Skip to main content
Adobe Photoshop Family
philip_tobias's profile

68 Messages

 • 

2.5K Points

Thu, Jan 19, 2012 6:00 PM

Under consideration

179

Lightroom: Support Common Image Formats (EPS, GIF, PDF, BMP etc.)

Feature request: Please add Lightroom support for common Adobe publishing and Web image formats, such as EPS, AI, PDF, GIF, and PNG.

Many of us use Lightroom to manage client images in NEF, JPG, PSD and other formats. But the clients' associated images, which are used on their Websites and in their logos and publications, are invisible to Lightroom. If Adobe Bridge can display these other image formats, why can't Lightroom?

Even if Lightroom did not provide direct editing support for these other image formats, it would still be extremely useful if Lightroom could catalog and display them.

It would also elevate Lightroom from being "just" a photo editor into the realm of being a true Digital Asset Manager (DAM). Now that Lightroom includes basic video support - isn't it time to support all the common image formats that our other CS applications use?

Please vote for, as well as reply to, this request if you would also like to see Lightroom support these additional common image formats...

Responses

68 Messages

 • 

2.5K Points

8 years ago

Thank you, Julian, for adding yet another vote.

1 Message

 • 

64 Points

8 years ago

Export PNG need... JPEG is fail...

68 Messages

 • 

2.5K Points

8 years ago

Thanks, Tibor, for yet another vote.

Keep the votes coming, folks. Maybe someday Adobe will get a clue that this feature is needed - by many of us.

...pt

10 Messages

 • 

182 Points

8 years ago

PNG support is already included
in LR print module
as you can import very large png files
in Watermarking or Identity Plate !!!

947 Messages

 • 

13.9K Points

"Better yet, let the library module catalog all the same formats as Adobe Bridge. "

Since the chances of that are remote, I suggest you look into using the AnyFile plugin.

68 Messages

 • 

2.5K Points

Since many of us have already found the AnyFile plugin insufficient for our needs, it would be better for Adobe to listen to its users. And provide more comprehensive file format support.

3 Messages

 • 

120 Points

@Lee Jay: I'm sure you're aware, because we've gone over this already in this thread (or perhaps it was another?) where I've explained why the AnyFile plugin is not suitable for my (and other's) needs.

947 Messages

 • 

13.9K Points

Then I suggest you use Bridge.

68 Messages

 • 

2.5K Points

Since I already bought and use Lightroom to manage my photos, it is silly to have to use Bridge, too.

3 Messages

 • 

120 Points

8 years ago

@Simon: That's not what we're asking for, and surely you know this. We want PNG support in the library module. Send them to Photoshop or Fireworks for editing, don't much care to edit them in Lightroom, I just want to be able to catalog them, and GIFs, and PDFs. Better yet, let the library module catalog all the same formats as Adobe Bridge.

10 Messages

 • 

182 Points

8 years ago

As you point it I already know that .
I have voted for inclusion of other formats in a lot of threads,
even begged for a placeholder (like LR did for video in previous versions).
What I was showing is that png read support is already there ...
may I write the !!! in bold ! ;-)

68 Messages

 • 

2.5K Points

Thanks, Simon, for voting for more comprehensive file format support.

3 Messages

 • 

84 Points

8 years ago

I absolutely agree with Jay Gunn on this, "let the library module catalog all the same formats as Adobe Bridge." That makes perfect sense. I still do the bulk of my comprehensive editing and clean-up work in Photoshop whereas I use Lightroom extensively for basic RAW file manipulation, cropping and cataloging. It is absolutely a maddening pain in the neck that I can't store my PNG files in the same library for comparison, quick access and use. I reiterate Jay's thought, "let the library module catalog all the same formats as Adobe Bridge."

68 Messages

 • 

2.5K Points

Yes, this does make perfect sense: "Let the library module catalog all the same formats as Adobe Bridge."

947 Messages

 • 

13.9K Points

It doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

Bridge is the hub for the Creative Suite and thus needs to catalog all the formats that can be handled by the Creative Suite.

Library is the hub for Develop (Camera Raw) and thus needs to catalog all the formats that can be handled by Develop (Camera Raw).

The Creative Suite can handle many more types of files than Develop (Camera Raw) can handle. Library is not intended to be a general-purpose Digital Asset Manager and it's not intended to be the hub for the Creative Suite. If that intention changes sometime in the future, then you've got a shot. Until then, I think the request to handle all the files Bridge can handle has no shot outside the plugin universe.

68 Messages

 • 

2.5K Points

What doesn't make sense, Lee, is having to use both Lightroom and Bridge to manage the same files. For it to be truly useful, Lightroom needs expanded image file support.

947 Messages

 • 

13.9K Points

Where would you stop it? The most useful files for me to add to LR are Word and Excel since I do my contracts in Word and my ordering is managed in Excel spreadsheets. Should LR manage those?

Once LR can "manage" all files, should it be able to show thumbs too? What about embedded metadata? Editing? Remember what happened with video. First we just wanted our videos imported. Then thumbs. Then thumbs from a selected frame. Then editing and exporting. Now people want more unlimited editing to include sharpening, noise reduction, and so on. And now we want better embedded metadata support.

All this comes at the expense of other features. Many of us are interested in the hundreds of other features - most much more useful to photographers than expanded file support - than a bunch of support for files LR can't handle and which can lead to the same slippery slope I described above for video. That slope was for one type of file. Expanding that to hundreds of types could lead to a lot of slippery slopes. And when you're all done, you've got Bridge, and none of the other features LR so desperately needs to support the photographic workflow.

That's why I'm opposed to this stuff. However, what I've said is that LR should be able to import any file type as an option (not by default) and do nothing with those files other than "manage" them - rename, move, delete. No thumbs, no editing, nothing else. If they'd do that and draw a line in the sand, I'd support that. It seems that's what the anyfile plugin does, plus thumbs.

68 Messages

 • 

2.5K Points

Since this feature isn't of interest to you, why spend so much time of your time on it? Many others here disagree with you. They would appreciate better file format support for images. I sure would.

947 Messages

 • 

13.9K Points

Because the features it (support for all files Bridge can handle) would displace are of interest to me.

68 Messages

 • 

2.5K Points

There is no evidence that adding better image file support would displace any features of interest to you or anyone else. But instead of disparaging this legitimate feature request, why don't you start some new discussion topics about the features you want?

103 Messages

 • 

1.3K Points

8 years ago

actually -having thought about it I have gone off this idea. It was what make Bridge completely unusable (in CS3). If there's any chance it might confuse LR the same way or slow it down at all Im against it

68 Messages

 • 

2.5K Points

Let's assume that proper software engineering could add additional file format support without negatively impacting performance.

54 Messages

 • 

1.1K Points

8 years ago

Do all these arguments against supporting all the file types in LR seem just plain dumb to anyone besides me? Or am I lost is some orphan universe?

68 Messages

 • 

2.5K Points

Yes, it is "just plain dumb" that one or two individuals have spent so much time telling the rest of us that we are wrong. The fact is, many people would appreciate additional file format support in a future version of Lightroom.

40 Messages

 • 

496 Points

David, you are likely new to creating images on the computer. More likey that you like photography and newly switched from film to digital. This is often a point of view for those that don't want to include other formats. Others have used scanning, and other forms of getting image data on the computer. Also have created images from the computer for DIFFERENT reasons other than a Fine art print out. So your perspective is understood, and can be argued for as LR was designed for "Photography". But even pro, or amateur "photographers" use these images in different formats, such as press printing/magazines (needing PDF, InDesign ), websites (PNG). I think that would satisfy the bulk of the urge for formats.

40 Messages

 • 

496 Points

or you like using something else for that, and like using multiple apps to manage image files?

9 Messages

 • 

206 Points

8 years ago

Yes, PNG support +1

Look, I don't care if it's not a photographic file format. That's such a load of youknowwhat. I just want to manage my pictures, including drawings, mangas and screenshots (for which PNG is the only sensible format!) from Lightroom and manage them in a nice an comprehensive catalog.

And even so, PNG is in fact a very nice format to save photos in when it's certain they will be edited at a later stage, purely because PNG is guaranteed lossless. Sure, one can use TIFF, but not nearly all external editors (small and large) support TIFF to its neccesary extend, if at all. JPEG is not a reasonable format for this use case, because of its lossy nature, so that leaves PNG the only choice left. And no wonder as it's the most popular lossless file format on the planet. It's just brilliant (and has been for almost a decade!).

To me it seems completely silly not to support it. It seems Adobe is completely out of their mind to *willingly* not support it, if that's the case. At any rate, even if PNG has some limitations (it doesn't support 32-bit float, but it does do 48-bit integer) it should be usable, because JPEG is definately *more* limited than any format these days, and JPEG is supported perfectly fine. So with that argument, it seems backwards. Why is JPEG even supported in the first place, being such a dreadful format? Right, for exactly the same reason PNG will have to be be supported.

So, come on, Adobe, Lightroom 4.4 must support PNG.

68 Messages

 • 

2.5K Points

Thanks, Martijn, for yet another vote.

40 Messages

 • 

496 Points

I would say to get ACDSEE Photo Manger or Pro (for RAW).
I think the raw in LR is way beyond AC's, but the browser manager in AC's is nice, among other things. You CAN raw edit in Pro if you want to and sometimes get different welcome effects.

2 Messages

 • 

72 Points

8 years ago

Lee Jay is just trolling as some do. I am wholly for adding png support and I honestly am utterly amazed they haven't already.
The only reason I can think is that their software is so shoddy anyway they're playing catch up to make it work.

68 Messages

 • 

2.5K Points

Trolling? That does seem to be the case with Lee Jay, doesn't it?

40 Messages

 • 

496 Points

The reason they are keeping it as lean as possible is to keep it as fast, and as true to "photographic"(though this term has been redefined already) as they can. I think they may need to have an option of selecting other file types to support to keep folks happy. You may also want to look at LR plugins that do add support of other formats, although they don't work as seamlessly as I thought(at least at the time I tried a PDF viewer format). I stopped using Bridge a couple or more years ago as it was horrible with attached storage drives and left a couple files in EVERY folder it accessed(Not THAT big a deal, but). It never worked for me and crashed way too often and was limited in a few ways. I use ACDSee to browse my images. It is the most flexible and fastest I found with DAM capabilities.

68 Messages

 • 

2.5K Points

Lightroom users don't want to have to juggle ACDSee, Bridge, or anything else - in addition to Lightroom. That is simply inconvenient.

In addition, if the Lightroom developers can add all the other new features without unduly affecting performance, you would think they could similarly extend basic file format support in a "fast" way.

As you noted, the current plugins are not a solution. So, yes, there should be an option for Lightroom to handle more file formats.

Enough excuses and delays, Adobe ... let's just get this done.

947 Messages

 • 

13.9K Points

Phil, you can see by the multi-year effort to get just one of these (and not the highest priority one, in my option - that would be PSB), the likelihood of you getting all of them any time soon is near zero. I think it's anyfile or nothing, at least for a while.

68 Messages

 • 

2.5K Points

The more votes, the harder it will be for Adobe to continue ignoring their users.

So instead of throwing in the towel, as you would like, I would like more votes for this sensible feature request.

947 Messages

 • 

13.9K Points

Best case for you now is that this would be supported in LR 6 in 12-18 months, as a guess.

Would you support LR importing any file type, showing a thumb only if the OS could provide it (otherwise you'd get a generic thumb), managing them (move, rename, delete), and making an OS call to open that file, and nothing more whatsoever?

40 Messages

 • 

496 Points

Yes Phil, You're right...Pushing forward is right. I think they OKed PNG as some cameras shoot in this format, so I think that fact and these requests made for the move. But I hope we can get more to vote for this.

Lee , Yes that actually would help a lot, as the main issue is not knowing what resides in the folder. I don't expect to do any edits with PDF Indesign or other non PS "image" formats within LR. PDF and InDesign are ADOBE formats after all. Yes I agree PSB cannot be ignored..I would even override my needs as saying it should be supported before the others, logically. It is a PSD format for larger size files. Just for being large it is out? Doesn't make sense.

68 Messages

 • 

2.5K Points

Yes, the wheels of progress often turn slowly. I had to wait from CS3 to CS6 for Adobe to finally fix a crashing bug I reported in InDesign.

Many of us would appreciate something along the lines that you suggest. Let Lightroom import and display a wider variety of files, then hand off any editing to the native application, like Illustrator.

Ideally, it would be nice if Lightroom could also create a preview and allow metadata for cataloging. But simply displaying the files would be very useful.

40 Messages

 • 

496 Points

managing tools like metadata, tagging for cataloging would be helpful indeed...

947 Messages

 • 

13.9K Points

"Ideally, it would be nice if Lightroom could also create a preview and allow metadata for cataloging."

See how this slope gets slippery? LR doesn't even support metadata from many digital-camera generated videos yet (I'm not talking crazy edge cases, here, I'm talking mainstream cameras like Canon), despite supporting video for several versions and being able to edit and export those very same videos. When mentioning importing of alternative file types, some say its fine to do nothing with them, others want metadata - and preview generation - and editing - and exporting - and incorporation into the modules. Someone above mentioned exporting in PNG. If it can export, can it edit? What about support for transparency? LR supports PSD but not layers and only has modest support for transparency (and only in LR 4.4 and LR5). Is that higher priority? What about support for vector files, or rendering of thumbs and previews from those files? Is that required? 3D? Solid modeling?

See how this can get out-of-control really quick and why LR generally resists this sort of thing?

68 Messages

 • 

2.5K Points

If the Lightroom development team can find ways to implement the whizzy new features in LR5 ... they can certainly figure out how to provide the basic file support (that should have been there since the beginning).

947 Messages

 • 

13.9K Points

It's not basic. It's not even close. LR was designed, primarily, to manage and process still images in raw format created by dSLRs:

"On one particular site visit to Greg Gorman’s studio, Mark got a rather rude awakening-he personally had to deal with gigs of images that he shot. Greg, shooting with a Canon 1Ds, shot about 4 gigs of images during the course of the shoot day. Mark, shooting with a Canon 10D, (smaller raw file sizes) shot about 4 gigs of shots of Greg shooting as well as the models; Andrew and Kevin Atherton-twin gymnasts from the Cirque du Soleil show Varekai. Mark also shot Greg’s studio and anything he could think of to aim his camera at. Mark learned firsthand the difficulties of dealing with tons of RAW images."

http://photoshopnews.com/2006/01/09/t...

Because of later advances (primarily dSLR video), LR now also manages videos created by dSLRs, and as somewhat of an accident, it also manages and edits non-raw images created by many different still camera types. It's still limited in this respect, as I mentioned above (it doesn't handle metadata from many Canon video files from non-dSLRs, and it can only use a tiny subset of its editing features on videos). Even getting PSD into LR was a fight against its creators.

Support for dealing with non-camera file types was never part of the Lightroom development story or intent. I'd encourage you to read that article I referenced to see what the team was thinking from the beginning.

68 Messages

 • 

2.5K Points

Interesting history. But now that it's 2013, for real-world tasks many users are demanding additional file support.

It is simply not practical to juggle Lightroom, Bridge, ACDSee or some other combination of tools, just to see our related files. Sheesh.

1 Message

 • 

62 Points

8 years ago

I am using camera-fv5 , https://play.google.com/store/apps/de... , it telling me that saving PNG provide better quality than JPG and I want my photo taken with camera-fv5 able to edited at lightroom . Is that a valid reason of LR supporting this format?

Or if there better android app can even take RAW file like DNG?

947 Messages

 • 

13.9K Points

LR5 Beta supports PNG, but not any of the other formats requested in this thread.

40 Messages

 • 

496 Points

wow, interesting...Doesn't help me. (need mainly PDF and InDesign support would be welcome). I am waiting for a new beta before I install it :-)

40 Messages

 • 

496 Points

8 years ago

try using uncompressed JPEG.

Champion

 • 

5.6K Messages

 • 

98.2K Points

8 years ago

As the author of the Any File plugin, I'm quite aware of its limitations, and like most others in this thread (and like all Any File users), I'd prefer the asset-managment capabilities of LR expanded so we wouldn't need Any File. However, given that LR 5 Beta has just come out, I agree with Lee Jay that it's very unlikely that we'll see any significant improvements in this regard for at least another 18 months.

So if anyone has specific improvements or additions they'd like to suggest for Any File, please feel free to contact me privately via ellis-adobe at johnrellis . com. (The one thing that just isn't feasible with Any File is the ability to do native editing of additional formats, e.g. PSB.)

40 Messages

 • 

496 Points

It would need to watermark, text overlay, resize and place in new folder, batch rename, all kinds of sorting and viewing options with background color options, seeing thumbs with multiple file info options, dual screen support, detachable modules of preview, thumbs and properties, ratings that would sync with Raw dev apps, Edit Exif, metadata IPTC, presets for these and resizes, and watermarkings/text overlays. Printing contact sheets with row and column adjustments and file info options,

These are a few things I do daily. I don't have any affiliation to ACDSee, yet my expereicne tells me it does all the above and much more very well for me. IDImager/PhotoSupreme is another that doesn't do Raw dev, but maybe suited for DAM. ACDSee I find simpler (no forced catalog) to use.

Maybe get ACDSee to import how LR develops files and I would do without LR! But it sure is not like LR dev.

Adobe has other contenders, and if it continues to ignore them, they WILL sneak up close. Capture One is another Dev, DXO that in my opinion do a less destructing dev on the Raw file with higher clarity on certain file types this can be seen in. It is possible.

40 Messages

 • 

496 Points

Another approach would be to make LR have the OPTION to be used as a BROWSER and then have a "Add to Catalog" mode...
this would be the simple solution for Adobe. (somewhat like PhotoSupreme).

I wish they would allow to separate the interface modules (Lib,Dev,Print,etc), hide the ones you don't want up at the time... but this is not possible in LR.

3 Messages

 • 

86 Points

8 years ago

It would be really great if Lightroom could support GIF+PNG because when creating a book from my last holiday I wanted the add the travel route from my agency to the book but it is in GIF. So this would save me from converting such images.
Basically I agree that the focus of Lightroom is raw+jpg.

4.5K Messages

 • 

76.3K Points

You are aware Lr5 supports png? (not gif).

4.5K Messages

 • 

76.3K Points

If gifs got converted to png, would that be a problem? In other words, is it a convenience issue (doing the conversion I mean), or do you need to maintain the gif format for other purposes.

3 Messages

 • 

86 Points

no, I did take a look at the 'whats new in LR5 page' but it wasn't in there :)
thanks for the info! That makes Lighroom 4->5 upgrade even more interessting.

GIF to PNG conversion is just a convenience issue, basically its OK for me because if done right its a lossless conversion (compared to GIF->JPG).

Although for my foto book it wouldn't matter on high JPG quality settings but basically I am on the "maintain as much as original image information as possible" side of the force :)

4.5K Messages

 • 

76.3K Points

Ottomanic Importer (@v3.9) will import gifs by auto-converting them to png (requires ImageMagick).

68 Messages

 • 

2.5K Points

That's nice. But many of us don't want converted or duplicate images. We simply want to view and manage our existing images - in whatever format they are already in.

4.5K Messages

 • 

76.3K Points

Understood, Phil. - but until Lr6 or Lr7 supports GIF, some may prefer limited support over no support at all.