I’m organizing my archive, for the first time, (a Nikon new LR user), and because of that, I have (many, many) thousands of photos to work, keywording, and gps geotagging and because of that I realized that I’m spending lots of time, doing the same actions over and over again.
So here I leave you some ideas for Lightroom improvements:
1. The lines and grid that appear in crop mode, and also straighten tool are most of the time, less than visible against some backgrounds, and would be better to have them in yellow, or even better, in a customizable color. Also when adjusting line horizon, in a very little detail base (some very little vertical line or other), it’s difficult to see if it´s ok, especially to the people like me, with some sight problems, and I use a 24” monitor…
2. In the keyword grid, I think the workflow would be much quicker if there were more predefined keyword space grids, I would suggest 3x the actual number of grids, or even better, a user definable number.
3. In the map mode (amazing improvement by the way!), it would be also a nice improvement, in terms of speed, if Lightroom could have a grid like that one used for the keywords, with a few boxes, for using user defined gps points, because it’s easier to click some we use more often, than searching for them all the time.
1. We try to keep most of the LR UI monotone so that it doesn't interfere with color judgement. Our eyes naturally blur colors together and so having yellow on top of your image would make it hard to judge. But I think you have a good point about it being adjustable, at least in terms of brightness (brighter for dark images, darker for light images).
2. When you say "Keyword Grid", I assume you are talking about the Keyword Suggestions and Keyword Set. If we trippled the size of these they would take away a great deal of screen real estate or have to be reduced in size to compensate. It might be easier to use the keyword list with hierarchical nesting, so that you are keeping groups of keywords (say 25-30 in each), and you can expand and contract these groups as you need them.
3. You can create Location Presets to apply to your images, rather than having to find them again and again. These appear as a list on the left rather than a grid on the right.
Thank you for the answer Brett. Its very regarding to see that someone reads what we're writing.
1. I understand your point, and I also like the monochrome option, it doesn't distract. But in this one, I think it would be a plus. Anyway Adobe can always leave the last choice to the user, to have it in color, or not. Maybe also if the lines were thicker, could make them more visible, because when we want to align a photo with a very small reference detail, its complicated...and it gets worse if you have seeing problems of any kind.
2. The keyword set in my opinion its much quicker, at least for some keywords, than to go and constantly scroll in a big list (and yes I have it very organized and nested, etc...but big. The space doesn't matter as we can unfold the options we don't use in the moment. So I definitively think that a 3x set would be a big improvement in the workflow speed...ni five cents of course..
3. I've seen the my locations, but to be honest it doesn't´ help in this matter, its not fast enough. We click on the location and drag the photo to a tiny little point.... So doesn't matter much in this process not simple and quick enough.
As you were referring, those boxes, (like on keyword set ones) take space on the screen. Well, not really true. We can fold and unfold them, and Adobe could even have the extended ones, to unfold only to the normal size, or fold them completely, or open it at full size (if you manage to add the feature).
So that doesn't matter much. And could also be done in the my locations side of LR (that is not very problematic in terms of space), and If we're working in the library mode, thats not a big problem. As I'm facing it, if I had both boxes with much more entries, I could speed up my working A LOT! It was a question of several click on the keywords, and on the predefined maps locations. Believe me. I have 58000 photos in queue for inserting, and this is very hard to be all the time, scrolling and searching...and slows very much the work.
Anyway thanks for the answer
PS: Sorry for my bad English...but that's not may own language
The point of the My Locations is that it acts like a preset or keyword, it's instantly applied. Once you have created a loction, simply select the images in the filmstrip that you want to apply to that location, and then click the check box that appears next to the location name. It's the fastest thing short of telepathy. From your description, it sounds like you've created a location but aren't actually using it, still trying to drag images onto the map.
Thank you for the tip Brett. I didn't realize that! My mistake in that point.
Maybe you could also help me in a point in what im becoming intrigued.
When i import photos (NEF), no mather what profile i use, even with no profile at all, i see the photo thumbnails ok, but after some seconds they become very dark.
However this doesn't happen with the Nikon D7000, but only with D50 and D80. Would apreciate very much any clue. Thanks
When you first import an image into Lightroom, the thumbnail you see is the one embedded in the RAW file. After some seconds Lightroom will have had a chance to read the RAW file itself and generate its own thumbnail, based on this RAW information and its settings in Lightroom. If the camera is applying settings to your image automatically (brightening, sharpening, or something else), these settings only apply to JPEG files and the RAW thumbnail. The RAW file is compossed of the unaltered information captured by the camera sensor.
In other words, your D50 and D80 are both applying settings to your images as you capture them, while your D7000 is not. If you would like Lightroom to make similar adjustments, you will want to create a preset that matches those settings created by your camera and apply them at import.
Yes I'm aware of that, but what its very strange to have some photos "almost" perfectly translacted, when others are very dark. As a matter of setings the D8 and D7000 have almost the same settings (D50 passed long time ago).
I think Lightroom will never be a fullfilled softwtare for Nikon users, until this problem its solved (i doubt of course). Its a real drawback to have the cameras set to take aperfectly customised photos, and than having to do the job once again in LR, when most or even all don't need further changes. LR workflow is superb, but this is a real pain in the a.. i must say...we all loose in this little war...
What remainds me.
What about an external simple calculator program to convert the Nikon camera settings that LR doesn't read, to the Lightroom settings?
That could be the possible answer for this problem?
I beleave that this (if its possible to be done), could solve some particular needs of making a optimised profile equal to the camera settings... If i Have x, y settings on the camera i need to change the lightroom parameters x, etc., accordingly to ?...to have the same photo obtained by the camera.
I also have many Nikon images in my LR catalog, stemming from D70S, D90, D300, D300S, D700, D3S (and P6000, although I was never happy with its image quality).
For some of them I choose as default setting the camera calibration "camera standard" i.o. "Adobe standard". For some of them I also change other default settings differently than Adobe.
I save this via while in Develop module via menu Develop - Set Default Settings, then click on Update to current settings.
This gives me a pleasing result, *sufficiently similar* to what I see from the camera screen. I shoot RAW (NEF) only.
Adobe has in fact already created profiles for the most usual cameras, to better match with what the camera manufacturers do render. They are shipped within the LR package.
It works also well for our two travelling-size cameras from Canon (S90, G12).
That should deliver what you mean by "simple calculator program". Of course Adobe can only use what is available to them - neither Nikon nor Canon or some others do fully document their native proprietary raw format.
More recently I do no longer choose my exposure in-camera for a ready-to-use jpg-result, but expose-to-the-right (mostly min. 2/3 exposure bias), in order to capture more image data. I overexpose close before blowing out highlights.
LR4 does a very nice job with its image-adaptive algorithms out of that. Hardly ever do I need to set exposure to -0.66, as one would numerically expect.
So I'd suggest you play around some more time, both with new concepts while capturing an image in camera, as well as thoroughly testing the camera profiles.
Camera landscape e.g. gives a nice vibration-saturation boost. Medium contrast becomes some cameras well as default.
There are so many happy Nikon-Lightroom users out there. It would be a pity not to count you among them some day!
Have fun, Cornelia
would it be possible for some users to show screen shots of their keyword presets, this might help other Lightroom users like myself improve their own workflow.
I would be interested in the Location Presets from a later reply to your post.
"3. You can create Location Presets to apply to your images, rather than having to find them again and again. These appear as a list on the left rather than a grid on the right".
Anyone like to offer any further advice.
Location presets can be set up to cover an area, such as a city. Or you can choose a specific location.
Here are screen shots for each:
This is determined by the Radius option when creating your Location preset. Once you have created the preset, simply drag it to your pictures, or you pictures to it, and they will be geotagged with that place.
Apreciated your words. Yes i'm begining to play around, and yes i even created some profiles, that are giving me more or less accurate results, but not quite the same tonal colors i was having with Nx. Thats why i was so relutant to change to Lr. The problem of the settings not been read, and also the Wb tool, that i think in Nx its far better with selectable average areas.
Even a conversion chart for the camera settings not read by Lr would been welcome. Another point is that the Auto tone function ( i use it mostly for the photos i dont care much ), which was working most of the times with Lr3, now is failing most of the times. I think its even worse with process 2010 converted photos to 2012.
I could show you a screen but it wouldnt help you , because its in Portuguese. I can advise you to get it well structures, and simple. The most smple possible. Don't had things you don't use, it only will complicate your workflow.
You need to work it out your way, for the type of work you do. I suggest that you work the keywords careffuly with no rush until you have it done.
I have 5 main keyword, like: local, time and weather,photo type, event, and then sub keywords: Ex:
# Family events
Hope that can help you, but as i have said keep it well structured and simple
After a week working in the keywording of my photos, i must say that what i've said earlier about the Keyword Set maintains completly. When i have the wright keys on the customized list its lightning fast, otherwise its about scrolling and srcolling, and i'm even getting pain in the wrist because of that. I know i can't have it all there, but the incrased size will lower the number of times i need to srcoll sown the nested list to add other keywords.
I really think this point must be revised...that will not help me in the present, of course, but i think in future, me and others would benefict. I beleave the triple (or a configurable size) increase would benefict imensly the workflow in this matter.
For instance the keyword suggestions in my opinion its almost superfluos and only takes space. The way to go is an increased Keyword Set, or even unfoldable by genre, or even to have the both options.
The space taken by the Keyword Set, doesn't matter much, because if you need to search in the nested keywords, you need always to scroll down to find it. For more specific keywording, with less itens, it will be damn fat, for the ones like me with more diversified genres, it will also be fast most of the time, anyway much more than now.
I also think that the little box for assuming the keyword doesnt help also. If we pass with the mouse in a keyword its grayed, so why not only clicking on it, instead of the need to check the little box?
Hope you have this ideas in consideration, to leed to some future improvement, and don't think i'm moaning about this, because that's not the case.
If you think so, i challenge you to give it a try, go keywording a vast archive (spend several days on i...), with a very deversified photo catalog, and you'll see what i'm talking about.