Lightroom Contact Sheet Trouble...

[SeanMauceri]

Hello, I am in dire need of help (deadlines! ahhhhh!).

So we have been using lightroom for a couple of months now.

I work as an assistant at a professional studio which does weddings and some private family jobs.

We work on power macs which both have enough power to plan a trip to the moon.

We print on a Canon IPF 51'' and a 5'''. Matte Epson 3* paper.

Each wedding is generally 5-7 Sets with 4''-6'' .NEF images each.

So heres the problem. Contact Sheet Resolution!

We never really had too much trouble with contact sheets, and only recently has it been noticed. Our images are printing so blurry it is hard to tell if eyes are open ect.

We had been printing on draft mode until now. I understand draft mode doesn't produce a fine image, but it seems they were never this bad.

So I tried turning draft mode off. It took hours to process every image (render it down/quality) and then it just wouldn't send it to the printer (at this point I want to throw a brick through my screen).

So my options with LR at this point are complete crap and a few wasted hours with no result.

I have gone back to CS3...A program which makes LR look like MS Paint...

The only problem is this is pretty time consuming and not very flexible.

So Please For all the is worthy on this earth...How can I use LR in a productive way???

How do you Print C.S's?

Do you share this problem??

Much thanks.

-A Stressed Out Employee.

 

[Sean McCormack]

try rendering standard previews first. Sound like you don't have enough resolution in the current previews.

Maybe you should consider a little light reading about Lightroom. Comparing it to paint shows you've missed the point completely.

 

[SeanMauceri]

Thanks, I'll try that.

I know quite a lot about lightroom. As a digital processor, it cannot compare to CS3.
LR is a fancy Bridge with a Library Function and a Pretty Interface...

Besides the point though, as it is not my decision on which program we use...

 

[davidmknoble]

LR is a fancy Bridge with a Library Function and a Pretty Interface...

Sean,

First, in addition to making sure you have your previews rendered (you can select a group of images in the library and then use the menu item, Library > Previews > Render xxxx) you can also set the number of images on your contact page. Try setting the columns and rows to a smaller number and then your images will print larger.

Also, I would disagree with your statement. One of the items I dislike about Bridge the most was that it was a fancy windows explorer. The library in LR has phenominal keyword and collection abilities so that it really doesn't matter where on my disk the image is stored.

In terms of printing, I have printed 35mm negatives to 13x19 paper after running a host of processing through CS3 and through Lightroom, independently, and the prints are almost mirror images. So I would have to say while Lightroom doesn't do some of the things CS3 does, it takes care of 95% of the photographer's needs.

Hope you can resolve your contact sheet problem. Let us know what you find out.

 

[Braders]

I know quite a lot about lightroom. As a digital processor, it cannot compare to CS3.
LR is a fancy Bridge with a Library Function and a Pretty Interface...

..

As a tool made for photography LR kicks CS3.

As a tool made for graphic artistry CS3 is it.

Raw baby, Raw....

 

[singaporescott]

Hi, I recently upgraded to LR2 (after having used LR1.4). Today I was trying to make contact sheets (3 across and 3 down) and noticed that the quality of the outputted PDF file was terrible (I never recall it being this bad with LR1.4; in fact, I recall being able to zoom into the contact sheet quite far and still see decent resulotion). I fiddled with the Print settings, tried printing in both draft and otherwise (which as mentioned above takes forever). I then tried re-importing the files and rendering both standard previews and 1:1 previews, but nothing seems to have corrected the problem I am having.

A few interesting points:
- Using the same photos and contact sheet configuration, the actual size of a contact sheet created in LR1.4 vs. LR2 is different (the LR1.4 contact sheet was actually a larger file). This would explain why I recall better resolution from the LR1.4 sheets I used to create.
- In LR2, I notice that the portrait photos on contact sheets are lower quality than the landscape photos. I understand that they are actually larger on the sheet (so it might make sense at first look), but even when zoomed into, the landscape photos retain higher quality longer. I don't recall this happening with LR1.4.

Am I doing something wrong with the creation of my contact sheets or is there a setting that I am missing? Any input would be appreciated.

Thank you, Scott

 

[Brad Snyder]

Scott, Welcome to LR Forums.

I've been on vacation, and my memory is kind of hazy, but I remember something about this being a very specific bug identified on the Adobe U2U forums (even to the point of rotation making a difference). I know the bug has been promised a fix, I just don't remember if it made in 2.1RC, or if it's waiting for whatever release is next/final.

If I can find that thread, I'll post it here. (I'm only about 5'' emails/posts behind to catch up on )

 

[singaporescott]

Hi Brad, thanks for the note and the welcome.

I did a search and cannot seem to locate the post you are referring to. I found this one http://www.adobeforums.com/webx/.59b5eba4 which seems to be started by Sean (the same person who started this thread), but it does not appear to address the specific problem I am having (and I assume others are having, too).

I also looked up the LR 2.1RC here http://labs.adobe.com/wiki/index.php/Lightroom_2.1 and this bug does not appear to have been addressed in this version.

If you have a moment, I'd really appreciate any more insight you -- or other readers -- have.

Thank you, Scott

 

[singaporescott]

OK, I posted over here http://www.adobeforums.com/webx/.59b5eba4/6 as well and it seems that LR 2.1RC DOES address the problem. I have downloaded the update and (just quickly) it seems to have addressed my problems... Just thought you'd want to know. Thanks, Scott

 

[Victoria Bampton]

That's great to hear Scott! The list of fixes on the 2.1 page certainly didn't cover everything that's been addressed, so you may find a few more things that have been fixed too.