Gray film on the exported images?

Similar Questions

• Last night my 5 Lightroom suddenly seems to update. A shooting blue veined lgo ratings appeared on my screen and many of my settings have been changed. My problem now is that when I export an image on my drive C:, the exported image n

  Last night my 5 Lightroom suddenly seems to update. A shooting blue veined lgo ratings appeared on my screen and many of my settings have been changed. My problem now is that when I export an image on my C: drive, the exported image is no longer automatically appears in my Picasa files as it has for years. How can I fix this please?

  Hello

  Greetings!

  In the export dialog box change the export after option.

  

  Concerning

  Jitendra

• I use Lightroom 5.7, 64-bit with Windows 7 Professional. Without apparent reason, I now get an error message when I export a photo, say a raw image to a JPG. However, the exported image seems to be OK. But now, I've noticed that my directory the files LR

  I use Lightroom 5.7, 64-bit with Windows 7 Professional. Without apparent reason, I now get an error message when I export a photo, say a raw image to a JPG. However, the exported image seems to be OK. But now, I noticed that my repertoire records in library view LR does not show images correctly: If there is a folder with subfolders, the folder contains 0 images, but sub records show the correct number of images. What happened and is there a solution? I tried to uninstall Lightroom and re - install, but the problem persists.

  Here is a screenshot of the error message:

  

  Post edited by: Joseph Costanza, Jr.

  See here for a solution.

• [JS] PageItem Export in PNG: dimesion of the exported image differs from PageItem

  When I try to export a block of rectangular text to PNG with JavaScript, the result PNG image may have a larger dimension than the text block itself in InDesign. I think it has something to do with the height of the text line.

  Is there an export option that I can use to make the exported image size the same as the text block?

  Please see my attached photos for an example:

  • The block of text in InDesign has a dimension of 400 x 80 (pixels)

  

  • It's PNG exported, which has a dimesion of 400 x 96 (pixel). Notice the padding at the top and bottom of the image.

  

  Hmm - move any element "in" a rectangle is not a simple operation. Well, we're going to (ab) use 'app.copy' and 'app.paste' then, although, theoretically at least, it should be possible by manipulating objects.

  This duplicates the selected item, removes its contents, affects none line and filling, and then glue the original selection in a new. After export, the duplicated object is automatically deleted if you end up with what you started with.

  (Attention! Tested only with CS4!)

  obj = app.activeDocument.selection[0];
  cliprect = obj.duplicate(undefined, [0,0]);
  cliprect.texts[0].remove();
  cliprect.strokeWeight = 0;
  cliprect.fillColor = app.activeDocument.swatches.item("None");
  cliprect.contentType = ContentType.UNASSIGNED;
  app.copy();
  app.select(cliprect);
  app.pasteInto();
  cliprect.exportFile(ExportFormat.PNG_FORMAT, File(new File("~/Desktop/test.png")));
  cliprect.remove();
  

• Why the last image of the exported image sequence is sometimes black?

  I get sequences of images in Photoshop and then exporting them to a file mp4 video.  For some reason, Photoshop sometimes decides to put a black frame at the end of the video, no matter what I try settings.  Sometimes it leaves aside the black frame.  I can't understand why he did this.  If anyone knows how to get rid of this?  When I import the resulting sequences first, I need to change all the frames of black.  Not impossible to deal with, but it is kind of a pain.

  Adobe Photoshop Version: 2014.2.2 20141204.r.310, 2014/12 / 04:23:59:59 CL 994532 x 64

  Operating system: Windows 7 64-bit

  Version: 6.1 Service Pack 1

  System architecture: AMD CPU Family: 15, model: 10, Stepping: 0 with MMX, entire SSE, SSE, SSE2, SSE3 FP

  Physical processor count: 6

  Processor speed: 3200 MHz

  Built-in memory: 8191 MB

  Free memory: 4507 MB

  Memory available to Photoshop: 7154 MB

  Memory used by Photoshop: 70%

  Graphics card: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 470 (with the latest driver Version 347.88)

  Adobe Bridge 6.1.0.116 x 64

  Use, file-> open and checking the box 'Sequence of Image', I am loading a sequence of JPGs I've cropped in Photoshop (using a script to automate this process), and I specify 23.976 fps. I checked all the JPG files, and they are OK. I play the animation in Photoshop, and it looks good.  I then export the movie using the file-> export-> made video, I use Adobe Media Encoder, h.264 format, high quality, 1920 x 1080 (the original document size), 23.976 fps.  It automatically selects the zone selection to export work.  That seems correct.  In a sequence of images of N, it is said that it will export images 0 to N-1, which I think is OK if it indexes starting at 0 and not 1.  I tried to export (frames) checked, and the result is the same.  The last image is black.  I also tried to change the work area to remove the last image and the last frame of the rendered video is so dark, but the last image of the sequence, I opened is missing.  I checked the image sequence that was exported with the area of complete work (or frameworks) selected and all managers are there - with just a framework black, added at the end, which is certainly not in the work area.

  No error message.

  I checked the help, also I tried searching the forums, but I don't know what I'm doing wrong.

  The problem has been around on and off for a few years.  He had disappeared with CC, but now he's back, even though I'm not aware of what I'm doing differently.

• Blue tint to the exported images from LR 2.4

  A particular image, that I exported from LR appears slightly more blue than it does in the LR library. At first I thought it's maybe because I export from a raw image in sRGB and downsizing a lot, but this isn't the cause.

  If I take the image of LR and EDIT in PHOTOSHOP CS3 using TIFF 16 bits and ProPhoto and then in Photoshop manually reduce 640 pixels on its longest side, change it to 8 bits per channel and ProPhoto convert to sRGB, the resulting image is not this blue tint and, in my view, exactly looks the same as the view from LR library. But if I ask LR for export in a 8-bit sRGB TIFF and reduce the size of 640 pixels, with no job of sharpening, the result has the blue tint.

  I have attached a screenshot with LR in the background and two windows photoshop: the left one is photoshop glancing tiff that LR exported; the right is Photoshop showing the same image will be created manually as described in my second para. I find that one on the left has a bluish tint, particularly in the foliage over the arms of the shovel. Flicking between the two windows photoshop, the histogram is clearly more blue in the left.

  Of course, you can say well, "Photoshop isn't Lightroom, so there are small differences. I accept it. But the fact is that Photoshop agrees with LR, this is just EXPORT from LR service that produces a result that is more blue.

  No idea why this should be so? (I have not noticed this on other images)

  I find that quite strange for sRGB, BTW, because the color is the smallest space the most important, one might think, to have the perception during the conversion in it.

  It has historical reasons. When sRGB was designed none of this really existed yet. Recently the ICC made a new sRGB version which has no perceptual intent. You can use it in Photoshop, but strangely, Lightroom doesn't know how to use it.

  When you refer to the scale, I'm not sure what you mean. Do you mean the alteration of color that occurs when mapping range of one color space to another? Sorry, I don't know anything about. But what at first glance seems odd is that why should the color of a pixel mapping be in any way affected by the values of adjacent pixels? (I guess this must be the case for effect "in areas with a lot of detail", as you suggest.

  I refer to the reduction of scale to 640 pixels wide that you do. It is very simply with an average value of the pixels within a zone to arrive at a new image of low resolution. For example, if your original is 3000 pixels wide, and you go to 500 pixels wide, you are averaging an area of 6 x 6 pixels (i.e. 36 pixels) for a single pixel value in the new image. In practice several different algorithms are used to do this, but the basic principle is the same. Lightroom evolves in a linear space, which means that the brightness (luminance) is a linear function of the values bit. This translates into the luminance of the final pixel being correct anything. Photoshop scales in the gamma corrected space of the profile document (gamma 1.8 for prophotoRGB and approximately 2.2 to sRGB). Gamma means that the lightness of a pixel is dependent on the value of bit powerlaw. This translates into the luminance is not always correct with the end result. Whether move you in linear space or corrected gamma issues only when you have lots of small details. Course, when you have a plan of color, no matter that you will come to the same value. However, if you have a lot of edges, there are an error of scale to gamma corrected space. This is detailed in a page I found a quick google here: http://www.4p8.com/eric.brasseur/gamma.html

  So scaling in linear space is preferable from the point of view correct color. However, it leads to the desaturation and maybe look less good.

  A second point that I would put to LR is this: no matter how you do this scaling, why you cannot export a file that resembles that on my screen of LR? The fact that they are different certainly suggests that LR does not use this linear gamma of scale displaying the pictures, then we could add "look, do go and stick to it; don't chop and move one feature from LR to another. »

  Here, you have run in one of the many peculiarities of Lightroom. Because it is made of the jpeg extracted in adobeRGB (in general), the scaling of the display in libraries and other is in a gamma corrected space and so resemble the Photoshop scale. To the point, there is no scale is done, but the view zoomed on is a rendering that is similar to using nearest neighbor scaling. For reasons of speed, it only displays a subset of the pixels. So, with an average of pixels is made. In addition, any color and sharpness noise reduction is applied in the zoomed view on. This means that the zoomed view on developing countries is often saturated. This can be a real problem. There are many images where this leads to completely wrong impression in the zoomed view on. An example would be an image of Christmas lights that will look very colorful with zoom out but when zoom you 1:1 (or go to the library) they lose all color because the color noise reduction, which is then applied. Sea of flowers in the grass, light neon, colored fabrics, etc., are other examples. If you have a lot of microdetail, only display that's really right in Lightroom to develop is the view of 1:1. This is largely fixed in LR 3 BTW, where he restores to a larger size, including the reduction of noise and sharpening and then further reduced to develop.

  I realize that you are not responsible for the LR... no bad vibes intended

  Not bad actually. I love Lightroom, but realize that there are many gaps. In my work, I do a lot of scientific image processing and I'm always curious to see how things are really make.

• Gray instead of the real image

  I am faceing a problem with adobe lightroom

  When I want to display a picture or simply to open or edit images, it appears

  It looks gray!

  I reinstall but the same problem!

  This is an example of what's going on with me!

  I have Adobe Photoshop lightroom CC

  

  If there is a question mark icon, the "Update folder Location" command will not appear. The user should right-click on the folder name and select 'Find the missing folder' from the menu that appears.

  More details are in this document: Adobe Lightroom - find folders and files moved or missing

• Can't move the film to the map image

  I'm on Windows 10 (with the graphics processor is disabled in the lightroom preferences) using Lightroom CC. When you select images from the film, they will not drag on the location of the card in the card module. I'm very well online and google maps works, it's as soon as I select the image, it will not drag and drop. I checked for other preferences, I might need, but it seems like it should be a no-brainer. Suggestions as to what I am doing wrong so I can get this feature? Thank you.

  Be sure to drag from within the image and not the border.

• The file name can be printed on the exported images?

  I use LR 3.5 and wonder if I can get the names of files on the images when I export show them.  If so, how to make that happen?  I'm already tattoo a copyright script, which I suppose I could change to include the name of the image, but that would be quite tedious to do.  I guess that there is an easy way to do what I didn't find.  Thank you!

  Get the Lightroom LR Mogrify plugin

• The size of the exported Image

  I have my plan of work set to 700 px x 700 px. When I export in PNG file is px 2917 x 2917 px. Why isn't the size, I put?

  You have changed the shape of resolution from 72 DPI to something else.

• Distorted exported image Aspect ratio

  The proportions of my project is 16:9 (horizontal, vertical 720 576).

  I have inserted a clip in the timeline panel.

  I exported a certain range in a file as an image.

  The image file size: 720 x 576.

  I have to import the image file into the project and inserted into the timeline.

  The proportions of the image is not the same as the original film.

  Specifically, the horizontal side is narrower than initially (see attached screenshots).

  The causes of this gap?

  More important still, what can I do to get the exported images to match the proportions of the project?

  Although I cannot get you-screenshots of screens in the pre 4, but if you get lost (don't forget, things like 'Export' is now all in action, plus possibly other changes), let me know and I'll make you a few images with annotations to direct you.

  Good luck

  Hunt

• Removal of the exported files

  If I change a photo into lr then export to desktop, send to where I want, then remove countertop, I'll still be able to edit in lr or is it gone?

  Thank you

  One, exported image is a separate file. To export the means to make a copy of the original file with usually a file Extension different, JPG or TIF instead of extending RAW file and at the same time, apply the changes, you did so that the exported image. LR is not really the original images. The changes you make on images in LR are saved in the catalog file or XMP file, or in the case of DNG, TIF or JPG the changes are actually stored in the original file in a special area that does not alter the original image. The only time you can see the changes made by LR is when you view the image within LR and or when you export an image. Then the changes applied to the exported image.

  So in answer to your last question.

  If you change an image and then export this image on the desktop, and then decide to delete the image you exported to your desktop remains the original images, and Yes you could / can still see in LR and make edits more on it or remove and or modify the changes you had made previously in this topic.

  Please review some of the very good tutorial available LR on the NET, and perhaps even buying a book on LR.

• Color change in the exported sequence (Premiere Pro)

  Short description: colors in exported from first and downloaded movies on YouTube do not match the colors of the source that were imported in the firstimages.

  
  

  Background: I use tool of digital color meter from Apple to read the colors on my poster and Apple Preview to display image (PNG) files.  To eliminate the effect of color profiles, I put my 'Generic RGB profile' poster (which, as far as I know, does not change the R:G:B values).

  Description: I made a sample consisting of a single color animation and exported an image as image file.  Such color as displayed in my animation software, that's what I've specified (R:G:B): 255:0:255, as it is in the exported image as seen in Premiere Pro.  However, if I export a MOV file in Premiere Pro, upload that file to YouTube and play, the color is: 251:0:254.  Also, if I open the MOV file in QuickTime Player and export an image, the color in this context is 251:0:254.

  Question: what causes this color change, and how can I eliminate it?

  
  

  N.B.: This isn't 'gamma changeQuickTime Player' (at length elsewhere).  The color as read in QuickTime Player is 242:13:207 - a large and easily visible difference and who does not appear in other players MOV (ex: Player Flip).

  I JUST DISCOVERED SOMETHING!

  I was testing my single color sample. MOV file on different browsers, and I noticed that he had a slight color change between when YouTube first loaded (Chrome browser) video and when he played.  When I stopped it at the first point loading and read the value of the color, is 255:0:255 - just what I wanted.

  I now believe that the video I'm generating is correct and YouTube does not alter the video as part of the Uploader, but it changes in reading it.

  So, I'm done.

• How to print the specific image size?

  Hi Gang - How can I print an image 11 x 15 "on paper 13 x 19"?  Initially, it seems easy, but things are not how to navigate. Here's what I did:

  I exported the photo and used the dialog box LR image resize to 11 x 15 "- easy."

  I imported the exported image (assuming that the image was 11 x 15 ") and then in the LR print area - it is where the confusion begins.

  The print tab displays the dimensions of the image as 8 x10.19 in.  Help, how can I do the 11 x 15 "I need it to be?

  I understand that I will need to adjust the image to get the part I want in the space of 11 x 15, but for the moment, I can't even 11 x 15 "size.

  I tried package customized options, but no luck there.

  I would like to Print Studio Pro Canon plugin that works very well. Except, again, I don't know how to ask the image size 11 x 15 "for printing on paper 13 x 19".

  Fiddling with settings, I printed a dozen attempts and still no luck to reach 11 x 15 "size of the image on paper 13 x 19".  For now, I'm OK with the image to cut or to another plane - no baby - I need to know how to make the print image 11 x 15 "size of the image. A

  Thank you to offer suggestions.

  Screenshot shows that my image 11 x 15 "is 8x10.19; I don't know how 11 x 15 ".

  

  LR v5.7

  Mac OS X Yosemite v10.10.2

  Brain: generally intuitive, but need some help on this issue!

  The first step in the Lightroom print module is to click on the Page Setup button, select your printer, and then select the paper size. It looks like your screen to paper size correct has not been selected yet, because you said you wanted to print on paper 13 x 19 inches, but the paper on the screen is only 8.5 inches wide. My guess is that Page Setup is always programmed for letter-size paper, and you should come back on layout and change it. After you do this, if your layout Style is unique, you should be able to affect the size of the cell 11 x 15 inches.

• Include the file name on the exported JPEG files

  Is possible to overlay a file name on an export jpeg?

  I create JPEG files for my site and wish I could auomaticaly overlay on the image, the file name. This will allow viewers to the site identify the image. I managed to overlay a watermark, but not the name of the file.

  I would like the image to look as it would in the slideshow module. Which allows a file name to be superimposed on the image.

  I use Lightroom 3 with Windows 7 64 bit.

  Any help would be greatly appreciated.

  Rob..................

  Rob,

  It has no function in LR to add overlays of text on the exported images. You can take a look at LR/Mogrify for this ability. I've not used myself, but know about its capabilities.

  Gossweiler beat

  Switzerland