Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 3 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Price to Upgrade to LR 2.0  (Read 13100 times)
Goodlistener
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 120



WWW
« on: April 02, 2008, 10:05:17 PM »
ReplyReply

Apparently Adobe has announced a public Beat of Lightroom 2.0 today.  How did Adobe handle the cost of upgrading from say Photo Shop CS2 to Photoshop CS3?  Are they going to ask me for money?
Logged
DarkPenguin
Guest
« Reply #1 on: April 02, 2008, 10:22:24 PM »
ReplyReply

Yes.  A bunch of it.
Logged
Josh-H
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1905



WWW
« Reply #2 on: April 02, 2008, 10:29:07 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Yes. A bunch of it.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=186615\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

LOL - in Adobe's defence - they have actually stated that they have not 'yet' decided on final pricing [or at least they are not 'yet' ready to disclose it]

I would imagine there will be a smaller upgrade charge for existing 1.x users however.
« Last Edit: April 02, 2008, 10:29:35 PM by Josh-H » Logged

madmanchan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2100


« Reply #3 on: April 02, 2008, 10:31:28 PM »
ReplyReply

In general it costs money to upgrade whenever the first digit of the version number changes ...
Logged

John Hollenberg
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 762


« Reply #4 on: April 02, 2008, 10:33:34 PM »
ReplyReply

I would guess maybe $99 to upgrade--about a third of list price for LR.

--John
Logged
canlogic
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 97


WWW
« Reply #5 on: April 03, 2008, 07:13:24 AM »
ReplyReply

I haven't tried the beta yet but from what I have read about new features it had better be fairly cheap. It looks like a lot of the "new" stuff are things that should have been in 1.0 like dual monitor support. I think they kind of rushed it out to stave off sales of Apperture and are now adding the missing stuff back in.
Logged

1dmkIII, some lenses, Epson 7880, iMac, Leica M8, other stuff
timhurst
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 82


WWW
« Reply #6 on: April 03, 2008, 09:20:48 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I haven't tried the beta yet but from what I have read about new features it had better be fairly cheap. It looks like a lot of the "new" stuff are things that should have been in 1.0 like dual monitor support. I think they kind of rushed it out to stave off sales of Apperture and are now adding the missing stuff back in.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=186713\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


I agree. The localised editing is proper version two fair but the rest feel like point release updates.

Even the enhanced CS3 functionality is a little smoke and mirrors. Correct me if I'm wrong but all it looks to be doing is passing the RAW files + parameters to the Camera Raw plugin in a "quiet" mode. Which means PS has to be kept bang up to date with LR for any of this to work correctly.
« Last Edit: April 03, 2008, 09:34:20 AM by timhurst » Logged

Kenneth Sky
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 418


WWW
« Reply #7 on: April 03, 2008, 10:02:20 AM »
ReplyReply

I have no quarrel with a modest upgrade cost but shouldn't beta testers be rewarded as well?
Logged
DarkPenguin
Guest
« Reply #8 on: April 03, 2008, 10:24:53 AM »
ReplyReply

Not on a public beta.  (This is a public enough beta.)

The reward (in theory) is the ability to give feedback on the product before it is released.
« Last Edit: April 03, 2008, 10:25:23 AM by DarkPenguin » Logged
John Hollenberg
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 762


« Reply #9 on: April 03, 2008, 10:57:22 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I agree. The localised editing is proper version two fair but the rest feel like point release updates.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=186729\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I don't agree re: these features:

--Dual monitor support
--30,000 pixel limit
--Revised Metadata browser (whether you like the change or not, probably was a fair amount of work)
--Smart Collections
--Improved output sharpening based on PK Sharpener algorhythms

When you add these all up, plus localized corrections, I think this merits a 2.0 designation.  Of course, if they just had soft proofing...

--John
Logged
canlogic
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 97


WWW
« Reply #10 on: April 03, 2008, 11:21:02 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I don't agree re: these features:

--Dual monitor support
--30,000 pixel limit
--Revised Metadata browser (whether you like the change or not, probably was a fair amount of work)
--Smart Collections
--Improved output sharpening based on PK Sharpener algorhythms

When you add these all up, plus localized corrections, I think this merits a 2.0 designation.  Of course, if they just had soft proofing...

--John
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=186762\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

To me the first 2 should have been in the initial release. 3 is a HoHum as is 4.
5 is a valueable addin if it works as well as Photokit.
If you look at what Apple added in 2.0 and the free 2.1 Adobe has not come up with a 2.0 yet.
Logged

1dmkIII, some lenses, Epson 7880, iMac, Leica M8, other stuff
John Hollenberg
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 762


« Reply #11 on: April 03, 2008, 11:31:07 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
If you look at what Apple added in 2.0 and the free 2.1 Adobe has not come up with a 2.0 yet.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=186774\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

For those of us on Windows, that is kind of a moot point.  Do you use Aperture rather than LR?  If so, why?  If not, why not?

--John
Logged
timhurst
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 82


WWW
« Reply #12 on: April 03, 2008, 11:54:52 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I don't agree re: these features:

--Dual monitor support
--30,000 pixel limit
--Revised Metadata browser (whether you like the change or not, probably was a fair amount of work)
--Smart Collections
--Improved output sharpening based on PK Sharpener algorhythms

[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=186762\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I would be surprised if any of these were major tasks development wise (1, 2 and 4 especially so). Depends how many hands Adobe has on it and if corporate is willing to back up the production team and push it to greatness - it COULD be so very very good. Which is why I'm disappointed they see this as a full release, regardless of Aperture.
Logged

rdonson
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1421


WWW
« Reply #13 on: April 03, 2008, 12:23:15 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I don't agree re: these features:

--Dual monitor support
--30,000 pixel limit
--Revised Metadata browser (whether you like the change or not, probably was a fair amount of work)
--Smart Collections
--Improved output sharpening based on PK Sharpener algorhythms

When you add these all up, plus localized corrections, I think this merits a 2.0 designation.  Of course, if they just had soft proofing...

--John
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=186762\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

or..... Adobe is looking for another cash infusion through its periodic upgrades.

We'll have to decide if 2.0 is actually worth paying $99 (or whatever) to upgrade to
Logged

[span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%'][span style='font-family:Arial'][span style='font-family:Geneva'][span style='font-size:8pt;line-height:100%']Regards,
Ron[/span][/span][/span][/span]
canlogic
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 97


WWW
« Reply #14 on: April 03, 2008, 04:57:23 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
For those of us on Windows, that is kind of a moot point.  Do you use Aperture rather than LR?  If so, why?  If not, why not?

--John
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=186777\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


I actually use both. I originaly bought Aperture when it was released and got a free copy of LR because I had bought (I forget what the software was called but Adobe bought them) When I got my Leica M8 LR supported it so I started useing it more and more. Don't get me wrong I really like LR and use it on my PC notebook but after upgradeing to Aperture 2.0 I find I get better conversions and I like the workflow. There are a few things I still like better in LR but for now I mostly don't have to round trip to PS where with LR I do. I am wondering if Adobe are holding back on LR features as they may not want to step on PS sales. In the end I probably will upgrade it but I think they at least need to put softproofing in it.
Logged

1dmkIII, some lenses, Epson 7880, iMac, Leica M8, other stuff
John Hollenberg
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 762


« Reply #15 on: April 03, 2008, 05:23:39 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Don't get me wrong I really like LR and use it on my PC notebook but after upgradeing to Aperture 2.0 I find I get better conversions and I like the workflow.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=186871\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Better conversions in what way?  Sometimes I wish I had a Mac so I can see how the other half lives... but as a die hard PC owner for 25 years it is hard to make a change.  Every time I play with a Mac I am not impressed (not Mac bashing, just my impression).

--John
Logged
GregW
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 305


WWW
« Reply #16 on: April 03, 2008, 05:48:15 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Better conversions in what way? Sometimes I wish I had a Mac so I can see how the other half lives... but as a die hard PC owner for 25 years it is hard to make a change. Every time I play with a Mac I am not impressed (not Mac bashing, just my impression).
--John
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=186878\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I'm not sure we can be truly objective in answering your question because conversions are subject to personal taste and preference.  My two take aways are: The initial Aperture 2 conversion is closer to that of Capture NX (D3, D300 NEFs) which I consider better.  I find the color and tone a little more pleasing when compared to a Lightroom 1.3 conversion.

Still, I can get pretty good results in both LR and Aperture.  I'm normally an advocate of pick one tool, stick with it and maximise your knowledge and understanding.  I'm convinced that switching from one to the other ultimately dilutes knowledge and capability.  That said, despite being a very satisfied LR user I am very impressed with Aperture 2.  I'll revise my opinion when the final release LR 2.0 is available.  Aperture 1.0 was a joke making LR 1.0 a shoe-in.  The game has changed.
« Last Edit: April 03, 2008, 06:13:51 PM by GregW » Logged
Tam
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 39



WWW
« Reply #17 on: April 03, 2008, 05:53:22 PM »
ReplyReply

I suppose one could point out that the software released as a Beta yesterday was described very carefully as unfinished and indeed, lacking features that will be in the release version.

It was clear to me that it was more of a rough sketch, released for comment and tire kicking.

So I really don't see the point in starting to be critical of its lack of features when you are not aware of the eventual feature set. I don't see the point of complaining about a price that hasn't been set.

I don't see the point in joining in on the discussion of what the next version of Lr will be, or will cost when the only point of view you can have is based on speculation and opinion unless you join in the spirit of cooperation and creativity that has characterized the entire Lr project.

I see a lot of good will on Adobe's part.
Logged
John.Murray
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 893



WWW
« Reply #18 on: April 03, 2008, 05:54:40 PM »
ReplyReply

Curious no one has mentioned 64bit support.  This plus Smart object support round-tripping into CS3 makes this a compelling upgrade, at least for me.
Logged

GregW
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 305


WWW
« Reply #19 on: April 03, 2008, 06:31:33 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I see a lot of good will on Adobe's part.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=186885\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I see a lot of goodwill in the LR team.  I'm yet to be convinced by Adobe as a whole.  LR was almost stillborn.  For some time to come I am convinced LR's talented engineers will be constrained by segment overlap and the fear of canibalisation.   Adobe's senior managers are responsible for balancing this equation.  

Apple failed to deliver with Aperture v1 to point that many believed they had completely lost interest.  Well see what they come up over the next 12-18 months.  What is for sure is that they are only limited by technical challenges and the amount of resources Apple are willing to commit.

Things are very interesting right now.
« Last Edit: April 03, 2008, 06:33:51 PM by GregW » Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad