo-management applications in the future.

In Adobe Bridge you can find the option to add keywords on the Keywords panel or the Metadata panel. The Keywords panel enables you to add or remove keywords using a keyword list, with checkboxes available to identify which keywords should be assigned to the currently selected image(s). You can also add new keywords by clicking the plus (+) button at the bottom of this panel.

On the Metadata panel in Bridge you can find the Keywords field in the IPTC Core section of metadata. You can edit the keywords in that field, and then click the checkmark icon at the bottom of the panel to apply the changes.

In Photoshop you can update metadata for the current photo by choosing File > File Info from the menu. For keywords you can choose the IPTC tab from the list at the left side of the dialog, and then update the Keywords field as needed. Click OK to apply the changes in metadata for the photo.

I don’t think the keywording options in Bridge or Photoshop are any more complicated than what is available in Lightroom Classic or other software for managing photos. All are relatively straightforward to use once you know where the keywording feature can be accessed.

Today’s Question: Can you remind me how to make a folder at the same level as all of my other folders in Lightroom [Classic]? For example, I want to be able to divide the images in one folder into two folders, so I need to make a folder at the same level as the existing folder.

Tim’s Quick Answer: You can create a new “top level” folder by either using the option to create a sub-folder below the higher-level folder (which could be the hard drive itself), or by using the “Add Folder” command to create a new folder anywhere.

More Detail: The “Add Folder” command is perhaps the most flexible way to add a new empty folder that is visible within Lightroom Classic, so you can then drag-and-drop photos into that folder from any other folder being managed by Lightroom. However, as I’ll clarify shortly, it also has the potential to be a little confusing to use.

To create a new folder in this way, you first click the plus symbol (+) to the right of the Folders heading on the left panel in the Library module, and then choose “Add Folder” from the popup menu.

In the popup menu that appears you can navigate to the location where you want to create the folder. This might mean simply navigating to an external hard drive, for example, or it might mean creating a folder within a “parent” folder such as the Pictures folder on your computer’s internal hard drive.

After navigating to the applicable location, you can click the New Folder button at the bottom-left of the dialog and enter a name for the new folder. Then click “Create” to actually create the new folder and click Choose to finalize the process.

One of the challenges with the “Add Folder” command is that it can be a little confusing to navigate to the correct location where you actually want to create the new folder. Therefore, I generally recommend the “Add Subfolder” command instead.

The key to the “Add Subfolder” command is to select the parent folder where you want to create a new folder. In the case of a “top level” folder, that often means selecting the hard drive itself, which by default won’t be listed among the folders on the Folders list on the left panel. If that’s the case, you can reveal the parent folder (or hard drive) by right-clicking on one of the existing top-level folders and choosing the “Show Parent Folder” command. This will reveal the parent folder (or hard drive) at the top of the list of folders. You can then click on that folder (or hard drive) name, then click the plus symbol (+) to the right of the Folders heading on the left panel. From the popup menu that appears, choose “Add Subfolder”.

With the “Add Subfolder” command all you need to do is enter a name for the new folder, which will become a subfolder of the parent folder (or hard drive) you had selected. In other words, it will be created as a folder at the same level as the existing folder you wanted to split into more than one folder for your photos.

Admittedly, the “Add Subfolder” option probably sounds a bit more confusing than the “Add Folder” option. However, I do find that many photographers find the actual process of using the “Add Subfolder” command less confusing than using the “Add Folder” command.