I've been using Adobe Lightroom rather intensely for several years now. Overall I've been quite happy with how the program streamlines my workload, organizes my photos, and how often it get's an update. Having said that, I am rather surprised that Adobe hasn't improved one area of Lightroom and it's wasting both me and my clients valuable time every week. The following letter is written on behalf of photographers everywhere that use Adobe web galleries. Please share this so Adobe listens and improves.
Dearest Adobe,
First, let me start out by saying that I am a big fan of what you guys are developing over there. I mean, seriously, it’s nothing short of magical what your programs allow us to sit down and do jacked up on 4 cups of espresso at 3 AM. I mean, where else can I easily replace flying bouquets of flowers with images of silly little adorable cats flying towards single bridesmades hoping to catch a furball. My clients really loved that and the grooms father actually thought he missed out on the flying cat bit at the reception while he was at the chocolate fountain. Talk about clients for life!
Having said that. I have one thing on my wish list for the next Adobe Lightroom update, whenever that will be. Oh, and one more accolade, great job on keeping up with timely updates for your professional line of photo softwares. You guys could teach a few things to the Aperture team over at Apple. What the heck happened with that program, yikes!
I am writing to you today on behalf of wedding, event, portrait, and commercial photographers that use Lightroom to make client galleries. I speak for everyone. Yes, EVERYONE, even the trees.
When I show up to a job, I typically will shoot hundreds, if not thousands of photos. If I hire a second shooter, I sometimes will have multiple thousands of photos that I will then have to comb through and process before I post hundreds, if not thousands of photos for my clients to browse through on your web gallery feature. I do this on a semi regular basis as well.
Here is where I am having an issue. My clients will typically select a pre-determined number of photos that we’ve agreed upon dictated by my prices. Sometimes this is 10 photos, but sometimes this can be 1000 or more photos.
So here is my workflow just so that we are totally clear.
- I select the photos that aren’t total crap through your awesome filtering//ranking system.
- I then post those photos to the gallery that I customized with my own logos. BONUS!
- I upload this gallery to my server.
- Then I send the link of the images to the client for their perusal.
- My clients spend hours combing through all of my photos making the very best selections one by one, without the ability to compare photos side by side or filter the images with their own ranking system.
- For the ones that they like, they then have to write them down in a text document and send them to me. For those that are computer, vision, or just generally impaired, this can be a challenge to get 100% right and causes me more work down the road.
- Then, I get a text document in my email with all of the photo numbers listed in a row, great!
- I then have two options. I can either copy and paste the numbers into the text search function in Lightroom, which sometimes doesn’t work, or I can memorize the number and hunt for it in my project one by one. Currently I am having to do this multiple times per week and am wasting hours and hours of time doing so. Probably weeks of wasted time per year.
- I then review each photo number to make sure I have all the photos that my client selected in my photo selections folder.
- I process the photos, send them to the client.
- I get an e-mail saying that they wrote down the wrong number of a file, they are apologetic, and send me the right numbers.
- I re-edit, and re-deliver.
- I dread the next photo gallery project coming up.
So this is my workflow and it feels very 2002. My clients have to physically write down the photos that they like for me to process, to make prints, or for me to retouch further and then I have to spend time away from my Internet re-selecting the photos that they have already selected and add them to the special “selections” folder. I feel like this is out of date. I know that there are other options however I like keeping my workflow simple and complete within Adobe.
Here is my suggestion. Please develop a way for clients to have a better experience when viewing, comparing, and selecting photos that ALSO makes my job more efficient. You can save us all hundreds of thousands of wasted hours per year doing so and you guys can feel better about yourselves for making everyones life enriched by removing the monotonous tasks of re-selecting photos one by one. You guys could easily be the best photo gallery service on the Interwebs with a few improvements.
In a perfect world my clients would be able to rank their photos how I can rank them in Lightroom, filter based on rankings, and select the photos digitally that they would like for me to retouch and deliver. Oh, and don’t forget this part because it’s crucial and the most brilliant. The photo selections from the client need to auto update in my Lightroom catalogue as “selected from client.”
Adobe. This is a great idea. You know , I know it, and we need to make it happen with the next update. I would love to be able to wake up, stroll into the studio, and start the day off with photos selections already made, ready for me to start retouching in my catalogue. I know this makes you all warm and fuzzy, which makes me all warm and fuzzy. Let's do this!
Sincerely,
Everyone That Uses Lightroom Galleries
As of late, Adobe seems to want herd every one into a subscription based model. I am glad these plugins are 3rd party so I can control my own profit and design.
Why don't you use Smugmug for this process? There you can create Events for your clients and there they can pick their favorite photos with a check box
http://help.smugmug.com/customer/portal/articles/886707-the-most-importa...
Problem Solved: http://fstoppers.com/open-letter-to-adobe-answered-by-an-fstoppers-reader
Sometimes is best to go the extra mile by yourself, just because you are a professional. Technology is helping us speed up the process, but is also killing some trade secrets. Take for example content aware feature. Before it was introduced, how many of us knew how to fix a blemish?
The problem is that Lightroom generates clean HTML+CSS galleries and I don't think this will change. To store the selects, you need to have an SQL database. You need PHP language, too. If you upload to your server, this will work (but not in local without server), but I don't know how many photographers can copy an .sql file into a new database in PHPMyAdmin and add the database username, pass, database name, server name in the generated PHP gallery...
Well, that's only will work if Adobe start a Kuler website. Probably this will be a paying option. I mean: server maintenance. Not an option to buy Lightroom and you can use this service forever.
There is one big problem still with Lightroom web galleries!
- Ugly (old, outdated designs)
- Not Responsive, mobile first designs (or adaptive, maybe?)
- All of them looking the same
- You not have eny option to create your designs (or give a proper documentation for web designers)
- Forget Flash, use Jquery
Well, we need an open letter for this instead.
Problem SOlved: http://fstoppers.com/open-letter-to-adobe-answered-by-an-fstoppers-reader
As a web developer, this request is akin to asking a photographer to shoot a wedding for free. The correct photography analogy is actually much worse: asking the *camera* to shoot the wedding, and being surprised that it needs a photographer.
You can't expect a program that creates a static website to be easily changed to create a dynamic one via a simple software change.
I'd be more interested in Adobe optimising their core engine to run on modern computers rather than pandering to software change requests that are clearly misinformed and out of scope.
In the meantime, hire a web developer, you cheapskate :)
I wrote the same below. It's funny how people think that they need to get a 1500-4000USD CMS (PHP prices in Central-Europe) for absolutely free, included in a raw processor... :)
haha yes!
So here's our open letter to Mr Martin:
Dear Gary,
How about you flying over from the states and shooting both mine and Lantos's weddings for free? You are only losing the same amount cash as the web development you expect to get for free or as a simple application update.
Best
Sham Bhangal
Senior Web developer, UK
:D
I would hardly call being funneled into a subscription based software offering "free". Especially when there are no equals. Certainly, they'll have the $$$$$$$$$$$$$$ to make improvements that address the needs of their clients. It's what they used to do.
Reasonable requests, yes.
My brother works as a graphic designer, and one job involved a photograph of a head office.
The client (a bank) came over and said 'the angle isn't quite what we want but we don't have any more photographs, so can you Photoshop it to show the other side of the building?'.
So yeah, reasonable requests. The request in question is on a par with the bank's!
Hardly. One of the reasons that new upgrades and software capabilities are released is due to innovation. If Adobe wasn't adapting their software to the needs of their client base, then there would be no need to upgrade software. And by slowly forcing their customer base into subscription based software, one should assume that they will continue to innovate and create a better user experience for their clients and the needs of their clients' clients. Your example is one that doesn't correlate. I'm sure the graphic designer would do the retouching for an additional fee. And if Adobe wants to stay competitive, then they will find ways to offer new and compelling additions to their software which make their end user experience more enriching. If they didn't do this, we'd all still be using Photoshop 1.0. But don't get me wrong, I don't want Adobe to adapt to include really incredible workflow plugins such as The Turning Gate. Because Adobe has shown me that they are interested in making my workflow profitable for them with their subscription based software model and encouraging the use of Behance, which I find very limiting creatively speaking.
'the graphic designer would do the retouching for an additional fee'
Thank you! that made my day :)
As a graphic designer for over 25 years, I can assure you if my client asked me to clone in an entire building and make it look realistic, that would incur extra fees. If your brother lacks the ability to estimate and charge correctly, that's on him. I'm not exactly sure what your argument is here, so I'm going to disengage from you, get back to the topic at hand and let others who are capable of benefiting from this type of software know that there are Lightroom plugins authored by The Turning Gate that work natively within Lightroom and they perform exactly as the OP requested in his letter to Adobe. Further, it is not subscription based. It's simply the best package of plugins that do precisely what I need in my workflow. They have a dedicated audience and have gotten the attention of Scott Kelby, who practically shamed Adobe during one of his shows for not offering something similar as part of Adobe Lightroom.
Oh Muellerworks, I no longer have any argument with you. You are now officially my hero! Big man kiss to the forehead. But I've already printed this thread out for the office, annotated with red ink. You should have told me there was more to come, damn you!
So what makes this special for me?
Its not that as a graphic designer (25+ years) that you clearly consider yourself technically competent on software development to be able to argue against not one but two developers about a software dev change. I’m not sure which of those 25+ years that gives you the experience to do that with such confidence, but Im guessing it was a damn good year. I’m cracking up about that even now.
Its not even that if a *bank* wanted an image done, every graphic designer with *any* experience would know the image would be for a newspaper or prospectus to shareholders, and the building would be a head office or some such, so the idiot client asking for the ‘other side’ would HAVE to be wanting the ACTUAL other side of the building… and you have no photographs of it! That was the joke, and the way you carried on even though you knew that is pure comedy man!!. Otherwise I can only suspect you’re aiming at a Photoshop disasters entry there, so I guess you’d frankenshop in a cathedral or zoo as the other side and do a thread like the lost cat poster skit? I can see my bro enjoying this big time, please post the link when you are done.
Its not that you cite the CC subscription pricing as a reason why a lightroom change *should* be made, even though LR is not actually part of CC for most photographers, and is actually the cheapest package Adobe do… subtle point, but the conviction with which you totally ignored the facts makes it gold.
Now, of course, I am not a photographer, and have never argued as such, because even if I were successful, I would most likely make more money doing what I do now, and photography is purely a hobby. Yes, I know, this is fstoppers and *absolutely nobody* should *ever* admit to being an enthusiast, but hey, I don’t shoot Canon nor Nikon, preferring Sony (god help me and my stupidity!), and I don’t even own a full frame. But you can probably just Google my name. I think I’ve written at least one Photoshop book. Its not the one that made me enough money to buy my house outright, but with 25+ years experience, you should have bought up a whole street by now. Maybe in Detroit?
No. What makes this special is that I cannot now open up Lightroom without physically smiling. So as I also disengage, let me thank you Muellerworks (and also Gary Martin for putting the pieces in place). You are both legends in my estimation!
Yawn
And I thought that you would ask for Lightroom to use the resources more efficiently............... (and use the GPU power to help speed up the import/export time). It's agonising to wait for hours to Import or Export a whole wedding.
LR is for developing RAW files primarily afterall, not for proofing/showcasing !
Btw, I'm using an OC'ed i5 2500k, 16GB DDR3 Corsair Vengeance, Intel335 SATA3 SSD and a dedicated 256bit GPU.
Catalin,
If you wanted to use LR now as an awesome client gallery with instant feedback and filter options, I found an awesome solution: http://fstoppers.com/open-letter-to-adobe-answered-by-an-fstoppers-reader
I think the most easiest way for adobe would be the JSON or XML file that will be generated after a customer choose the right pictures. No database needed for that, but maybe the photographer must know something about CHMOD...
Which is coming back for the first problem: not every photographers are web programmer and not many have own hosting (4ormat, 22slides, Squarespace).
We don't need to ask Adobe to do this. We just need a proper SDK for Lightroom Web Galleries, to write your own up to date, mobile first gallery.
Use Capture One.. and Capture One Pilot.. and youll have what you want.
LR is great.. been huffing its glue since they pieced the Beta together.. but truth of the matter is.. Capture One is a tool for Professionals.
ALSO... Lightroom could stand to have markers for any adjustments that are made to yoru photos... so If Im looking at an image and it has an adjustment brush.. a crop.. and a split tone.. I SHOULD be able to see at a glance.. Highlight each of them green... and viola.. no more guessing.
I could go on.. and on.. and on.
Good article.. I feel ya.. but CO will save the day.
Jason,
How does Capture One allow me to create interactive web galleries for clients? We use Capture One frequently on commercial shoots and I am familiar with the program. Our studio uses Phocus for 95% of what we do due to us using the H4D Hasselblad workflow.
Does Capture one create client response galleries?
HI Gary.. wow seems this thread was like opening up a wound huh? haha! Lots of responses! I imagine within them is a solution. Have to jet though so Ill simply answer your question.
Capture one does create web galleries.. though I've not explored them, nor am I certain of the amount of functionality they afford (If any).
What I was referring to was the ability to have a client look at images on set as you're shooting them, via any device with web access... iPad .. cellphone.. etc. Using Capture One Pilot.
You can tether to CO 7 and have one.. OR several devices in the studio monitoring the shoot.
Hand an iPad to the AD, and they can rate the images...AS youre shooting them.
Works a treat...
Lightroom does have an offering by the fella at Turning Gate that works on iOS devices that lets you do much the same as with capture one.. ( rate the images ) and then connect to LR in the studio to import that info. Not sure what its called though. But it may be what you're after.
Best wishes.
Here is a shot from a two weeks ago of me and the guitarist of Guns N Roses going over images and rating them for later consideration. The ability to sit down and go over the shots so swiftly and seamlessly while my Digital Tech handles other tasks on the computer...or to hand the client the tablet and let them peruse at their leisure... is priceless:
Yep, I had the same issue even w/ Picasa. Wrote my own site to do it (www.choosepix.com) for making it easier for people to filter photos down to favorites and it's easy to see which ones they selected. I think Smugmug does it better, but they have more resources to put on it :-)
But ditto what folks have said...Lightroom is for photographers. It works well for culling there.
Gary,
Thanks for your well articulated feature request. In the past we've relied on third party solutions to solve this workflow for the Lightroom customer, however, as we move forward to expand Lightroom beyond the desktop and begins to utilize cloud-based components, this workflow becomes more natural for Adobe to solve natively. We'll be sure to share more details with you and the F-stopper community in the future.
Thanks,
Sharad Mangalick, Lightroom Product Manager
For everyone who thinks Adobe can't or shouldn't or think this is an unreasonable request.
Let us all remember that there once was a version of Photoshop that you export an html gallery export template that used to incorporate what has been requested in the above letter. I think the only thing it lacked is a way to download all the file numbers.
There even was a version of Photoshop were you could export .PDFs and use a scanner from within the program. Why on earth Adobe willfully choose to eliminate useful features is beyond me. I cannot stand their grip on the photo editing and graphics market and they are getting worse about it not better.
This single feature that is requested above would instantly propel whatever software developer that incorporates it to instantly take over the wedding photo editing market. Why no one does this is beyond me and is once again proof that capitalism does not produce the best products.
Agreed! However, see my post above. The Turning Gate plugins for Adobe Lightroom does this.
Wait a minute...this person is showing UNPROCESSED photos to their client? wow, how unprofessional!
"Then I send the link of the images to the client for their perusal."
HUGE mistake. A professional would never do that.
To Photo Pro IP.
A Professional would never carry on with such a negative intensity as you have. Surely your comments and lack on knowledge on the workflow in the commercial arena attest to that.
What Gary Martin has written is a reasonable comment to Adobe, not my approach but I get what he's doing. No problems.
Better for your own rep that you say no more so you don't make the hole you are in any bigger.
Maturity is something that we all must learn. Some want to learn is with dignity while others just have trouble learning.
Sometimes, silence is golden.
How am I negative by pointing out that you're not doing YOUR JOB!???? I'm doing my job. I don't ever deliver or show unprocessed work to my clients be them floor manufactures, drape manufactures, weddings, or portraits.
Nor do I hand them over 10000 files!
What's negative about it? do you want a pet on your back for not doing your job? is that what you get at your day job for not doing it right now?
I am not the insulting my client by have THEM do MY work!
Some reads for you about "commercial work"!!!
http://www.dpbestflow.org/node/456
http://www.dpbestflow.org/file-delivery/unrendered-file-delivery
So let me ask you this since you're the "expert here":
You send unprocessed files to a client, does that mean you don't even shoot RAW? because if you shoot JPEGS, those are processed IN-CAMERA for you, hence there is not much processing left to do anyway aside from cropping. You cannot process Highlights/shadows etc., without getting a really muddy ugly looking file. Matter of fact if you need more information on that aspect you could Join Lynda.com or Kelby training and see an enormous amount of videos TEACHING about the correct way to process files in the first place. Ohh wait, I forgot, you're all allergic to educating yourselves! My mistake! Forget that.
IF you do shoot RAW (as you should be), showing an unprocessed file to a client can ruin your reputation quickly considering that most are not going to display properly on other people's computers. For one, and second most are not sharpened, have the proper white balance, color, etc etc etc, so you're showing a file that looks like crap to a client that is supposed to pick their "favorites"???? makes zero sense. You just can't do that. Sorry, I don't know who told you to do this aside from a client that doesn't know any better, or doesn't want to PAY you.
From the article above written by ASMP which is an organization OF PROFESSIONAL COMMERCIAL PHOTOGRAPHERS. They photograph works you see in famous magazines, and photograph famous brands with medium format cameras BTW and not rebels. They must be stupid then!!!!
"Delivering proprietary raw files:
We do not recommend delivery of proprietary raw files unless they are being given to a trusted partner in the creative production pipeline. Raw files display differently in every PIEware, no matter how the camera is set. This means that the interpretation of the images is entirely up to the choice of PIEware and how the PIEware is configured. For instance, Camera RAW can be set-up to auto adjust the main image controls: exposure, recovery, fill light, blacks, brightness, and contrast. The results may be good, or they may not be so good. The take-away is that the photographer’s intentions have clearly gone out the window."
I'd stop replying here if I were you, and start reading through that website.
Happy Sunday!
Man you hit the nail on the head! I waste so much time because of this process! Great job!!! Come on Adobe!! Make this happen!