I’m currently using a little app called PhotoBulk to prepare photos to submission to a client. I export from Lightroom at a particular pixel size, then go into PhotoBulk and perform two operations: optimize JPEG quality (I’ve found that setting PhotoBulk to its middle setting works well) and save (which PhotoBulk does in a subfolder), then copy the optimized versions over the originals; as a separate operation, load those optimized copies into PhotoBulk and resize to 800 pixels on the long edge (again, saved to a subfolder); finally, rename the 800 pixel versions with a suffix in Path Finder before compressing and uploading. This process works, but could definitely use less involvement on my end, and Retrobatch looks like it has the potential to make that happen.
First things first, I need for Retrobatch to be able to open directly from Lightroom, which has the ability to open exported files directly in another application at the end of the export process. This works with PhotoBulk, but Retrobatch says it is “unable to open files in the Preview.app Document format” for the exported JPEGs, which seems odd, since RB is perfectly fine loading a folder of JPEGs from within the application.
Once we cross that hurdle, I’d like to be able to do a JPEG optimization - resaving over the originals with a specified quality works well enough for my purposes - and then resize to 800 pixels on the long edge and save to a subfolder of the folder the original images loaded from (with a filename suffix, which seems to work fine already).
If it could then ZIP compress the contents of that folder, with the reduced-size subfolder included, that would be a bonus, but just getting to the point where I can just run a batch with minimal involvement would be a big step in the right direction.
So, is there something I can do to get Retrobatch to open a set of files directly from a Lightroom export? From there, I think I can save optimized JPEGs over the originals, and I believe saving (in my case, the 800 pixel versions) to a folder relative the source folder is already a feature request, but I’m not sure if/when that might be coming.
Thanks for all the work you’ve put into an interesting tool - I’m hoping it will be able to handle my specific use case at some point in the future.