Lightroom as batch converter or do I have to keep the raws?

OK so you save all the settings in the raw archive which can reside off-line while you edit metadata from the exported copies?
<wishing this was true>

Paul Furman wrote:

OK so you save all the settings in the raw archive which can reside off-line while you edit metadata from the exported copies?
<wishing this was true>

All settings reside in the LR catalog (ends in .lrcat). You can export metadata to sidecars for RAW files; for JPEG, TIFF, PSD and DNG, metadata is written to the files when you tell it to do so. (Cmd-S on Macs)

Metadata changes in exported copies don’t get integrated into the metadata for the orignals, except by major workarounds- I don’t know anyone who is doing just that.

However, if you have your Catalog on your lap or desktop, and the images are totally offline, you’ll have Previews available, and you can edit metadata, rank, etc, but not edit the photo.

John McWilliams wrote:

Paul Furman wrote:

OK so you save all the settings in the raw archive which can reside off-line while you edit metadata from the exported copies?
<wishing this was true>

All settings reside in the LR catalog (ends in .lrcat). You can export metadata to sidecars for RAW files; for JPEG, TIFF, PSD and DNG, metadata is written to the files when you tell it to do so. (Cmd-S on Macs)

So it puts the crop instructions & keywords into the jpeg? That must be some proprietary system, not exif.

I currently use sidecar XMP files. I
wonder if I edit the file in another program, it’ll probably strip the LR info…

Metadata changes in exported copies don’t get integrated into the metadata for the orignals, except by major workarounds- I don’t know anyone who is doing just that.

However, if you have your Catalog on your lap or desktop, and the images are totally offline, you’ll have Previews available, and you can edit metadata, rank, etc, but not edit the photo.

Thanks.

I need to study what owns what & how to make virtual copies & learn how to delete them & move them with LR & explorer. I think what might make sense for me is to adjust the exposures on the raw then export jpegs & do my annotation & ratings on those. On the rare occasion that I go back to the raw to make adjustments, the annotation & ratings can be redone. I will be doing photoshop edits on a decent number of images and those will be the final ones I’ll want access to so it makes no sense to rate and annotate the ‘old’ raw set.

I can see all sorts of potential problems with the whole idea of having to import images to the database versus working with actual files & folders. A whole bunch of actions work in an unfamiliar way like renaming, moving deleting, etc. I’d hate to move some files in explorer & find out that hosed months worth of work!

I downloaded a trial version of Adobe Lightroom.

Is it reasonable to use LR as just a batch converter? There’s a bunch more tempting stuff but I don’t know how to integrate it without completely tying myself to LR and a pure raw format. Even if I do, I don’t quite know how to proceed.

How does it work with tying together metadata to images that move on to photoshop? If I need to do more, which copy owns the keywords & ratings & such? I messed around with making virtual copies & lost all my LR edits (I’ll probably figure that out… just whining). But I’m still not clear on the best workflow. If I don’t tie myself to LR completely and just use it to process sets of adjusted jpegs I lose the ability to go back and make adjustments and all the ratings, keyword & filter goodies. OK, I lose that anyways by not saving PSDs from photoshop but damn, this LR stuff is tempting, it’s just that it messes up my whole system <g>.
How did you approach the needed changes with LR?

One thing that maybe would help me is if the exported jpegs could hold keywords and rankings in the IPTC or something. I saw an option to save settings in the files… then I could do all that and still be able to use it on web pages. It still would be a nightmare migrating web edits back into the system though.

If duplicate export files could act as the home repository for annotation I could make this work. Duplicate systems don’t seem to work well with LR.

What I’d really like is:

1) Raw files on an external drive (normally turned off, and the raw files will start on the local drive for a few months before being archived).

2) Web versions where I can either edit annotation/keywords and ranking or very easy update from the source files.

3) An in-between version of final processed jpegs so I can keep the best of them on the laptop.

For the least changes, my file system would look like:

G:/external drive/raw, seconds, goof around junk…
-this drive usually turned off

C:/favorite final jpegs and annotation
-this is where I’d like to store the data
-this is where I download & work, then archive to G:/
http://localhost/local copy of php-based/mySQL database and web shots -ideally this level goes away though it’ll take work to integrate
http://www.mydomain.com/ public web site
-ideally I’d be able to synchronize public comments from here

On Mon, 22 Dec 2008 19:14:19 -0800, Paul Furman
wrote:

I downloaded a trial version of Adobe Lightroom.

Is it reasonable to use LR as just a batch converter? There’s a bunch more tempting stuff but I don’t know how to integrate it without completely tying myself to LR and a pure raw format. Even if I do, I don’t quite know how to proceed.

How does it work with tying together metadata to images that move on to photoshop? If I need to do more, which copy owns the keywords & ratings & such? I messed around with making virtual copies & lost all my LR edits (I’ll probably figure that out… just whining). But I’m still not clear on the best workflow. If I don’t tie myself to LR completely and just use it to process sets of adjusted jpegs I lose the ability to go back and make adjustments and all the ratings, keyword & filter goodies. OK, I lose that anyways by not saving PSDs from photoshop but damn, this LR stuff is tempting, it’s just that it messes up my whole system <g>.
How did you approach the needed changes with LR?

One thing that maybe would help me is if the exported jpegs could hold keywords and rankings in the IPTC or something. I saw an option to save settings in the files… then I could do all that and still be able to use it on web pages. It still would be a nightmare migrating web edits back into the system though.

If duplicate export files could act as the home repository for annotation I could make this work. Duplicate systems don’t seem to work well with LR.

What I’d really like is:

1) Raw files on an external drive (normally turned off, and the raw files will start on the local drive for a few months before being archived).

2) Web versions where I can either edit annotation/keywords and ranking or very easy update from the source files.

3) An in-between version of final processed jpegs so I can keep the best of them on the laptop.

For the least changes, my file system would look like:

G:/external drive/raw, seconds, goof around junk…
-this drive usually turned off

C:/favorite final jpegs and annotation
-this is where I’d like to store the data
-this is where I download & work, then archive to G:/
http://localhost/local copy of php-based/mySQL database and web shots -ideally this level goes away though it’ll take work to integrate
http://www.mydomain.com/ public web site
-ideally I’d be able to synchronize public comments from here

LR is designed to be an all in one solution for most photographers who have adpted RAW as their preferred shooting format. In that regard, it is superb on all counts. But it really isn’t intended to be just a link in a long chain of different processing tools. I’d suggest simply adapting to the LR workflow, using it as the basis for everything else you want to do with your images. Keep the RAW files and use them as your main archive (yes, LR will keep track of them even if you keep them offline), and then simply export individial images as jpegs or tifs when you want to do more with them.
I think you’ll find this to be a very simple and effective way of doing things, and will let you be able to concentrate more on photography as opposed to juggling images on your computer. At least I found this to be true for me.

Paul Furman wrote:

John McWilliams wrote:

Paul Furman wrote:

OK so you save all the settings in the raw archive which can reside off-line while you edit metadata from the exported copies?
<wishing this was true>

All settings reside in the LR catalog (ends in .lrcat). You can export metadata to sidecars for RAW files; for JPEG, TIFF, PSD and DNG, metadata is written to the files when you tell it to do so. (Cmd-S on Macs)

So it puts the crop instructions & keywords into the jpeg? That must be some proprietary system, not exif.

It crops the JPEG on Export. Export, as used in LR, ususally refers to the rendering out of the instructions into a JPEG, TIFF, etc.

I currently use sidecar XMP files. I wonder if I edit the file in another program, it’ll probably strip the LR info…

I don’t think programs other than PS read LR Metadata and vice versa.

Metadata changes in exported copies don’t get integrated into the metadata for the orignals, except by major workarounds- I don’t know anyone who is doing just that.

However, if you have your Catalog on your lap or desktop, and the images are totally offline, you’ll have Previews available, and you can edit metadata, rank, etc, but not edit the photo.

I need to study what owns what & how to make virtual copies & learn how to delete them & move them with LR & explorer.

I think what might

make sense for me is to adjust the exposures on the raw then export jpegs & do my annotation & ratings on those. On the rare occasion that I go back to the raw to make adjustments, the annotation & ratings can be redone. I will be doing photoshop edits on a decent number of images and those will be the final ones I’ll want access to so it makes no sense to rate and annotate the ‘old’ raw set.

I can see all sorts of potential problems with the whole idea of having to import images to the database versus working with actual files & folders. A whole bunch of actions work in an unfamiliar way like renaming, moving deleting, etc. I’d hate to move some files in explorer & find out that hosed months worth of work!

There are ways to do so without losing anything. It’s easier to move within/by LR; then Explorer/Finder will be handled by LR and your folders will be quite visible.

It bugs me that I have to manually [export] things but I guess that’s a good thing otherwise I’d be complaining that it was taking over my computer <grin>.

Paul Furman wrote:

It bugs me that I have to manually [export] things but I guess that’s a good thing otherwise I’d be complaining that it was taking over my computer <grin>.

Typo: "manually [import]" not [export].

Stephen Bishop wrote:

On Mon, 22 Dec 2008 19:14:19 -0800, Paul Furman
wrote:

I downloaded a trial version of Adobe Lightroom.

Is it reasonable to use LR as just a batch converter? There’s a bunch more tempting stuff but I don’t know how to integrate it without completely tying myself to LR and a pure raw format. Even if I do, I don’t quite know how to proceed.

How does it work with tying together metadata to images that move on to photoshop? If I need to do more, which copy owns the keywords & ratings & such? I messed around with making virtual copies & lost all my LR edits (I’ll probably figure that out… just whining). But I’m still not clear on the best workflow. If I don’t tie myself to LR completely and just use it to process sets of adjusted jpegs I lose the ability to go back and make adjustments and all the ratings, keyword & filter goodies. OK, I lose that anyways by not saving PSDs from photoshop but damn, this LR stuff is tempting, it’s just that it messes up my whole system <g>.

How did you approach the needed changes with LR?

One thing that maybe would help me is if the exported jpegs could hold keywords and rankings in the IPTC or something. I saw an option to save settings in the files… then I could do all that and still be able to use it on web pages. It still would be a nightmare migrating web edits back into the system though.

If duplicate export files could act as the home repository for annotation I could make this work. Duplicate systems don’t seem to work well with LR.

What I’d really like is:

1) Raw files on an external drive (normally turned off, and the raw files will start on the local drive for a few months before being archived).

2) Web versions where I can either edit annotation/keywords and ranking or very easy update from the source files.

3) An in-between version of final processed jpegs so I can keep the best of them on the laptop.

For the least changes, my file system would look like:

G:/external drive/raw, seconds, goof around junk…
-this drive usually turned off

C:/favorite final jpegs and annotation
-this is where I’d like to store the data
-this is where I download & work, then archive to G:/
http://localhost/local copy of php-based/mySQL database and web shots -ideally this level goes away though it’ll take work to integrate
http://www.mydomain.com/ public web site
-ideally I’d be able to synchronize public comments from here

LR is designed to be an all in one solution for most photographers who have adpted RAW as their preferred shooting format. In that regard, it is superb on all counts. But it really isn’t intended to be just a link in a long chain of different processing tools. I’d suggest simply adapting to the LR workflow, using it as the basis for everything else you want to do with your images. Keep the RAW files and use them as your main archive (yes, LR will keep track of them even if you keep them offline), and then simply export individial images as jpegs or tifs when you want to do more with them.
I think you’ll find this to be a very simple and effective way of doing things, and will let you be able to concentrate more on photography as opposed to juggling images on your computer. At least I found this to be true for me.

Well I’ve moved my queries to the adobe forums, and it’s going to take a while to sort it all out but…

If I have it write to xmp sidecar files for the raws, those can be moved outside LR & retain everything. Yeah it’s cleaner to move from LR but I’m not forced this way.

Jpegs will apparently only hold keywords in the IPTC data, but they will hold them through exporting so I can add basic keywords to the raw+jpeg on import, use LR as a raw converter when needed and boil that down to a set of jpegs. Then LR works fine on jpegs… you really don’t need raw files to take advantage of LR, minor contrast adjustments, crops, dust cloning etc are fine to do on jpegs and it functions exactly the same.

Paul Furman wrote:

Paul Furman wrote:

It bugs me that I have to manually [export] things but I guess that’s a good thing otherwise I’d be complaining that it was taking over my computer <grin>.

Typo: "manually [import]" not [export].

Hah, o.k., I flew over that one anyway.

LR on a Mac can track some moves you make in the Finder (Explorer) but not all.

IAE, if you make your moves in LR, they are tracked in the OS (creating/deleting folders; moving images; renaming files or folders)

Paul Furman wrote:

Well I’ve moved my queries to the adobe forums, and it’s going to take a while to sort it all out but…

If I have it write to xmp sidecar files for the raws, those can be moved outside LR & retain everything. Yeah it’s cleaner to move from LR but I’m not forced this way.

Jpegs will apparently only hold keywords in the IPTC data, but they will hold them through exporting so I can add basic keywords to the raw+jpeg on import, use LR as a raw converter when needed and boil that down to a set of jpegs. Then LR works fine on jpegs… you really don’t need raw files to take advantage of LR, minor contrast adjustments, crops, dust cloning etc are fine to do on jpegs and it functions exactly the same.

Anything you Export from LR [JPEG, TIFF, PSD, DNG] will contain the metadata, unless you tell it to not do so.

John McWilliams wrote:

Anything you Export from LR [JPEG, TIFF, PSD, DNG] will contain the metadata, unless you tell it to not do so.

Maybe if you import the results but really once you write out to jpegs, the adjustments need to be removed and in my tests, there is nothing left but keywords in the IPTC data.. those do show as regular keywords in the database, flags & ratings are lost AFAICT if you just grab an exported web jpeg & import that, you only get keywords. It would be nice if XMP files for raw would work with jpegs.

In rec.photo.digital.slr-systems Paul Furman wrote:

John McWilliams wrote:

Anything you Export from LR [JPEG, TIFF, PSD, DNG] will contain the metadata, unless you tell it to not do so.

Maybe if you import the results but really once you write out to jpegs, the adjustments need to be removed and in my tests, there is nothing left but keywords in the IPTC data.. those do show as regular keywords in the database, flags & ratings are lost AFAICT if you just grab an exported web jpeg & import that, you only get keywords. It would be nice if XMP files for raw would work with jpegs.

Firstly, I agree with just about everything that John has said. Things will be a lot easier if you figure out how to work with LR. If Lightroom is a screwdriver, and you need a hammer, then get a proper hammer instead of trying to use the screwdriver as one.
Lightroom is really good at serving as a kind of database of your photos as long as stuff stays within it, but it is not so good at exporting and reimporting stuff and having every single piece of metadata go along with the file. So why would you export a jpeg only to reimport it again? What are you trying to accomplish by doing this? LR already maintains a copy of the file with all its metadata and (mostly) keeps you from having to worry about the details of the file as it exists in the filesystem. Keeping multiple copies is mostly going to serve to eat up more disk space and complicate LR’s catalog.

In rec.photo.digital.slr-systems Paul Furman wrote:

John McWilliams wrote:

Anything you Export from LR [JPEG, TIFF, PSD, DNG] will contain the metadata, unless you tell it to not do so.

Maybe if you import the results but really once you write out to jpegs, the adjustments need to be removed and in my tests, there is nothing left but keywords in the IPTC data.. those do show as regular keywords in the database, flags & ratings are lost AFAICT if you just grab an exported web jpeg & import that, you only get keywords. It would be nice if XMP files for raw would work with jpegs.

Firstly, I agree with just about everything that John has said. Things will be a lot easier if you figure out how to work with LR. If Lightroom is a screwdriver, and you need a hammer, then get a proper hammer instead of trying to use the screwdriver as one.
Lightroom is really good at serving as a kind of database of your photos as long as stuff stays within it, but it is not so good at exporting and reimporting stuff and having every single piece of metadata go along with the file. So why would you export a jpeg only to reimport it again? What are you trying to accomplish by doing this?

LR
already maintains a copy of the file with all its metadata and (mostly) keeps you from having to worry about the details of the file as it exists in the filesystem. Keeping multiple copies is mostly going to serve to eat up more disk space and complicate LR’s catalog.

On Fri, 26 Dec 2008 16:37:18 +0000 (UTC), Jeremiah DeWitt Weiner wrote:

In rec.photo.digital.slr-systems Paul Furman wrote:

John McWilliams wrote:

Anything you Export from LR [JPEG, TIFF, PSD, DNG] will contain the metadata, unless you tell it to not do so.

Maybe if you import the results but really once you write out to jpegs, the adjustments need to be removed and in my tests, there is nothing left but keywords in the IPTC data.. those do show as regular keywords in the database, flags & ratings are lost AFAICT if you just grab an exported web jpeg & import that, you only get keywords. It would be nice if XMP files for raw would work with jpegs.

Firstly, I agree with just about everything that John has said. Things will be a lot easier if you figure out how to work with LR. If Lightroom is a screwdriver, and you need a hammer, then get a proper hammer instead of trying to use the screwdriver as one.
Lightroom is really good at serving as a kind of database of your photos as long as stuff stays within it, but it is not so good at exporting and reimporting stuff and having every single piece of metadata go along with the file. So why would you export a jpeg only to reimport it again? What are you trying to accomplish by doing this? LR already maintains a copy of the file with all its metadata and (mostly) keeps you from having to worry about the details of the file as it exists in the filesystem. Keeping multiple copies is mostly going to serve to eat up more disk space and complicate LR’s catalog.

Exactly. Once you work within the boundaries that LR prefers, ie letting it set up its own catalog from the images on your disc, you’re done. There is no need to create multiple copies of files since the LR database always refers to the orginals.

If I do any editing in photoshop, I’ve got to move to jpeg or tif or something duplicate and that becomes the final image.

In article <s5a5l.11037$x%>, Paul Furman
wrote:

If I do any editing in photoshop, I’ve got to move to jpeg or tif or something duplicate and that becomes the final image.

you can have lightroom create a smart object for photoshop so there’s no duplication.

Things will be a lot easier if you figure out how to work with LR.

If I do any editing in photoshop, I’ve got to move to jpeg or tif or something duplicate and that becomes the final image.

you can have lightroom create a smart object for photoshop so there’s no duplication.

Ah yes I just discovered that in a tutorial. I’m not clear, still it looks to be creating a psd file, I have an older version, CS1, so the layers don’t come in but it gives the processed image & that’s how they used it in the tutorial, abandoning the raw file.

nospam wrote:

In article <s5a5l.11037$x%>, Paul Furman
wrote:

If I do any editing in photoshop, I’ve got to move to jpeg or tif or something duplicate and that becomes the final image.

you can have lightroom create a smart object for photoshop so there’s no duplication.

Ah yes I just discovered that in a tutorial. I’m not clear, still it looks to be creating a psd file, I have an older version, CS1, so the layers don’t come in but it gives the processed image & that’s how they used it in the tutorial, abandoning the raw file. What I would do for my old setup is copy the unmodified version into an ‘orig’ folder and I’d do that in LR now, copying the adjustments… then with photoshop I’d overwrite the file in the ‘final’ folder using explorer/photoshop and clear the adjustments on that in LR (keeping the keywords, flags & ratings). I’m not sure where I’ll end up but that’s the current workflow match point.