Lightroom: Export images at multiple resolutions in one go

  • 45
  • Idea
  • Updated 3 days ago
  • Under Consideration
I have discovered through experimentation that photos published to Facebook look best at 2048 pixels on the longest side (the maximum it supports) but images measuring 960 pixels on the longest side come a very close second so that's what I export at when Facebook.

I also publish the images on my own website, which uses SmugMug as a backend and is capable of automatically displaying delivering higher resolution photos (than Facebook) to the browser depending on the viewport size, so I export at 1400px resolution to strike a balance between filesize and image quality.

My problem is that it's not currently possible to export these two sets of images at the same time, I have to do them one after each other (because doing them in parallel is MORE than twice as slow due to LR's poor parallelisation of task execution), manually switching between different export resolutions and folders.

Instead, I would like to be able to pick two (or more) resolutions to export at, set (sticky) subfolder names for them (so that they end up in separate folders within the base export folder), and set LR to export all the images in one go. This would save me a huge amount of manual faffing around every time I export, and because LR would only have to fully render each image once (instead of twice as at present) it would dramatically reduce the total time taken to export both sets of images.

I realise that it should be possible to write a plugin to achieve this (and I'm looking into it) but surely exporting a set of images multiple times at varying resolutions is a fairly common use case (e.g. web/client DVD res and print ordering res for wedding photos) and it would therefore be of benefit to a significant proportion of the LR user base to make it worthwhile Adobe implementing it as a native feature?
Photo of MarcusT

MarcusT

  • 48 Posts
  • 7 Reply Likes

Posted 8 years ago

  • 45
Photo of Tom Heisey

Tom Heisey

  • 1 Post
  • 1 Reply Like
I've got to agree with the others.  I often export full size TIFF for publication, fullsize JPG for the client, 2048 or 960 for FB, and low res for email.  For some I also do Full HD, UW-FHD, or QHD for wallpapers.  All of these actions take up loads of time to repeat or to do outside of LR.  This should be a dead simple thing to output multiple resolutions at the same ratio.  Please add this!
Photo of apmadoc

apmadoc

  • 12 Posts
  • 4 Reply Likes
Option 1 set up an export group - that group defines xx exports - for each you choose file type, resolution, diectory, etc

Option 2 - dialog box, checkbox your existing presets
Photo of Leroy Schulz

Leroy Schulz

  • 24 Posts
  • 7 Reply Likes
Hi Victoria, I think the most elegant way would be to create export sets that contain export presets.  Run the export set and all the exports presets inside would run sequentially.  Surely that's doable and would save me so many steps every day.
Photo of Frank Kloskowski

Frank Kloskowski

  • 7 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
Hey Adobe give me your source code and I'll write it for you. Piece of cake.
Photo of Rick A

Rick A

  • 11 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
Leroy Schulz had the best suggestion. At least allow us to run multiple presets at one go, and *allow us to duplicate a folder of export presets* so that we could keep doing this for every separate shoot or requirement.
Photo of Leroy Schulz

Leroy Schulz

  • 24 Posts
  • 7 Reply Likes
I've given up hope that small, useful features like this will be added.
Photo of Jason Robey

Jason Robey

  • 1 Post
  • 1 Reply Like
This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled Feature request: Export presets that nest multiple export presets..

For example, every export I do, I have a preset for full res with a watermark, full res without a watermark, and smaller for Instagram. It would be great if I could just hit export once to do all those.
Photo of Leroy Schulz

Leroy Schulz

  • 24 Posts
  • 7 Reply Likes
That's exactly my case.  1) low res without watermark, 2) low res with waterwark, 3) high res for archive.  Every day I do this over and over.  How simple would it be to have export sets where with one click I could export everything?  C'mon Adobe.  With the billions you're making from us with the subscription model, surely you can put a few resources into developing this feature.
Photo of Rick A

Rick A

  • 11 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
One would've thought that.. some of these would be default options in the export offered by a digital asset management app. 
Photo of Leroy Schulz

Leroy Schulz

  • 24 Posts
  • 7 Reply Likes
Agreed.
Photo of Rick A

Rick A

  • 29 Posts
  • 3 Reply Likes
I’m eagerly waiting for one of the Lightroom apologists to drum up a reason for not doing this.
If we aren’t going to get a basic feature like this I should at least be entertained.. just like they entertain us with reasons for not supporting multiple mobile catalog syncing. It seems like this forum exists only for LR defenders to assert that LR has no problems and everything problematic in LR is done for a good reason.
Photo of John R. Ellis

John R. Ellis, Champion

  • 4468 Posts
  • 1187 Reply Likes
"Maybe I should learn Lua and charge everyone ten bucks for an LR script that does the same?"

Maybe you can find a copy of Rob Cole's ExportManager plugin. He passed away four years ago and his Web site disappeared. But a few people have collected some of his many plugins here: https://github.com/RobColeLr. (The consensus among plugin developers who knew Rob is that his informal license allows his plugins to continue to be distributed.) Many of those plugins continue to work in LR 8.
(Edited)
Photo of David Converse

David Converse

  • 683 Posts
  • 207 Reply Likes
I don't need it for myself. But I see a business opportunity.
Photo of Rick A

Rick A

  • 29 Posts
  • 3 Reply Likes
John E,
thanks for suggesting a look at Rob Cole's plugins. 

David,
I genuinely appreciate your tech knowledge about LR. But.

“navel-gazing novel, railing about "Adobe apologists."

“I pretty much never”

Quite patronizing aren’t we? 


“Once a request is logged, the why, though interesting, is irrelevant in the short term” —> 8 years, no acknowledgement, yay / nay? Would this be tolerated in IT support? And then what does one say to someone who tried to say "you should not be asking for it because that's silly".


Victoria, 

as you rightly said “It's a shame, as we're all meant to be on the same side. “ 

I’m also glad you mentioned that everyone is acting voluntarily here. 

I had to think a lot before saying what I did, but someone had to call out the many wrongs committed against users on these forums. 

I've culled some examples of interactions that happen on these forums. What’s missing, in these below messages, is respect for someone asking for an improvement or complaining about a problem:.


To all who told me to observe etiquette:

 I wish to ask, are these good examples of “Help etiquette”, 

In each case, there was no personal provocation. The “help” if offered is irrelevant when served with insulting or patronizing comments


Example of bypassing the problem by Adobesplaining:

“Commits to the cloud on Lightroom mobile only happen when you move to a different image. If you work for a while on a single image it is prudent to move to a different image occasionally to commit the changes” —> Rikk F; this is a bug in LR mobile, but the user is told “its prudent to move to a different image occasionally” 


Other Examples, indicate compulsive aggression from folks rushing to defend Adobe, when not required. 

“I'm giving you straight explanations. Accept them or jog on.” —> John B

“I've explained why I consider that your proposal is something I wouldn't want and why I think it is generally undesirable. I don't need to understand why you propose it, just take it at face value.” —> John B

“I have a whole lot more confidence in my estimation of user opinions than I have in yours. Do you not know how ludicrous your "fight" sounds?” —> John B, Clearly belligerent, eager to get aggressive 

“Do you honestly believe that any Adobe official is going to answer that? ..... / .... Why don't you wait until the next version of Lightroom comes out (so you'll know whether or not it is available as perpetual license) before complaining about Adobe not listening to consumers?” —> Johan Elzenga, responding to a question about LR 7 standalone 

“It's a bit like the family dog - much as we all love him we do get rather fed up with him insisting on leaving his scent every 5 yards. It drives the cats away.” —> John B responding to Rob Cole's suggestion of a plugin

“Sorry, but this is nonsense.” Johan Elzenga, responding to a technically wrong response from another user. Someone being technically wrong is a license to be rude to them?

“Local sync has been requested many times. But in theory, why would anyone need it?” —> John B responding to a user asking about 4000 photos on iPad, while ignoring that many users may not have that bandwidth when traveling

“Because I refuse to pay Adobe an extra $ 10 per month for sufficient storage space, they should enable WiFi sync (for free)” —> same thread —> what’s the need to belittle the user’s requests? 

“Why do you overwrite the preset in the first place?” —> Johan Elzenga, questioning why a user is doing something that LR allows them to do

“It's not many people over 5 years” —> oft repeated comment by various people. 

“ I don't think that it would have been a trivial task to bolt this onto a 10+ year end program” —> John B discussing sync; ok for John to express frustration, not ok for others.

“ I doubt if more than a dozen people worldwide are with you!” —> John B, repeating a sentiment he’s expressed on many tickets; is that ok, to scoff at other’s requests?

“19 votes is why.” —> oft repeated statement by John B when someone finally gets frustrated about why Adobe doesn’t fix a problem or add a feature. He has wisely refrained from stating this on the ticket with 1000+ votes. 

“I haven't referred to inexperienced at any point - but stupid and/or tired” —> John B

“A professional generally doesn't allow her or his workflow to accumulate duplicates in significant numbers” —> John B belittling someone who added a request to auto-identify duplicates.  

“Hype, Robert?” —> John B responding to a person complaining about bugs

“I still think that's an exaggeration, Bob; I doubt that I am any less demanding than you” —> John B responding to a person complaining about bugs; it is a problem only if John B thinks it is a problem.  Otherwise be ready to be bullied. 


I’m happy to start on a fresh page, but there has to be some understanding that users with requests / bugs, or, users with complaints about Adobe’s product management shouldn't be attacked, insulted, patronized and bullied. 

Photo of Roelof Moorlag

Roelof Moorlag

  • 189 Posts
  • 56 Reply Likes
You are right, everyone else is wrong. I am so sorry if i gave the impression of bulliing. Sarcarsm off. Maybe better for you bloodpressure to sign off for this forum. How many friens do you have btw?
Photo of Victoria Bampton - Lightroom Queen

Victoria Bampton - Lightroom Queen, Champion

  • 4979 Posts
  • 1939 Reply Likes
Rick, you've obviously spent a lot of time hunting down all of these examples. Some - at least without context - do sound harsh. Some of these comments have a back story that isn't visible here, and knowing that back story, I'd say they were quite restrained. Some simply highlight the way things can come over badly in text without the benefit of facial expression, tone of voice, body language etc. Some can be read multiple different ways, which is also a downside of the written word. And some could certainly be phrased in a more kindly fashion.

On the other hand, I could create a list of people ranting and raving, and the kind way in which they were answered. There's a real mix here. However I do have more important things to do, and I'm sure you do too! ;)

Adobe does not generally actively moderate their forums, beyond spam and blatant personal attacks, because they would be accused of blocking free speech and manipulation. This is in direct contrast to some other company's forums, where saying anything anti the program gets the post deleted and the user banned. 

The up side is as long as people don't go toooo far over the line, you can share your opinion. The downside is everyone else can too, and those will often differ. It would be lovely if everyone treated each other the way they want to be treated, but that's down to each individual. 

Everyone's made their point. Now can we please let it drop before this thread does get closed?
(Edited)
Photo of Craig Colvin

Craig Colvin

  • 2 Posts
  • 3 Reply Likes
The 42 votes thing is meaningless. Yes this thread has 42 votes but I found multiple threads all asking for this feature and they had anywhere from 20 votes to 200. Add them all up and it becomes more significant. 

It's very clear that Adobe doesn't care about what the customers in these forums want and will come up with their feature list some other way. 
Photo of john beardsworth

john beardsworth

  • 1196 Posts
  • 303 Reply Likes
Because it would be a never-ending commitment? There's a limit to what they can promise, and I'm not sure it would help much to say "we hear you" every year that passes by! The others don't, by the way.
Photo of Leroy Schulz

Leroy Schulz

  • 31 Posts
  • 11 Reply Likes
Never-ending commitment?  Much like a subscription model?  :-D
Photo of Rick A

Rick A

  • 27 Posts
  • 3 Reply Likes


If a company maintains their own forum they owe it to those submitting ideas on that forum, to acknowledge and track their requests. Otherwise, there's always r/lightroom. 

If Adobe isn't interested in engaging with customers they should simply shut this down, instead of encouraging people to post here and then shutting them up directly or via proxy. Then we all know without a doubt that we cannot ever hope to get anything from Adobe (BTW it is an irony that the service provider is "GetSatisfaction" lol what a let down)


Leroy Shulz, thank you for documenting everything that's wrong.

John B, you seem to have enjoyed painting me as a conspiracy theorist.

However something is still very wrong with your understanding or your intent when misinterpreting my original comments: You keep insisting and trying to twist my intent as an attempt to blame all fellow customers, and I'm only directing my ire at those select few who keep turning up in many threads just to shut people up. In this thread, that role was wonderfully essayed by you.

If you want to be acrimonious, at least don't rely on twisting people's words, that will give you some credibility in the discussion.

It's my educated guess that this feature isn't costly, but AFAIK only one competing product has ever offered it, so relatively-little customer interest may well have been the key.  
What? So Apple shouldn't have added gestures to their mouse or hot corners to their GUI? And then why does Adobe have the "Enhance Detail" feature at all, by that logic? You have plunged to deeper lows here with these comments. 

As for "low customer interest" --> that applies only to resource intensive features. Something so simple and mundane like multiple export options should be a no-brainer to get done, so that you go 1-up on the competition with a wider feature set. 

Because it would be a never-ending commitment? There's a limit to what they can promise, and I'm not sure it would help much to say "we hear you" every year that passes by
Perfectly Adobesplained, as expected from a Justifier/Apologist. You have excelled at patronizing and insulting people to defend Adobe. If we really were to listen to your misplaced advice, a vendor should only take your money and never own any responsibility. Microsoft did just that, and went down the drain until finally they started actually listening to their clients. 

Your one-sided view, that Customers should have a never-ending commitment to Adobe via subscription, while Adobe shouldn't be bothered to engage with them because it risks a "never ending commitment", is just ridiculous.
Adobe will cut off their commitment to me the day I don't pay their fees. This is certainly not a never ending commitment from their side. 

And why even twist the discussion by shifting the goal post into the topic of "commitment"? Adobe is into the business of making software, to sell. If they keep behaving this way, there won't be enough people left to buy it because others are getting better. 5 years ago people on these forums weren't talking so often about switching, and the frequency of those mentions has increased. 

The problem is John B, the critics are trying to help Adobe salvage its reputation because they've become blinded by their arrogance, and that's the part that Justifiers are missing out on. On the other hand, you are the ones who are doing the greatest harm to the company by telling people to shush.

Your points thus far, John have simply been aimed at antagonizing critics and defending Adobe. No one had aimed any criticism at you and yet you wanted to jump in, and even after Leroy S put together everything in a succinct post for your consumption, you insist on poking holes in it. You really have no credibility left on this discussion John B thanks to that approach. 

Re: the comparison to other companies, I don't know anything about CatureOne's forums. 
Apple has a twitter support team, a very responsive get support site, and unlike Adobe's team, the Apple team provides resolutions in a timely manner. The Adobe team merely parrots out predefined responses. 

Apple has their own forum, and the scenario there is pretty much the same as you see on the Adobe forums. 

However, here's the difference: Apple has fewer well paying customer for its hardware, they know what those customers need most, and they know how to keep them happy. For its services, they keep churning out a slew of bug fixes and listen to the smallest tremors. 

When Apple slips up, retribution from their customers is swift and hard, as it should be, make no mistake about that.. There's no place for feudalism when you are a client. 

Lastly, you patronizingly asked me to read a comment by apmadoc.. I hope you also read my response to that comment, especially the part about "Voice of Customer". But you chose to ignore that anyway, because you think that would be a "never ending commitment" for Adobe, right?

John B, so far, you have tried to misrepresent my intent, tried to school me on how software development works, tried to teach me how customer engagement works, tried to de-emphasise the importance of this thread itself, tried to Adobesplain how features are prioritized, all the while assuming you are The Knowledgeable One and everyone else is an idiot. Please step down from that mound of dirt which you think is a mountain. 

I conclude by leaving you to ponder over this comment from Frank Kloskowski:
I am a Software Engineer by day and I it is a fact that developing this functionality would be "low hanging fruit" for Adobe compared to other functionality requests I have seen.
(Edited)
Photo of john beardsworth

john beardsworth

  • 1196 Posts
  • 303 Reply Likes
You began by insulting other customers, "Rick A"....

Leroy Schulz said:
Never-ending commitment?  Much like a subscription model?  :-D
Best not to vanish down that rabbit hole, but let's not forget that while the subscription model was sold to us with the promise of delivering features, that doesn't mean we should whine if don't get our own pet must-haves. But as you realize, I was referring to your point #5. Adobe saying "but not now" once in x years satisfies few, and how frank could interactivity ever be? Just a simple suggestion of "it's not rocket science though relatively few people want it" leads one angry keyboard warrior to spin into an ever-more long-winded imitation of the Bruno Ganz Downfall scene. While it may be better to have this forum than not, it is like I suggested, a hostage to fortune if we users can't be realistic.
(Edited)
Photo of Victoria Bampton - Lightroom Queen

Victoria Bampton - Lightroom Queen, Champion

  • 4970 Posts
  • 1931 Reply Likes
> I found multiple threads all asking for this feature and they had anywhere from 20 votes to 200

Craig, since you've already found those additional threads, post the links and we'll merge them so the votes are combined. The moderators do try to combine requests asking for the same feature, but they're not always easy to find.