# Anybody else confirmed this issue with LR 4 install over existing LR3?



## schlotz (Mar 7, 2012)

see attached link to a thread on fredmiranda.com  

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1092153


----------



## Linwood Ferguson (Mar 7, 2012)

I mostly do not use curves, so a related question -- is there any way to search for photos where I DID use the curves as opposed to the defaults? 

So far all of my shots look fine in LR4, but I had used (heavily) the sliders for highlights, etc., but not changed the underlying tone curve.   I'd be curious to find some where I had (if any), is there an easy way?


----------



## schlotz (Mar 7, 2012)

The unfortunate part would be converting 3 catalogs of over 30,000 photos only to discover the tonal curves were lost resulting in spending a fair amount of an evening restoring to 3.6. Adobe REALLY missed this big time. So far, my $79 has been wasted on a non-usable upgrade.


----------



## Linwood Ferguson (Mar 7, 2012)

schlotz said:


> The unfortunate part would be converting 3 catalogs of over 30,000 photos only to discover the tonal curves were lost resulting in spending a fair amount of an evening restoring to 3.6. Adobe REALLY missed this big time. So far, my $79 has been wasted on a non-usable upgrade.



How does it take a long time to convert, the old catalog is there, the old program is still there, you just run it.  The only thing lost is the previews (well, and any work you did in LR4).

I think they may have missed in shipping it if this is a bug, but the non-destructive nature of the upgrade and ability to run (albiet not simultaneously) both versions on the same computer really reduces the risk. I'm not being an apologist for Adobe, but I do think that people are claiming a lot of damage that really hasn't occurred.  Damage to Adobe's ego (let's hope!), a lesson learned to stop disabling catalog conversion during betas (let's REALLY hope), but unless you deleted manually and didn't back up your old catalog, nothing is gone.

Now finding this out 6 months into using LR4.....


----------



## turnstyle (Mar 7, 2012)

Does this also impact images that used presets like Direct Positive?

ie, will all of my images that used Direct Positive automatically look not as expected, even without moving them to the new process?


----------



## sizzlingbadger (Mar 7, 2012)

Take some images, export as a catalog and test it then you will know for yourself.


----------



## turnstyle (Mar 7, 2012)

sizzlingbadger said:


> Take some images, export as a catalog and test it then you will know for yourself.



I don't have LR4 yet, trying to figure out what issues I might have before I take the plunge.


----------



## Hal P Anderson (Mar 7, 2012)

You can install the trial version. It won't replace your LR3, and you can test all you want. It would be a good idea to import _copies_ of the images you test with, rather than your originals.

Hal


----------



## turnstyle (Mar 7, 2012)

Thanks again -- though if all my curves are going to be reset, I'd probably just as soon wait.

It seems like whether this is a real issue should come out soon enough: either all curves are reset with LR4, or perhaps it's just a false alarm.

I'm still getting up to speed with LR, so for me it just helps to know if I should wait.


----------



## clee01l (Mar 8, 2012)

turnstyle said:


> Thanks again -- though if all my curves are going to be reset, I'd probably just as soon wait.
> 
> It seems like whether this is a real issue should come out soon enough: either all curves are reset with LR4, or perhaps it's just a false alarm.
> 
> I'm still getting up to speed with LR, so for me it just helps to know if I should wait.


I'm not sure I understand the problem or if there is one.  I just converted a catalog of ~15000 images Some have beed extensively edited in LR3 And I'm sure there are a few edited with LR2  So I have these Process 2003 and Process 2010.  On conversion the Process is still 2010 and the tone curve and adjustment sliders are still where I expect them to be.  If I convert any to Process 2012 I get a linear tone curve and the Tone sliders change to reflect the new fields. This should be expected,  after all the 2012 Process has a completely different approach.  If I leave the image with the original history and the process is still 2010. My image looks like it did in LR3.  Nothing changed.  With LR4 I can keep the image as they have been finaled or I can reprocess (and improve upon) what was already a pretty good image.   Now am I missing something in the description of the problem or is there no problem?


----------



## Linwood Ferguson (Mar 8, 2012)

I just did a controlled test and cannot see the same bug.

I did this:

1) Created a new catalog with v 3.6
2) Imported a NEF (no XMP)
3) Set the tone curve to wacky values, no other changes (+100, -100, +100, -100)
4) Exited, started LR 4
5) Imported (Add) that shot
6) Looked at it in Develop, the tone curves were as set, the image looked right (ie wacky), and the process was 2010.
7) Changed (via the drop down not the exclamation) to process 2012, tone curve stayed the same

This was on Windows 7 x 64 bit. 

Am I missing something or is that what is supposed to fail?


----------



## Mark Sirota (Mar 8, 2012)

I haven't tried to reproduce it, but I believe the bug only affects the point curve, not the parametric curve. Try repeating that test but set the point curve to something wacky rather than setting the parametric curve sliders.


----------



## Linwood Ferguson (Mar 8, 2012)

Mark Sirota said:


> I haven't tried to reproduce it, but I believe the bug only affects the point curve, not the parametric curve. Try repeating that test but set the point curve to something wacky rather than setting the parametric curve sliders.



OK, that did it, but it is not as straightforward as it loosing the settings, it is munging them.  I started with the point curve on the left, when I opened LR4 it showed the one in the middle, but the image was still horrible -- it had not applied the relatively flat contrast curve.  When I opened the panel I got the sliders positioned as shown (though I did not use the sliders to produce it).

The good news personally is I don't think I ever used the point curve here, I would have been in Photoshop if I were doing that.  I might have rarely used the sliders but at least at first glance they are preserved.  But yes, it does look like adobe has quite a bug here in the catalog conversion.

*EDIT: Ignore the part about the parametric curve being different, I had not realized that doing the point curve was in addition to the parametric curve, I thought one overrode the other.  The right panel is thus the holdover of the first test I did, and not an indication that the conversion from point curve affected parametric.  Sorry.   But the corruption of the point curve is certainly there, as is (below) the ability to use metadata reads to get it back.
*


----------



## Linwood Ferguson (Mar 8, 2012)

I did discover one more thing.  If before leaving LR3.6 I did a "write metadata" and in LR4 after it loads (incorrectly) I do a "read metadata" the curve comes back from LR3.6.  So the issue is in the upgrade itself, apparently LR4 is able to deal with the point curve conversion (or non-conversion) OK, just not through the upgrade process.   In other words at the middle panel able when I did a Read Metadata in LR4, it immediately changed back to the left panel.

Not necessarily the right answer for a workaround, I'm not sure I would want to trust doing a WRITE and READ on every photo (especially since the "write" is a bit asynchronous and I've never been quite completely sure when it was "done" despite the progress bar).


----------



## turnstyle (Mar 8, 2012)

I don't really edit the Point Curve in LR either -- but I was curious if any of the Develop Presets do -- I just checked a bunch, and all the ones I looked at either leave the Point Curve at the default Medium Contrast, or set it to Linear (which I'm going to assume is well-handled by the conversion).

Also, from what I understand, if LR4 munges your Point Curve, I believe you can use the History Panel to step back.


----------



## schlotz (Mar 8, 2012)

I wasn't too clear regarding the amount of time I spent restoring to 3.6.  Made a bad decision early in the process (since all the other upgrades had worked flawlessly) to do a complete program backup via Norton, run the upgrade, delete the old 3.6 THEN start to play in LR4 - oops! Well, never again.  So I had to do a restore the hard way - dumb... then spent the rest of the evening experimenting.  Not real comfortable with the idea of sidecars but this maybe the solution via the update file metadata process.  Think I'm going to wait for a true solution via Adobe then transition to LR4, and this time the smart way!


----------



## b_gossweiler (Mar 8, 2012)

I haven't really tested this issue myself, nor have I followed the issue closely, but you might want to have a read of this post over at photoshop.com. The poster seems to have performed some serious testing.

Beat


----------



## Braders (Mar 9, 2012)

Unbelievable.

Iv'e just read this and associated forums highlighting this issue. Got home and BANG, my 25,000 image catalogue has lost all tone curve adjstments.

Politely....WTF!

Note also - although tone adjstments are logged iin the history, clickiing them makes the image change appropriately, however nothing happen to the line on the tone curve adjstment panel.

Oh boy...


----------



## chris02 (Mar 9, 2012)

Lots of talk about this here as well 
http://feedback.photoshop.com/photoshop_family/topics/lr4_deleted_all_my_tone_curve_adjustments
Appears that the team are working on a solution.


----------



## chris02 (Mar 9, 2012)

Yet another issue in that edit in does not work, loads of chatter on the net that nik products no longer work. Only solution at this time appears to be to download pse 10 and for some reason everything works again.


----------



## Jim Wilde (Mar 9, 2012)

chris02 said:


> Yet another issue in that edit in does not work...



Got any specifics on that, Chris? Do you just mean with the Nik products, or more generally? I have no problem using "Edit in Photoshop CS5", or indeed with the CS3 version.


----------



## chris02 (Mar 9, 2012)

I have loaded LR4 and none of the 'edit in' links work. It appears that its an Adobe issue that is causing problems on Windows and OSX and is not just restricted to NIK products.

http://feedback.photoshop.com/photoshop_family/topics/nik_plugins_are_not_working_in_lightroom_4

http://feedback.photoshop.com/photoshop_family/topics/lr4_external_editor_failure


----------



## b_gossweiler (Mar 9, 2012)

As far as I understand the issue occurs on both Windows and Mac, and also for non-Nik plug-ins. Having other Photoshop applications installed seems to make the edit-in work. It works fine for me with Viveza 2, but I also have PSE9 installed.

Beat


----------



## Jim Wilde (Mar 9, 2012)

Thanks for the links, sure seems that there's a problem of some sorts there, though pinning it down may be a bit more difficult....if it was broken for everyone it would be easier, but the fact that it isn't will likely make problem determination somewhat more difficult. Same with the main problem in this thread.....why have some folks had zero problems with the upgrade, but plenty of others have had major issues? 

I've been wondering if uninstalling the beta prior to installing LR4 final had any influence. I did do the uninstall, and everything (including performance) has worked fine. Did you use the beta at all, and if so did you uninstall before installing the LR4 final?


----------



## chris02 (Mar 9, 2012)

Hi Jim, never used the beta went straight from 3.6 to 4. May try downloading pse 10 as a trial later to see if it helps.


----------



## schlotz (Mar 7, 2012)

see attached link to a thread on fredmiranda.com  

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1092153


----------



## sizzlingbadger (Mar 9, 2012)

My NIK plugins all work fine. Make sure you download and install the new plugins that have been released to support LR4.


----------



## Victoria Bampton (Mar 9, 2012)

They've found the bug and are working on a fix. There's a very good chance they'll also publish a fix, for those affected, as they have with other catalog-affecting bugs in the past. So yes it's a pain, but don't panic.


----------



## Jim Wilde (Mar 9, 2012)

Which bug, Victoria? The catalog upgrade (no photos displayed in All Photographs), or the "Edit in" not working? Or are they connected?


----------



## Victoria Bampton (Mar 9, 2012)

TNG said:


> Which bug, Victoria? The catalog upgrade (no photos displayed in All Photographs), or the "Edit in" not working? Or are they connected?



The point curve being lost in certain situations. 

Not sure about the others, I'm trying to catch up.


----------



## chris02 (Mar 9, 2012)

sizzlingbadger said:


> My NIK plugins all work fine. Make sure you download and install the new plugins that have been released to support LR4.



I tried that, still dose not work. Thinking PSE download or wait for a fix??????


----------



## b_gossweiler (Mar 9, 2012)

As far as I can understand right now, there are 3 (so far unrelated) bugs bothering many users, and on all of them Adobe is working on a fix:

ToneCurve settings not transfered to LR4 catalogs properly upon catalog conversion
(Nik) plug-ins (more specific external editors) not working properly. Again, having CS or PSE installed (which I guess most of us have) seems to inhibit this bug
Folder contents not shown on catalogs with a large number of images in a folder

Beat


----------



## MarkNicholas (Mar 10, 2012)

This is a good example of not jumping in straight away every time there is an upgrade. I always leave it for while to let the dust settle down. I need an new computer anyway so will probably join the fray at LR4.1 or 4.2.


----------



## chris02 (Mar 10, 2012)

chris02 said:


> I tried that, still dose not work. Thinking PSE download or wait for a fix??????



Found 2 possible short term cures for this issue

http://kb2.adobe.com/cps/401/kb401629.html#products

and the second from justme06 on the following link
http://forums.adobe.com/message/4257943#4257943

I give them a try later


----------



## chris02 (Mar 10, 2012)

Hi all,

Found this on the Adobe forum and works on my Windows 7 64bit machine. All the Nik stuff now works.

http://forums.adobe.com/message/4257943#4257943

Create "Fake" Registry Key


Using the Navagator on the Left hand side of the screen: Navigate to the following registry key: HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\App Paths\
Right-click the App Paths folder and choose New > Key.
Type Photoshop.exe as the name of the new key, then press Enter.
Right-click the Photoshop.exe folder and choose New > String Value.
Type Path as the name of the new value, then press Enter.
In the right pane of the registry, right-click the (Default) value and choose Modify.
In the Value Data field, enter C:\Program Files\Adobe\Adobe Photoshop CS5\Photoshop.exe
Click OK.
In the right pane of the registry, right-click the Path value and choose Modify.
In the Value Data field, enter C:\Program Files\Adobe\Adobe Photoshop CS5\
Click OK.
Exit the registry.


----------



## wblink (Mar 10, 2012)

MarkNicholas said:


> This is a good example of not jumping in straight away every time there is an upgrade. I always leave it for while to let the dust settle down. I need an new computer anyway so will probably join the fray at LR4.1 or 4.2.



Thanks buddy, hope you like my work anyway ....


----------



## Braders (Mar 11, 2012)

chris02 said:


> Hi all,
> 
> Found this on the Adobe forum and works on my Windows 7 64bit machine. All the Nik stuff now works.
> 
> ...


Thanks for the info, great work....but

I have been with this program since Beta Beta and still, nothins changed. Every release is fraught with bugs and then this...really.

@Mark I thought this is what alpha and beta testing is for!

I dont have time to be @%#^ing with registries and tricking my computer into tricking some software to do the job we pay good money for.


----------



## b_gossweiler (Mar 11, 2012)

I guess the reason why this problem slipped through all the testings is the fact that 99.5% of the testers do have PSE or CS5 installed, which makes the external editors function normally.

Beat


----------



## homefreesoon (Mar 11, 2012)

I have PSE9 and tried to use the NIK plug ins for the first time and nothing works. No error messages just nothing happens. Question, can you use NIK plug ins on JPEG's I usually shoot Raw but have some older jpegs.  I spent hours organizing my photos into my pictures and am ready to start uploading into lightroom 4. Did a small sample of three photos and tried using NIK plug ins but they don't work. Any suggestions?


----------



## b_gossweiler (Mar 11, 2012)

I can only speak for Viveza 2, which works fine for JPEGs. Have you tried re-installing PSE9?

Beat


----------



## keithz829 (Mar 12, 2012)

I just looked into this on my system and found that importing my LR3 catalog into LR4 had no impact on the history for the original RAW files edited in LR3.  I also checked and the process shows as 2010 for each file.


----------



## Victoria Bampton (Mar 12, 2012)

keithz829 said:


> I just looked into this on my system and found that importing my LR3 catalog into LR4 had no impact on the history for the original RAW files edited in LR3.  I also checked and the process shows as 2010 for each file.


That's quite normal.  PV2010 retains the existing settings.  You can choose to upgrade photos to PV2012 when you want to reprocess them with the new sliders, or you can leave them with their current LR3 appearance.


----------



## Victoria Bampton (Mar 12, 2012)

homefreesoon said:


> I have PSE9 and tried to use the NIK plug ins for the first time and nothing works. No error messages just nothing happens. Question, can you use NIK plug ins on JPEG's I usually shoot Raw but have some older jpegs.  I spent hours organizing my photos into my pictures and am ready to start uploading into lightroom 4. Did a small sample of three photos and tried using NIK plug ins but they don't work. Any suggestions?



Hi homefreezon, welcome to the forum!  One other thought - have you got the latest Nik updates?


----------



## turnstyle (Mar 12, 2012)

Victoria Bampton said:


> That's quite normal.  PV2010 retains the existing settings.  You can choose to upgrade photos to PV2012 when you want to reprocess them with the new sliders, or you can leave them with their current LR3 appearance.



Something I noticed that does seem odd.

If you create a Smart Collection with the rule [Has Adjustments][false] -- and then select an image within the collection that has PV 2010.

If you then change it to PV 2003, it disappears form the smart collection -- presumably that counts as an 'adjustment'

If you undo and change it to PV 2012, it remains within the smart collection -- presumably this time it doesn't count as an adjustment.

I'm hoping to make sense of this b/c it impacts how I might transition from 2010 to 2012.


----------



## Victoria Bampton (Mar 13, 2012)

Mmmmm, I've heard someone else report that too.  I think it's because PV2012 with no adjustments is the default setting, so technically it has no adjustments, whereas PV2003 is not default and is therefore an adjustment.


----------



## Braders (Mar 13, 2012)

So, a bit of news it seems.

It appears the tone curve isn't lost but misplaced. In otherwords, some time in the future there will be dot release that will contain a script to restore the tone curve.

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=63597.0


----------



## turnstyle (Mar 13, 2012)

Victoria Bampton said:


> Mmmmm, I've heard someone else report that too.  I think it's because PV2012 with no adjustments is the default setting, so technically it has no adjustments, whereas PV2003 is not default and is therefore an adjustment.



I think that someone else was me. :crazy:

Here's my concern: if I convert a PV2010 file to PV2012 now, and it it's seen as an adjustment -- what happens with a later version of Lightroom with the next PV? Will that file then not be in the "no adjustments" collection? See what I mean?


----------



## Jim Wilde (Mar 13, 2012)

To be honest, I'm really struggling to understand your concern. I get that you might want to update all previously un-edited images (which are at PV2010) to PV2012....which then brings them into line with every new image that you shoot and import into LR4, i.e. PV2012 and no adjustments. Assuming the next version of LR introduces yet another new PV, you can presumably go through the same process, i.e. which of my PV2012 images have I not changed, which are therefore OK to update to the next PV. Some pretty big assumptions there.

The fact that changing a PV2010 image to PV2003, and have it recorded as an adjustment, just seems a bit irrelevant to me. BTW, after changing an un-edited PV2010 image to PV2003 (whereupon it drops out of your "Adjustments is False" smart collection) have you noticed that if you then change it again, this time to PV2012, it gets added back into the smart collection?


----------



## turnstyle (Mar 13, 2012)

TNG said:


> To be honest, I'm really struggling to understand your concern. I get that you might want to update all previously un-edited images (which are at PV2010) to PV2012....which then brings them into line with every new image that you shoot and import into LR4, i.e. PV2012 and no adjustments. Assuming the next version of LR introduces yet another new PV, you can presumably go through the same process, i.e. which of my PV2012 images have I not changed, which are therefore OK to update to the next PV.



The concern is that since PV2010>PV2003 counts as an adjustment within LR4, and PV2010>PV2012 does not count as an adjustment within LR4 -- there seems to be no way of knowing whether files converted from PV2010 to PV2012 within LR4 will be seen as having an adjustment when, say, LR5 comes out.


----------



## Jim Wilde (Mar 13, 2012)

The point is:

a) Any un-edited PV2010 files which you update to PV2012 will be the same as any NEW files which you import from now on.
b) None of us know what changes will happen with LR5 and beyond, so I don't see the point in worrying about it.


----------



## turnstyle (Mar 14, 2012)

TNG said:


> The point is:
> 
> a) Any un-edited PV2010 files which you update to PV2012 will be the same as any NEW files which you import from now on.
> b) None of us know what changes will happen with LR5 and beyond, so I don't see the point in worrying about it.



I was assuming I should use a "no adjustments" smart collection to batch convert PV2010 to PV2012 -- but if doing so counts as an adjustment when the next PV comes out, then I won't be able to perform a similar batch conversion.


----------



## schlotz (Mar 7, 2012)

see attached link to a thread on fredmiranda.com  

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1092153


----------



## Mark Sirota (Mar 14, 2012)

I would suggest backing up and asking yourself why (or whether) you really want to do a batch conversion from PV2010 to PV2012. I personally wouldn't recommend it, even though I feel PV2012 is better in the vast majority of cases.


----------



## turnstyle (Mar 14, 2012)

Mark Sirota said:


> I would suggest backing up and asking yourself why (or whether) you really want to do a batch conversion from PV2010 to PV2012. I personally wouldn't recommend it, even though I feel PV2012 is better in the vast majority of cases.



If it's better in the vast majority of cases, isn't that reason to do it?


----------



## Mark Sirota (Mar 14, 2012)

It's better in the vast majority of cases _if you take the time to re-edit from scratch_. In those cases I'm working image-by-image anyway, so no reason to do a bulk update. As I revisit old files for whatever reason, I'll generally make a VC and start again with PV2012 to see if I can make it better than I was able to with PV2010.


----------



## chris02 (Mar 15, 2012)

One tip if you use the reg hack to get 'edit in' to work, then make sure you turn off the any programs that automatically clean up your registry, for example Tune Up as they will delete the entry as it does not find the relevant software.


----------



## Victoria Bampton (Mar 15, 2012)

turnstyle said:


> I think that someone else was me. :crazy:



Ooooooops, could be!  Things are blurring somewhat at the moment!!



turnstyle said:


> I was assuming I should use a "no adjustments" smart collection to batch convert PV2010 to PV2012 -- but if doing so counts as an adjustment when the next PV comes out, then I won't be able to perform a similar batch conversion.



When the next PV comes out, just add them to a collection before you upgrade if you're concerned.


----------



## turnstyle (Mar 15, 2012)

Victoria Bampton said:


> When the next PV comes out, just add them to a collection before you upgrade if you're concerned.



Ha, brilliant!

Given that I would almost certain forget by then, I'd probably create the collection at the time I convert, leaving:

1) Create Smart Collection with: [Has Adustments][False] and [Type][Video][False]

2) Add those files to a Collection "Batch Converted PV 2010 > 2012"

3) Convert them to PV 2012

fwiw, the reason I want to convert is that: 1) I trust that PV 2012  is an improvement over 2010, and 2) I tend to go back through older files, and it would be helpful to not have to convert them one-by-one.


----------



## bobrobert (Mar 16, 2012)

I have a LR3 catalogue of 5000 images and still have LR3 installed - which will remain in place - and I don't see the need to upgrade it to LR4. If need be I will load it into LR3. Start over anew - as stated above - with unedited images in LR4 and catalogue them. I see people on other forums bitching about this "problem" and honestly I don't see it as a problem. Even when using PS I would never import an edited image that didn't "look good" and try to improve it . Just re edit it from scratch.


----------



## bwlr (Mar 18, 2012)

I am hoping someone can clarify something for me on the point curve thing...

My understanding is that doing things like changing the tone curve from "Medium Contrast" to "High Contrast" will carry over from LR3 to LR4, but if I do something custom it will not carry over.  Is that correct?  Or do any and all changes in the Tone Curve panel get lost?

Thanks...


----------



## b_gossweiler (Mar 18, 2012)

bwir,

My tests show that the following adjustments DO NOT get carried over into develop of LR4 upon conversion:

Point Curve Type set to anything other than Linear on JPEGs
Point Curve Type set to anything other than Medium Contrast for Raws
Changes done to the point curve which lead to the Point Curve Type set to "Custom"

Parametric changes to the point curve (sliders Highlights, Lights, Darks and Shadows) do get carried over in conversion.

Beat


----------



## bwlr (Mar 19, 2012)

Thanks!


----------



## someothername (Mar 22, 2012)

clee01l said:


> I'm not sure I understand the problem or if there is one.  I just converted a catalog of ~15000 images Some have beed extensively edited in LR3 And I'm sure there are a few edited with LR2  So I have these Process 2003 and Process 2010.  On conversion the Process is still 2010 and the tone curve and adjustment sliders are still where I expect them to be.  If I convert any to Process 2012 I get a linear tone curve and the Tone sliders change to reflect the new fields. This should be expected,  after all the 2012 Process has a completely different approach.  If I leave the image with the original history and the process is still 2010. My image looks like it did in LR3.  Nothing changed.  With LR4 I can keep the image as they have been finaled or I can reprocess (and improve upon) what was already a pretty good image.   Now am I missing something in the description of the problem or is there no problem?



So I have several dozen images where I did quite a bit of adjustments with the tone curve, i.e. creating points on the line and shifting things up or down and left and right.  If I understand what you are saying, and what I got from the DPReview review, they will be just fine as long as I don't click on the ! and update to process 2012.  In fact, I could continue to work on them using process 2010.  Is that correct?

If that's the case, then I'm fine -- I just have to remember to create a new virtual image if I want to try out 2012 on a 2010 image.  If I am correct in my assumption that I can work on two different virtual images from the same master, one in 2010 and one in 2012.  Is this true?

Certainly a lot of other good things to make it worth while, like dealing with my .mts files.

Thanks,
Brandon


----------



## Mark Sirota (Mar 22, 2012)

someothername said:


> SIf I understand what you are saying, and what I got from the DPReview review, they will be just fine as long as I don't click on the ! and update to process 2012.  In fact, I could continue to work on them using process 2010.  Is that correct?
> 
> If that's the case, then I'm fine -- I just have to remember to create a new virtual image if I want to try out 2012 on a 2010 image.  If I am correct in my assumption that I can work on two different virtual images from the same master, one in 2010 and one in 2012.  Is this true?



Yes, you've got it right. Alternately, if you can wait, it is likely that LR4.1 will fix the point-curve-in-upgraded-catalogs problem completely whenever it arrives. So there's little need to go out of your way to do anything special here -- the Virtual Copy approach works for now if you need to work on old files that had a point curve in PV2010.


----------



## someothername (Mar 28, 2012)

Mark Sirota said:


> Yes, you've got it right. Alternately, if you can wait, it is likely that LR4.1 will fix the point-curve-in-upgraded-catalogs problem completely whenever it arrives. So there's little need to go out of your way to do anything special here -- the Virtual Copy approach works for now if you need to work on old files that had a point curve in PV2010.



It appears the part about being able to continue to work with 2010 process is not correct.  I had an image that I'd greatly modified a virtual copy of, it looked ok as a thumbnail, I clicked on it and made another virtual copy.  That copy lost all the tone curve adjustments I'd made, as expected.  Well, no, I expected the new virtual copy to come up with the !, but still have the 2010 process applied.  It did not.  And when I opened the initial virtual copy in develop, all the tone curve adjustments went away, even though they had been showing on the thumbnail, and they show in the loupe version of of that virtual copy.

I had the impression from somewhere that there would be a drop down or context menu associated with the ! button that would allow you to choose which process to apply, 2010 or 2012.  I don't see that.  I do see that once you click the !, you get a new develop panel.  In other words.  once you click !, the next dialog box commits the change(s) and you can't go back.  If you want to retain the 2010 image, you can not touch it with the developer ever again, right?  Is there a way to lock an image to prevent further development?

Thanks,


----------



## Victoria Bampton (Mar 30, 2012)

You can continue to work with PV2010 - just don't click the !.  If you want to go back, click in the history panel to get to an earlier step.  If you're affected by the tone curve bug, the 4.1RC released yesterday should fixed the history.


----------



## someothername (Apr 1, 2012)

Victoria Bampton said:


> You can continue to work with PV2010 - just don't click the !.  If you want to go back, click in the history panel to get to an earlier step.  If you're affected by the tone curve bug, the 4.1RC released yesterday should fixed the history.



I'm thinking it probably best to wait until clicking on check for updates shows me something available.  Perhaps it will be 4.1.1 and have the facebook fix as well.


----------



## clee01l (Apr 1, 2012)

turnstyle said:


> I was assuming I should use a "no adjustments" smart collection to batch convert PV2010 to PV2012 -- but if doing so counts as an adjustment when the next PV comes out, then I won't be able to perform a similar batch conversion.


I would recommend against any batch conversion of PV2010 images. Since PV2012 is so different in its approach you basically are needing to manually reprocess each image since the Tone adjustment parameters are very different. If you leave PV2010 images in PV2010, your images still look as good as they did in LR3.x  While PV2012 can improve most PV2010 images, it is not necessary if you were a satisfied customer using LR3.x.


----------

