Ask Tim Grey

Today’s Question: I have several folders in Lightroom Classic that show zero photos. Is it safe to simply right-click these folders and choose “Remove” from the popup menu?

Tim’s Quick Answer: I recommend first confirming that the folder is truly empty, but if it is then it is indeed safe to remove the folder using the Remove command in Lightroom Classic.

More Detail: While it is safe to remove a folder that Lightroom Classic shows doesn’t contain any photos, I recommend first checking if there are any files (including photos) in that folder on the hard drive that aren’t reflected in the Lightroom Classic catalog.

If you use the Remove command on a folder that is truly empty, the folder will be removed from Lightroom Classic and also removed from the hard drive. If the folder is not empty the Remove command will remove the folder from Lightroom Classic but will leave the folder and its contents on the hard drive.

To check the contents of the folder first right-click on the folder in the Folders list on the left panel in the Library module in Lightroom Classic. From the popup menu choose “Show in Finder” (Macintosh) or “Show in Explorer” (Windows). This will bring up a window in the operating system with the applicable folder highlighted. Double-click that folder and review the contents.

If there are files in the folder, you have several options. You can leave the folder where it is and remove it from Lightroom Classic as noted above. You could also move the folder to a more appropriate location on your hard drive, such as to keep it separate from your photo storage. You could also delete the contents of the folder, and then remove it from Lightroom Classic.

If the folder contains photos that you want to include in your Lightroom Classic catalog, you could use the Synchronize Folder command to import those photos. Back in Lightroom Classic right-click on the folder and choose “Synchronize Folder”. Wait for the Synchronize Folder dialog to update reflecting the number of photos that are not in the catalog, which will be shown to the right of the “Import new photos” checkbox. Also turn on the “Show import dialog before importing” checkbox is turned on. Then make sure that checkbox is turned on, and that the “Remove missing photos from catalog” and “Check for metadata updates” checkboxes are both turned off. Then click the Synchronize button.

In the Import dialog configure the settings as desired to import the photos. In most cases I recommend not applying any changes at this stage, meaning you should not apply a Develop or metadata preset, for example. Then click the Import to add the applicable images to the Lightroom Classic catalog.

Today’s Question: Is the new Assisted Culling feature in Lightroom Classic suitable for bird and wildlife photography? Your comments have referred to using it for people photography, but wouldn’t it then work well for animals?

Tim’s Quick Answer: The Assisted Culling feature in Lightroom Classic is not currently a good option if you want to use the eye detection features for birds or wildlife, but it is still usable when it comes to evaluating whether the subject is in focus.

More Detail: The Assisted Culling feature in Lightroom Classic provides a tool for evaluating images to help you more quickly identify favorite versus outtake photos. The options for evaluating whether the eye is in focus and that the eyes are open, however, are specifically intended for photos of people in the current iteration.

At the moment, Assisted Culling is mostly focused on evaluating photos of people, not birds or animals. But that mostly relates to the two options for evaluating the eyes. The Subject Focus feature will work for photos that do not contain a person but that contain a key subject that stands out clearly or a wider scene where there is distinct sharpness and detail.

Over time, I am confident that Adobe will update the Assisted Culling feature so it is more useful across a broad range of photographic subjects. It has already proven quite helpful when it comes to evaluating a large number of portraits, for example, so you can more quickly narrow the photos to those you are most likely to consider favorites. I’m sure the image analysis will continue to improve, and to expand to be useful to a wider range of photographers.

Today’s Question: In what situations would you convert from 16-bit to 8-bit?

Tim’s Quick Answer: Only when necessary. I recommend keeping your primary image file in 16-bit per channel mode, and only converting to 8-bit per channel when creating an image for sharing, such as when saving a JPEG derivative image to share online.

More Detail: When you process a raw capture, such as with Camera Raw in Photoshop, I recommend converting to a 16-bit per channel image rather than 8-bit per channel to maximize potential detail and fidelity, and to minimize the risk of any posterization (the loss of smooth gradations of tone and color). I only recommend converting to 8-bit per channel mode when it is necessary, such as when saving a derivative image in a format such as JPEG that doesn’t support (or require) a higher bit depth.

If you’re completely finished applying adjustments to an image that had been saved in the 16-bit per channel mode, and you want to reduce the bit depth to reduce overall file size, the risks are not too great as long as you only do so for a color (not black and white) image and you make sure to flatten the image first (assuming the use of layers in Photoshop).

For black and white images, I would never convert the master image file to 8-bit per channel because doing so carries considerable risk of posterization in the image, leading to potential banding and other problematic visual artifacts.

But overall, I recommend keeping the master image in the 16-bit per channel mode, and only using 8-bit per channel mode for derivative images created for sharing. Even in those cases, it isn’t generally necessary to use the explicit step of converting to 8-bit per channel mode, such as by using the Image > Mode > 8 Bits/Channel command in Photoshop. For example in Photoshop you can simply use the “Save a Copy” command to save as a JPEG in 8-bit per channel mode because 16-bit per channel is not supported in that case.

Today’s Question: I have the dreaded “corrupted catalog” message [in Lightroom Classic] and have looked online at how to fix this. I am reluctant to try to fix this issue with so little knowledge of how the catalogs work. I fear causing more issues.

Tim’s Quick Answer: You can generally recover a corrupted catalog using tools built into Lightroom Classic. Failing that, you can recover from a catalog backup.

More Detail: There are two messages you may see if the Lightroom Classic catalog is corrupted. If you are presented with the dialog that includes the “Repair Catalog” button, click that button to see if Lightroom Classic is able to resolve the issue for you.

If you don’t see that button, you can launch Lightroom Classic while holding the Alt key on Windows or the Option key on Macintosh, which will bring up the Select Catalog dialog. Choose the applicable catalog from the list within the dialog and turn on the “Test integrity of this catalog” checkbox at the bottom-right of the list. Then click the Open dialog.

If neither of the above provide a solution, your best option is to recover from a recent catalog backup. By default those backups are stored in a “Backups” folder in the same folder as the catalog files. The backup will be a ZIP file that you can extract the catalog files from. Then open the catalog by double-clicking the file with the .lrcat filename extension.

Another option that may work is to create a new catalog and then use the “Import from Another Catalog” command to import the corrupted catalog into the new catalog.

Worst case, you could simply create a new catalog and import all existing photos using the Add option at the top-center of the Import dialog, making sure that you don’t apply any changes such as a metadata preset or Develop preset during that import. As long as you had previously enabled the option to automatically save metadata to the source files, this would preserve key metadata. However, in this case you would lose Lightroom-specific metadata such as collections, virtual copies, and history.

Today’s Question: Why is 8-bit a bigger problem for black and white images compared to color?

Tim’s Quick Answer: Put simply, for a black and white image there are very few shades of gray available in 8-bit per channel mode compared to a color image. This leads to a very high risk of posterization (a loss of smooth gradations of tone) especially with relatively strong adjustments.

More Detail: The bit depth for an image refers to the total number of tonal or color values available. A higher bit depth translates to more tonal or color values available, which helps ensure smoother gradations of tone and color in the image, even with relatively strong adjustments.

When working in 16-bit per channel mode there are a tremendous number of tonal or color values available. For a black and white image, that provides a total of 65,536 shades of gray from black all the way to white. For a color image the number is over 261 trillion color and tonal values.

For a black and white image there is only one channel rather than the three channels for an RGB image, which greatly impacts the number of tonal values available. In 8-bit per channel mode a color image can consist of up to almost 16.8 million color and tonal values. That’s nowhere near the huge number for a 16-bit per channel color image, but it is enough to provide smooth gradations unless extreme adjustments are applied.

For black and white images in 8-bit per channel mode there are only 256 shades of gray available. This creates a very real challenge for avoiding posterization even with relatively moderate adjustments. A very common example is a loss of smooth gradation in the sky, where banding can result even with minor adjustments. This takes on the appearance of something like a black and white rainbow, with bands of different shades of gray rather than smooth gradations across the sky.

So, while I always recommend working with images in the 16-bit per channel mode to maximize image quality especially in the context of avoiding posterization, this is especially important for black and white images because they are so much more limited in terms of the number of tonal values available.

Today’s Question: Do we need to be careful to only switch to 8-bit as a last step in editing [in Photoshop]?

Tim’s Quick Answer: In general, I recommend only converting to 8-bit per channel (rather than 16-bit) with a copy of the original image and after flattening that image.

More Detail: I strongly recommend leveraging 16-bit per channel processing for your images in Photoshop, rather than 8-bit per channel. This ensures the maximum available tonal and color values for the image. If adjustments are applied to an 8-bit per channel image there is a risk of posterization, or the loss of smooth gradations of tone and color. This is a particular concern for black and white images.

So, when processing a raw capture and opening it in Photoshop, I recommend keeping it in the 16-bit per channel mode. This is handled via the Workflow Settings in Camera Raw or the External Editing Preferences in Lightroom Classic. Save the image with all layers intact as a 16-bit per channel image as a TIFF or PSD file.

When you want to create an 8-bit per channel image, either export a copy with the desired settings, or create a duplicate within Photoshop. In the latter case you can choose Image > Duplicate Image from the menu, turning on the “Duplicate Merged Layers Only” checkbox so the duplicate will be flattened. This is very important to ensure the conversion to 8-bit per channel mode occurs after adjustments have been applied to the pixel data.

You can then convert the derivative image to 8-bit per channel mode by choosing Image > Mode > 8 Bits/Channel from the menu. You can then perform any other tasks, such as to resize to different pixel dimensions, and then saved the resulting derivative image in the desired file format.

Today’s Question: I have a photo where the sky is washed out (but not blown out) due to high overcast clouds and relatively bright lighting. I think this was somewhat exacerbated by the foreground being boats on the ocean, with a lot of light reflecting off the water. What would you recommend for adding some color or detail to the sky using Lightroom Classic?

Tim’s Quick Answer: In this type of situation, I recommend using a mask in Lightroom Classic, using the Color control to add a tint to the sky, and possibly reducing the value for Exposure and refining other adjustments as needed.

More Detail: There are a variety of things you could do to deal with a washed-out sky, including completely replacing the sky using another photo by creating a composite image in Photoshop. However, as long as the sky isn’t completely blown out, you can generally add some color and possibly darken or add contrast as needed. This would involve adding a mask so the adjustment only affects the sky.

In many cases you could obviously use the Select Sky mask option so the adjustment would only affect the sky. However, in many cases, especially with a relatively straight horizon, using the Linear Gradient option works very well. This enables you, for example, to have the adjustment taper off toward the horizon for a more natural look.

Once you’ve added either a Sky or Linear Gradient mask, you can apply the targeted adjustments. I recommend starting with the Color adjustment, which is often missed as it isn’t especially conspicuous. By default, the color swatch will appear as a white rectangle with a black “X” on it. Click that swatch to bring up the color picker, and click within the gradient to select a good shade of cyan or blue for the sky. Click the “X” at the top-left of the color picker to close it.

You can then apply other adjustments as needed. Often a slight reduction in the Exposure value will help, but you may also want to enhance contrast such as by increasing the value for Clarity or by adjusting the other tonal value adjustments such as Highlights, Shadows, Whites, and Blacks.

As needed, you can go back and forth between refining the layer mask and fine-tuning the adjustment settings until you are happy with the result. For example, if you used a linear gradient for the mask, you can reposition or adjust the size of the transition based on the adjustment you’ve applied, or you can modify the adjustments to better match the area being affected based on the mask.

Today’s Question: Once I’ve identified the people who appear in photos using the People view [in Lightroom Classic], is there a quick way to locate photos of a specific person without having to switch to the People view to find them?

Tim’s Quick Answer: Yes, you can simply filter the Keyword List to only show keywords that are identified as people, and then click the arrow associated with a name on the Keyword list to filter the photos to only those containing the keyword for the applicable person.

More Detail: When you identify a person in the People view, the keyword assigned to the image as part of that process is identified as a Person keyword. This is indicated by the fact that the Person checkbox will be turned on, which you can review by right-clicking on the applicable keyword on the Keyword List and choosing “Edit Keyword Tag” from the popup menu.

At the top of the keyword list there is a filter option for viewing only People keywords, which is easy to miss because it is hidden from view by default. You can expand the filter option by clicking the triangle icon to the right of the search field at the top of the Keyword List. That will reveal several options, including People. Click that label to filter the Keyword List to show only those that have the Person checkbox turned on.

Once you’ve filtered the Keyword List and located the name of the person you want to view images for, you can hover your mouse over the keyword for that person’s name and click the right-pointing arrow icon to the right of the keyword. This will set a filter so that all photos with the selected keyword will be displayed, based on your entire Lightroom Classic catalog.

Today’s Question: I upgraded to the latest Lightroom Classic and now the icons which indicated crop and adjustments are no longer at the bottom of the photos. I use this to keep track of my edits. Do you have any ideas why this is happening?

Tim’s Quick Answer: You can enable the badges you’re referring to in the Library View Options dialog for the grid view or in the Preferences dialog for the thumbnail filmstrip on the bottom panel.

More Detail: The small icons that appear at the bottom-right corner of thumbnails for some images are referred to as badges. They indicate the status of various features, such as whether an image has been cropped or whether adjustments have been applied in the Develop module, among others.

I haven’t seen any issue with an upgrade to Lightroom Classic causing these badges to be disabled, but it is easy to enable them again regardless.

For the grid view in the main image preview area, go to the menu and choose View > View Options. Go to the Grid View tab, and make sure the “Show Grid Extras” checkbox is turned on. Then also make sure that the “Thumbnail Badges” checkbox in the Cell Icons section is turned on. Then close the dialog, and you’ll have the thumbnail badges again in the grid view.

For the thumbnails on the filmstrip on the bottom panel, go to the Edit menu on Windows or the Lightroom Classic menu on Macintosh and choose “Preferences”. Go to the Interface tab and turn on the “Show badges” checkbox in the Filmstrip section. You can then close the dialog and you’ll have the badge icons restored on the thumbnails on the filmstrip.

If you’re curious about the meaning of these badge icons, by the way, there’s a post that explains them on the GreyLearning blog here:

https://greylearningblog.com/meaning-of-thumbnail-badge-icons-in-lightroom-classic/

Meaning of Thumbnail Badge Icons in Lightroom Classic

Today’s Question: I know you can batch rename photos in Lightroom Classic, but the process involved seems cumbersome when I only want to rename a single image, such as to add a bit of text to the end of the filename. Is there a simpler way to rename a single photo?

Tim’s Quick Answer: Yes! You can rename a single image in Lightroom Classic by updating the File Name field in the Library module.

More Detail: While the Rename Photos command can be tremendously helpful (and flexible) when it comes to renaming multiple selected images, I agree that it can be a little cumbersome for a situation where you want to make relatively minor changes to the filename for a single image. For example, you might want to append “-BW” to the end of a filename to indicate this is a black and white version of a color original.

Fortunately, you can very easily change the filename for a single selected image by editing the text in the File Name field in the Metadata section of the right panel in the Library module.

You can make any changes you’d like in that field, including completely changing the base filename if you want to. Just be sure not to edit the filename extension, which is includes the period after the base filename and the additional characters (typically three or four characters) that appear after the period. The filename change will take effect as soon as you change the focus to another field, such as by pressing the Tab or Enter/Return key on the keyboard or by clicking on another metadata field.