From: Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}>
Subject: Re: A lightroom question
Full headers:
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2017 18:36:28 -0500
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2017 16:36:28 -0700
From: Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}>
Mime-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Hogwasher/5.17
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <>
Subject: Re: A lightroom question
References: <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <ot5giq$1mtk$> <> <ot5lh5$1tq5$>
Lines: 68
X-Trace: sv3-hlAivPr8SHfAnkyXybmCr977JuiUi9sMSR33lIHNDkOlCK159CNhRssxHknXAu6nTym9A6h6JGUpEhx!Ko5fUVprV550wNtu3Ejm+4yGu3JgD0peKXqRTBwqdXxDwI21HhvIcdQK3TtJINhS6mTRIn8vZ0D4!eZV8tI1fN1I=
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 4557
Print Article
Forward Article
On Oct 29, 2017, Mayayana wrote
(in article <ot5lh5$1tq5$>):

> "Savageduck"<savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}>  wrote
> > The first thing is to understand how LR works. If you are working with
> > original files in LR all adjustments/edits are not applied directly to the
> > original, but to XMP sidecar files. The JPEG is not altered. The first
> thing
> > most sensible LR users will do is create a virtual copy and make all edits
> > and adjustments to that.
> I understand. It's a clever design. I'm just pointing out that in that scenario there's still the
> original JPG and there's still loss in the final save. So if one is going to work with JPGs then
it seems a
> good design.

The original JPEG has lost all it is ever going to lose, there is no "final 
save” in LR.
> I think we're saying the same thing. You work in RAW or TIF, then export to JPG only if necessary.

Not quite, that was what I did when I used a RAW only workflow. Now that I am 
shooting a RAW+JPEG workflow with my Fujifilm cameras, if I have to make 
adjustments to the SOOC JPEG, I do so to an LR Virtual copy. If I export any 
image it is done via the LR export dialog and not saved back to LR.


....and the resized exported result:

> I'm just pointing out that it makes sense to store in non-lossy formats in the first place, either
RAW or something
> like TIF, when it comes out of RAW. And if it's coming from JPG? Why not convert it anyway?

That defeats the purpose of having SOOC JPEGs which might have an in-camera 
film emulation applied, the RAW file will be just a RAW file, and available 
for other adjustment.

> That's basically what LR is doing -- saving some kind of backup bitmap image.

Nope, an XMP sidecar file is not some kind of backup bitmap image. It is a 
set of instructions detailing the edits and adjustments.


> By saving in TIF you can cut out the middleman and don't need to be limited to LR. And you can
also have multiple edits
> as multiple non-lossy files. Like "beach.tif”, "beach without uncle fred.tif", "beach2.tif”,
"beach3.tif", etc. And any of those can be worked
> on further. Maybe that's not relevant to you. I like to save whatever I do as a non-lossy file, in
case I later want to proceed from that point to do 
something else.

My originals, be they RAW or JPEG are never molested, and I can have as many 
edits or variations of any original merely by making as many virtual copies 
as I desire.
> But it's true that I don't use LR. I just use the basic computer file system. If you prefer to have
> LR keep track of your images then letting it handle bitmap backups may be convenient.

There are no bitmap backups.