Lightroom: Print module 'feature'

  • 1
  • Problem
  • Updated 5 years ago
  • (Edited)
When printing to JPG out of the print module, without using 'Zoom to fit' cell size reports an incorrect size value if exceeding the longest size of your image. For example, it will constrain the image up until the point where the longest size is exceeded. It will not report this fact, but instead give you false export sizes.

Would it not be an idea to auto complete the smallest size, fixing the aspect ration when scaling images in cell size?

For example, I have an A2 image size which I wanted to fit an A3 image within. I set up my paper to A3, my image size to 420x297mm, 1 cell and no borders. My exported image in photoshop was in fact 280mm wide. However, LR still says it exported a 297mm smallest edge image.

To get round this I am now using zoom to fit which will zoom my images to the desired size, but this is not a required step and is therefore confusing. We either want to constrain our images or not.

I would suggest that when you enter a non standard aspect ratio in your image cell size, 'Zoom to fit' clicks on automatically, therefore telling you you are not keeping the image to the correct aspect ratio. When 'Zoom to fit' is not checked, the smallest cell size should constrain automatically to the largest, until you reach the largest size of the area required.

After screwing up a few big prints earlier last week I feel this isn't very clear

Thoughts?
Thanks
Photo of stuartpeckphoto

stuartpeckphoto

  • 226 Posts
  • 2 Reply Likes

Posted 5 years ago

  • 1
Photo of stuartpeckphoto

stuartpeckphoto

  • 226 Posts
  • 2 Reply Likes
Anyone?

I now know how to get around the poor print GUI in LR, something to explicitly trap these things in LR would be nice
Photo of Rikk Flohr

Rikk Flohr, Champion

  • 1373 Posts
  • 334 Reply Likes
I print from LR daily. But then, I don't size my files for output in programs outside of Lightroom. I would not be in favor of this. Earlier, I decided not to comment but since you are creating multiple posts trying to get feedback, I decided to give mine.

Personally, I consider Lightroom's print module well executed but that is probably not what you wanted to hear.

People will vote with the plus one button if they feel strongly.
Photo of stuartpeckphoto

stuartpeckphoto

  • 226 Posts
  • 2 Reply Likes
Thanks for commenting Rikk.

Well I'm just getting at the fact that if (for whatever reason) you want to resize your images (I don't usually ) so to therefore not fit the usual aspect ration, it doesn't reflect this in the measurement in LR. Computer programs should give you the information that it exports. My example of a 297mm width image printing to a 280mm didn't tell me it would only print to 280mm.

Do you not think that it should give you an either/or scenario. If I choose to go outside of my normal aspect ration, it should grey out normal aspect ratio measurements. By using the measurement cell, it should constrain the image measurements. And the keep square? That surely should be 'constrain proportions' and not keep square, unless of course you;'re working with 6x6

I spoke to adobe about this and they saw it happening, they saw what sizes I was exporting, they dropped it into photoshop and acknowledged it wasn't exporting the right size

The sizing files part in programs outside of LR was just to diagnose the size differences, it's not part of my normal workflow

Thanks
Photo of stuartpeckphoto

stuartpeckphoto

  • 226 Posts
  • 2 Reply Likes
Basically speaking it doesn't report what it exports and in software terms when dealing with a massive userbase of all experience levels, that is a no no. There are two things in the print dialog that SHOULD be linked but they are not. If you were stopped on the highway for doing 100mph but you were only doing 50, you;d wanna know why your speedo was giving you incorrect readings. right?