Skip navigation
Bob Spree
Bob Spree
Currently Being Moderated

LR4 Beta. Book Module: Image format (Height x Width)

Feb 22, 2012 11:52 AM

I have just received my very first book from Blurb produced in Lightroom 4 Beta.

I have to say that I am so delighted at the quality of the printing,the front and rear covers and the speed of the process. Especially as the book is for a very special presentation.

The book contained 116 pages printed in Large Landscape Hard Back format.

The whole process from ordering the book to receipt only took 5 days having been printed in Holland and then delivered to the UK.

The tracking system from UPS worked brilliantly and I was even asked if I wanted change the delivery date to suit me.

 

I was so delighted that I have ordered another copy and that will arrive in the same time frame as the first copy.

It was also interesting to see printed on the back page "Produced using Lightroom 4".

 

However I do have one item that I would like to see changed and that is the choice of format.

The book was produced using images that I had tightly cropped to a standard format. By that I mean that when cropping the images I selected "Original".

I wanted all my images to be exactly the same format for a film show and wanted to avoid different size images appearing on the screen. I also use many of the images for landscape style calendars.

The only large landscape offered by Blurb was 13" x 11".

The result was that I had to recrop all my images to this format or lose elements to left and right.

This was unsatisfactory so I had to make my original images fit the page which meant a large area of black (my choice between white or black) at the top and bottom of the page.

 

My request therefore is: Is it not possible using modern printing on such a large scale to give customers the option of choosing the exact format (Height x Width) in order to suit the customers requirements?

 

Well done Adobe and well done Blurb.

 

Bob Spree

England

1030 Views   9 Replies   Latest reply: jtbikeguy, Feb 24, 2012 12:32 PM
 
Replies
  • Jeff Schewe
    Currently Being Moderated
    1. Jeff Schewe,
    Feb 22, 2012 12:43 PM   in reply to Bob Spree
    Report

    Bob Spree wrote:

     

    My request therefore is: Is it not possible using modern printing on such a large scale to give customers the option of choosing the exact format (Height x Width) in order to suit the customers requirements?

     

    That's a Blurb formatting issue. The reason Blurb books are relatively economical is that they limit the sizes and papers to have an economy of scale. If Blurb did offer custom sized books, the odds are they would be much more expensive...

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • gnits999
    Currently Being Moderated
    2. gnits999,
    Feb 22, 2012 2:31 PM   in reply to Jeff Schewe
    Report

    There is several other threads discussing the fact that templates cannot be adjusted or tweaked.

     

    The nett result is that images which do not fit the template image box exactly and you want to preserve the original width / hight image ratio, then with Lightroom Books  current toolkit you have no choice other than to leave large amounts of white (or black..) space on a page.  This often leads to unbalanced page compositions. I am really surprised and disappointed that Lightroom Books does not allow us tweak the position and size of template objects.

     

    Jeff is correct in that pricing is related to standardising / limiting page sizes, papers, etc.

     

    However,if we could tweak the width and hight dimensions of a template object, we could better place our original image to maximise the dimensions of the book sizes available.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Jeff Schewe
    Currently Being Moderated
    3. Jeff Schewe,
    Feb 22, 2012 3:20 PM   in reply to gnits999
    Report

    gnits999 wrote:

     

    I am really surprised and disappointed that Lightroom Books does not allow us tweak the position and size of template objects.

     

     

    This is a version 1.0 feature and the amount of work it took was considerable. The editing of existing templates wasn't in the cards for LR 4. Not to say it might not happen in the future...

     

    However, I would be surprised if there there will not be some method users can use to modify the underlying page templates, but prolly not directly in Lightroom.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Cornelia-I
    Currently Being Moderated
    4. Cornelia-I,
    Feb 22, 2012 3:34 PM   in reply to gnits999
    Report

    Hi Bob,

    And the best we can hope for is for LR4b#2 or LR4 final that you can add own layouts.

     

    But in order to create them you have to employ another layouting software such as Adobe Illustrator or Scribus...!

     

    No way to reference your metadata fields in your LR catalog either !

     

     

    For sure I will create layouts which place 3:2 or 4:3 image frames on any desired paper size, as I crop as deliberately per image as you do, and not on the fly by stupid limitations of a forced book layout page.

     

    See e.g. http://forums.adobe.com/message/4206837#4206837

     

    Here you could add your vote to a feature request related to that: http://feedback.photoshop.com/photoshop_family/topics/lightroom4_empow er_the_print_module_to_create_custom_templates_for_book_module

     

    Thanks for any support in this.... Whatever it may be worth... LR5 ???

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Jeff Schewe
    Currently Being Moderated
    5. Jeff Schewe,
    Feb 22, 2012 3:45 PM   in reply to Cornelia-I
    Report

    We'll find out after LR 4 ships...for more info on how the Book moule was concepted, see this interview with Kevin Tieskoetter.

     

    (actually, I wasn't sure how much I could say about editing templates....but Kevin talks about it, so I guess I can :~)

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Cornelia-I
    Currently Being Moderated
    6. Cornelia-I,
    Feb 22, 2012 3:55 PM   in reply to Cornelia-I
    Report

    Just for clarification: 1 image per page might not be much better for a given paper size regarding superfluous space left on the page as currently.

    But if you place 2-5 on a page this could be different.

     

    What is so incompatible with my taste in book layout is: all layouts are oriented on the paper size, instead of on common image ratios. As if *some designer*, a non-photographer or point-and-shooter at best, had devised these layouts. Graphical patterns is all they are.

     

    The autofill feature would be so much more meaningful if we had such image-ratio driven layouts and could specify that the image must match the frame dimension, i.e. Both fit and fill fulfilled at the same time. So a portrait image would only go into a portrait frame and vice versa with landscape.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • gnits999
    Currently Being Moderated
    7. gnits999,
    Feb 22, 2012 4:01 PM   in reply to Jeff Schewe
    Report

    Jeff,

     

    I appreciate the prompt reply. I have no doubt there has been considerable effort poured into the book module. My initial excursion into this module was filled with hope and wonder and I can see the longer term potential.   However, when I discovered that a designer cannot tweak template objects I fell back to earth with a bang. In its current form this module is useless to me.  So near and yet so far.  The real attraction for me was that Lightroom would fill image cells correctly and more importantly, apply the correct capture and output sharpening by default into the book page. Also, a glimpse at better use of my own metadata. Alas,,, for me not usable.

     

    However, I am mad (not at you but at Adobe).  I am mad that resources have been poured into a Book Module and a Map module, yet leave the Print Module in its unfinished state. My number one request was to allow me place my metadata on a printed page.  The Print Module is not finished.  The Book Module will not be finished. The pattern repeats itself.  Do I have to wait for version 5 or 6.  The general approach by Adobe to the use of Metadata belonging to images is so sad, for so long (across all products, not just Lightroom).

     

    The ability to be able to create your own templates offline is not a solution either, but better than been stuck with the canned templates.

     

    I have made my feelings on this felt.   I will wait and see what is delivered, and hope for the best. 

     

    Ps. Just finished re-reading  my dog eared copy of Image Sharpening.  I assume a new version will be on the horizion as so many of the examples are rendered obsolete by virtue of the changing centre of gravity of the sliders. Thank you for your contribution in so many areas.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Bob Spree
    Currently Being Moderated
    8. Bob Spree,
    Feb 23, 2012 6:01 AM   in reply to Jeff Schewe
    Report

    Hi Jeff

     

    You are probably right about costing more and in this case as it was for a very special presentation I would willingly have paid more.

     

    Surely we can be given the option of choosing our own format and then decide if we are willing to pay the price.

     

    Blurb can only profit from this arrangement as the figures they quote will still allow them to make a decent profit.

     

    Bob Spree

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • jtbikeguy
    Currently Being Moderated
    9. jtbikeguy,
    Feb 24, 2012 12:32 PM   in reply to Bob Spree
    Report

    Based on my experience with the book module - LR/Brurb hook up - it appears they're not ready for prime time professionals.  In another post I reported that when I ordered a book via LR4 upload I was charged NJ sales tax even though Blurb is in CA and has no physical presence in NJ.  As a working professional, I am not required in NJ to pay sales tax on resale items since my customer pays it on the retail price that I charge.  This policy may differ in other states.  When I inquired to Blurb about that, they replied that I must fax a copy of my Blurb invoice back to them to have the sales tax reimbersed.  My conclusion is that they're set up to deal specifically with the end users rather than resellers at this time.

    Also, in response to the template grips in this forum, I totally agree.  Our pro camera format is for the most part 2/3 and their templates are for the most part 4/3 meaning that if I want a full page image I have to crop it to fit the page.  Sigh.....

     
    |
    Mark as:
Actions

More Like This

  • Retrieving data ...

Bookmarked By (0)

Answers + Points = Status

  • 10 points awarded for Correct Answers
  • 5 points awarded for Helpful Answers
  • 10,000+ points
  • 1,001-10,000 points
  • 501-1,000 points
  • 5-500 points