This content has been marked as final. Show 22 replies
No, ACR is a plug-in that requires Photoshop. You might consider using Lightroom. It incorporates all of the features of ACR. But even then, you would still need a computer to run the program. If you didn't take a laptop, how are you planning on running anything?
The O/P was referring to use it without a computer.
Yes, I understand that. But please tell me how to someone can use ANY computer application or plug-in WITHOUT a computer.
You need a computer but there are smaller computers than laptops, I guess.
Furthermore ACR is as far as I know no one trick poney but a Adobe Photoshop plug-in.
Thus the answer is 'no' in my opinion.
You do need some kind of serious screen when editing your images through ACR. This is almost a conditio sine qua non. So I don't get the question very well...
>But please tell me how to someone can use ANY computer application or plug-in WITHOUT a computer
I would if you could afford it. :-P
I have been confused for months about ACR and Photoshop CS3 RAW DNG issues - your ACR questions opens a large can of worms - think you mean who wants 500M of photoshop plus cost on second lite travel computer just to use PS ACR ?
Quick answer is the on-road best solution is Ligthroom Beta 2.0 - would be better even over stand-alone PS ACR.. less money over PS and great travel solution for quick check image quality.
Adobe tech support and even most recent expert books and articles on Camera Raw are confused on ACR issues - lot of confusion - Sorry this is such long post....and forgive me if much of this is already scattered in many places on these forums and obvious to most Photoshop Techies...
...The real question is why does PS ACR exist at all ?
Actually ACR really is a "standalone program" that processes images and converts them to snapshot tiff images for use in PS CS3. It can also store RAW images on disk but only in the DNG format with xml sidecars - it really is identical to Lightroom, except Lightroom does more on processing side and stores images in many Raw formats. ACR looks like code taken directly from Lightroom..
PS ACR is actually sold as a stand-alone program - But it's called "Lightroom Beta 2.0" -- Reason PS ACR is a Plug-In and not stand-alone for marketing and business reasons serial number issues. Beta 2.0 Lightroom works really well - impressive worth every penny ....and much better travel solution.
PS ACR really is a Lightroom Beta 2.0 "code bag" on side for Photoshop CS3 - a tab placeholder until Adobe gets a real RAW or DNG solution for CS3 which may take long time -- Beta 2.0 Lightroom does not use "ACR Plug-In" at all -- PS ACR is not a solution it is a good short term fix.
I love adobe products and group - but even the "expert books" and adobe tech support are confused about real issues - that is fact Photoshop CS3 can not do anything with RAW or DNG files and can not store what it does in a portable xml code file -
Now for an even more confusing issue - when you load images into PS ACR and export them to PS CS3 with the PS ACR "open image" button -- PS CS3 comes up with file name in Banner with original file type (eg Color.NEF for D3 )- so you think your editing original in NEF file in CS3 -- what they do not tell you is you are now working on a fixed tiff "snapshot" with all of the PS ACR xml changes permanently embedded ("fix locked forever") - it is not a NEF or DNG or any other RAW format -- and you lose all xml data - no xml data stored with new images as sidecar -- now go to "Save as" in PS CS3 and you get list that in includes even more confusion - you see "store as Color.Raw" as an option -
DO NOT BE FOOLED - .Raw is not what you think -- it is an an old exchange format very large - it has nothing to do with DNG or RAW or NEF like formats at all....
This has taken many days of trial and error experiments to unravel - non of this is bad -- only very confusing and think stems from three simple issues - maybe other more expert users can correct me or comment. But here is show stopper issue and why PS ACR exists as a plugin
1. PS CS3 can not process native RAW images (DNG's NEF etc..) right now.... PS ACR is band aid and issued as a plugin to convert to tiff.
2. Storing what you did in xml file is possible for functions contained in Lightroom - but near impossible or difficult for most advanced image functions in PS CS3 - That problem is a big one.. However some simple compromises possible with DNG linked to xml files in PS CS3 think will happen someday, but may take lot of time....
3. Suppling ACR as a stand-alone program might confuse issue even more since Lightroom Beta 2.0 is that stand-alone program .. so Adobe made it a "plug-in" instead so tied to PS CS3 serial numbers ... Lightroom Beta 2.0 is fantastic skips PS ACR totally and does everything ACR does as stand-alone and more
In my opinion, your comments are grossly inaccurate in many respects and misleading in others.
Please be specific - how are they inaccurate or miss-leading ?
think Adobe will confirm CS3 limits on xml and RAW - not ment to be negative or opinionated or even critical - on other items
Please run LightRoom Beta 2.0 - pick an image and select
"Edit in Adobe Photoshop CS3"
Next pop us says "The Camera Raw Plugin being used by Photoshop is an ealier version than lightroom" goes on to say "Some lightroom adjustments may not be visible in Photoshop unit the Camera Raw plugin is updated". I do have the most recent version plugin from Adobe site (4.4.1) and it goes on to say "Such an update will be provided in the future".
You get to pick "Render Using Lightroom" or "Open Anyway" - pick Render Lightroom you get a psd format image in CS3 (check file info to be sure) that has all xml conversions fixed locked into into image - if you pick Open anyway - it bypasses PS ACR and you get a Tiff in CS3 and again all conversions locked into image - write that back to disk with CS3 and no XML and all setting from Lightroom are lost (now fixed in image)
Also -- The controls in PS ACR are 100% identical to Beta 2.0 - not at all like CS3 - the DNG and xml outputs are identical to Beta 2.0 as well -
If you look at the XML files written by PS ACR and by Lightroom Beta 2.0 the xml code is identical and both have same version Core build - it is same code even the same build.....
"Adobe XMP Core 4.2-c020"
QED - looks like a duck talks like one - but whats so bad about that ?
cheez not sure why this should be miss-leading or even an emotional issue - I am just a photographer trying to understand all of this - should not be controversial at all - spoke with a software developer this AM and this all finally made lot clear to him as well - many are confused by existing material - actually exciting to finally understand what we can do and can not do with RAW images
Jim - tell me where I am off on this ?
Lightroom beta 2 is using a code base more advanced than Camera Raw 4.x. You'll note there are new tools in LR 2 which don't appear in Camera Raw 4.4.1 so that's why the dlog pops and tells you that the current version will be rendered by LR and can't be by Camera Raw 4.4.1. A new version of Camera Raw will be released that CAN render Lightroom 2.0 settings when Lightroom 2.0 ships.
>...The real question is why does PS ACR exist at all ?
As an import plug-in to decode proprietary raw file formats which Photoshop can't read...and will prolly never read because Adobe has Camera Raw to do so. You also seem confused over XMP metadata files? They aren't XML (although XMP does follow certain XML specs) they are XMP (eXtensible Metadata Platform=XMP) that contain processing parameters as well as other metadata schemas that can't be safely written into proprietary raw file formats. XMP Core 4.2 is the most recent released version of XMP, not the Camera Raw/Lightroom processing pipeline.
Sorry I stand corrected it is XMP not XML - was a slip (we do lot in XML, bad habit fingers go to L after XM)....
Think what you said is same as what I said -
1. LR 2.0 better over ACR - we're in agreement
2. ACR is good solution for now - again we are in agreement - However I disagree that its forever.. I expect DNG will become native to a new CS4 and that same controls found in ACR will also be added to CS4 under adjustment as window - I maybe wrong but see DNG stuff critical to Adobe's industry leverage they will put DNG everywhere possible. Want photographers to push Nikon Cannon and others to put DNG in cameras so Adobe will make it easy for us guys to use in all software everywhere - just a guess
3. LR 1.4 could open PS ACR now as the entry to CS3 - but it does not - in fact if you remove the ACR Plugin CS3 can not read RAW files (dead in water), but LR 1.4 and LR 2.0 work just fine and they both imports all RAWs as PSD directly to CS3 - in other words neither program needs PS ACR now -- so not too sure I agree that ACR will be entry from LR 2.0 .... what's advantage LR 2.0 has all inputs and outputs to all RAW formats already -
My question is why would you want a RAW image to go from LR 2.0 to ACR ? When you have same functions and much better in LR 2.0 already -
Finally, I suspect that code in ACR is based on LR 1.4 core but so is LR 2.0 - menus are same - retouch pen is new in 2.0 - ACR does have heal and clone option like 1.4 and 2.0 -
..... but who cares about all of this ????
Key is fact is you lose all advanatges of Camera RAW and ability to correct many important things in a RAW image when you do anything in CS3 and write out again - many things I can only do in CS3 - that was not clear at least to me unitl spent lot of time and trial an error - it is not clear at all from adobe or material ACR
Everyone I talk to wants DNG or ability to process any RAW inand out using CS3 or CS4 -- my bet is Adobe is working on that ...
1. Yes, for now but the "next version" of Camera Raw will be equal to the final release of LR 2.0.
2. Nope...Camera Raw will remain for a good long while as _THE_ import plug-in for proprietary raw files opened in Photoshop.
3. Lightroom already uses the Camera Raw pipeline so it has no need of the Camera Raw plug-in.
And to be accurate, Lightroom code is based on Camera Raw code, not the other way around (although a lot of stuff in Camera Raw 4.x was designed by Mark Hamburg, the Lightroom founding engineer who worked with Thomas Knoll on Camera Raw code).
>My question is why would you want a RAW image to go from LR 2.0 to ACR ? When you have same functions and much better in LR 2.0 already -
Sorry I said Jim in last post not Jeff -
Think the major LR 2.0 incompatibility from LR 1.4 is the retouch pen - fact that it works with XMP is amazing - a std XMP files is 12K with retouch pen few points goes to 72K and lot of code generated with lot of X Y points added when you read file..
Can imagine what an XMP instruction set for a mask or edge or color correction or other complex CS3 function might be - but on the other hand it is possible just big files and retouch pen is proof of principle can be done ..
Confirmed that retouch pen changes survive PSD image to CS3 (Render using Lightroom 2.0 option) but do not survive (do anyway option) in LR 2.0 in ACR mode..
Again - my interest here is getting process info (especially color corrections) once done in CS3 back into Lightroom so can quickly be applied 500 RAW images - and that has to be XMP based ...
I think you still don't quite understand. You do as much color correction and other work in Lightroom or Camera Raw as you can. Those changes made on one image can be applied to other images when appropriate. However, once an image is opened from either Lightroom or ACR, the changes are not XMP instructions anymore. Those changes are applied directly to the image data. Notice that when you open an image from Lightroom into Photoshop a new copy of the image is created, and that is what you edit. ACR is somewhat different in that it loads the pixels into Photoshop, but reserves the saving of the image until the Photoshop editing session is complete. But in either case, Photoshop/ACR or Lightroom, a new image is created. And those Photoshop edits are not XMP changes that can be readily copied to other images. There are methods within Photoshop, using adjustment layers, that would enable you to copy changes to other images, but that is a different process.
Thanks for fast reply - lots of neat things to address with RAW and these issues - but many very fundamental and simple issues around color and color correction that could be addressed quickly ... so many good tools avialable in CS3 and none for LR at all .. CS3 has unleashed worlds creative juices for those tools
But many issues maybe best solved in LR 2.1 or LR 2.2 .. Think Nikon and Cannon want to keep own formats for a reason - and not go to DNG - has to do with both photometrics of sensors and Bayer specs - cost and time to reverse engineer those curves -- painful job.. other issues on top of sensor photometrics -- has to start at sensor - actually am impressed that they have given us RAW at all - Opens door to write objective article that A is better than B - based on physics
I am humbled re sensor technology and whats happened over last ten years with sensor density and depth D3 and Cannon - photometric correction necessary next step so as consistent and good as our own eye -- we can do that in RAW - I can guarantee that Canon has Nikon's correction data and visa versa... we do not have that data ...
Next question will Adobe create a SDK for Lightroom based on images that goes beyond "file exports" .. ?? or give us ability to work on RAW in CS3 (CS4) so low cost and easy to get that data
Hey Jeff my friend with all due respect think thats what I said in all my posts - Think I do understand issue quit well - please take time to re-read what I posted as I have yours before posting - says same thing you said here....
big problem is not workflow and CS3 - I do 1000 images in a typical shoot and my work flow rarely includes CS3 except the first two images with Greta or 18% Gray or both - Big Problem is can not use the many great tools in CS3 on RAW images to get correction on that first image so can apply that correction to next 500 RAW images in mass using LR and XMP - many analytics some just clever color systems in CS3 (onOne, Rags below, Pictocolor) - But to get back to RAW images correction in LR with XMP have to manually enter corrections in LR based on what you learned in CS3 - that is a lot of work .... or can take 45 minutes processing (Rags Script below).
This my friend is a fundamental and serious limitation in current imaging art - not ment to be criticism of adobe or of you or of art - many others have commented on same- so close but still far. e.g. Rags Gardner and Thomas Fors in all the excellent work they have published using Greta 24 chart and fantastic CS3 scripts - take a look at what they say and more impt what they had to do to make it work (very complex and slow) - why is it complex ?
again not negative - and none of this is end of world stuff -- just clear next big step to speed and simplicity here is to get XMP and DNG to work in CS3 directly so CS3 tools can be used even on limited basis and/or give us SDK for LR 2.0 that opens ability to do image processing in LR 2.0 - not just image exports as SDK is now.
Re Jeff's #11:
> the "next version" of Camera Raw will be equal to the final release of LR 2.0
Those quotation marks bracketing "next version" are mildly disconcerting. Is that the next MAJOR version as in an ACR 5.x that will only work in CS 4, or dare we look forward to a a next orderly update to ACR 4.5 hosted by CS3?
Camera Raw and Lightroom will always be able to render each other's files so yes, there will be a version of Camera Raw that CAN render Lightroom 2.0 final release files.
However to have the same controls and functionality of Lightroom 2.0 will require the NEXT major version of Camera Raw that will work in the NEXT major version of Photoshoppresumably called CS4.
post removed by davidcrebelxt... wasn't thinking... sorry.
As many stated ACR is a PS plugin, but that does not mean that Adobe could not design it as a standalone app generating JPEGS/TIFFs. When the OP says "computer" he probably means a bulky laptop. What about an iPhone or an iPod touch? ACR can probably run in those and one could quickly process RAWs in the field and generate small JPEGs for Web posting...
ACR can't run in an iPhone, though it's a cool idea.
Just thought I'd mention that it is still possible to use your camera to
produce jpegs. Some cameras will create both., giving you the best of both
worlds. Just bring plenty of memory cards.
I know ACR does not run on the iPhone at this point. The iPhone runs OS X, therefore it may not be impossible to conceive an iPhone version of ACR.