Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 6 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: What's still missing from LR4?  (Read 18722 times)
luxborealis
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 685



WWW
« on: January 10, 2012, 07:09:11 PM »
ReplyReply

I know, I know - I'm raining on the parade, but at some point the "wish list" has to start. Don't get me wrong - I am enjoying LR4 and am still discovering nuances and improvements over LR3.

So let me get the ball rolling: here's the start of my "wish" list for LR4:
  • LR4 still has only a "spot removal" brush and not a true healing/clone stamp brush;
  • I'd like the option of having some book layouts with more informal rotated and layered photos, something iPhoto and Aperture have always offered - how difficult would it be to add a "rotate" function along with the "bring to front", "send to back" options built into iPhoto/Aperture
  • I know many were hoping for an implementation of Layers in LR4 - not me, but it would be nice if the adjustment brush and graduated filter "pins" are numbered with those numbers referenced in the history so when reading the history, you know which steps correspond to which brush (we aren't all linear thinkers and doers!)
  • integration with mobile devices such as tablets and phones; e.g. Capture1 can wirelessly send images to mobile devices from the app (while shooting tethered or processing, I believe);
  • the Slideshow module is still one of LR's weak links - it could have done with some Ken Burns effects, a soundtrack timeline and an ability to vary the transitions without going random; while LR is great for a quick show, that's about it
  • even the Web module hasn't seen any improvements along the lines of what some third party guys have done like the Turning Gate.

Perhaps Slideshow and Web should be dropped since third party solutions are so much more superior and it would make for a leaner app (LR4 does seem to run a bit slowly compared to LR3)
Logged

Terry McDonald
Revealing the art inherent in nature
- visit luxBorealis.com.
Have a read of my PhotoBlog and subscribe!
DianeK
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6


« Reply #1 on: January 10, 2012, 10:54:14 PM »
ReplyReply


Perhaps Slideshow and Web should be dropped since third party solutions are so much more superior and it would make for a leaner app (LR4 does seem to run a bit slowly compared to LR3)

Yes I heartily agree they could have spent a little time improving the slideshow module.  It's so annoying when the music un-syncs a few seconds with each playing of the show.  If you have spent a lot of effort timing your dissolves with certain musical highlights, even less than a second of variance throws the impact you have built out the window.
Just curious about your musing about third party solutions - what do you recommend for a Mac user since ProShowGold does not have a Mac version?
DianeK
Logged
Josh-H
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1905



WWW
« Reply #2 on: January 11, 2012, 12:32:11 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Perhaps Slideshow and Web should be dropped

I don't think dropping them is a good idea since they both have very useful applications.

I would have preferred to see more work on both of these; rather than the inclusion of 'Book' and 'Map'. But thats just me.. I like to finish one project before starting another  Grin
Logged

john beardsworth
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2464



WWW
« Reply #3 on: January 11, 2012, 01:43:21 AM »
ReplyReply

I agree with your original point that Slideshow needs some extra features. Ken Burns and a timeline are obviously lacking, and I'd add multiple music tracks and videos in the slideshow. To drop it, as you then suggest, runs against the LR concept of one tool for the whole workflow.

Similarly with Web, we don't need Adobe creating new built-in web galleries (fwiw they have rewritten the Flash galleries so they are colour managed). The very concept is to host third party solutions, and all of us who have created galleries want one thing - the ability to define our own right-side panels.

As for mobile devices, notice the export to Revel (formerly Carousel).

I'm not sure there'll be much demand for layouts involving rotation, and I'd say there are already too many tutti frutti layouts . However, there is a mechanism like Web for creating your own layouts and I think implementing this is a better use of developers' time and skills.
« Last Edit: January 11, 2012, 09:23:02 AM by johnbeardy » Logged

dreed
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1170


« Reply #4 on: January 11, 2012, 02:21:44 AM »
ReplyReply

What's missing in LR4?
#1 - the de-blur algorithm in the now famous video clip
#2 - might be there but I've seen no reference: being able to use the ruler for angle correction whilst zoomed in
#3 - object detection, via edge detection, so that you can adjust objects rather than need to use the brush and paint them.
#4 - being able to tell LR that a bunch of "edges" should all be parallel and have it calculate the transformation required to "fix" the picture rather than rely on lens correction
#5 - being able to "snap to lines" when selecting a position to start/end the rule for angle correction
#6 - button titled "magic" that automagically transforms any image into a pulitzer prize winner.
Logged
kikashi
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3684



« Reply #5 on: January 11, 2012, 02:35:55 AM »
ReplyReply

it would be nice if the adjustment brush and graduated filter "pins" are numbered with those numbers referenced in the history so when reading the history, you know which steps correspond to which brush (we aren't all linear thinkers and doers!)
What a good idea!

Perhaps Slideshow and Web should be dropped since third party solutions are so much more superior and it would make for a leaner app (LR4 does seem to run a bit slowly compared to LR3)
To be fair, you're running a beta of LR4 which probably contains a good deal of debugging code.

Jeremy
Logged
Fips
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 195



WWW
« Reply #6 on: January 11, 2012, 04:31:35 AM »
ReplyReply

I was hoping for more a more flexible use of gradients. Like curved or circular ones. A more advanced lens correction tool would have been nice too. Especially the distortion correction could use one or two sliders to control second order distortions. Does anybody know if whether the built in lens profiles make use of higher orders?
Logged
dreed
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1170


« Reply #7 on: January 11, 2012, 04:44:18 AM »
ReplyReply

I was hoping for more a more flexible use of gradients. Like curved or circular ones.

Oooh, being able to apply a gradient filter using a curved surface rather than a straight one sounds very nice. (Think of a circle as just being a curve that is closed on the screen rather than off.)
« Last Edit: January 11, 2012, 11:21:12 AM by dreed » Logged
bdp
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 235


WWW
« Reply #8 on: January 11, 2012, 05:06:30 AM »
ReplyReply

1. An overlay function like every medium format capture software has, so that magazine layouts can be placed over images during a shoot using tethered capture.

2. a 'same as previous' setting for auto-import from a folder. It exists already for tethered capture and would be useful for auto import for cameras not supported for tethered capture that run their own software in the background.
Logged
RFPhotography
Guest
« Reply #9 on: January 11, 2012, 06:43:42 AM »
ReplyReply

Support for 32 bit image formats.  For at least cataloging if not editing.
Logged
john beardsworth
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2464



WWW
« Reply #10 on: January 11, 2012, 07:45:10 AM »
ReplyReply

1. An overlay function like every medium format capture software has, so that magazine layouts can be placed over images during a shoot using tethered capture.

You've not looked hard enough - it's under View > Layout Overlay. See this video on a couple of tricks.

John

Logged

madmanchan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2100


« Reply #11 on: January 11, 2012, 08:21:55 AM »
ReplyReply

I was hoping for more a more flexible use of gradients. Like curved or circular ones. A more advanced lens correction tool would have been nice too. Especially the distortion correction could use one or two sliders to control second order distortions. Does anybody know if whether the built in lens profiles make use of higher orders?

Yes, the Adobe lens profiles correct high-order distortion (up to polynomial degree 7).  They handle not only simple barrel/pincushion distortion, but also wave/half-wave distortion as found in many wide-angle lenses.

The manual distortion slider does up to degree 3.  We found in our testing that providing additional sliders for higher-order distortion correction was very unintuitive, and a frustrating experience to get a scene line to appear straight in the image (esp. if there is wave or half-wave distortion).  Much easier and more accurate to use a lens profile with a one-click operation.
Logged

luxborealis
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 685



WWW
« Reply #12 on: January 11, 2012, 08:52:34 AM »
ReplyReply

This is a great start to a list for Adobe - please be sure to forward your suggestions to them, too!

Quote
I was hoping for more a more flexible use of gradients. Like curved or circular ones.

Agreed! It would be great to be able to "warp" the line. Also, it would be helpful to be able to shift the midpoint within the gradient.

The reason I suggest dropping Web and Slideshow (if Adobe isn't serious about improving them and implementing them well) is that I sure don't want Lightroom to be become code-bloated with "half-assed" features as has happened to other apps.

Quote
Just curious about your musing about third party solutions - what do you recommend for a Mac user since ProShowGold does not have a Mac version?

Diane - For slideshows on my Mac, I often use iPhoto/Aperture using properly sized and sharpened jpegs exported from LR. When I want to alter the transitions and timing with a simple soundtrack, I use Keynote (just drag and drop jpegs). For really serious slideshows, use iMovie.

Quote
I'm not sure there'll be much demand for layouts involving rotation, and I'd say there are already too many tutti frutti layouts . However, there is a mechanism like Web for creating your own layouts and I think implementing this is a better use of developers' time and skills.

John - "tutti frutti" to you is artistic and creative to many others! At least the option should be there and neither Web or Print has it. Many clients love it when one or more photos on the page are "offset" with a slight rotation. Take a look at modern layouts - it's jaunty, it's liberating and it is easy to implement. If a word processor can do it, a graphics package should be able to and when LR goes into "Book" module it becomes more of a graphics package and less of a photo package.

Also - Flash is dying a slow death and even Adobe recognizes it but won't give up on it quite yet. The sooner HTML5 is implemented, the better.
Logged

Terry McDonald
Revealing the art inherent in nature
- visit luxBorealis.com.
Have a read of my PhotoBlog and subscribe!
Fips
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 195



WWW
« Reply #13 on: January 11, 2012, 08:59:12 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
The manual distortion slider does up to degree 3.  We found in our testing that providing additional sliders for higher-order distortion correction was very unintuitive, and a frustrating experience to get a scene line to appear straight in the image (esp. if there is wave or half-wave distortion).  Much easier and more accurate to use a lens profile with a one-click operation.

Thank's a lot for this insight, I appreciate it a lot! I don't want to hijack this thread but could you explain to me, or point me to some explanation, of how higher order distortions are corrected with just a single slider? I agree that the lens profiles give excellent results in general, but for example with my Tamron 17-50 2.8 there still seem to be some residual distortions a bit away from the corners. (However, I haven't done any rigorous testing so far. Just noticed it in a series of architectural photos I made).
Logged
john beardsworth
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2464



WWW
« Reply #14 on: January 11, 2012, 09:21:07 AM »
ReplyReply

Also - Flash is dying a slow death and even Adobe recognizes it but won't give up on it quite yet. The sooner HTML5 is implemented, the better.
I didn't say I agreed it was a good thing that they'd put time into updating the Flash gallery - I agree it's beating a dying horse. LR3 already supported HTML5, so Adobe can leave it to the third parties. What they did do was strip out the Internet Explorer based browser in LR's Windows version and put in some Webkit code so 3rd party galleries would look right in LR on both platforms.

John
« Last Edit: January 11, 2012, 09:26:31 AM by johnbeardy » Logged

BernieKohl
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 24



« Reply #15 on: January 11, 2012, 10:29:20 AM »
ReplyReply

I would really like to see something similar to Capture's LCC correction.
« Last Edit: January 11, 2012, 12:21:51 PM by BernieKohl » Logged
john beardsworth
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2464



WWW
« Reply #16 on: January 11, 2012, 11:13:37 AM »
ReplyReply

You might want to describe what it is...
Logged

ihv
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 76


WWW
« Reply #17 on: January 11, 2012, 12:23:34 PM »
ReplyReply

I'd like to see one day integrated 3rd party plug-in API (not after process) - that would enable features delivered much faster than the current iteration of LR.
A bit shame not to have a proper cloning brush tool in 2012, fingers crossed it will make into the final version.
Logged
DianeK
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6


« Reply #18 on: January 11, 2012, 12:43:44 PM »
ReplyReply


Diane - For slideshows on my Mac, I often use iPhoto/Aperture using properly sized and sharpened jpegs exported from LR. When I want to alter the transitions and timing with a simple soundtrack, I use Keynote (just drag and drop jpegs). For really serious slideshows, use iMovie.


Thanks.  I have been using iMovie and iPhoto for slideshows outside of LR3.  I was hoping this was something of ProShowGold calibre out there for Mac that you knew of.
Thanks again.
Diane
Logged
RFPhotography
Guest
« Reply #19 on: January 11, 2012, 01:07:53 PM »
ReplyReply

I would really like to see something similar to Capture's LCC correction.

You can already create custom lens profiles for use in LR/ACR.  And there is a lengthy list of lenses already profiled.

http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/lensprofile_creator/
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 6 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad