Lightroom: LR4.1 RC2 messing up Olympus RAW files

  • 14
  • Problem
  • Updated 5 years ago
  • Solved
  • (Edited)
After updating to LR4.1 RC2, I noticed some serious issues with my Olympus E-PL1 RAW files today.

Usually I have my camera set to 3:2 aspect ratio (the standard on this camera is 4:3). But since I shoot RAW only, I can always go back to the original aspect ratio and recrop in postprocessing. That was fine with LR3 and even 4.0.

Now, in LR4.1 RC2 I noticed I cannot go back to the original aspect ratio anymore. LR seems to recognize now that the shot was taken in 3:2 and doesnt let you go back to the 4:3 even though the cropped information is in the RAW file of course.

Now, here is how LR3.6 will render the RAW file without making any adjustments:


But when I open and export the same RAW file from LR4.1 RC2 without making any adjustments(!) I see this:

This show that LR4.1 RC2 crops the image to 3:2 aspect ratio. And I cannot find any way of returning to the full information.

Unfortunately, however, the story doesnt end here. It get's much worse. I work with a dual monitor setup. When I view the file in LR4.1 RC2 - again, without any adjustments, the main window streches/squeezes the 3:2 information into a 4:3 aspect ratio. The secondary screen doesnt stetch or squeeze anything:
Note: It's a bit hard to notice in this screenshot. But you can measure it and will see that the photo on the left is 3:2 and on the right (my main window) is 4:3 (squeezed together). If you peek into the buildings you may see that the are sqeezed together a bit.

Further observations:
1) The problem only occurs with files that very not edited with a previous version of Lightroom. If I look at files that I edited in LR3.6, I can retain all information in 4:3.
2) The problem of cutting the image to 3:2 and not be able to go back to the original even though it's RAW, also occurs in Camera RAW 6.7.
3) On the last screen you might notice a diference in color rendition on both screens. That might be another color management inssue that I still have to look into (I work with two calibrated monitors).

I'm really surprised by the change of how LR4.1 RC2 handles the Olympus RAW files. For me, at this point this is a real bummer because not only LR is now dropping RAW information that I don't find a way to get back but also it messes with my whole workflow. Not to mention that the streching/squeezing of images on two screens is more than annoying.

I hope this gets fixed until the final. Otherwise it will be unusable for me.

Thanks,

Timo

P.S: If you need anymore information, pls let me know.
Photo of Timo S.

Timo S.

  • 67 Posts
  • 2 Reply Likes

Posted 7 years ago

  • 14
Photo of Pascal Joris

Pascal Joris

  • 3 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
I'm using my cameras with RAW+jpg to make two pictures in one: a jpg out of camera, using camera picture mode and crop funtions, to get a "immediate" picture. And then I use the RAW to try out other ideas.
Now, with LR4.1RC2 (don't know if LR4 did that already, I went directly to 4.1RC2 because of my new OM-D), LR seems to crop the RAW to the format chosen in the camera for the jpg. Unacceptable. (And, frankly, it's rather silly, no?)
Photo of Timo S.

Timo S.

  • 67 Posts
  • 2 Reply Likes
Well, I wouldn't mind, if Lightroom would automatically crop them to the aspect ratio set in the camera BUT ONLY as long as I am able to reset the crop to the full 4:3 raw photo when I click on the crop tool.

For me, it is unacceptable that LR changed it's behaviour with this new release.
Photo of Pascal Joris

Pascal Joris

  • 3 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
I can agree with that. I my mind, automatically cropping RAW pictures is completely against the idea of RAW as data as unaltered as possible, to gice the fotograph full liberty to what he wants; so I'd prefer a button where you can activate the crop ;)
But a no-choice-crop is a no go.
I never realised it up to now, because I never used the jpgs, but the new camera types make this option very interesting - and LR sabotages it.
Photo of Jon Gilbert

Jon Gilbert

  • 11 Posts
  • 2 Reply Likes
I CAN'T BELIEVE THEY DID THIS. This is the most idiotic lack of a feature I've ever seen. How could a product as "mature" as Lightroom 4.4 simply NOT have the ability to use the entire RAW file, and "force" you to crop it like that? What in the heck, Adobe?
Photo of Timo S.

Timo S.

  • 67 Posts
  • 2 Reply Likes
Any word on this issue from Adobe?
Photo of MartinM

MartinM

  • 8 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
ADOBE PLEASE FIX THIS!
Photo of Jon Gilbert

Jon Gilbert

  • 11 Posts
  • 2 Reply Likes
+1!
Photo of Eric Chan

Eric Chan, Camera Raw Engineer

  • 631 Posts
  • 133 Reply Likes
Official Response
The discrepancy of aspect ratio probably has to do with stale previews. Rebuilding the previews should fix that. As to the default aspect ratio, Lr will now set the crop of the image to whatever was set in the camera. If you want full flexibility to crop later, set your in-camera aspect ratio to 4:3.
Photo of Timo S.

Timo S.

  • 67 Posts
  • 2 Reply Likes
Dear Eric,

thanks for your reply. But please allow me to repsond and explain why - in my opinion - this is an irresponsible way to treat your Lightroom customers.

The problem is not, that I cannot set my camera to 4:3 in order to get the full RAW files. The point is: What are photographers - who maybe have accumulated photo archives over years - supposed to do with files they already shot? You (Adobe) apparently decided to implement a feature ex post facto that limits the possibilites of RAW files that photographers already have and the workflow the were used to.

Let me give you another example to show you how stupid (sorry - but this makes me angry) the way this feature was implemented is:
Most cameras have a setting for black and white. Let's say you set your camera to B&W but still shoot RAW to get the full sensor information - just in case. Now you go out and shoot images. But during post-processing, you decide, you want certain pictures back in color again. No problem, right?
But what if Adobe were to implement a new "feature" with the future Lightroom 4.5 that reads the picture style or color control that was set in the camera and sets the image to black and white - but without any option to go back to color even though it's a RAW file? When customers complain - the answer is: Oh, if you want color, please set your camera to color and not to B&W. But, of course, this feature would affect also photos that people have already shot - maybe years ago. Ridiculous, right? Exactly!

Lightroom is a software designed to let users manage their photo archive with it. Such a software is expected to be a long term solution. We want to be able to work with our photos even 2 or 3 or 5 years after we shot them -without the fear that developing capabilities are lost because of new "features". But if Adobe decides to develop it's software regardless of previous workflows and limiting features it already offered, then obviously customers cannot rely on such software anymore.

So, please: I do get why such a feature can come in handy. But leave your customers the option to go back to the full photo - especially when they were used to from previous versions. Why is that so hard? If you think this feature is useful, then let Lightroom render the photo with the aspect ratio that was set in the camera. But as soon as the user hits the crop tool, he should to be able to work with the full sensor information with the original aspect ratio!

Cheers,

Timo
Photo of Eric Chan

Eric Chan, Camera Raw Engineer

  • 631 Posts
  • 133 Reply Likes
Timo and others,

Understood. In the future, we may be able to implement a mechanism for retrieving the full (uncropped) image data. I did not mean to suggest this was impossible, or that we hadn't considered it. We actually did consider it this time around, but it didn't make the cut for various reasons.
Photo of Pascal Joris

Pascal Joris

  • 3 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Hallo Eric

I hope you will implement such a mecanism. The behaiviour of LR in this case goes completely against the idea of RAW - I suspect, the one responsible for this decision has not quite understood what RAW is for :(
Photo of Timo S.

Timo S.

  • 67 Posts
  • 2 Reply Likes
@Eric - regarding your suggested fix for the distorted view of the photos:
This is a bug that is not caused by the previews. I now had the time to look into it. I deleted my previews folder completely and let LR render them again. The problem persists. So there is definitely a bug in the rendering engine. Oh, boy...
Photo of Ira Weinschel

Ira Weinschel

  • 6 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Eric, I'd just like to reiterate that I believe this implementation was VERY poorly thought out. For cameras with an EVF, I want to set a specific aspect ratio for framing purposes. That doesn't mean I don't still want the ability to change my mind later. Your suggestion to always shoot in 4:3 is (imho) a very disappointing answer. I urge you and the team to make this a higher priority.
Photo of Rick Baumhauer

Rick Baumhauer

  • 49 Posts
  • 26 Reply Likes
I guess I'll add my voice to the list of people who want this changed back (started my own topic after doing a search, but "Aspet Ratio" is hard to search for :) ).

I understand that some people asked that the RAW be cropped to the ratio set in camera, so this was changed sometime in the 3.x cycle (and I understand their reasoning). However, I think the case is much stronger that RAW files should never be altered by default, and certainly not irretrievably - they're RAW files, after all.

With the OM-D, setting the camera to a 3:2 ratio gives a better combination of displays for the LCD (which is 3:2) and EVF (which is 4:3, but I prefer the modes that put the shooting info along the bottom, and 3:2 gives the largest view in those modes).

I would like to strongly urge the Lightroom team to change this behavior, either by respecting the 4:3 nature of m43 RAW files, or at least providing a preference to allow users to determine their preferred behavior.
Photo of evan

evan

  • 12 Posts
  • 5 Reply Likes
Here is a duplicate thread I started a while back. You can have a look for more of the same. I'll spare my comments here, but this issue needs to be corrected. If this is intended behavior then Adobe needs to take a closer look at their intentions and who this product is designed for.

http://gsfn.us/t/2rhj6
Photo of Timo S.

Timo S.

  • 67 Posts
  • 2 Reply Likes
Short update (for those who skipped my latest reply to Eric):

I finally had the time to look into the solution that Eric suggested for the distorted view problem of the files. Rebuilding previews doesn't help. So it seems like a bug that needs to be fixed. So, now, I can wait for LR4.2 and hope that the problems are fixed and that I eventually get a fully working version of LR4. Such a mess.
Photo of MartinM

MartinM

  • 8 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
I have got the same problem like Timo S.: Rebuilding the previews doesn't work, the pictures stay distorted... ADOBE PLEEEEAAAASE FIX THIS!! That's absolutely ridicolous for a state of the art raw-development software tool. Well I should say for a formerly state of the art software tool...
Photo of Eric Chan

Eric Chan, Camera Raw Engineer

  • 631 Posts
  • 133 Reply Likes
We've tried to reproduce the aspect ratio discrepancy between the two displays in-house, but haven't seen it happen yet (aspect ratios are consistent between the two). We'll keep trying, but it would be helpful if you could send an example raw file for which this is happening consistently on your end (you can use madmanchan2000@yahoo.com with YouSendIt, dropbox, etc.).

Also, please try clearing your Camera Raw cache in Lightroom's Preferences -> File Handling -> Camera Raw Cache Settings -> Purge Cache button.
Photo of Timo S.

Timo S.

  • 67 Posts
  • 2 Reply Likes
I just tried - both clearing the Camera RAW Cache as well as deleting the Previews - and it didn't help. I send you an email with two Olympus RAW files that should exemplify the problem.
Photo of MartinM

MartinM

  • 8 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Thanks Eric Chan, clearing the Camera Raw Cache worked finally. But not very smooth - the distortion vanished not until i zoomed into the picture...
Photo of MartinM

MartinM

  • 8 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
The problem still occurs! Zut as the french say. It now only occurs in the develop module. When I open the picture at first I see the correct aspect ratio of the preview, then this gets replaced after half a second by the wrong aspect ratio and is again distorted... If I produce a jpeg via "Export" I get an jpeg with correct aspect ratio... I will send you an raw file via mail and dropbox link.
Photo of Eric Chan

Eric Chan, Camera Raw Engineer

  • 631 Posts
  • 133 Reply Likes
Are you sure you've cleared both Lr previews and the ACR cache?
Photo of Timo S.

Timo S.

  • 67 Posts
  • 2 Reply Likes
I am sure that I did both - but it didn't help. But thanks for keeping on it.
Photo of MartinM

MartinM

  • 8 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
I definitely deleted both: At first the ACR Cache and after that I closed LR 4.1 and deleted the previews. After relaunching I had the problem like described above.
Photo of MartinM

MartinM

  • 8 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Hi Eric Chan, any news for us?
Photo of TK

TK

  • 531 Posts
  • 120 Reply Likes
1. Although I personally have no issues with aspect ratios (as my cameras only supports one), I sympathize a 100% with the posters here. AFAIC, the current behavior should never have been considered acceptable.

2. I notice that I am not the only one who suffers from LR not knowing when to refresh previews. Why do customers have to manually re-render previews or manually zoom into previews to force a re-drawing?

I wish LR could work out on its own when it is time to replace a preview (library JPG) with an updated version. It should not be hard to have a "dirty" flag associated with each preview that gets set whenever the respective images is manipulated in the Develop module (or through some other way).

Also, it is not like LR would not do any automatic checking. When LR decides -- for reasons that escape me and may have to do with daylight saving time changes -- that the DNGs on my external hard drive have become out of sync with the catalog (although they are never touched with anything but LR), LR (3.6) goes ahead and forgets all the (portrait) rotation information I manually created after an import.

Maybe this needless overriding of known rotation information has been fixed in LR 4, but understandably, I wish LR 3.6 would leave the rotation information alone but care about invalid previews (library JPGs).
Photo of Eric Chan

Eric Chan, Camera Raw Engineer

  • 631 Posts
  • 133 Reply Likes
Thank you all for providing sample images. Unfortunately, even though I have tested with these images, I cannot reproduce the problem: both Library and Develop show the correct aspect ratio (i.e., geometry shape) for the images. If I export to a JPEG or TIFF, the resulting image also matches what I see in both Library and Develop.

Out of curiosity, what happens if you create a new catalog (just as a test) and import one or two of your images into it? I am curious how the aspect ratio appears in the new catalog.
Photo of Timo S.

Timo S.

  • 67 Posts
  • 2 Reply Likes
Thanks Eric. I created a new catalog and importet a folder of my Olympus files. The issue with the distorted aspect ratio is solved by this.

But how can I solve this for my existing catalog? I created the catalog originally with LR4.0 - the problem occured after upgrading to LR4.1 RC2 (RC1 was still fine). Of course, nobody wants to start editing their Olympus files again. (Let alone the many more file from my Nikon cameras in my catalog.)

And aside from this issue. Is there any progress on the issue of giving us back our full RAW data? Will LR4.2 have a feature that allows resetting the crop to the sensors native aspect ratio or at least revert back to the state where LR ignored the setting in the camera?

Cheers,

Timo
Photo of Allan Olesen

Allan Olesen

  • 64 Posts
  • 6 Reply Likes
Eric, you say, that you cannot reproduce the problem. I have a feeling that may be because you have a different opinion of how it should behave.

Could you please describe the intended behaviour?

I have a camera with a 3:2 sensor. If I set the aspect ratio in the camera to 16:9, I still get a full 3:2 raw file (verifiable in RawTherapee) with metadata saying that the aspect ratio is 16:9.

When I import such a file into a raw converter, I expect one of two behaviours:

1. Ignore the 16:9 metadata and show a 3:2 image.

2. Use the 16:9 metadata to "pre-crop" the photo to 16:9, but still make the full image area availiable in the crop tool.

Instead Lightroom does this:

3. Crop the photo to 16:9. Throw all available image information outside the crop area away with no option for the user to use that information in the crop tool - even though the information is still there in the raw file and occupying space on the disk.

If #3 is really the intended behaviour, I think that a lot of us would like to hear Adobe describe the rationale behind this. It is very much against the tradition behind raw photography.
Photo of Timo S.

Timo S.

  • 67 Posts
  • 2 Reply Likes
@Allen: What Eric meant by not being able to reproduce the issue refers only to the part where the geometry of the preview is not correct. In my example, that's the main window showing the image unproportional but the secondary showing the correct proportions. As I stated, with a new catalog this issue is solved and that's why Eric cannot reproduce it. It is more or less a seperate issue.

The other issue is, of course, whether LR should crop photos according to the aspect ratio set in the camera. As Eric stated earlier, this is at the moment intended by LR 4.1. He acknowledged our criticism on this behaviour and now the question is, whether or when Adobe will provide a solution that meets the needs of the photographers who are affected by this issue.
Photo of Allan Olesen

Allan Olesen

  • 64 Posts
  • 6 Reply Likes
Sorry, but I cannot see any postings from Eric Chan where he says what you are quoting him for. But in general, I have a feeling that I am not able to see all posts in a thread in this forum.
Photo of Allan Olesen

Allan Olesen

  • 64 Posts
  • 6 Reply Likes
Found it now. The "View xx more comments" link is rather camouflaged so it doesn't appear to be a link.
Photo of Jakub Rojcek

Jakub Rojcek

  • 1 Post
  • 0 Reply Likes
Downloaded LR 4.1 a few days ago and not being able to import my RAW (ORF) pictures in their full aspect ratio. So this will not be solved?
Photo of Timo S.

Timo S.

  • 67 Posts
  • 2 Reply Likes
Well, since Eric answered the following eearlier, I still hope it will be solved:
"Understood. In the future, we may be able to implement a mechanism for retrieving the full (uncropped) image data. I did not mean to suggest this was impossible, or that we hadn't considered it. We actually did consider it this time around, but it didn't make the cut for various reasons."

But I also would appreciate an update on the progress on this issue including the questions when and if LR4.2 will solve this issue...
Photo of evan

evan

  • 12 Posts
  • 5 Reply Likes
The more noise we make, the more likely they will address it.
Photo of Timo S.

Timo S.

  • 67 Posts
  • 2 Reply Likes
Absolutly. I guess it would also be good if more people clicked on the +1 link to show that they have this problem (next to "X people have this problem" below the first post; not anything Google related ;)).
Photo of Michael Willems

Michael Willems

  • 3 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
3 years ago and it has not yet been fixed. Very poor decision on the part of Adobe.
Photo of Alastair McAra

Alastair McAra

  • 5 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
I'd like to add my voice as well. I am helping a client who has an Olympus micro four thirds camera who shoots raw and processes in LR4 on a Mac. She is frustrated by the issue of raw files being squashed into the wrong aspect ratio. Basically I just want to get a sense that Adobe is really listening to Olympus users and will fix this in 4.2.

Secondly I'd like to add my complete agreement with those who want the raw file to be repected. It seems so logical to have the raw 4:3 data to be available to the shooter who sets the camera to 3:2 (or 1:1 for that matter) for the shooting view. This gives them the ability to have wriggle room in processing - and quite simply having the software 'forbid' this completely goes against the idea of raw.

I help many people understand and use Lr, and it makes me unahappy when things are not as they should be.

Would love to hear more from Eric Chan on this as he has so much to offer on so many fronts (love your printing guidance Eric).
Photo of Eric Chan

Eric Chan, Camera Raw Engineer

  • 631 Posts
  • 133 Reply Likes
Official Response
Hi folks,

I have a brief update on this. First, I want to say that I appreciate the feedback and understand what you are looking for. It is conceptually quite straightforward.

On the implementation side, things are a bit more complex. At present we do not have a mechanism for specifying a default crop rectangle that is different from the full uncropped raw image area. So, with all the cameras we've supported so far, we've had to make a decision as to whether to show the full uncropped image area (regardless of the in-camera aspect ratio / crop setting), or to honor the user's choice of in-camera aspect ratio / crop (at the expense of recovering the full image area later during editing). Neither option is ideal, obviously, but we had to pick one. In our testing, we found that users preferred the latter option: that is, the image you see in ACR/LR should match the aspect ratio & crop of what you saw on the back of the camera LCD when composing the picture.

Going forward with newly supported camera models, we plan to have a more flexible approach which provides the best of both worlds: the default rendering will honor the in-camera crop, yet users will be able to get back to the full uncropped image area (*). Unfortunately, gracefully handling already-supported camera models is more complex. This is because these images may have existing user-edited crops applied in ACR/LR, and we need to be sure we respect this as well (i.e., we must take care to avoid changing crops that users may have already applied). I am not saying we won't tackle this, but it may take more time to get there.

Eric

(*) Keep in mind that not all camera models support this. Some vendors actually crop the raw image data in the camera (i.e., they actually record fewer pixels when you change the aspect ratio), so it will not be possible to retrieve the "full" image area for these cases.
Photo of Allan Olesen

Allan Olesen

  • 64 Posts
  • 6 Reply Likes
Thanks for the update.

I hope that for existing models, you will at least will give us the option of ignoring the in-camera crop and get the full sensor image, even if that means that we will have to perform a manual crop after import. In other words: return to the old way, Lightroom handled this.

Further, there seems to be a lot of user requests regarding crop functionality. This seems as a good opportunity to revamp the crop functionality and give us:

- A crop function which tries to maintain centre coordinate and area of existing crop rectangle when selecting a new aspect ratio.

- Crop presets.

- Access to crop rectangle through SDK without having to manipulate xmp files outside Lightroom.

- A possibility to adjust and store a number of different crop rectangles in each photo and recall those when exporting, so it gets easier to do exports of the same photos to different aspect ratios.

- A possibility of defining crop rectangles with fixed pixel sizes. (Yes, I know that a lot of people don't understand why someone would want this. But there must be a reason that Rob Cole has found it necessary to write a plugin for exactly that.)
Photo of Jon Gilbert

Jon Gilbert

  • 11 Posts
  • 2 Reply Likes
So 9 months later and you still don't have an option? How about just add a menu option that says, "Reset to original camera resolution," then warn the user that this will remove any existing crop that they have applied?

For crying out loud, it can't possibly be as complicated as you're making it seem like. Come up with a solution and implement it, don't drag your feet because you can't do it "the way you'd ideally like to".
Photo of Ira Weinschel

Ira Weinschel

  • 6 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Thanks for the update, Eric. The more flexible approach you've described sounds ideal. I definitely want LR to honor the in-camera crop, I just don't want it to be permanent. :-)
Photo of Alastair McAra

Alastair McAra

  • 5 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Thanks for the update Eric - greatly appreciated hearing more. Will wait patiently on the outcome.
Photo of Andre Malenfant

Andre Malenfant

  • 65 Posts
  • 4 Reply Likes
In the mean time, the following works perfectly for me with my Oly E-P3. It should work with all Oly's and with some adjustments (may use other tags, see documentation) with any camera that doesn't crop before saving the RAW file.

Install exiftool (http://www.sno.phy.queensu.ca/~phil/e...) and run the following command (mac examples but should work the same on windows):

exiftool -AspectFrame="0 0 4031 3023" -AspectRatio=4:3 YOUR_NON_4_3_IMAGE.ORF

This will create a backup copy of the image and change the values of two exif tags in the file to remove the aspect ration you selected in camera. You can then import in LR or read metadata from file in LR and it should be displayed as a 4:3 image. You may need to drop or re-render the previews in LR.

If you want back the aspect you selected in camera, just crop in LR. Anyways, the camera just crops right in the middle, it's easy to recreate. I created a script that creates 4:3 and square duplicates so I have a cropped and un-cropped version in LR giving me the ability to go back to 4:3 and/or change the crop.

More advanced versions of the command:

This will create a new file name instead of replacing the original file:

exiftool -AspectFrame="0 0 4031 3023" -AspectRatio=4:3 -FileName=NEW_NAME.ORF YOUR_NON_4_3_IMAGE.ORF

This will put the new file with the same name in a different folder:

exiftool -AspectFrame="0 0 4031 3023" -AspectRatio=4:3 -Directory=SOME_FOLDER YOUR_NON_4_3_IMAGE.ORF

This will process ALL ORF files from the current folder and put the 4:3 version in the folder specified:

SAVEIFS=$IFS
IFS=$(echo -en "\n\b")
for f in *.ORF
do
echo "$f"
exiftool -AspectFrame="0 0 4031 3023" -AspectRatio=4:3 -Directory=SOME_FOLDER "$f"
done
IFS=$SAVEIFS

With creativity and the help on exiftool you can build a script that works for your workflow.

Enjoy!
Photo of Brad Barrish

Brad Barrish

  • 3 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Hi Andre. I feel like I'm banging my head against a wall on this and I'm hoping you can lend a hand. I have a directory on my desktop called 20130416-234902 containing all of the ORF files that I would like to change, but cannot figure out how to do that based on the info you provided and I'm getting frustrated. I was able to get the single image command to work, but cannot figure out how to do all files in the directory. Thanks for your help!
Photo of Andre Malenfant

Andre Malenfant

  • 65 Posts
  • 4 Reply Likes
The latest and easiest approach is to use this LR plugin: http://tim.jagenberg.info/projects/de.... I had an issue with it with ORF files, it works fine in LR but the Mac Finder has issues rendering the thumbnail. If you are on a mac and still get issue, come back to me as I have a little fix for DeAspect (that the dev may have added since).
Photo of Brad Barrish

Brad Barrish

  • 3 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
I'm using Aperture, but stumbled upon this thread due to an issue I was having with 16:9 photos I shot on my Olympus E-PL5. I think I have it figured out now with your shell script, which I didn't actually realize was a shell script originally. Thanks for the quick reply and for posting this in the first place. It really saved me.
Photo of Andre Malenfant

Andre Malenfant

  • 65 Posts
  • 4 Reply Likes
Oh, sure, LR plugins won't help you ;) So It worked for you now?
Photo of Brad Barrish

Brad Barrish

  • 3 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
It did indeed.
Photo of Jon Gilbert

Jon Gilbert

  • 11 Posts
  • 2 Reply Likes
This is a terrible solution. I have thousands of images in 1:1 aspect ratio. There is no way in heck that I'm going through and duplicating all of them just to fix Adobe's problem. I'll just not use Lightroom until they fix this problem. It's obviously not a professional product.
Photo of Eric Chan

Eric Chan, Camera Raw Engineer

  • 631 Posts
  • 133 Reply Likes
Out of curiosity, how did you create a develop setting that does a square aspect ratio that you can apply during import? I thought that "crop" was not one of the properties you can choose for develop presets.