Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 3 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: List of flaws and needed revisions to version 1.0  (Read 17384 times)
marty m
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 335


WWW
« on: April 11, 2007, 02:23:08 AM »
ReplyReply

This thread is intended to be a compilation of the flaws in Lightroom.  What needs to be fixed in the next version?  What is not working properly?  What causes crashes?  What features should be added?  What did Adobe fail to include that is in equivalent software?

We can post on the Adobe web site until the next millenium and our individual suggestions might never be noticed.  On the other hand, several of the participants on the forum are directly identified with the design of the software.  Hopefully they will forward our combined suggestions.
« Last Edit: April 11, 2007, 02:24:50 AM by marty m » Logged
marty m
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 335


WWW
« Reply #1 on: April 11, 2007, 02:26:50 AM »
ReplyReply

Here's two of the major issues that must be addressed in any upgrade. These are discussed in other threads:

(1) Lightroom must import ALL files and not only the raw files. So if the CF card has raw files, jpeg files and wav audio files -- all with the same file name -- all three will be imported into Lightroom.

It is the software equivalent of criminal negligence that Lightroom now arbitrarily imports only the raw files. That means that when the photographer erases or reformats the CF card, he or she loses all of the other files.

Lightroom can incorporate a very simple filter so that only one type of file is seen, and the photographer can delete all the others if you choose to do so.

In the meantime, the import function in Lightroom is so severely crippled that it is essentially useless for importing from CF cards.

Use the import function in Photo Mechanic instead.

(2) Lightroom needs to include the ability to play back audio wav files recorded on Canon pro bodies. This should be seamless, and Photo Mechanic is an excellent example of how the feature should work.

As long as Lightroom lacks this feature it can't be used for reviewing and editing photo files.  At least not if the photographer makes extensive use of the audio function while shooting and needs to play those audio notes back when reviewing and editing.
Logged
Kirk Gittings
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1547


WWW
« Reply #2 on: April 11, 2007, 10:03:30 AM »
ReplyReply

1) LR needs to be able to write to a network drive.
2) Without being able to correct for barrel distortion, in addition to CA,  means I always have to reopen most images in PS to finish the image. I may as well use PS to begin with.
Logged

Thanks,
Kirk

Kirk Gittings
Architecture and Landscape Photography
WWW.GITTINGSPHOTO.COM

LIGHT+SPACE+STRUCTURE (blog)
macgyver
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 510


« Reply #3 on: April 11, 2007, 10:07:51 AM »
ReplyReply

I wouldn't mind seeing a dodge and burn control, though I don't know if that is feasable the way LR is set up.  I doubt it.  Other than that maybe some speed improvments when dealing with large numbers of images.

Personally I never use LR to import off the card, instead I copy my card to where I want it in my file structure and then index that in LR.
Logged
dcp
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 13


WWW
« Reply #4 on: April 11, 2007, 11:23:45 AM »
ReplyReply

Noise control is horrible.. I'm sure Adobe can do better than that. The high ISO images processed from LR is decades away from the likes of C1PRO et al.
Logged

2x Canon EOS[span style='color:red']1[/span]dmk2; Canon EF16-35mm f2.8[span style='color:red']L[/span], 24-70mm f2.8[span style='color:red']L[/span], 35mm f1.4[span style='color:red']L[/span], 85mm f1.2[span style='color:red']L[/span], 70-200mm f2.8[span style='color:red']L[/span]IS, 135mm f2.8SF, 180mm f3.5[span style='color:red']L[/span] Sigma 10-20mm f4-5.6 - Full time wedding photographer
DarkPenguin
Guest
« Reply #5 on: April 11, 2007, 11:40:59 AM »
ReplyReply

I haven't played too much with this yet.  Did lightroom incorporate the nifty auto CA/fringing removal that RSP had?  The CA controls are nice but it "just happened" with RSP.
Logged
francois
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6802


« Reply #6 on: April 11, 2007, 11:49:46 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I haven't played too much with this yet.  Did lightroom incorporate the nifty auto CA/fringing removal that RSP had?  The CA controls are nice but it "just happened" with RSP.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=111895\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I haven't used RSP but LR can correct fringing.
« Last Edit: April 11, 2007, 11:51:00 AM by francois » Logged

Francois
francois
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6802


« Reply #7 on: April 11, 2007, 12:00:25 PM »
ReplyReply

Here's a few ones that would make my life easier (in no particular order):

1. Zoom to 1:1 with Crop Overlay Tool
2. Search for keyword's synonyms
3. Dodge & Burn
4. Local contrast enhancement
5. Split (and merge) libraries
6. Conform to keyword capitalization when suggesting keywords
7. Bring PKS and Noiseware into LR without the round trip to PS
8. Generate an optional log file of the import sessions

Be sure to fill Bug Report/Feature Request on Adobe website (here).
Logged

Francois
DarkPenguin
Guest
« Reply #8 on: April 11, 2007, 12:47:57 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I haven't used RSP but LR can correct fringing.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=111897\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I know.  Does it do it automatically like RSP?
« Last Edit: April 11, 2007, 12:48:19 PM by DarkPenguin » Logged
francois
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6802


« Reply #9 on: April 11, 2007, 12:58:18 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I know.  Does it do it automatically like RSP?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=111909\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
No, it doesn't.
Logged

Francois
JayS
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 64


« Reply #10 on: April 17, 2007, 08:54:21 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Noise control is horrible.. I'm sure Adobe can do better than that. The high ISO images processed from LR is decades away from the likes of C1PRO et al.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=111892\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I agree on this point.  I posted a question about Preprocessing Noise parameters on import based on ISO Metedata, similar to what could be done in RSP.  I can provide what I have set up there for various ISOs, but it is specific to a Canon 20D and was done by someone who put an extensive amount of work into RSP to do this and determine the best parameters to apply ahead of time.  The nicest aspect was that you could obviously have different ISOs on the same shoot, import and let RSP handle each different one automatically.

Jay S.
Logged
roine
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 7


« Reply #11 on: April 17, 2007, 10:52:27 AM »
ReplyReply

An option to turn off back ground jobs, eg the meta data uppdate, if You have a lot of picturs, i have 70 000, then all those background issues sinks the whole computer for a log time. The meta data and keyword counting and data collection takes a lot of power and make the program useless.

Roine
Logged
troyhouse
Guest
« Reply #12 on: April 17, 2007, 11:40:18 AM »
ReplyReply

2 huge ones, Speed. Seriously slower than it should be. And the ability to render a folder of images to screen rez, not just the ones visable in the window. This would make scrolling MUCH faster
Logged
BFoto
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 241



WWW
« Reply #13 on: April 17, 2007, 12:19:51 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi

1. Fix all PC related issues
- like crashing with CF card import of 100+ images
- Including the shadow option in overlays for slideshow (only on mac)

2. more speed+++. The time it takes to render previews or change images before a clear image is dispayed seriously hinders workflow

3. Fix speed issues related to applying spot healing tool. this essentially freezes its use, the more 'spots' the slower it gets

4. Prevent rendered jpeg preview degradation as more adjustments are made

5. Sharpening - aka RSP + unsharp mask

6. Noise reduction - aka RSP. High ISO files are poor in LR

7. Apply keyword functionality to folder structure.

8. Stacking - apply stacking in not just the folders.

9. Auto snapshot on export

10. Add ISO filter to the metadata browser in the LIbrary

11. How bout direct tethered shooting capacity from camera

Thanks
Logged

BFoto
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 241



WWW
« Reply #14 on: April 17, 2007, 12:23:41 PM »
ReplyReply

Also

12. soft proofing for print
Logged

roine
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 7


« Reply #15 on: April 17, 2007, 12:23:56 PM »
ReplyReply

Hello

abt spot healing, a version, selectible, where I only mark the spot and LR makes a per picture dessision for the source, today it only copy current to the other pictures, so source may vary and it isnīt so usefull if the target movs in a serie.

Roine
Logged
Ben Rubinstein
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1733


« Reply #16 on: April 17, 2007, 01:00:32 PM »
ReplyReply

Speed, Bridge 1 and ACR is far far faster at rendering previews andshowing changes or zooming in to 100%, it's not good enough.

The recovery highlights tool works by lowering contrast in the highlights rather than actually recovering the data as the minus exposure tool does, this is simply lazy given that the fill tool works as it should i.e. actually lightening the shadows rather than adjusting the contrast in them.

There needs to be rotate in the develop mode! It's crazy to have to go back to grid mode (with the 5 secs that it takes) each time I want to rotate. Not being able to star more than one pic at a time except in grid mode is silly too.
Logged

theophilus
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 154


« Reply #17 on: April 17, 2007, 06:54:15 PM »
ReplyReply

1) "Loading..." time is inexcusably slow
2) Ability to define multiple steps in zooming (fit-->50%-->100%)
3) Real USM/Smart Sharpen type sharpening
Logged
Ben Rubinstein
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1733


« Reply #18 on: April 17, 2007, 07:20:24 PM »
ReplyReply

I just tried rendering 100% previews to see if that cut the loading time down, yes it did but it still takes 6-9 seconds to show at 100% (instead of 15!) and I have no idea how that is possible, even if there was a full size jpg to load, PS can do it in half a second, why does it take 8 seconds for LR to load and show a section of what has to be a pretty small file?

Of course the rendering takes an age and a half. I'm thinking of just going back to Bridge/ACR, it's just far far faster.
Logged

nicolaasdb
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 213


WWW
« Reply #19 on: April 18, 2007, 02:12:01 AM »
ReplyReply

I would like it when:

--->> I can put text over an image (visual copyright protection) so when my images are in a webgallery my copyright will always be there...and I don't have to open them up in CS first and put it on there with an action.

--->> I could put plug in filters in it....like alien skin exposure....so I will have a nice starting point

Have to work with LR more to come up with other needs.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad