Jump to content

Craig Joiner

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Craig Joiner

  1. Try the 'Embedded & Sidecar' option. With this LR just pulls the full size preview your camera embedded in the RAW file and is much faster. It won’t match what you eventually see in the develop module, but useful for checking critical focus at 100% etc. during initial culling. Craig
  2. The current system doesn't do this either. It does, however, minimise the risk to an acceptable level as the image is immediately removed from sale and not subject to further downloads/sales until it is removed from public view. Waiting months for a deletion while still visibly on sale is asking for trouble, not to mention difficult to explain should the publisher stumble across it. In any case, Wim was suggesting the kill switch should kill anything in the pipeline too & I agree.
  3. +1 for a kill switch. I sometimes license images direct to magazines that still demand the same images are not used in rival magazines for 6 months or more. Personally I thought the current restrictions were too blunt an instrument but I've come to live with them. However, if Alamy remove the editorial block I'm stuck. Deleting the image completely isn't an option because takes 6 months. A simple kill switch in addition to the proposed options seems like a reasonable compromise to me and would cover all eventualities. Craig
  4. Steve, You don't say which version of Windows you are using but as you refer to Microsoft "Photos" I'm assuming you're using windows 10. The default photos app in Windows 10 is not colour managed and images look very over saturated on wide gamut screens (as do desktop wallpapers 🙄). The old windows photo viewer can be reinstated however, see https://www.ghacks.net/2018/07/16/how-to-restore-the-windows-photo-viewer-on-windows-10/. This seems to be compatible with version 4 colour profiles. Craig
  5. Good point! Last time I did that, that feature of plugin wasn't working correctly and it kept reverting back so I'd forgotten about it. It was quickly fixed I hasten to add.
  6. The same happens if you submit a new updated version of an image. Have you tried clearing the Alamy data for the affected images in Lightroom? That often works but it depends on your matching criteria as to whether it will correctly match the newer images on Alamy. I match by filename only and when stuck have found that renaming the files in lightroom to match the version of my filename Alamy have applied to the newer image works (usually they append _1 from memory). You still need to clear the Alamy data in Lightroom for those images before re-syncing but once matched you can rename the images back to their correct filename in lightroom and the images remain linked. Hope that is of use. Craig
  7. Not necessarily. The key here is ‘Any information supplied for display...’ If this personal info is added to the caption or keywords then yes, that is a breach. If it’s the standard IPTC contact & copyright sections then, as that is deleted / replaced by Alamy, it’s really only a waste of his time. Of course, if he supplies images direct to buyers or puts them on his own website it’s still a worthwhile thing to do.
  8. Double click on the 'Scale to Megabytes' option in Post-Process Actions in the bottom left of the Export dialogue in Lightroom to add it to the export options. Then it's just a matter of adjusting the max % value until you get the required megapixels. It's a bit of a fiddle and I never really understood why the max sixe is 33.33MP allowed by the plugin as Alamy accept much larger.
  9. The key is getting your file names to match the ones you used when you sent the images to Alamy. If there are consistent differences (such as a simple prefix or suffix) then the plugin can be set-up to account for that. If, like me, you radically changed your file naming along the way and lots of your images with Alamy have filenames significantly different to your current filenames in LR, then this is a bit more tricky. They way I handled this was ask Alamy to send me their metadata spreadsheet of my images and this contained the filenames I originally supplied. It was then a simple case of identifying the images with my old filenames and modifying the spreadsheet so these matched the filenames in LR. I then sent the spreadsheet back to Alamy who uploaded it to their system and updated all my filenames so they now matched LR. Craig
  10. +1 The Sony appears to be a fine camera (but no better than any of its peers), but the system (ergonomics, menu, button location etc.) is very different to the Nikon system (and arguably not as mature). Running two very different systems side by side seems counterproductive. I get that people have switched to Sony in the past because they wanted the advantages of full frame mirrorless, but with the Z6 and Z7 pretty much matching the two Sonys, unless you didn’t like the Nikon system, there is no need. If it were me, and given the OP's previous regretted switch to Sony, I would not do anything until the Z6 was out, fully tested and I’d handled both cameras. It's worth pointing out that with the shortest flange distance of any of the full frame mirrorless cameras, the Z mount promises some very high image quality from its lenses. Indeed, the MTF charts for the modest 24-70mm f4 Z-mount kit lens suggest it could have better image quality than the 24-70mm f2.8 F-mount lens with unheard of corner to corner sharpness for a zoom lens. If this proves to be the case in the real world then I could be tempted back to zoom lenses when I come to replace my current DSLR. Even if the Z6/Z7 fall slightly behind the Sonys in other areas in the real world, investment in the Z mount is likely to be worth it in the long run IMHO.
  11. Why not wait for the Nikon Z6 to arrive in a couple of months before jumping? Seems to me that this camera has all the advantages you are looking for in the Sony but retains the Nikon system (button locations, menu system etc.) that you know plus with the FTZ lens adapter you can keep all your existing F mount glass (unless you have the older screw type AF lenses of course). The Sony system is very different to the Nikon system and I wonder if you were frustrated by these differences when you previously moved to Sony? if so then perhaps the A7III will be no different? If it were me I'd try them both out in a shop side by side with your existing bodies as Colin suggests, and then decide. If there's no decisive winner then I'd personally not change. I've not used the A7III but by all accounts it's a fine camera, but is its image quality significantly better or worse than your existing bodies or the Z6? Probably not.
  12. In my experience disabling right click has no effect as the majority of infringers simply lift the images from Google where they found the image and never visit the originating site.
  13. Indeed. Edit -> Catalog Settings Then in the Metadata tab check ‘Automatically write changes to XMP' Make sure you also uncheck ‘Include Develop settings in metadata inside JPEG, PNG, and PSD files’ otherwise every edit you make in the Develop module is also written to the file on the fly which can cause Lightroom to slow down, unless you want need all your edits also stored in the files. I’d personally not recommend writing any data to images. With this setting on, Lightroom will be making lots of writes to your precious image files which increases the risk of corruption. I understand why people might prefer to do this however, but just be sure to understand the risks and adjust your backup strategy accordingly. In other words, make sure you have a backup of all your images before Lightroom touches them and keep that separate from subsequent backups of the images Lightroom has altered. Oh, and of course keep lots of backups of the Lightroom catalogue too. I hope that makes sense. Craig
  14. By default Lightroom only stores the metadata in it's database and unless you tell it to save the data to the original file, it doesn't make any changes to the image file on your hard disk. I would always advocate using the same workflow for all image types as it reduces the chance of human error and unexpected consequences such as you have found. So, I will always export from Lightroom as I know all my metadata will be correct and any image edits (no matter where made) will be in the exported images. I never use the original files on my hard drives and I never write changes to images from Lightroom either. I learned the hard way a long time ago that this introduces a small but very possible chance of image corruption. That said, if you want to write your metadata to the jpeg files, right click the image in Lightroom, select 'Metadata' and then 'Save Metadata to File'. However, depending on how your have your keywords set-up in Lightroom, this may not do what you expect. For instance it will save ALL keywords, including any you have marked not to export (such as keywords you might use to identify images sent to Alamy etc.) Another reason to always export from Lightroom. Craig
  15. You need to fetch the Alamy data for images on Alamy before anything will be visible in LR. Part of this process will automatically match images in your LR database with images on Alamy but it’s a manual process which needs to be kicked off from the Export dialogue in LR (Ctrl + Shift + E on a PC) and selecting 'Fetch Alamy Metadata', but if you haven’t done so yet, check the instructions at https://www.lightroom-plugins.com/downloads/Alamy%20Uploader%20Manual.pdf first which explains all the options and how to match images. Lots of useful stuff is downloaded (check out 'Alamy Plus' in the Metadata panel in LR) but unfortunately views and zoom data is not. I guess Alamy have not made that available for the plugin to use otherwise I’m sure it would be there.
  16. I thought that LR should flash up a warning when you try and open a raw file in PS with an older version of ACR. This warning will give you the option to render the file in LR before opening it in PS thus ensuring all newer features are included. Perhaps this has accidentally been suppressed? Try resetting all warning dialogues LR preferences (general tab) and see if the dialogue now comes up. If that doesn't work you can always export as a tiff file then re-import into LR and/or open in PS.
  17. Just to add, one of the great things about keywording in LR is that it remembers your keywords so that when you type those same keywords into new images it offers up the keywords previously used as you type which can speed up keywording and helps eliminate (or at least reduce) typos. At a more advanced level You can also add pseudonyms to keywords so 'Beech Tree" could have the pseudonyms 'Tree', 'Beech', 'Fagus sylvatica' and these pseudonyms are automatically added to the exported images and will all appear in AIM as tags. Then there are keyword hierarchies which can be useful too...
  18. You can always re-import your tiff/jpegs into LR once finished in PS and then add the keywords. Then just export as jpegs from LR and upload to Alamy.
  19. It's only metadata (keywords, captions etc.) that can be updated by the plugin. You cannot replace images on Alamy with newer versions. You would have to upload re-processed images as new images and delete the images on Alamy you are replacing.
  20. If the only difference is a fixed suffix or prefix that is missing at one end then you might be able to account for this in the plugin using the options in the matching section. If that doesn't work I believe you can change filenames in Lightroom to match Alamy, run the plugin to match images and then change the filename back and the Alamy reference sticks. Bit of a fiddle but as a one off exercise it should work. Best test it on a couple of images first though! Alternatively Alamy used to provide a spreadsheet of all your metadata and it was possible to manually update all your filenames in the spreadsheet to match Lightroom then send it back to Alamy who would apply the changes to their system. It's how I matched all my images just before the new image manager went live but last I heard Alamy had yet to update their spreadsheet system since the changes. Probably worth an email to Alamy to see if it is now possible to make bulk changes by spreadsheet.
  21. Yes, everything in the new Image Manager can be seen and (mostly) edited in Lightroom. Off the top of my head only the restrictions and license type cannot be edited in Lightroom. It also shows basic sales info (number of sales and total $ for each image) too. It can be synced both ways so any changes made in LR can be synced back to Alamy and any changes made on Alamy synced to LR. It's also able to retrospectively match existing images on Alamy with images in your LR catalogue, provided your file names haven't changed drastically since you uploaded them to Alamy. As you can tell from this thread, the Alamy plugin is in a state of flux at the moment due to changes going on behind the scenes at Alamy but Jim is actively working on it so it should hopefully settle in soon but you might want to spend some time familiarising yourself with LR before trying the plugin. I couldn't agree more.
  22. I'm not aware of any such plugins for Photoshop. If all you want to do is keyword offline then simply keyword & captioning your images in Photoshop before uploading to Alamy will achieve this goal as Alamy will read the appropriate IPTC metadata from your images. You will still need to select your supertags on Alamy however. I would definitely recommend Lightroom for it's powerful digital asset management database tools and I personally find it's image processing interface more intuitive than Photoshop's ACR although it is the same underlying engine but I know many prefer ACR's interface. Definitely worth investigating what it can do for you but I would not recommend Lightroom if, at the end of the day, all you want to do is keyword your Alamy images as Photoshop already does that.
  23. Yes, it's been a bit on and off over the last few days for me but the latest version put out today at http://www.lightroom-plugins.com/AlamyIndex.php seems to be working so far. The plugin is getting regular updates as new issues are fixed but it isn't currently automatically updating in Lightroom due to the constant changes still happening. I found that whenever I have had an issue, the newest version from the above link has usually fixed it. Update @12.40pm: I spoke too soon and it's stopped working again!
  24. I read that as well in the blog but this is not contradictory that the order of tags doesn't matter. The relevant passage in the blog refers to tags like "Berlin wall" meaning that the relevant image with the tag "berlin wall" (one tag) appears earlier in the search than tagged "berlin" and "wall" (2 tags). They refer as they say to a "multi-word search" that's not true. My image tagged with two separate supertags show higher in search result than the image that has one multiword supertag. This is exactly what I have found from my own testing. Adding multi-word keywords is pushing my images down the search order.
  • 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.