Iridient developer workflow update#
Iridient developer workflow zip#

That said, non-destructive editing brings with it some confusion, particularly for those working with RAW images or using Photos extensions to do the editing. One of the near-magical features of Photos, and iPhoto before it, is the way it allows you to edit a photo with the assurance that those edits are non-destructive-you can always revert to the original version.

#1612: OS suggestions, new accessibility features, higher cellular prices, Chrome OS Flex for old Macs, Memorial Day hiatus.

Iridient developer workflow update#

#1613: M2 MacBook Air and 13-inch MacBook Pro, long-awaited features coming to OS, watchOS 9, TidBITS website changes, tvOS and HomePod update.#1614: 2022 OS system requirements, WWDC 2022 head-scratcher features, travel tech notes from Canada.#1615: Why Stage Manager needs an M1 iPad, Limit IP Address Tracking problems, Citibank cryptocurrency confusion.#1616: Explaining passkeys, Apple challenges for senior citizens, macOS 11.6.7 Big Sur fixes email attachment bug.It adds it to lightroom as a stacked image, it will work i'm just wondering about the appropriate setting for the export back to lightroom. The workflow you are trying to develop isn't going to work very well, in my opinion. Then that file with all of the changes could be opened in Lightroom. Your only choice would be to start with the other one and save a PSD or TIF file. And the changes made with that processor will not be read by Lightroom. If you try to use this other raw processor you will be starting from the beginning. The changes are stored in the catalog and the raw images left untouched in its initial state. Lightroom does not apply changes to the raw image.

Iridient developer workflow zip#

PNG format will get you a little bit better compression in some cases (still lossless) than TIFF with ZIP but is less widely supported than TIFF and a bit slower to process.īrian Griffith (author of Iridient Developer) My general recommendation is TIFF with ZIP compression (which is lossless) at 8 bits/channel if disk space is a concern and 16 bits/channel if you plan to do extensive post RAW edits or are really looking to push dynamic range to the limits. If you run into major issues with post processing at 8 bits/channel or plan on really significant exposure/contrast edits post RAW (think HDR, exposure blending, etc) then you may want to just go straight to 16 bits/channel for ultimate flexibility. If you give attention to the critical edits at the RAW stage (exposure/contrast, especially at the extreme ends of the range particularly with highlights, white balance and some basic sharpening/noise reduction) then I feel you often are perfectly fine dropping down to 8 bits/channel for post-RAW edits and you'll see significant disk space savings. With more non-destructive editors like Lightroom this is less of an issue. If you plan to do more extensive edits and/or use multiple programs for editing then there are definitely advantages to using lossless compression formats like TIFF or PNG over JPEG which is lossy and can produce generational loss when saving and re-saving over and over. Some people are generally happy with their camera's JPEG files and if you are good with the results you get with camera JPEGs and want maximum disk space savings going to JPEG can work just fine as an output from the RAW processing stage in Iridient Developer. There isn't really one perfect choice or I'd skip all the options '-) To a degree output choice just depends on the needs of the user.