Skip navigation

seems like v5.2 final is released

Sep 17, 2013 9:11 AM

  Latest reply: bob frost, Oct 1, 2013 2:52 AM
Replies 1 2 Previous Next
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Sep 21, 2013 11:53 AM   in reply to ssprengel

    There's no question, '0' Feathering is NOT optimal for most clone spots, but otherwise the LR5.2 Final Spot Removal tool updates are a nice improvement. There was a recent inquiry at the Photoshop Lightroom forum link I posted that their LR5.0 edited images were set to '75' Feathering in LR5.2, which is probably closer to optimal.

     

    I'm working through 179 images to correct the '0' Feathering setting and finding  it's easier to just start over when multiple clone spots were used to cover a large area. The new "drag" capability combined with the Feathering control provides results almost as good as PS CS6  Spot Healing Brush. I still need to use PS CS6 Content Aware Fill for things like large blank areas created after using the Transform tools.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Sep 21, 2013 1:59 PM   in reply to hamada2003

    I installed 5.2 this morning.  Now I can't import pictures from card.  Worked perfectly well before.  Any advice?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Sep 21, 2013 2:26 PM   in reply to daleb1350

    Whatt version of LR were you using previous to LR5.2? We need to know the error messages you're seeing and a screenshot of  the Import module showing all of your settings. Also system and camera type and OS version would be helpful.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Sep 21, 2013 2:36 PM   in reply to trshaner

    I was using LR 5.  No error messages.  When I installed, I wasn't asked for region (as some people apparently were).  I'm running OSX 10.8.5 on a Mac and shooting with a Canon EOS 40D.

     

    Thanks.

     

    Dale

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Sep 21, 2013 3:09 PM   in reply to trshaner

    Everything now working fine. 

     

    Dale

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Sep 21, 2013 3:13 PM   in reply to daleb1350

    Care to share what you did that sorted out your problem?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Sep 21, 2013 4:36 PM   in reply to DdeGannes

    I just registered my product.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Sep 29, 2013 9:36 AM   in reply to vinsolo

    Just found another bug in LR5.2 Final. All of my LR4.4.1 catalog images converted in the LR5.2 Final catalog appear to have the 'Constrain Crop' box unchecked in the Lens Corrections> Manual tab. This means all images that have 'Transforms' applied have the crop removed and now white areas are showing.

     

    So how can I get the 'Constrain Crop' checkbox set back to 'Selected' for 544 image files other than doing this "manually?"

     

    This is really becoming a PITA!

     

    Constrain Crop.jpg

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Sep 29, 2013 9:52 AM   in reply to trshaner

    trshaner wrote:

     

    So how can I get the 'Constrain Crop' checkbox set back to 'Selected' for 544 image files other than doing this "manually?"

     

     

    Try selecting all 544, go to Develop, one of those 544 will be the "most selected" so will appear in the Loupe, click on the small switch to the right of the Sync button, which will turn on Autosync. Then check the Constrain Crop check box in the LC Manual tab. Wait until Autosync finishes, job done, yes?

     

    Don't forget to turn off Autosync when you're finished.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Sep 29, 2013 11:08 AM   in reply to Jim Wilde

    Jim, that worked! It's the first time I've used 'Autosync' in LR and for this pupose it is a BIG timesaver! I checked a number of the images just to be sure the crop was still correct and everything looks good. Thanks buddie..and yes I did turn it OFF!

     

    I must be the only one using LR5.2 Final experieincing this issue...or the first one to discover it?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Sep 29, 2013 11:56 AM   in reply to trshaner

    Todd, you may be the first to discover it....yours is certainly the first report I've seen about it. Have started to ask around to see if it's been noticed elsewhere. I'll also try to reproduce the problem myself when I have time, bit tied up at the moment (OK, if I'm honest I'm watching the NFL.....while keeping an eye on the baseball, especially the AL wild-card race!).

     

    Will report back when I've run some tests.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Sep 29, 2013 12:22 PM   in reply to Jim Wilde

    I did some filtering and discovered only images with Lens Corrections> Manual> Transforms applied were affected. It probably has something to do with addition of the 'Upright' tools in LR5's Len Corrections> Basic panel.

     

    The 'Autosync' fix is relatively painless, but if you didn't realize it and created client output from LR you'd sure have "egg on your face!"

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Sep 29, 2013 1:52 PM   in reply to trshaner

    Todd, did you go directly from LR4 to LR5.2, or did you upgrade to LR5.0 first? Reason for asking is that I couldn't reproduce the issue when creating a test catalog using LR4.4, applying transforms, then upgrading to LR5.2. "Constrain Crop" remained checked after the upgrade. So I'm interested to know your upgrade path....

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Sep 29, 2013 2:57 PM   in reply to Jim Wilde

    I upgraded my LR4.4.1 catalog directly to LR5.2 Final with no other versions in between. Some of the images were processed n LR4, but I'm unsure of the version used. JPEG and raw mages from four different cameras processed in just about every version of LR 1-4 were affected. I'm currently on Windows 7 OS and transitioned from an XP system during LR3.6.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Sep 29, 2013 4:09 PM   in reply to trshaner

    When I found the first  image inside LR5.2 Final with Constrain Crop removed I thought it was an editing error on my part. Then I used AnyFilter to pull up all images with any Transform applied and initially found 544 image files. I then added 'Crop Constrain to Warp' to the filter and  was left with about 200 images with the Constrain Crop option unchecked in the Manual Transform panel. It's highly unlikely this could have happened by error on my part to over 200 image files, especially since that would mean ~50% of all my images with Transforms applied were "goofed!"

     

    I just created a new test catalog in LR4.4.1and applied Transforms with Constrain Crop and it converted without any issues in LR5.2 Final. Not sure what that indicates other than LR4.4.1 edited images don't appear to be affected. I'm not going to try further regression testing, but others are welcome to try and comment here.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Sep 29, 2013 4:31 PM   in reply to trshaner

    @ trshaner, post 47. Just a thought did you uninstall LR 4.4.1 before you upgraded and/or remove your preference file? Did you accept the choice to upgrade your LR4 catalog when prompted to do so during the install process?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Sep 30, 2013 12:45 AM   in reply to trshaner

    Todd, you might be interested to know that Jeffrey Friedl has just updated his Data Explorer plug-in (http://regex.info/blog/lightroom-goodies/data-explorer) with the following:

     

    Capture.JPG

     

    Well worth a look.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Sep 30, 2013 6:24 AM   in reply to Jim Wilde

    I did not uninstall LR4.4.1 before installing LR5.2 Final and upgrading my catalog. In post #23 I said:

     

    I downloaded and installed LR5.2 Final on my Windows 7 system and was surprised to see that my LR4.4.1 previews were "moved" from the LR4 catalog folder to the new LR5 catalog folder. NO PREVIEWS LEFT FOR LR4! I had to manually copy 40 GB of previews back into my LR4 catalog folder. All previous LR5 installations were removed prior to the LR5 Final install.

     

    I always keep my older LR version installed for a few months. If there is some major issue I can at least recover and work on the images with LR4 edits in the LR4 catalog. Why was I not offered an option to COPY instead of MOVE the LR4 previews?

     

    So I did accept the prompt to upgrade my LR4 catalog during the LR5.2 Final install.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Sep 30, 2013 6:37 AM   in reply to Jim Wilde

    Jim Wilde wrote:

     

    Todd, you might be interested to know that Jeffrey Friedl has just updated his Data Explorer plug-in (http://regex.info/blog/lightroom-goodies/data-explorer) with the following:

     

    Capture.JPG

     

    Well worth a look.

    Thanks Jim the 'Unconstrained Crop' filter item is exactly what is required to find these images. AnyFilter works as well, but I had to run the filter in two steps, 1) FInd images with ANY Transform applied, and 2) remove images with 'Crop Constrain To Warp' checked. I'll download Jeffrey's 'Data Explorer' and run it to make sure all affected images were found and corrected.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Sep 30, 2013 7:30 AM   in reply to trshaner

    I ran Jeffrey's Data Explorer with Transforms applied to one (1) image without 'Constrain Crop checked as a test. It works fine and took about 65 sec. to filter 22,261 images, which is about the same as AnyFilter. So AnyFilter did find all of the affected images. AnyFilter also allows you to nest multiple filter items, but Data Explorer can only run one item at a time. Data Explorer is easier to use in this case (and others) since it combines multiple items into one search term:

     

    'Unconstrained Crop' = ANY Manual Transform Item or Crop Applied + Constrain Crop NOT selected

     

    There's a place and use for both of these plugins!

     

    Constrain Crop - Jeffreys Plugin.jpg

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Sep 30, 2013 7:31 AM   in reply to trshaner

    I always unclick the option to transfer previews when upgrading. I find it is much better to create all new previews with a new version of LR after upgrading the catalog. Then you have all the old ones left untouched. But I wouldn't leave LR 4.4 installed alongside LR5, as in my mind there are too many things shared for things to go wrong. LR5 will just copy your LR 4 prefs if you leave them, and they will both be using the ACR cache.

     

    Bob Frost

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Sep 30, 2013 8:02 AM   in reply to bob frost

    bob frost wrote:

     

    I always unclick the option to transfer previews when upgrading. I find it is much better to create all new previews with a new version of LR after upgrading the catalog. Then you have all the old ones left untouched.

    My LR4.4.1 previews are working with no issues inside LR5.2 Final. I was also able to copy the previews back to the LR4.4.1 catalog with out any issues inside LR4.4.1. I'm not sure why you are suggesting it's a good idea to "rebuild" all of the previews. With a meager 22,000+ images and a rebuild time of ~5 sec./image it would take 30+ Hours!

     

    bob frost wrote:

    But I wouldn't leave LR 4.4 installed alongside LR5, as in my mind there are too many things shared for things to go wrong. LR5 will just copy your LR 4 prefs if you leave them, and they will both be using the ACR cache.

    My LR4.4.1 preferences are what I want inside LR5.52 Final and the ACR cache is already shared with my PS CS6 ACR. My intention of leaving LR4.4.1 installed is not to continue working in it, but for "backup" and test purposes when things like I've posted here happen! It is a very common practice for working professionals to keep the previous version of the application or suite installed until the new version has proven it is stable. From what I can see Adobe has made sure two (or more) versions of the same application can be installed and used with "minimal" issues.

     

    Bob, I do appreciate your feedback so don't take me wrong! But I don't see how leaving LR4.4.1 installed has anything to do with the 'Constrain Crop' becoming unchecked in the "converted" LR4.4.1 catalog inside LR5.2 Final, do you agree?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Sep 30, 2013 8:46 AM   in reply to trshaner

    My reply was in reply to your post where you described how you updated LR 4.4.1 to 5.2, not the other problem of unconstrained crops vanishing.

     

    It might be a common practice of photographers to keep both versions going alongside one another, but from 20-30 years of playing with computers my experience tells me not to do it! 'Dll-hell' isn't just a distant memory. Upgrading an existing version to a new one is certainly getting better than it was not so many years ago, and often now one is told that one can install a new version alongside the older one. But........... there are so many bugs in programs running on their own, that I simply don't believe they can have thought of all the possible interactions with another version of the same program running alongside, especially when they share common files.

     

    We used to have terrible problems with some of the Nikon programs years ago, and Nikon had to write a series of utilities to clear out remnants of older versions before installing a new one. Even now, I think Adobe has one to clean up Photoshop installations.

     

    Did you say earlier that you were a programmer? If so, excuse my pessimism, but from many years of sorting out my and others computer problems, at work and at home, I mistrust all programs! They will always drop you in it eventually, so the only answer is to minimise their opportunities to go wrong, and running just one version (after clearing out all the old folders and registry entries that uninstallers still seem to be unable to do correctly) is a good start in my book.

     

    Why can't people write decent uninstallers?

     

    Bob Frost

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Sep 30, 2013 8:59 AM   in reply to bob frost

    You can be skeptical if you want.  It isn't going to hurt anything working the way you do.  But an update of Lightroom from Adobe is actually a complete new installation.  The preferences come across, of course, but everything else is new.  I have Lightroom 4.4 running alongside 5.2, and don't experience any issues.  You can be "safe" and it won't hurt anything.  But, in my opinion, you are being overly cautious.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Sep 30, 2013 9:02 AM   in reply to bob frost

    Bob,

     

    While I totally understand your skepticism, for the record: I've got Lr2, Lr3, Lr4, & Lr5 installed and never had any problems/conflicts (I use them all regularly for plugin testing, well, not Lr2 so much anymore ).

     

    In other words, Lr is pretty good about this stuff. In fact, in all my years of following Lr forum(s), I've never once seen problems traced to multi-version Lr conflicts (other than previews being kyped as trshaner noted above). That's probably the reason there is no Lr cleaner utility, as there is for some other programs that may have install/uninstaller issues...

     

    I'm not trying to change your mind, but for other readers sakes...

     

    Summary: Lightroom has problems, but that's not one of them .

     

    Cheers,

    Rob

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Sep 30, 2013 10:43 AM   in reply to bob frost

    bob frost wrote:

    Did you say earlier that you were a programmer? If so, excuse my pessimism, but from many years of sorting out my and others computer problems, at work and at home, I mistrust all programs! They will always drop you in it eventually, so the only answer is to minimise their opportunities to go wrong, and running just one version (after clearing out all the old folders and registry entries that uninstallers still seem to be unable to do correctly) is a good start in my book.

    I started my career in 1968 with a minicomputer manufacturer (Interdata>Perkin-Elmer>Concurrent Computer) and was with them for 20-years.–The days of TTY I/O, paper tape, IBM punched cards, magnetic core memory (64KB max.), and no mass-storage devices or monitors. How the heck we were able to create any kind of usable programs boggles my mind today!

     

    Yes, I've gotten bit many times by bad uninstallers, but most of Adobe's apps have good uninstallers (except perhaps Acrobat). I think you're suffering from "battered-user" syndrome, which is understandable! There's certainly nothing wrong with a more cautious approach to software installs and if it's working for you I'd continue that way.

     

    Message was edited by: trshaner Corrected link URL

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Sep 30, 2013 11:16 AM   in reply to trshaner

    What? No IBM 604 plugboard programming??

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Sep 30, 2013 12:36 PM   in reply to DJ-G

    I actually worked with vacuum tubes in the late 1950s as an 11-year old kid:

     

    http://www.quickreference.info/small-business-stories/american-basic-s cience-club-case-history-of-a-successful-small-business/

     

    My mother used to ask me each month, "Are you sure you want that $3.45 'Kit of The Month'–That's a lot of money."

     

    I have to admit feeling a bit of that same kid excitement with each new camera, lens, computer, or software purchase, but it costs a heck of lot more than $3.45. It's just disappointing when we have to deal with all of the bugs.

     

    I never had a single 'Kit of The Month' that didn't work 100% perfect, but that's when pride-in-workmanship was a valued commodity and most everything was Made in America. We really need to turn that around!

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Sep 30, 2013 1:18 PM   in reply to trshaner

    We're pretty much on the same boat (from the same boat?) I remember being totally seduced by a 1960 Popiular Electronics cover of a flip-flop on a clear board with two power transistors. One bit, 2x3 inches . I don't mind upgrades or working out problems - makes it more interesting and gives my retired butt something to do . I do realize others have better things to do.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Sep 30, 2013 1:21 PM   in reply to Rob Cole

    OK, so what happens to xmp sidecars if you have the same images being edited in two versions of LR? Is the info stored in separate places readable only by the appropriate version? And with the acr cache, presumably older versions will have to write their own cache files, so there could be two cache files for each image? Just curious!

     

    'Battered User'

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Sep 30, 2013 1:49 PM   in reply to bob frost

    bob frost wrote:

     

    OK, so what happens to xmp sidecars if you have the same images being edited in two versions of LR?

    You're right there - if they have the same photo files you have to take care not to overwrite xmp. And of course you have to take care not to delete photos in one that are still in use in the others...

     

     

    bob frost wrote:

     

    Is the info stored in separate places readable only by the appropriate version?

    Are we still talking about xmp? If so, then Lr2 can read PV2003 settings from Lr5 xmp, and vice versa... (i.e. they interpret what they can understand and ignore the rest).

     

     

     

    bob frost wrote:

     

    And with the acr cache, presumably older versions will have to write their own cache files, so there could be two cache files for each image?

    Not sure how that works - maybe somebody else does. As I said, never been a conflict, so Lr handles it somehow..

     

     

    In my opinion, there is no need to have multiple copies of Lr, except for tesing/trial purposes (or to maintain compatibility with other people using different Lr version...). And if you do have multiple versions installed, it's best to think of one as the "xmp and photo file master", unless of course you duplicate all photo files. But to me, this issue is somewhat independent of number of Lr versions installed. I mean, if you have multiple catalogs via the same Lr version (e.g. for testing/trial purposes...) you have the same issues.

     

     

    R

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Sep 30, 2013 4:17 PM   in reply to Rob Cole

    I only use one version, but I would wager the xmp is from the last version to do a change and save the metadata. As mentioned above, the version will do its best to interpret it. However, I believe LR works off the catalog, and under the multi-version situation its metadata may differ from the xmp until read into the catalog explicitly.

     

    All in theory.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Sep 30, 2013 4:25 PM   in reply to DJ-G

    The potential for xmp problem comes in if:

    * you use auto-save xmp setting, since first change results in shared xmp getting overwritten (or if Lr takes a notion, it may save without a change).

    * you forget what you are doing, and save xmp manually.

     

    I say "potential" because as you stated, data written is never a problem until it's been read .

     

    Not theoretical - all in practice .

     

    Cheers,

    Rob

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Sep 30, 2013 5:06 PM   in reply to Rob Cole

    In my situation I don't do any "new work" inside the older LR version without first copying the files to a new folder to keep them separate them from the originals. I also don't use XMP files, but that's not the case for others. If at some point I deem the new version is too buggy as to be usable I will trash the newer version and its catalog, import the new image files into the older version, and start over on editing them. This is my "backup plan", which I haven't had to use....just yet!

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Oct 1, 2013 2:52 AM   in reply to Rob Cole

    Thanks guys, I think I'll stick to my old-fashioned 'one-at-a-time' approach. It seems we are getting into the realms of 'known unknowns' and unknown unknowns' as Donald Rumsfeld would have said!

     


    Bob Frost

     

     

    "There are known knowns; there are things we know that we know.

    There are known unknowns; that is to say there are things we now know that we don't know.

    But there are also unknown unknowns - there are things we do not know we don't know."

     

    Donald Rumsfeld, US Secretary of Defense.

     
    |
    Mark as:
1 2 Previous Next
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