Lightroom: Export megapixel option to support values under 1.0 megapixels

  • 8
  • Idea
  • Updated 3 years ago
  • (Edited)
Basically, I'd like the megapixel option to support values under 1.0 megapixels.

This because I'd like to export photos for web usage that are not too large, having the same amount of *pixels* in the image at the same time.

Limiting the size using the longer edge (the nearest solution) would work for me if my images had normal ratios (e.g. from 3:2 to 1:1), but I work a lot with panoramas and that means often having images with extreme ratios (3:1 and even more!). If I set the longer edge to a size that is OK for 3:1 panoramas, 3:2 images are too large. The opposite obviously happen if I set an optimal longer edge size for 3:2: panoramas became too small.

And 1.0 megapixels it's actually a LOT for web usage. a 16:9 image limited at 1.0 megapixels becomes a 1333x750 image, which is practically wallpaper size on a laptop's screen! I would like to type in something like 0.6/0.7 megapixels.

Notice that megapixels here is the *right* and *easy* solution for this problem, there's no way around it.

I can't be sure, but it seems to me that it's really a user interface issue. The megapixels option already supports floating point values (1.1 megapixels is absolutely valid) and maybe the only thing that needs to be done is to set a lower minimum value for this option in the user interface (something like 0.1 MP, but even 0.5 MPs could be good).

Adobe developers, I really hope you could fix this! Lightroom is really a great piece of software!

(This is basically a repost from a thread I started in the adobe forum, but it seems to me that this is the best place to post this feedback. Sorry for the repost!)
Photo of Luigi Rocca

Luigi Rocca

  • 3 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes

Posted 7 years ago

  • 8
Photo of Steve Sprengel

Steve Sprengel, Champion

  • 2657 Posts
  • 341 Reply Likes
It does seem reasonable to ask for less than 1.0 in the MP input area, but what is the point of having the same amount of pixels in a set of images with widely varying aspect ratios? What is your use-case?
Photo of Luigi Rocca

Luigi Rocca

  • 3 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
The use case is web usage.

I want my photos on the web to be of costant quality: big enough to appreciate what's inside the photo, but not big enough to print or use beyond looking at them and seeing that they are beatiful photos.

When you select the width&height option, or the longer edge option, you're defining a box your photos will fit. But with widely varying aspect ratios there's no good unique box for them to fit.

A box appropriate for normal (3:2, 4:5, 1:1) photos makes big panoramas (2:1, 3:1, 4:1...) too small to view.

The only way I could get this result now is to make an export for normal photos, an export for wide photos and another one for ultrawide panoramas. More effort to obtain a worst result.

Moreover, the fix I'm asking for does not make lightroom more complicated in any way. No more buttons, no more options, no interface cluttering at all. Simple as before.

The best would be to have a minimum usable value of 0.1 and allowing two points of precision instead of one.

This could allow something like this to be done:

I don't want my images to be fullscreen, but a bit smaller. Let's say a bit smaller than a laptop screen resolution (1280x800). The optimal size for a 1:1 photo would be something like 600x600. The optimal size for a 3:1 panorama would be, 1000x360? I'm speaking of appreciating the same level of detail here. The AREA of these two exports is the same. 600*600 = 1000 * 360. The megapixel option does just that, I only need it to accept smaller values. In this particular case, 0.36.
Photo of Mark Timofeev

Mark Timofeev

  • 4 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
I asked adobe for this 4 times.
My reasons same as Luigi.
Answer was "You don't need that. You can go up to 512 Megapixels"

Solution for export is very simple:
1. Set Megapixels=1.1 in desired template.
2. Export this template as *.lrtemplate,
3. Edit text file. Lookin' for "size_megapixels = 1.1" then change to 0.4
4. Import template as new export settings and Don't edit digits in LR!

Adobe rounds entered value in 0.1, so 0,36 will become 0.4 but this seems minor problem for me.

For use with publish service plugin, my solution was directly binary editing of catalog file (*.lrcat):

1. Make backup of your catalog.
2. Select in desired exports "megapixels = 12.3"
3. Close ALR.
3. Оpen *.lrcat with good hex editor
4. Search "size_megapixels = 12.3" and change digits IN BINARY EDITOR.
Don't edit as text by adding chars, because it is fixed lenght field.

Voila!
But I wait for adobe solution every minor version since ALR 3.4
Photo of Rob Cole

Rob Cole

  • 4831 Posts
  • 385 Reply Likes
If you want to avoid using a binary editor to edit fixed length text fields (read: *very* risky):

1. Use SQL instead, or - much easier and fool-proof:
2. Use Exportant.

Rob
Photo of Mark Timofeev

Mark Timofeev

  • 4 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
My main reason that i like both square 1:1 and panoramic 3:1 images.
And for WEB gallery images looks natural if they have same area and quantity of details.
Even in row 2:3 and 1:1 looks very different if same height or width.

Just to show how it works go to
http://photo.marktim.ru/OPENAIR/FLORAL
then go fullscreen and select any image. Gallery starts show with natural 0.5 mpix images.
Photo of Pheudor Krikman

Pheudor Krikman

  • 17 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Lightroom export. Why using megapixels options begins with 1 MP? For most web purposes is prohibitively large. It must begin with 0.3...0.5 MP. So perfect solution goes useless. Please correct check algorhytm to allow not 1.0...512.0 but 0.1...50 or anything you want. Thank You.

This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled
Lightroom: Ability to specify export dimensions in Megapixels.
Photo of Rob Cole

Rob Cole

  • 4831 Posts
  • 385 Reply Likes
@v1.2, Exportant supports scaling megapixels to support fractional values.
Photo of Rob Cole

Rob Cole

  • 4831 Posts
  • 385 Reply Likes
Luigi Rocca wrote:
|> "it seems to me that it's really a user interface issue."

That is correct, and the fix would take almost no time, and is essentially zero risk. It is hard for me to imagine why this isn't just fixed in the next release, along with a handful of other things like it. - blows my mind... Adobe seems to just completely ignore everything except the catastrophic bugs and new cameras when releasing dot versions, and even new major versions have too much of this sort of thing persisting. Sorry to say, but it's true. It's like nobody records the issues raised in the feedback forum, or takes responsibility for addressing them.

Note: this glaring problem of megapixel limit was posted 10 months ago, but has not yet been acknowledged by Adobe.
Photo of Rob Cole

Rob Cole

  • 4831 Posts
  • 385 Reply Likes
Is this problem Windows-only?
Photo of Pheudor Krikman

Pheudor Krikman

  • 17 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Thank you, Rob.

I'm glad to meet understanding in this so simple but annoing issue.
Personally I don't criticise Adobe because it is so common in today's business, and Adobe is way better in other aspects of software engineering. They must triplecheck all the things they do and with growth it inevitable becomes bureaucratic.

As for me I don't afraid direct binary "hacks" (with back-up of course).
Exportant is a manual export plugin so it is not suitable for automation purpose as for me. I use Gallery export plugin for maintaining web photogallery using ALR. It is well automated solution and based on ALR Publish Service, which depend on export interface.

This error is for Mac too.
Photo of Pheudor Krikman

Pheudor Krikman

  • 17 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Of course, edited files often contains destroyed exif data.
Photo of Rob Cole

Rob Cole

  • 4831 Posts
  • 385 Reply Likes
So, what is the source of the image number, upon export:

A. exif metadata.
B. parsed from filename.
C. try A first, then resort to B.
D. Try B first, then resort to A.

And if image number unobtainable, does import fail, or is the image number just absent in the filename.

I could answer these questions myself, but if you know the answers already, I would appreciate being saved the effort.

Thanks,
Rob
Photo of Pheudor Krikman

Pheudor Krikman

  • 17 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
upon export there are 2 possible fields "original number suffix" or "filename number suffix".
If imported file already renamed (Just renamed!) before import (dsc1234abc.nef) then upon export both fields gets empty. ALR don't see any number suffix.
Photo of Pheudor Krikman

Pheudor Krikman

  • 17 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
And all numbers absent in exported filename
Photo of Rob Cole

Rob Cole

  • 4831 Posts
  • 385 Reply Likes
Got it.

I could provide some handling via Exportant that would suit you better, but it would be subject to the previously-mentioned caveats - so there may be zero value in doing so - can you tell me?

Caveats: due to limitations of SDK, it would only work with export services like "Hard Disk", which basically won't try and do anything extra with file that has been rendered for export. It won't work with any online publishing plugins, unless of course you can export to hard disk, then use some other means to upload...

Bottom-line: folder/file-renaming upon export (via general purpose post-process actions) is subject to some serious limitations, which make it prohibitive in many but not all exporting / publishing situations. Whether you can use it or not depends on your situation...

Reminder: the same is NOT true of the other features in Exportant, which can be used with *any* export/publish service.

Cheers,
Rob
Photo of Pheudor Krikman

Pheudor Krikman

  • 17 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
To Rob Cole.

Just visited http://www.robcole.com

You've made many nice tools for Adobe Lightroom.
Thank you.
Photo of Rob Cole

Rob Cole

  • 4831 Posts
  • 385 Reply Likes
Thanks - it's nice to be appreciated :-)
Photo of Scott Matthews

Scott Matthews

  • 5 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled Megapixel export needs ability to export less than 1 full megapixel....

Hi all, when selecting the "megapixel" export option, you are forced to enter a number of at least 1 -- however, it should be an option to enter a smaller number (and not just a 'tenth' such as 0.5, but even smaller decimals such as 0.05 or smaller).

Just as you can export small images by specifying a small width/height -- you should also be able to export small images by specifying a smaller-than-1 megapixel value.

And the megapixel option is important -- because unlike the other export options, it results in the same image area size for all the exported images.

This was brought up over 4 years ago:
http://feedback.photoshop.com/photosh...

And I just encountered the same problem:
https://forums.adobe.com/message/8181250

You'll see that a number of people have had the same problem, for the same reason -- and it seems perfectly reasonable to want to be able to specify a size smaller than 1 full megapixel (for example, for web graphics).