On Oct 31, 2007, at 12:51 PM, Mark Roberts wrote: > My impressions of the web gallery generator in Lightroom: > Generates even more bloated code than Photoshop - lots of JavaScript > and a fairly somplex directory structure (for a web gallery). I was > also disappointed that it doesn't seem to let you set sharpening of > yout web images (the sharpening settings applied in Lightroom's > Develop > module apply, of course, but I have them set for basic capture > sharpening, not small web output). Overall, the output looks pretty > but > I don't think I'll be using it again.
I find the simple HTML gallery produces good enough for casual stuff. BTW, for HTML gallery output you can remove the 'medium' and 'small' JPEG image renderings entirely before uploading them to a server, they're only used by the flash gallery formats. I find the HTML output a little more complex than I'd prefer as well, but it's fairly easy to understand and work with once you study it a little bit. The js and css files are pretty clear and not too complicated. I post-process all JPEG exports from Lightroom intended for the web with a quick Photoshop script that does a set, small USM adjustment. Lightroom does not provide any output sharpening other than the relatively simplistic sharpening function in the Print module. This is something I expect in the future, many have told me they've requested it as a feature add. Godfrey -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
