Lightroom: Ability to hide icons for crop & spot removal tools to give more space in other panels in Develop module

Quote: I imagine many only use the keyboard shortcuts for the tools after a while and don't really need the toolbar anymore.

Actually, I've found the opposite to be the case. On each and every occasion I've asked user groups whether they use icons or keyboard shortcuts the majority indicate icons.

Also, deliberately hiding such an important aspect of the toolset from users would be the work of a fool.

If you're going to make a feature request then I suggest that you ensure that it isn't going to be at the detriment of other users.

Ian, maybe it has escaped you that I am suggesting an "option" to hide the toolbar.

The toolbar will neither be hidden from users nor will users be forced to use the option.

Note that you can already use the "T" key to hide the image toolbar. While this can be confusing to some who may hide the image toolbar and then don't remember how to bring it back, obviously someone (smart) thought it would still be a good idea to make the image toolbar hidable.

I'm simply asking for the same option to be available for the toolbar.

I appreciate your sampling of user behaviour but you will still acknowledge that there are many users who predominantly use keyboard shortcuts, right?

Could you please explain to me why my idea would be "to the detriment of other users"?

I'd be against this idea. Making it merely an option still means development time going into it. As well as agreeing with Ian, I'd point out that Solo mode already deals with the OP's concerns for vertical space.

John, Solo mode does not deal with my concerns. Having several panels open at the same time is useful. More vertical space will help.

Things like that don't really cost much "development time". Where would you like the development time to be invested?

Too long a list! But you can't get away with saying a feature request is an option and you don't have to use it.

If vertical space is really a problem, IMHO the better solution is smaller fonts, less space above and below text, smaller panel headers.

I'm sorry, but I do not accept your use of "aggression" here. I disagreed with your FR without being impolite. Ignoring something isn't a good way to indicate one's disagreement with it (and see Jeff's FAQ reply to my request for a Don't Like button http://feedback.photoshop.com/photosh....

As for "what list?" I was following directly on from your "Where would you like the development time to be invested?"

A parting thought: I don't think an idea should be commented on negatively because one thinks that development time would be better spent otherwise.

I feel that is an unfair way of championing ideas one personally feels are in the critical development path. I suggest that people should "like" the ideas they want to promote and "dislike" ideas that they feel would get in their way, but a feature which is completely neutral to anyone not using it shouldn't be voted down on the grounds of "stealing development time".

I argue that ideas should be judged on their merit and it is then up to the product manager / developers to decide whether the idea is worth spending development time on.

Voting against on the grounds of "stealing development time" is numerically indistinguishable from genuine criticism and could be used to achieve a double promotion of the ideas one believes to be worthy of development.

I'm neutral about it this idea. The toolbar seems to take up so little space, plus I think it looks kinda cool, and I mostly use the mouse for these tools. But, I wouldn't oppose the option either - as TK pointed out, the option won't hurt you if you don't use it...

PS - I really think it best to steer away from opposing ideas based on opportunity cost - let Adobe have that job...

In the free world, we can oppose whatever we like for whatever reason. But, I choose not to oppose ideas just because I would not personally find an advantage in them - I prefer to let Adobe have that role. To each their own... Every feature has an opportunity cost - that goes without saying...

"John, you cannot seriously criticise my FR as such since if it were implemented already it wouldn't hurt anyone who doesn't want to use it."

But it isn't implemented, and the criticism is primarily of the FR itself. You can't then discount that disagreement by hiding behind "it would only be an option".