Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

983 Forum reputation = excellent

1 Follower

About MDM

  • Rank
    Forum regular

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location


  • Alamy URL
  • Images
  • Joined Alamy
    29 Apr 2009

Recent Profile Visitors

4,222 profile views
  1. I have a 2017 10.7” iPad Pro and it is amazing but tagging with it - no, not for me. It’s possible as Betty does it but I think it would be very tedious, an order of magnitude at least more tedious than using a computer for me. But then I find tagging really tedious anyway. I would want to be able to copy and paste metadata easily from my existing Alamy images as well as from text files rather than use the AIM method which I have never liked. That is possible but it takes a bit of learning selecting, copying and pasting on an iPad and it is a lot slower than on a computer. However if you were happy to change your workflow a bit it could be made a lot easier - tag in Lightroom, transfer to iPad, upload and do the final tidying in AIM maybe. I love the iPad though. Have a big library of photo mags and books to keep me alive when travelling on trains and planes, keep all my music on it, great for web, social media, watching video snippets and so on. Also it can be used for basic photo editing with Lightroom mobile which has a lot of good features although nowhere near the desktop version.
  2. Any document withput a background layer can be flattened. It doesn't mean there is more than one layer. Flattening the image is one way of changing a normal layer to a background layer, another is simply to select the Layer 0 and hit the New Background from Layer command. And there are various ways of changing the background layer to a normal layer (Layer 0) but there is no info from the OP about what he does then he says processed in Photoshop. I only interjected here to argue against the idea that the amount of transformation applied in ACR causes a raw document to open with a normal layer (Layer 0) rather than a background layer as I can't envisage any way that could happen. Yet another impossible thing to digest before breakfast but hey - who knows ? I await enlightenment. πŸ€”πŸ˜€
  3. Yes that is true and I fully agree. In fact that has always been the case as long as I have been using Photoshop (mid-90s) and before. The question by the OP was about using the transform tool in ACR and I can't believe or imagine any way that ACR can add an extra layer to a file during a raw conversion regardless of how much or how little transforming has been done. That makes no sense. Of course if the OP has done some extra work in Photoshop which adds a layer or turns the background layer into a normal layer, then the image needs to be flattened first or it is not possible to save automatically as JPEG. I wonder if sufficient information has been provided by the OP in fact. EDIT - if anyone has an explanation as to why and when a newly opened raw file gets a normal rather than a background layer, then I am happy to be corrected. That is the way to learn.πŸ˜€
  4. No idea - that is very odd. Save your history in Preferences - History Log to Metadata and/or aText File and make sure you have Detailed checked. That way you should be able to see what has been happening with the file as it will record everything.
  5. That is what I said above in my first post but the bit depth for conversion has to be changed manually in ACR - it is not random.
  6. I think there is some magical thinking in this idea. I don't believe it is possible and I would love to see it demonstrated. Photoshop never adds an actual layer to a newly converted raw image to create a multi-layered document but what it can do is change the background layer to an ordinary layer if the image is opened as a smart object (shift-Open in ACR). I don't know if there are any other circumstances in which a newly converted raw file will open in Photoshop with a normal layer instead of a background layer but, assuming that there has been no additional processing in Photoshop, then that is the only rational explanation. The bottom line here is that any file that is open in Photoshop does not have a jpeg or psd file format. The file format becomes relevant when the image is saved and Photoshop will always default to the last file format successfully saved. If the background layer in the image has been converted to a normal layer for any reason, then the image can't be saved directly as a jpeg so will offer to save as a psd instead if the last saved image was saved as a jpeg. If the previous image was saved as a psd then it will attempt to save as psd - same thing if it was a tiff and so on.
  7. As far as I know, Photoshop will always try to save as the last file format saved as long as that file format is compatible with the image being saved. So if the last file saved was a JPEG, then Photoshop will attempt to save the next file as a JPEG unless the new file cannot be saved as a JPEG where it will offer to save as a PSD instead. The only thing I can think of in relation to newly converted raw files using ACR is that the new file is 16-bit rather than 8-bit. This has to be done consciously in ACR at the bottom of the ACR dialog. I can't think how using Transform in ACR would have any effect on the file format that a file which has been opened in Photoshop is going to be saved. However, if the file has been processed in Photoshop, then any number of things could make the new file incompatible with being saved directly as a JPEG. It is not clear from the original post if the processing in Photoshop is doing something to the file. If there is no intention of doing any processing in Photoshop, the simplest thing is to save the file directly from ACR with the numerous options available rather than open it at all in Photoshop,(Save button at bottom left).
  8. But he shouldn't be comparing what he sees in the browser with what he sees in Photoshop (Elements) for a valid comparison. Better to look at both in Photoshop side by side. And it's ppi not dpi πŸ˜€
  9. I was trying to be helpful in fact as a lot of others are so I hope I am not included in your bully tag. Why bother to continue? Well I am actually intrigued by the psychology of all this - denial of the obvious when the evidence is there for all to see is something I find fascinating. In the real world it has become all too common and I find it anything from laughable to very distressing, The fact is that your image is too fubared to tell if it was originally in focus.
  10. Mark - Forget about browsers. That is what confused him in the first place about the zoom factor. As I said above, just download the Alamy crop and compare in Photoshop with the full size image he uploaded. He hasn't argued with that so perhaps he has taken it on board.
  11. Makes no sense to you it I guess but, if you right click on the cropped image of yours that Alamy posted, then you will have an option to save it to disk. You can then open it in Elements and compare it to the full size jpeg you posted and you will see they are the same size (that is the objects in the image are the same size).
  12. Nonsense. You are living in a world of alternative facts. I have checked the crop Alamy put up against the the image you uploaded and they are identical at 100%. As I said before, you need to save the Alamy crop to disk, not take a screenshot. The evidence is there. It is sad indeed - this whole thread.
  13. Here is another odd English word I never heard until recently: PROROGATION - no laughing matter I daresay but what else can one do πŸ€₯ πŸ˜‚πŸ€£
  14. "There's no use trying," she said; "one can't believe impossible things." "I daresay you haven't had much practice," said the Queen. "When I was younger, I always did it for half an hour a day. Why, sometimes I've believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast."
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.