ACDSee Forums: Forum: ACDSee Pro 3 Beta - General Discussion

ACDSee Forums: Forum: ACDSee Pro 3 Beta - General Discussion - Recent Topics http://community.acdsee.com/forums/ ACDSee Forums: Forum: ACDSee Pro 3 Beta - General Discussion - Recent Topics en Sat, 21 Nov 2009 12:59:41 +0000 CamCarmichael on "Thank you." http://community.acdsee.com/forums/topic/thank-you-1#post-42894 Mon, 28 Sep 2009 20:58:22 +0000 CamCarmichael 42894@http://community.acdsee.com/forums/ With the launch of Pro 3 today, I'd like to acknowledge the major contribution made by you, the Beta Forum Members. The conversations that have taken place here have been heard - providing both specific issues that required attention as well as a general sense of the workflows and features that are most important to you. Of course, not all issues were addressed, but your tireless testing - and subsequent posts - provided real input that helped shape Pro 3 and will serve as a base for future development. On behalf of the entire team, I thank you and encourage your participation in not only the Pro 3 forum but the Development area as well. Cam Marc Sabatella on "My thoughts on solutions to issues with saved originals!" http://community.acdsee.com/forums/topic/my-thoughts-on-solutions-to-issues-with-saved-originals#post-42546 Wed, 23 Sep 2009 18:09:47 +0000 Marc Sabatella 42546@http://community.acdsee.com/forums/ In the Process-Edit-Process thread, which has really meandered quite a lot, I think some progress has been made toward identifying what some real issues are here. I've been giving the matter a considerable amount of thought to one in particular: the problem some JPEG shooters have with their originals being moved when using Develop or Edit mode. As I've mentioned elsewhere, I don't exactly love this aspect of the implementation either.  But nor do I love the idea of having to do explicit exports to make my JPEG edits visible to the outside world, as one has to with Lightroom.  In my mind, they're both awkward and unfortunate side effects of the need to keep separate original and edited copies of an image in order for non-destructive editing to function.  I don't see a way to implement non-destructive editing with none of those unfortunate side effects, and apparently neither Adobe nor ACD does either, or they'd have done it.  Nor do I see any way to predict which of these awkward and unfortunate side effects would be more painful to more users.  I think Bill has outlined a proposal for treating JPEG's more like RAW files, and this in effect "solves" the problem by moving toward the LR model.  If it is determined that moving JPEG originals must be avoided at all costs, then I think his ideas make sense. But again as I described elsewhere, I also wonder whether it would be possible to address most of the concerns over the moving of JPEG originals without such a drastic implementation change (and the corresponding need for an explicit "export" command or an equivalent way to make edits available to the outside world).  So this is where I would like to outline my ideas for solutions, and see to what extent they would actually problems. First, my assumption is that if you truly want your originals all in one place and not touched in any way by ACDSee or any other program, the simplest way to do that is to close your working folder before you begin editing, archiving the originals and then working on the cloned folder.  That's actually what I've advocated in the past (in my DAM article series).  It seems to me if always having all originals from a shoot in one folder together is important to you, then think this makes a lot of good basic sense, and fits in well with many sound backup strategies.  If you take this approach, then concern about what ACDSee does with the cloned copied almost goes away right there (but not entirely, and that's why I'm just getting started here :-). I also recognize that this isn't always acceptable - for some people, the need to have all originals together isn't important enough often enough to be worth altering one's workflow to be worth this cloning up front (or else, it isn't practical for whatever reason - time or disk space constraints, syncing metadata between original and cloned copied, etc).  But nevertheless, the need might come up to be able to access all originals for a shoot at once.  For this reason, I am advocating that ACD add an "Originals" item to the "Filter" list, to allow one to view the original versions of any group of files.  Or some similar mechanism, but this seems simplest to me to fit into the exist architecture.  The goal would be to provide a way to access the originals for the whole folder at once, which you could then burn to disk, backup to another drive, etc, as you see fit.  I also advocate providing an option to not hide the Originals and Develop folders.  Yes, one can turn on display of hidden folders, but maybe I don't want them hidden to the outside world either, and maybe I don't want ACDSee to be showing me *all* hidden folders - just these. The question is, between the suggestion of cloning the folder before beginning and having the option to view all originals together, what remaining objections would there be?  If you do the clone, the originals *are* all the same folder and are never moved.  If you don't clone but instead rely on the Filter, then yes, your originals may still be moved.  But really, they were moved when you downloaded them from the camera; they'll be moved again if you ever migrate them to a different drive, moved again if you back them up and restore them.  And besides, in the old world, the originals would have been *overwritten* if you followed the same steps - surely that's worse than having them moved?  And they are not scattered all over the place either - they are still underneath the current folder, at most one level removed, and can easily be all backed up together by backing up the main folder, etc.  So again, the question is, aside from a general uneasiness with files being moved, is there is any specific *problem* not addressed by this? Before you answer, let me raise the objections I see, and propose solutions for those too. So again, we're now assuming that those JPEG who care about having their originals all int he same folder can either clone the folder before beginning, or else can use Filter->Originals feature to view their originals together after the fact, and I'm looking for things that would still be problematic. I'm going to start with the case where we go ahead an do the clone.  If you use Edit mode on these cloned copies, you really don't need ACDSee saving yet another copy every time you edit one of those clones.  Actually, I'd personally find it useful, since my *real* originals would at that point likely be on a external drive and perhaps not easily accessible while I'm editing the clones.  So being able to quickly undo my edits and start over without having to reconnect that drive (which might well not be in the same city as me at that point!) would be very nice.  So from my perspective, I'd like to see a simple command from within ACDSee to delete all saved originals for a given set of files (ie, removing the "E" from the image on Manage mode).  I'd use this to reclaim the space taken by those extra copies when I feel I am done with my editing of the cloned folder.  Others who don't foresee a problem with having access to the original folder while working on the clone would probably prefer an option to simply turn off the saving of originals, so the space is saved right off the bat rather than needing to be cleaned up later.  I think *both* of these would make *fabulous* enhancements to the current implementation.  Potentially worth holding up the release for - but, luckily, also completely "compatible" enhancements that could be added for a 3.1 release with no great complications. Again, assuming you're doing the cloning, but now looking at the case where you use Develop mode - there is simply no way to avoid the fact that there will be two copies aside from the true pre-clone, archived (possibly on an external drive) original.  Develop mode needs the cloned original that you are working from in order to work. So there's no possibility of an option to disable the saving of originals entirely for Develop mode.  And the version that actually contains your edits is, if not strictly necessary since it can be generated on the fly, valuable in that it speeds viewing.  And again assuming the core implementation is left alone - so your original is moved but the edited version left in place - keeping the edited version around prevents the need for the explicit "export" step required in Lightroom.   But the "cleanup" option - deleting the saved originals, removing the "D" from the developed image - would remain a wonderful enhancement to reclaim the space when I feel I'm done with a batch of images. It occurs to me that what I've just written is actually completely compatible with Bill's suggestion of treating JPEG more like RAW.  That is, whether the developed version is saved in place and the original moved, or the original left in place and the develop version saved elsewhere, is immaterial - I'd still find the "cleanup" option useful to reclaim space when done.  I really can't see that it would affect my life one way or another which file goes where, except that I'm ready for the product to be released sooner rather than later :-), so I'm trying to find ways of seeing if we can come to a consensus on a solutions that addresses most concerns with relatively little effort on anyone's part (mine, yours, or ACD's).  Also, I've argued elsewhere why I think it makes more sense for the edited copy to be in place - because that's what a "normal" editor would do, and I think people are going to expect their edits to be visible to the outside world without having to explicitly export them or find the edited file in another folder.  But I'm still trying to understood just what the objections are to Develop mode moving the original, and how this is considered worse than an "normal" editor simply *overwriting* the original. Speaking of which, without actually *understanding* the objections to originals being moved, one other idea occurs to me that would simplify life for those who prefer to use Develop mode more like how one would have used a "normal" editor.  Those who shoot JPEG, are concerned with non overwriting originals, but are unwilling to clone the whole folder before beginning, were presumably in the habit of doing a "Save As" operation from the editor rather than save.  Convenient, then, tht Develop mode has only a Save As and no Save.  A change to ACDSee that might work well is to alter the behavior of Save As to then abandon the changes to the original - treat it as if it hadn't been processed at all, so that hitting Done or Next does *not* apply your changes.  I believe Tracy alluded to this.  Actually, I'm a little surprised it doesn't work that way already.  But on the assumption there is a reason it works the way it does, I'd also be OK with leaving Save As alone, but add a new option to "Save As, And Abandon Changes To Original".  This would remove the non-destructive functionality (eg, the saved version couldn't then be revisited and picked up in the same way it could had you simply hit Done or Next - your processing would have become "permanent").  But it seems a lot of the objections to the current behavior comes from people who have not really embraced non-destructive editing in the first place (and hence are not willing to put up with having a few files moved around in order to reap the rewards of non-destructive editing). Almost done, but let's return to the case of people *not* cloning their original folder before commencing editing.  In Edit mode, I assume most of these these people would be using Save As in the past in order to avoid overwriting their originals.  So as far as i can tell, no change is needed to that functionality, except maybe remove the nag dialog when you try to exit edit mode after doing a save as - same rationale as "Save As And Abandon Changes To Original".  Again, either Tracy or tdi or both have alluded to this.  Some people would not have used Save As but would have made their own copy of the file before editing, and for those folks, having an option to simply disable the saved originals feature would allow them to edit in place as they always have. For Develop mode, again, no getting around the need for multiple copies if we want it to work and avoid the extra step of an explicit export to make edits visible outside ACDSee.  I've outlined why I think it smarter to have the edited version in place, as that the version I think the outside world is most likely to expect to see in place, since that's how "normal" editors work.  The options I described above for Save As And Abandon Changes To Original would, presumably, also be appreciated here.  But in the default case where you simply hit Done or Next, I guess I do keep coming back to how "normal" editors work, and in "normal" editors, that overwrites your originals - I can't see how moving them out of the way can be considered worse. So I don't perceive the *need* for change there. Anyhow, that's *my* perception of the path of least resistance here.  I think users who find it important to their workflow to have all their originals in one folder are best off cloning the folder before beginning, as that accomplished this most directly and simply.  But even so, that leaves room for some enhancements to ACDSee in order to better support that type of workflow, and to better handle the cases where people have not first cloned their originals folders.  So the list of enhancements needed for ACDSee to address the issues as I've framed them are: - Add global option to not hide Originals and Developed folders.  Or just *don't* hide them; I doubt that many would mind seeing them.  Although I guess that opens the door for more questions on what they are there for from people who otherwise might have remained blissfully ignorant, so an option is probably better) - Manage Mode: add Filter->Originals (should appear to work same for JPEG and RAW) or equivalent way to view the original versions of currently displayed files.  BTW, one alternative is a separate "Show Originals" command that works on currently *selected* (as opposed to currently *displayed*) files. - Manage Mode: add "Remove Originals" command for selected JPEG files (affects both Developed and Edited files, making the processing "permanent"). - Edit Mode: add option to not save originals.  Perhaps implemented as separated command from within Edit mode ("save" versus "save without saving original") or else a global option.  But if it's a global option, there should still be a way to override it case by case, and it shouldn't create more work in the cases where you don't want to override it.  That is, Save should *silently* save with originals saved or not saved according to the global option setting, but there should be a way to explicitly override this from within Edit mode for a given file. - Edit Mode: add command to Save As And Abandon Changes To Original (better named, of course; or just make that the default behavior of Save As and eliminate the current nag dialogs). - Develop Mode: add command to Save As And Abandon Changes To Original (same observations as above). I think that actually finally covers what I've been thinking.  My feel is that these changes are actually rather small but would address practically all concerns raised.  Figuring out which of these are worth holding up a release for and which aren't - well, that's not my job.  But I'm actually quite excited to realize that *all* of these could potentially be released in a 3.1 version in a completely compatible way - eg, adding these options and commands in 3.1 wouldn't break any work done with 3.0 that I can see.  As opposed to changing the relative locations of the saved original and edited version of file (which is done in place, which is moved elsewhere), which I think everyone would agree would be a *nightmare* to change after 3.0 goes out. richardchesher on "Beware the acdsee pro 3 download" http://community.acdsee.com/forums/topic/beware-the-acdsee-pro-3-download#post-42645 Thu, 24 Sep 2009 19:53:08 +0000 richardchesher 42645@http://community.acdsee.com/forums/ I got the download details for Pro3 from Digital River yesterday after having prepaid for the software last month. On the first try my download was interrupted by somebody calling me on Skype and I had to abort. Later I clicked on the download link again but nothing happened so I clicked again - anyway it finally downloaded but the 60MB file gives "Error reading setup initialization file" - so I tried to download again and got a message that I was only allowed to try 5 times (I was only aware of three tries if they counted my clicking the link twice the second time). I sent and email to the address on the warning page and got no reply. So today I went onto the web and tried the link from there - got the same message and it said I had now tried 10 times!!! Sent another email to digital river support and am waiting very impatiently. So be careful when you download the software you paid for. irivlin on "Cost of upgrading to ACDSee 3" http://community.acdsee.com/forums/topic/cost-of-upgrading-to-acdsee-3#post-41440 Wed, 02 Sep 2009 05:45:14 +0000 irivlin 41440@http://community.acdsee.com/forums/ I just received an offer that I can upgrade to ACDSee 3 for the trifling sum of $160. I don't wish to sound cheap but this is silly. $160 for an *upgrade* - has ACDSee lost its marbles? I would have though a reasonable figure to go from 2.5 to 3 would have been $75. $160 is ridiculous..... They can count me out, that's for sure.   batray on "not happy with upgrade from 2.5 to 3 - poor raw editing" http://community.acdsee.com/forums/topic/not-happy-with-upgrade-from-25-to-3-poor-raw-editing#post-42692 Fri, 25 Sep 2009 08:14:33 +0000 batray 42692@http://community.acdsee.com/forums/ I am not happy with the upgrade from 2.5 to 3 I did today.  3 has many nice features and seems more stable (2.5 constantly crashed when adding watermarks).  However the raw editing in 3 has several sever limitations that 2.5 does not. Problem 1 (deal breaker): In 2.5 when I edit RAW photos from my Olympus SLRs it gives me access to the larger sensor area captured in the RAW file, 3.0 arbitrarily crops the RAW image to the same size as the JPG.  Even worse the crop area is different than that used by the camera for the JPG,  I have found that access to the extra data RAW image is vital for some photos.  The arbitrary limitation that does not allow me to access that data when editing the photos is a deal breaker. Problem 2: The tiny histogram for RAW editing is not acceptable.  2.5 allows me to break out the histogram separately and resize it much larger.  It also allows me to select which color components I watch.  I find these features vital.  The tiny histogram for raw editing in 3 is close to useless! I am going to ask for a refund for my upgrade to 3.0 raw editing is so poor.     tanney on "Help with login to "My Account"" http://community.acdsee.com/forums/topic/help-with-login-to-my-account#post-42847 Sun, 27 Sep 2009 23:55:04 +0000 tanney 42847@http://community.acdsee.com/forums/ I think I screwed my account up by changing the email address.  Neither the old or the new login email address works. Can someone point me to who I need to contact to get it fixed?  Thanks tracychess on "Photoshop file munged by ACDSee?" http://community.acdsee.com/forums/topic/photoshop-file-munged-by-acdsee#post-42711 Fri, 25 Sep 2009 15:17:46 +0000 tracychess 42711@http://community.acdsee.com/forums/ I just (accidentally) used PROCESS/DEVELOP on a Photoshop file with multiple layers.  ACDSee munged the file (flattened the layers) and gave me a new 'Photoshop' file, without warning.   This happened when I the next image in the filmstrip. I did not explicitly 'save' the changes.   I did not 'DONE'.  I did not 'save and exit', and I did not '>'.  Further, when I realized the problem and pressed REVERT to ORIGINAL, ACDSee gave me the 'original with the layers flattened'.  Ugly.  Not exactly 'non-destructive editing'. I was able to recover the file by opening the file in the [originals] folder with Photoshop, and saving back to the starting folder.  However, ACDSee 3.0 still marks the file with a D as if it has been DEVELOPED.   not nice..  mak_kawa on "Questions for ACDSee Pro 3" http://community.acdsee.com/forums/topic/questions-for-acdsee-pro-3#post-42804 Sun, 27 Sep 2009 12:48:30 +0000 mak_kawa 42804@http://community.acdsee.com/forums/ When ACDSee Pro 3 non-beta version will be *publicly* announced and released?  (I have not received an e-mail from ACDSee offering pre-order of upgrade version of ACDSee Pro 3.)  And... does ACDSee Pro3 non-beta version support Pentax k-7 PEFs? It is most important point for me to decide to upgrade from ACDSee Pro 2.5 or not. finlays on "Pro 3 Database problem" http://community.acdsee.com/forums/topic/pro-3-database-problem#post-42836 Sun, 27 Sep 2009 21:03:36 +0000 finlays 42836@http://community.acdsee.com/forums/ I downloaded Pro 3and installed on my Vista desktop and XP laptop. All went well, 2.5 database converted fine and all seems to be working without a hitch...except...when I try to optimize database on my Vista machine, it appears to complete the task(yellow bar full)  then hang. I have to use task manager to close ACDsee. Doesn't seem to cause any problems, just annoying. Optimize on XP works just fine. Michael Presley on "My Workflow - just for your consideration" http://community.acdsee.com/forums/topic/one-more-post-or-my-w#post-42699 Fri, 25 Sep 2009 12:59:27 +0000 Michael Presley 42699@http://community.acdsee.com/forums/ I thought I would share my work flow just for the sake of discussion and comparison to the processes that have been described in this forum - the process I describe here is derived from experience and influenced by Peter Kroegh's "The DAM Book". I use Lightroom for all of my work. I had obviously hoped that ACDSee 3 would have allowed a similar workflow and for RAW files I guess it comes close - not so for JPEGs. (NOTE: in the following discussion the word RAW is usually synonymous with original and would include JPEGs) File Structure: I've structured my folders with the bucket concept from the "The DAM Book. I consider a bucket full based on the capacity of a standard DVD (>4.7G). A bucket is nothing more than a folder with subfolders beneath it. Importing: I use Lightroom to import my pictures. I have some preset develop settings that I apply while importing (applies a camera profile, a little sharpening and clarity). I also add some keywords that I think fit most of the pictures - these will be adjusted later. I have Lightroom put the pictures into a folder under the current RAW bucket and I name the subfolder based on the date of the photo. I also have LR create a full size preview during the import - this speeds up the process of viewing at 100% and when in the develop module. I don't rename the pictures but rely on date and keyword filtering to find photos later. This is where I haven't adopted all of the book's concepts. I find the use of keywords, captions, and date information adequate for cataloging my photos. BTW I would consider myself a serious amateur with professional aspirations, so I'm not managing a stock photo library or much of a client list as of yet - which the book is clearly aimed at. 1st Review: I now go through the imported photos and flag the ones I think are keepers. I use the loupe and compare view to analyze the pictures at this point. I use the P key in Lightroom which picks/flags the photo. If any photos really standout during this first review I'll also press the number 1 through 5 to assign a star rating. I may sometimes use the quick develop tools to adjust exposure on a photo that needs it to help in my review. Quick develop tools can adjust most of the parameters that you use (exposure, fill, black level, etc...) and can be applied to one or to every photo that is selected. These edits are achieved with slider controls and can be applied while in the thumbnail view. After I've picked the 1st review keepers I then invoke refine photos command which marks all of the unpicked files as rejected and this also removes the 'picked' status from all of the photos. 2cd review: I now go into the develop module and adjust cropping, exposure, etc as needed. I also try to be more critical in my review of the picture and will reject some more of the photos. The list of photos is filtered and the ones that are marked as rejected are no longer visible at the moment. Final review: I know go back and review the keywords, captions, titles, etc. You can't really overstate the importance of the keywords. At this point I finally delete all of the rejected photos. I run a backup program to backup the photos to another hard drive (including the Lightroom database), and will then format the compact flash card. Please note that I don't format the flash cards until after I've backed up. I don't arbitrarily create derivatives (JPEG copies) of my adjusted RAW files but create copies as needed for web sites, family, customers, etc... this is another point from the book that I'm still thinking about. I have adopted the bucket concept of folder structure for the derivatives as well. I have a folder on my documents drive (separate than the C drive) that has a "My Pictures" folder and under it is a folder call RAW which contains the buckets for the raw files. There is another folder under "My Pictures" called DERIVATIVES which contains the jpegs I create from Lighroom. If the photos are for a customer I directly export JPEG versions to my Zenfolio site out of Lightroom, if there are photos from family events that I want to share with the family I export directly to my flickr account. I will also usually export a few JPEGs for use on the laptop, or will email photos as needed. On the happy occassion that I sell a print I will revisit the adjustments made to that photo and refine them as needed (parametric editing) and then export a higher quality version to whereever it needs to go. Another feature that I use in LR is the ability to create virtual copies - that is an editble copy of my original file that only exists in the database - I will often create black & white, different crops, or other special processed views of my photos. As mentioned, these only exist in the database unless/until you export a new TIFF/JPEG file. In LR, the database is very important and is part of my regualr backup scheme. The exported files I do create I manage with ACDSee (v2.5 Pro). I'm a big fan of ACDSee (have been since the very early days of it's existence). I think ACDSee is a great tool for managing these files, it's still directly connected to your hard drive (I mean as browsable, has Windows context menus available and so forth), has adequate editing tools for quick adjustments to the jpegs. I just don't think it competes with Lightroom for RAW processing capabilities. I almost always shoot RAW but will occassionally shoot JPEGs for what I would consider non-critical work - the process I describe above doesn't change at all for either format. At no times are the original files manipulated except for metadata changes. I have no reason to create a work copy of JPEGs or to take special precautions to protect JPEGs outside of good backup habits. I've written this for the sake of some explination as to why I'm reistant to the way ACDSee handles the JPEGs and the existance of the [developed] folder. Ultimatly, I've found that I need to stay with one software package and can't be bouncing around but I'm certainly willing to continue trying new versions of my favorite products. My library is currently around 75,000 photos - I suppose that photographers tend to be packrats. mrobben on "Upgrade from beta to final version. How to retain settings." http://community.acdsee.com/forums/topic/upgrade-from-beta-to-final-version-how-to-retain-settings#post-42582 Thu, 24 Sep 2009 05:37:10 +0000 mrobben 42582@http://community.acdsee.com/forums/ I ordered ACDSee pro in pre-order. A couple of minutes ago, I received an email that the final product is ready and I have downloaded it. Now, when I try to install I get a message saying that I should remove my beta version first. But I would like to keep my settings (and especially my (non destructive) edits in my photos). (I have been using the beta in production - Yes, I know I should not have done that, but things got so convenient with this new version). Any tips on how to achieve this?   Kind regards, Maarten rocsen on "Edit from Quickview" http://community.acdsee.com/forums/topic/edit-from-quickview#post-42803 Sun, 27 Sep 2009 10:52:53 +0000 rocsen 42803@http://community.acdsee.com/forums/ In Quickview on the main toolbar we have shortcuts for View and Manage in the top right corner. Is there a reason we don't have one for Process? Or even Edit / develop? From Quickview in full screen mode you first have to double click the image, then goto Manage, then select Process, then click on Edit. 5 mouse clicks and movements just to edit a photo. Would be nice to have all these all these shortcuts on the context menu (right click) as well so it can be launched directly from full screen mode. VBoger@hotmail.com on "Esc" http://community.acdsee.com/forums/topic/esc-1#post-40471 Wed, 12 Aug 2009 20:51:49 +0000 VBoger@hotmail.com 40471@http://community.acdsee.com/forums/ I could set the Options in a previous version of the program (2.5) to open in a full screen + always on top and close it by Esc button. Now if I set it to open in a full screen - it would open it as I want it but to close it I have to press esc and then click to close it with a mouse; and later if I open any other picture it would not open it in a full screen (as I set it in the Options previously) because in order to close the program I had to leave the full screen mode and close the program manually. Please make it as it used to be - simply pree Esc (in a full screen mode) and the program closes and next time your open any picture it will open it in a full screen mode again (if that's what your option is). Thank you. That missing feauture will stop me from upgrading to 3.0. Picture Man Photography on "Text Overlays" http://community.acdsee.com/forums/topic/text-overlays#post-42576 Thu, 24 Sep 2009 03:30:59 +0000 Picture Man Photography 42576@http://community.acdsee.com/forums/ I found a neat feature in 2 and 2.5 which has been really improved in 3.0.  That is the ability to "overlay" a secondary object onto the primary image.  I use it often, quite often, in one form or another.  I found another use for it in my web design business although I have to be careful now that I've discovered that the process is not editable.  Once the second object is applied to the first object, it no longer can be edited once 'saved'. Many of my web applications have buttons that need to be labeled.  Pro 3 works much better the Paint Shop Pro.  The big difference is that with Paint Shop Pro, the process is flattened into a third image, if you so desire, so that the 'master' can be edited later.  I'm told that Adobe does a much better job with layers.  Pro 3 doesn't do layers, that I can figure out. Or does it do layers and I haven't found that function yet?  Alternately, I could use another product that has a much better layering technique and that is Word Perfect Presentations. Am I missing something with Pro 3 that could be considered layering? Jankunas on "Unlocking Beta Version Trial" http://community.acdsee.com/forums/topic/unlocking-beta-version-trial#post-42763 Sat, 26 Sep 2009 10:13:39 +0000 Jankunas 42763@http://community.acdsee.com/forums/ I can't even get to unlock my trial version of Pr 3 Beta One window syas thanks for trialing the product and I have until Oct 30! Windows message asks me to check access to some files - which are OK (Text screen clippings attached)  ACDSee Pro 3 Beta Thanks for being part of the Beta program! Your participation has helped to shape ACDSee Pro 3 into the best photography workflow software around. ocdse pro 3 As a thank you, we’d like to give you a BETA complimentary Versa Pod Pro tripod with your purchase of ACDSee Pro 3, coming out this Fall. The pre-order period is now over. Please check this spot in late Septemberfor another opportunity to orderACDSee Pro 3 with your bonus tripod. ___ F Beta - expires October 30, 2009. Close    ACDSee is unable to conned to the database, and will now dose. Please make sure the following database is accessible from this computer, and then restart ACDSee: C:Documenft and Settings\Nick\Local Settings\application Data\ACD Systems\Catalogs\3OProBeta2\Default [ OK There is nothing wrong in accessing the folders in the same location for Pro2.5 All Anti virus etc dissabled to check that the programmes haven't been blocked. Windows XP platform Michael Presley on "Adios mi amigos" http://community.acdsee.com/forums/topic/adios-mi-amigos#post-42661 Thu, 24 Sep 2009 22:30:31 +0000 Michael Presley 42661@http://community.acdsee.com/forums/ So I guess this is goodbye - until the next major release - I do enjoy the discussions on what we like, what we dislike, and how to make the best of the software - but as I've said in other posts - ACDSee has sadly gone down a path that I'm not willing to travel and I won't be purchasing the new version of ACDSee Pro - I guess I'll have to limp along with Lightroom (meant tongue in cheek). Maybe the next version will be more to my liking. Best of luck with the new version... Regards, Mike tracychess on "PROCESS - EDIT - PROCESS" http://community.acdsee.com/forums/topic/process-edit-process#post-40877 Wed, 19 Aug 2009 16:40:12 +0000 tracychess 40877@http://community.acdsee.com/forums/ I open a photo in DEVELOP mode and use GEOMETRY to shift the alignment.  Ok. I switch to EDIT.  The new ALIGNMENT is maintained.  I use ROTATE to shift the alignment further.  Ok.  I switch back to DEVELOP.  Nope.  The message I get is: This image cannot be opened in DEVELOP without losing the changes entered in EDIT, blah blah blah.  Nonsense.  So, I am in Edit.  I read the message and select SAVE.  I save as the SAME FILENAME.  That's what I want.  I switch to DEVELOP. The image is rotated the way I left it in DEVELOP.  I Switch to EDIT.  The image is rotated the way I left it in Edit.  Too weird.  I switch back to DEVELOP. NOPE.  Although I did not make changes in EDIT, I get the same message: This image cannot be opened in develop without losing the changes made in EDIT, blah, blah, blah.   Nonsense. I did not make any changes.  I switch to MANAGE.  The photo shows a D and an E.  I read the help file.  It says:  Developed  Displays a Develop overlay icon on thumbnails if the file has been developed.  Edited  Displays an Edit overlay icon on thumbnails if the file has been edited.  hmmm....  I open the image again.  It opens in Edit.  I wonder, how many different variations of nonsense I can create by doing things in a different sequence?  The help file says 'DEVELOP FIRST', then Edit. But many of the same functions exist in both 'modes'. Mortals do not read help files.  But wait, there's more.  I open in Edit.  I change the EXPOSURE. (brighten the image).  I switch to develop (nope, so I save as same filename and it switches) - but the EXPOSURE change is not visible?  So I switch to Manage - the exposure change shows.  I drag-drop into photoshop and the exposure change has been applied.  But not seen in DEVELOP mode.  I'm going home now.... This is too complicated.... Gothmoth on "ACDSee and Google Earth" http://community.acdsee.com/forums/topic/acdsee-and-google-earth#post-42706 Fri, 25 Sep 2009 14:10:50 +0000 Gothmoth 42706@http://community.acdsee.com/forums/ mhm.. i dont see my posting. i asked if there is a possibility to open google earth (not google maps) from within acdsee. so that the GPS info from the picture is used to show the location in google earth. Wombat on "What will happen to this forum?" http://community.acdsee.com/forums/topic/what-will-happen-to-this-forum#post-42664 Thu, 24 Sep 2009 23:33:11 +0000 Wombat 42664@http://community.acdsee.com/forums/ There's so much useful information here that has come out of both general discussion and bug reports. Will it all be archived somewhere once the final release comes out? BShrader on "Canon 7D raw?" http://community.acdsee.com/forums/topic/canon-7d-raw#post-42487 Tue, 22 Sep 2009 20:48:39 +0000 BShrader 42487@http://community.acdsee.com/forums/ How soon will we see the ability to process raw files from the new Canon 7D? They are due to ship next week and I'm told I should see mine shortly thereafter.