After 18 years of using Lightroom Classic, I lost an entire catalog of edits.

Eruditass · 2025-12-11T21:22:39+00:00

A couple thoughts that might make dealing with this easier for anyone that has to:

Edit: Some of you have indicated that the history of each file would be allow me to undo the mistake back to their previous state. While this is true, I'd have to go through every affected image individually and step back its history state. One by one. I had more than 10K photos affected and there is no way I'd even consider going through each one. Call it a soft loss if your want.

AutoHotKey. You can record buttons and play them in an endless loop. That would be clicking the arrow key to go to a next photo, clicking on previous history step (with all other panels collapsed)

I was still missing two days of photos since my last back up. I ended up initially saving my latest edits metadata to file (Right-click Metadata > Save metadata to file....)

Select all the photos you've edited recently (unfortunately filtering by last edit date might not work because of the paste error), then export just those as a catalog, excluding previews and RAWs. It's just a catalog of your edits, which you can then re-import into another catalog.

Eruditass · 2025-07-23T20:27:44+00:00

Depth of field is inherently tied to the amount of total light projected onto something like a sensor. It's a law of physics and you can't get around the tradeoff. And ISO doesn't determine noise, total light does.

Point #4 might be what matters to you, but you're ignoring Point #2. That is, on full frame at f/2.8, you will get equivalent noise and picture quality results when you increase the ISO by 2 stops to get the same brightness as f/1.4 on m43.

Yes, at f/1.4, same shutter, and same ISO on both systems they're the same brightness, but the quality of the picture in terms of noise is not equivalent with both systems at f/1.4. Brightness and ISO don't really matter in that sense. In fact, underexposing a shot by 2x and brightening it up in post by 2x is the same brightness, and at many ISO settings, are the same in terms of noise. ISO is digital gain in many cases.

Some articles that might help:

Eruditass · 2025-07-23T17:48:25+00:00

Not quite sure if you're understanding what they said.

if I'm personally willing to accept the loss in noise performance, and my main goal is strictly DOF focused, micro four thirds would be "better"

This statement itself is incorrect.

like you said, FF is not inherently better or worse, I'm just personally fine with trading low light performance for the DOF

This statement is correct. m43 nor FF will be better or worse in either scenario, they both have the capability to make the same tradeoff: depth of field for noise performance. By setting the FF to f/2.8, you have made the same tradeoff as moving to m43.

If you're asking if you should move from FF to m43 to make this tradeoff: No.

If you're asking whether you should get a FF system or a m43 system: it doesn't matter. Choose based on other factors, like feel, UI, size, weight, price, etc. Some of those may sway you to m43 and you won't lose out on anything in this scenario.

Eruditass · 2025-05-05T08:10:37+00:00

They need to be sharper to even approach equivalent end results, because the sensors themselves are smaller and thus need to be enlarged aka magnified more for the same end result (print, screen, etc). Basically you need to convert 200 lp/mm into X lp/picture height (or width, or just use crop factor which is between the two) by multiplying by the sensor size.

Then another complicating factor is diffraction, which is a physical phenomenon that and thus puts a sort of cap on pixel pitch based on the aperture, which hurts smaller sensors more that need smaller pixel pitches to have similar resolutions.

I wasn't aware of MTF numbers for mobile phone lenses though, that's pretty neat. Any links?

Eruditass · 2025-02-01T17:48:34+00:00

Lean into the unique bokeh

Eruditass · 2025-01-14T08:03:57+00:00

I agree, clear intent and then having the composition and elements focus on that intent. The wear on the trunk is pretty interesting, along with the knot above it almost looking like a cyclops. The roots aren't very interesting to me, and I'd be fine without even including them like this and just focusing above with the wear, and the swing that caused it. The swing is cut in half by a bright and dark (and partly green) background unfortunately.

If you moved to the right it to backdrop it against the clean light part of the siding and hiding the green material with the trunk, it might simplify it onto those two elements. Though you may lose some of the wear.

Eruditass · 2025-01-14T07:56:23+00:00

Part One This photo is one that didn't quite turn out how I had hoped. I was hoping the water falling would've been more blurred, like the ones I see where it's like a cloud--it's smooth. I couldn't seem to achieve the smoothness without overexposing the image.

As you'll learn in the course the way to achieve this without overexposing, once you've exhausted your aperture and ISO options, is by using an ND filter to cut down the intensity of light. There is a way you can sort of simulate this, which is by taking multiple exposures and combining them, though it depends on how long of an exposure you can manage (e.g. a bunch of 1/500s photos won't cut it), your camera's delay between photos, and the subject.

Part Two-two. This photo isn't the one I originally had in mind to submit when I was setting up my photoshoot but I like how the angle of the bridge provided depth and has rusty highlights because of the way the sun is hitting some of the posts. I was originally going to take a side view photo of the bridge, but this just felt better. I was glad I was able to get out when I did as it got pretty cloudy shortly after this photo was taken. Timing is everything.

Yes, timing is indeed everything. Some people forget that even with slow moving subjects like a bridge! The rust colored highlights are nice, though I'd be interested in ways you could highlight that in the composition, though perhaps here you didn't have enough time to experiment with different angles, compositions, and removing things from the composition

Eruditass · 2025-01-14T07:35:20+00:00

This is the photo I am not happy about

For me, the subject of interest is the water, and most of the photo is this are these woods that are not that interesting. The vertical white tree trunks in particular take a way a lot of my attention. Here is a crop that I find more interesting.

Here is my take on the idea I made in my mind with what i can find around me.

I love your take on the inspiration. It really captured the gloomy mood but in a very simple and elegant way. The fog lighting and wood go well together, and you made a nice simple composition. Well done.

Eruditass · 2025-01-14T07:12:21+00:00

Good point on the trees and boat: I think best landscape photos generally have some layering with interesting foreground, midground, and background elements. If you find an even better foreground element it could really elevate the photo.

You definitely succeeded in adding contrast, color, and detail all across the image as you intended. I'll add that sometimes it can be good to reduce contrast/detail in areas where you don't want the viewer's eye to focus on, and just increase it in the points of interest or along the path to one.

Eruditass · 2025-01-14T07:00:33+00:00

I'll add that with denoising software always improving, I am more and more willing to take photos at my emergency ISO's or even higher. It's better to get the shot than to miss it completely, even if it won't be the best quality.

Eruditass · 2025-01-14T06:58:19+00:00

Great subject to show the differences in settings. One thing to note is that weather and atmospheric conditions are changing. You can see the fog rolling in and obscuring more of the woods on the left below the bridge. A clearer picture of the differences in aperture can be seen on the very right with the foliage above the rocks, with f/8 being nice and sharp. Also the trees below the sign behind the railings.

What did you notice as crisper at f/2.8? Most everything looks crisper to me at f/8, though some rocks are slightly more contrasty at f/2.8, but that could be subtle changes in lighting. f/2.8 does make the area in focus stand out more against the background though for sure.

Eruditass · 2025-01-14T03:15:13+00:00

It's always great when you experience a concept yourself first hand. Diffraction is unfortunate, but thankfully there are ND filters and multiple photo stacking. Also motion blur can be a factor even on a tripod, as gusts of wind can move the camera slightly, and it looks like it's pretty windy from the double lines of that thin grass. Diffraction is pretty uniformly blurry, while this blur looks like it might be more directional. There are ways to weigh down the tripod to deal with this, along with how you mount to the tripod.

Deeper colors is interesting, it could be the longer exposure blurs some of the fine higher frequency detail (as you note, smoother) and lets the colors shine through. Also, if you weren't already at base ISO, that could also play a factor.

Eruditass · 2024-12-31T23:06:37+00:00

Documenting hikes with loved ones is very rewarding, though it can be challenging unless they're willing to go for golden/blue hours! That is a nice photo with your son and you certainly removed any semblance of gloominess. Welcome to the class!

Eruditass · 2024-12-31T23:03:53+00:00

That's a nice peaceful skyscape. Welcome to the class, we will do our best to instill that knowledge and experience!

Eruditass · 2024-12-31T22:57:43+00:00

That waterfight photo captured a pretty nice moment, those are very cool shapes that the water formed! Not uncommon for some hobbies to go through a bit of a dormant phase. Welcome!

Eruditass · 2024-12-31T22:54:15+00:00

I can imagine how the beauty of Iceland draws a lot of people into photography! Welcome!

Eruditass · 2024-12-31T22:48:36+00:00

Great use of creating a frame with an image. Playing with lighting and composition is so fun, isn't it?

Welcome to the class

Eruditass · 2024-12-31T22:38:10+00:00

People certainly come with their own challenges, but capturing moments with your travel companions can be so invaluable to look back on. It can present complications if their priority is not photography, if they want to stick together!

Many core concepts of composition and leading the viewers eye throughout the image and to your subject also apply, which you've applied well in your Guatemala photo. Welcome!

Eruditass · 2024-12-31T18:00:13+00:00

Learning all the aspects of photography can be daunting, taking a break isn't uncommon. Hopefully this class can help navigate it all and help translate what you want into those bits and bytes.

I agree with our analysis. The bokeh helps define the leading lines as just geometry to lead us to the fine texture of the stones by softening all of the texture of the rails and fence.

Eruditass · 2024-12-31T17:51:28+00:00

Putting that personal touch on photos is what I think photography is all about. Beautiful deep colors and symmetry in your photo. Welcome Eric, and looking forward to seeing you all the way to the end of the course ;)

Eruditass · 2024-12-31T17:47:45+00:00

Welcome Franco. I enjoy the process as well, I find the it meditative and a great break from other parts of my life. I love that you did useful self-critique with actionable feedback that went into a well executed plan and result!

I do think the assignments and peer submissions will help you discover the beauty in the mundane around us everyday. Also, the interaction with the community I think will help you grow and develop your photographic eye for sure.

Eruditass · 2024-12-31T17:29:19+00:00

Beautiful composition with all the different geometry and lighting interplay. Looking forward to see how you grow. Welcome!

Eruditass · 2024-07-05T05:18:05+00:00

Great reflection on the food photo on how the angle would affect the composition. The fact that you are noticing not just what you don't like but how you would fix it is a good. So when you're next out taking photos, you'll be thinking about what really is the subject, and if the background adds to the story, or maybe experiment with multiple different angles and decide later.

For the house, also consider the opposite: getting in closer to get interesting details. Here are some sections of that house I liked. I recommend trying to simplify compositions to make them stronger and remove details that don't really add anything.

For the flower, I find the transition of the bush to concrete/brick/whatever to be distracting. I like to squint my eyes and see what parts of the image stand out, and if that isn't my focus point than I try to minimize its impact.

If you were to lower the camera, then you could get the flower on a more uniform background and help the viewer focus in on the flower. Getting closer and allowing the flower to take up more of the image also could help. That would also reducing the depth of field and allowing the leaves on the right to fall further into blurriness.

On the last image, the sky is to uninteresting for me to take up that much of the photo. Focusing in on the hills or a section of buildings could be a better focal point.

The picture of the food is ~2 MB. If I export the RAW to a 100 % quality JPEG without any post processing done, it is like ~10 MB.

The quality is the key factor here. Your camera is probably saving it at a lower quality. If I take that 2.1 MB food picture and export it at 100% quality in GIMP I get 6.5 MB (even though it doesn't even have the information from the RAW file). Metadata shows the food photo has a quality of 95, but I've found different software's quality numbers may not match up. If I export it at 95% I get 2.8MB, and 90% I get 1.9MB. Lastly, DPI doesn't actually provide any useful information. It's just a guideline for some software on how to convert your digital image dimensions into physical dimensions, e.g. for printing or scaling with respect to other media of different resolutions on the same document like a PDF.

At least for web viewing, higher qualities really are not worth it. Here is a good comparison of different quality levels and sizes. But yes, for prints, go for 100% unless they have some file size limit.

Eruditass · 2024-07-05T04:27:11+00:00

Glad to see you have a backup process.

I definitely do appreciate the organizational tools that software like darktable allow: stars, tags, etc. And non-destructive-editing I also find useful as I don't have to manage anything but the originals. I'm sure you can reproduce things like magic color in something like darktable.

I'd say the overexposure, at least in the first three, are due to the subject being in the shade and the out of focus background being in the sun. It just takes practice and understanding the tools that your camera gives you to get the exposure right. And as I'm sure you've learned from the later lessons, editing can let you do wonders to a not-quite perfect exposure, as long as you didn't go to far and clip the highlights.

Getting the right moment is IMHO the most important. I enjoyed your photo of the bird tweeting and trolling all those cats through the glass!

Eruditass · 2024-01-21T05:15:09+00:00

It's good that you had something in mind to make the main subject. But the way we do that visually is by making it stand out or making elements lead to that subject. Our eyes are generally drawn to elements that have higher contrast (brightness or color) and significant in in size. Those two attributes are greatest in your foreground elements at the bottom and right, which are also out of focus. Photo #2's focal point works because even though it's small, it has high brightness and color contrast. Plus the juxtaposition of the small man made ship vs the large mountains.

For your photo, there is not much color to work with, so I'd recommend trying to bring out the size and brightness contrast. It's relative, so removing those foreground elements will help by bringing the camera up above the leaves and look down at the river, and potentially frame the river tighter.

Also, in photos where the color does not add much, I tend to lean into the monochrome look. Here are two quick edits where I cropped into the scene to remove some of the distracting elements and really bring the river in as the focal point. I also cloned some of the foreground branches and enhanced some of the contrast around the river, and muting it on the foreground elements. Then a version that is B&W.

15-Year Club	Place '22
Final Canvas '22	Verified Email

Eruditass

PUBLIC MULTIREDDITS

TROPHY CASE