Proposed workflow using L3 WITHOUT using Libraries .

Comments

10 comments

  • Avatar
    Paul van den Broek

    Meetoo#

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Anders Svensson

    As far as I can tell, File > Open Images for Quick Edit is the closest we can come to using Luminar 3 just as an editor (I also have zero interest in the Luminar as a DAM), but the ability to save editing information per image looks to have been removed completely in Luminar 3, which is a big issue for me for several reasons, as I wrote in another post: incremental backups (small image-specific files vs one large catalog containing everything), fault tolerance (corrupt database affecting many images), being able to move editing to another host (I hardly want to create a catalog per image), and Luminar's hopelessly version-specific rendering that means that the only way to get what you saved in a .lmnr is to open it in the same version you saved from.

    1
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Dann Lavery

    Here's a video by Abba, and around the 35min mark he explains one workflow option to bring in files without adding them to the catalogue.  Seems simple and straightforward enough.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IRiv5ow4x7M

     

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Anders Svensson

    @Dann, yes, those are the Quick Edits I mentioned, but he's starting from imported photos for some reason. The usefulness of it for me is that I don't have to import anything. (Although there seems to be no getting around the resulting Quick Edits folder.)

    The issue for me is still where the editing information resides though. I want to be able to move/backup/restore editing information per image. Luminar 2018 allowed that, Luminar 3 doesn't, for no apparent reason other than that Skylum obviously doesn't give a toss about backwards compatiblity. (The differences in rendering raw files from update to update being the worst example of this.)

     

     

    2
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Dann Lavery

    @Anders, agreed.  What happened to the large .lmnr file types?  For myself I'm at the other end of the pendulum on this.  The size of the .lmnr files (with history etc) were too large.  Ultimately I have been editing an image, get it to where I want it, and export.  Once exported: COMMAND + W and on to the next.  I very rarely have found a need to go back.  I do however make a lot of presets (looks) so that does somewhat aid in replication. 

    I'll be curious to follow the progress of L3.0 and hear comments on the size of the library file and how concerns like yours are addressed.

    All the best in your photography quests for 2019.

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Anders Svensson

    @Dann, the .lmnr aren't large if you uncheck "Save original resources" in the Save dialogue, to prevent Luminar 2018 from copying the original raw file into the directory. (Since the .lmnr is a directory containing multiple files, not a single sidecar file like other image apps typically write.)

    The downside is that the original raw file is then referenced by absolute path in one of the files below the .lmnr directory (on a mac at least, in Contents/Info.plist), so if you move the raw + .lmnr to a new location and try to open it you'll get a "file could not be opened",  "may be damaged" error. That's fixed easily enough (editing Info.plist is enough), but in practice I'm mostly copying these files in nightly incremental backups. If I move raw/lmnr files to another computer for editing then it's typically to the same paths.

    (If Luminar had referenced the raw with a relative rather than absolute path then moving the raw/lmnr pairs wouldn't have caused any problems at all, but who would expect Skylum to have thought of that. :)

    Right now, I think exporting as you do is probably the only reasonable course since there's no knowing how a .lmnr will render in any given version of Luminar. I have files saved with version 1.0 of Luminar 2018 that render differently in 1.2 and 1.3. (I haven't been able to open a single .lmnr in Luminar 3 yet, so can't yet compare with Luminar 3.) Sometimes the changes are minor, sometimes they're enough to bother me, but not being able to count on the same visual rendering after an update to Luminar means that .lmnr files are specific to the version of Luminar that they were saved with. Not a great property of any editing application.

    It'll be interesting to see how this plays out in Luminar 3, now that all editing information is in a catalog that each new version of Luminar 3 will just render with the latest version of its raw engine. I imagine that people aren't going to be terribly happy when they notice that all of their previous edits look a little different after the last update because of some "improvement".

    I quite like Luminar as an editing tool, but all these issues means it isn't really fit for anything but export and move on. I might just stick with Luminar 2018 if things don't improve with Luminar 3: I'm not interested in a DAM, so if Luminar now wants to be Lightroom then it's not for me. I mostly use DxO PhotoLab anyway, but it's always nice to have more than one tool.

    Merry Christmas.

     

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Linda Greene

    I am in agreement most of the points in this thread. I do not need another DAM, and find that L3's functionality as a DAM is quite limited so not even tempted to switch. L3 will not have a place in my workflow unless it can function independently of the Library so will roll back to Luminar 2018 for now.

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Angela Andrieux

    Hi Everyone,

    For now the best option is to create an empty library and use the Quick Edit mode. We will be bringing back the .lmnr project files in one of the upcoming updates.

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Anders Svensson

    Hopefully the upcoming updates don't force us to continue using Quick Edit mode. I'd like to edit/save individual images just the way we do with Luminar 2018, for those of us that aren't interested in Luminar as a browser/DAM.

    1
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Anders Svensson

    Although I'd prefer a single sidecar file instead of the current lmnr project directories, like DxO PhotoLab (dop), Capture One (cos), Lightroom (xmp), and others.

    0
    Comment actions Permalink

Please sign in to leave a comment.