andalus Posted May 18, 2012 Share #1 Posted May 18, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) If I adjust images in ACR via Bridge do the same adjustments show up in LR4 images, or is adjusting images in LR4 an entirely separate thing from working in Bridge and Photoshop's ACR? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted May 18, 2012 Posted May 18, 2012 Hi andalus, Take a look here Please Help. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
01af Posted May 18, 2012 Share #2 Posted May 18, 2012 If I adjust images in ACR via Bridge do the same adjustments show up in Lr 4 ...? Yes, they do. ... or is adjusting images in Lr 4 an entirely separate thing from working in Bridge and Photoshop's ACR? No, it isn't. Lightroom and Camera Raw share the very same raw engine. So unlike other raw converters, these two are 100 % compatible to each other. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke_Miller Posted May 18, 2012 Share #3 Posted May 18, 2012 I believe 01af is correct, but only if LR4 is set to save edits in .xmp sidecar files. If it is configured to save edits only in the Lightroom catalog, ACR will not be able to "see" the Lightroom edits. Also if you use Process 2012 in Lightroom you will find ACR 6.7 is not compatible Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wda Posted May 19, 2012 Share #4 Posted May 19, 2012 If I adjust images in ACR via Bridge do the same adjustments show up in LR4 images, or is adjusting images in LR4 an entirely separate thing from working in Bridge and Photoshop's ACR? Andalus, remember one simple rule. Lightroom is 'non-destructive', whereas ACR in Photoshop is destructive unless you store all adjustment layers at some cost in file size. That is why I do most of my processing in LR, creating virtual copies to store separate instructions for, say, a colour and monochrome variants. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
01af Posted May 19, 2012 Share #5 Posted May 19, 2012 ... remember one simple rule. If people start their advice stating it was a 'simple rule' then typically it either is not simple, or no rule. Here, the latter applies. Lightroom is 'non-destructive,' whereas ACR in Photoshop is destructive ... That's utter nonsense. Instead, Lightroom is non-destructive, and so is ACR. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wda Posted May 19, 2012 Share #6 Posted May 19, 2012 ACR works in conjunction with Photoshop where many photographers finish processing their pictures. It is at that stage that the process becomes destructive because once layers are flattened and saved, all instructions are lost. Photographers using LR predominantly for their processing have no such limitations. Correct? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
250swb Posted May 19, 2012 Share #7 Posted May 19, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) ACR works in conjunction with Photoshop where many photographers finish processing their pictures. It is at that stage that the process becomes destructive because once layers are flattened and saved, all instructions are lost. Photographers using LR predominantly for their processing have no such limitations. Correct? Rubbish. Steve Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
01af Posted May 20, 2012 Share #8 Posted May 20, 2012 Rubbish indeed. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
250swb Posted May 20, 2012 Share #9 Posted May 20, 2012 For clarity using ACR in Photoshop produces a .xmp sidecar file that stores the information of changes made to the .dng file. You can off course go back the the default .dng file if you want to at any time. The image you make in ACR is opened in Photoshop as a .psd file, and this will save all Layers and Smart Filters applied to the image in post processing. So you have two levels of being able to go back over what you do and edit it later in both ACR and a .psd file. Of course most people may ignore the possiblity of saving the ACR generated file as a .psd file and save as a .TIFF because of file bloat. But even then, you can always work on a .TIFF file and add layers etc, and then save that as a .psd file, with all your Layers intact. So working in Photoshop is non-destructive if that is what you choose. Steve Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted May 20, 2012 Share #10 Posted May 20, 2012 David said that when layers are flattened and saved, then the file is no longer undestructed. Photoshop is NOT like Lightroom or Aperture when you come to save a file, unless you save said file with all its layers. If you use layers, of course. So, it's not "Rubbish". Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adan Posted May 20, 2012 Share #11 Posted May 20, 2012 Well, let's be clear. What is opened in ACR and Photoshop is a PHOTOSHOP document based on the .DNG data - a whole new file (which can be saved various ways, from jpeg to TIFF to a Postscript file to a .pdf to ".psd with layers". The original .DNG image data - the pixel values the camera captured - is not changed or "destructed." The metadata relating to settings like WB or tone curve is changed (but can be set back to defaults). You can open a raw image in ACR and never actually open it in Photoshop - simply click "Done" instead of "Open." Any settings changes you made will be saved (in the dng metadata, or in an xmp file) - AS DESCRIPTIONS of what the settings were, not actual changes to the pixels in the picture. They can be changed back at any future time. I certainly read wda's post as meaning the .dng itself was irretrievably altered by ACR - which IS rubbish. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wda Posted May 20, 2012 Share #12 Posted May 20, 2012 Andy, not so. I understand the way raw data is stored in ACR or Lightroom.. My reference to destructive processing referred to those pictures which are subsequently transferred to Photoshop (PS) for more extensive processing, such as that whichcannot be done in ACR or LR, such as working in layers. Historically, processing data is not stored in PS once a file is flattened and saved. (I used the word 'flattened' in my earlier post). To that extent old-fashioned Photoshop is destructive, cf with Lightroom or Aperture. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted May 20, 2012 Share #13 Posted May 20, 2012 I thought I was agreeing with you Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mija1789 Posted May 20, 2012 Share #14 Posted May 20, 2012 I thought I was agreeing with you I misread too initially but wda's post is a reply to adan (aka Andy Piper). Too many Andy on this thread. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
01af Posted May 20, 2012 Share #15 Posted May 20, 2012 I understand the way raw data is stored in ACR or Lightroom. My reference to destructive processing referred to those pictures which are subsequently transferred to Photoshop for more extensive processing, such as that which cannot be done in ACR or Lr, such as working in layers. Now this statement is (a) basically correct and ( entirely different from your original statement (post #4 in this thread). You can work destructively in Photoshop, but you don't have to. It's your choice. So working in Photoshop does not necessarily mean you have to give up non-destructive processing. And moreover, it absolutely does not matter whether you import your images into Photoshop via Lightroom or via Camera Raw. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wda Posted May 21, 2012 Share #16 Posted May 21, 2012 Andy Barton, yes; I was replying to the Andy (Piper) just above my reply. 01af, I think the confusion arises from the different backgrounds of users. In the age before Raw capture (BRC), most serious photographers used Photoshop, in its variant forms, or similar software, for digital image processing. ACR was added to Photoshop at a later date to provide raw processing within Photoshop. My belief and personal practice (BRC) was to flatten and save my working files in TIF. There was no historical record to return to unless I documented my stages. That remains the case today, except that most of my processing is done within Lightroom and only refined in PS. Occasionally I do work in PS for more esoteric results which require blending and layers. I guess that many newer digital photographers come to Photoshop primarily to use the ACR function and many do not process further in the main body of the software. In that case, history can be preserved if the software is set up properly and raw files are retained. Lightroom optimised digital processing specifically for photographers, as opposed to Graphic Designers (as in old Photoshop). It has the full potential to retain history, a dominant virtue of LR as compared with the main PS programme (excluding ACR).. I made the wrong assumption in my first reply. I would guess that the majority of hobbyist users of digital cameras do not even recognize Raw format or understand its value and processing. I would guess that most regular members of this forum do understand, but I may be wrong. Now on to more serious personal work! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.