Lightroom: More detailed dialog boxes for develop presets and settings

  • 3
  • Idea
  • Updated 8 years ago
Merged

This conversation has been merged. Please reference the main conversation: Lightroom: Have develop preset parameters viewable inside Lightroom after creation.

I ́d like to be able to better control develop settings. For instance, when I want to copy settings from one image to another, I get the "Copy Settings" dialog box. In this box I can only check what settings I want to copy, but I don ́t see the values! A more informative dialog box - like the one for metadata, since it shows the contents - would be good.

Same thing goes for develop presets. I have poor memory (!), so whenever I try to update a preset, I have a hard time trying to remember what settings (and with what values) are involved in that particular preset. A "preset editor" would be great!
Photo of Jan Thomassen

Jan Thomassen

  • 9 Posts
  • 7 Reply Likes

Posted 8 years ago

  • 3
Photo of TK

TK

  • 531 Posts
  • 117 Reply Likes
Perhaps even more useful than values would be an indication whether or not the source values are default values plus whether or not they'd be overwriting non-default values.

This would be a quick way to ascertain whether an unintentional overwriting of already performed development settings would occur and would allow one to deselect corresponding settings.

With multiple targets one would have to take a conservative approach and flag overwriting of non-default values if that were the case for only one in several images. Alternatively, the actual count of affected images could be shown (per setting).
Photo of Jan Thomassen

Jan Thomassen

  • 9 Posts
  • 7 Reply Likes
TK, what do you mean by default values in this case?

Anyway, some way to review both old and (would-be) new values for the settings we are about to copy (or preset we are about to update) would be useful. I agree this should be fine-grained, i.e. an ability to select or deselect per setting. The metadata editor already has this.

Counts would be good, too.