Is Luminar non-destructive? Is Luminar non-destructive?

Mark1948

Is Luminar non-destructive?

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

Mark1948 wrote:

Is Luminar non-destructive?

As far as I'm concerned, everything is non-destructive. After processing, I save the image with a different name. I would never copy over an original with a processed image.

Blenheim Orange Loc: Michigan

Mark1948 wrote:

Is Luminar non-destructive?

"Non-destructive" seems to me to be a marketing buzz phrase. I spent some time at the Luminar site, and "non-destructive editing" is touted, but not explained. Anytime you replace a file with a different file having the same name, that is "destructive" of the original file stored under that file name. That is a fundamental to file management with computers. All that "non-destructive editing" could mean is that the program by default creates a copy (or a rendition of a raw file) for editing purposes. If I am not mistaken, that is true of all image editing programs when working with raw files.

What does "non-destructive" mean to you, and what are you looking for?

Mike

Mac Loc: Pittsburgh, Philadelphia now Hernando Co. Fl.

Blenheim Orange wrote:

"Non-destructive" seems to me to be a ma... (show quote)

Yes, you can undo any change you make even after you save the change and you can return to the original with a click.

Mark1948

I always save raw & bakup raw files before importing to LR but wonder if like LR, Luminar separately saves "edits" or an altered/edited version of the original file?

Also, I probably ought to create a separate post but would really appreciate seeing criticism of Luminar.

Mark1948

I always save raw & bakup raw files before importing to LR but wonder if like LR, Luminar separately saves "edits" or an altered/edited version of the original file?

Also, I probably ought to create a separate post but would really appreciate seeing criticism of Luminar.

NeilJP

I used the beta for Windows and was impressed enough to advance purchase the new version that is released later this week. On the face of it, it would appear to do all that lightroom does possibly with the exception of user defined presets although I am not sure about that as there is no reason you can't save the presets if your choice as a favourite. I would suggest waiting till January and then asking the question as that will give users of the new Luminaries about 6 weeks to play and understand it better.

NeilJP

I used the beta for Windows and was impressed enough to advance purchase the new version that is released later this week. On the face of it, it would appear to do all that lightroom does possibly with the exception of user defined presets although I am not sure about that as there is no reason you can't save the presets if your choice as a favourite. I would suggest waiting till January and then asking the question as that will give users of the new Luminaries about 6 weeks to play and understand it better.

leftj Loc: Texas

Blenheim Orange wrote:

"Non-destructive" seems to me to be a ma... (show quote)

In Luminar you can revert to original after editing. To me that is "non-destructive".

a6k Loc: Detroit & Sanibel

When you "save.." in Luminar you save a different file which has the lmnr extension. I can't swear that it could not hurt your original but I haven't seen how it could. I always "export variants" anyhow. There does not appear to be a menu item for saving to the original raw file.

The commenter who always edits copies rather than originals is using exemplary but understandable caution. It's just a "best practice". But in this case, I don't see the point.

The ability to "revert" is to the live version.

tommystrat Loc: Bigfork, Montana

After processing, I use Luminar and the "Export" function first. I save the processed work to the desktop under an identifiable, but different name. Then, I can "Save" the original .nef or .jpg file as named with a .lmnr extension. I NEVER override or destructively edit the original .nef file. I copy the original .nef file, process it in Luminar, then store the processed image with the original .nef file. This may be overkill, but I have lost more than one original file hitting "Save" and I'd rather be "save" than sorry! Ouch, really bad pun...!

brucewells Loc: Central Kentucky

For the benefit of this thread:

https://www.simplerphoto.com/nondestructive-image-editor/

gkuep1945 Loc: Dowling Park, Florida

I don't know of any software which can format a photo into a RAW file. The RAW file is data of the manufacturer's format. No one has the option of saving in that format. Therefore, when you open the RAW file, the software has to convert the data into a photo format in order to display it. Then you can edit it and save it into a photo format type file of your choosing.
That is the basis of being "non-destructive" in that the RAW file is only read and never written by the software.

dhowland

I'm interested in the answer to this question as well. I don't simply want an opportunity to "revert" but to have the RAW files left alone as in Lightroom. Interested to hear what the answer that is ... so far not hearing it definitively ...

leftj Loc: Texas

dhowland wrote:

I'm interested in the answer to this question as well. I don't simply want an opportunity to "revert" but to have the RAW files left alone as in Lightroom. Interested to hear what the answer that is ... so far not hearing it definitively ...

Then you obviously can't comprehend.