Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Clarifications relating to Lightroom and CC  (Read 9232 times)
BartvanderWolf
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 3758


« Reply #20 on: May 18, 2013, 06:36:33 PM »
ReplyReply

Isn't that exactly what they're doing now ?  by offering the first year at a discount rate.

Hi,

That would of course be only available for first time subscribers, wouldn't it?
Still scr€wing the users that got Adobe to where they are now ...

Still unknown is what happens when users unsubscribe for a (couple of) month(s),
and re-subscribe only when required, using CS6 for the interim period ...

Cheers,
Bart
« Last Edit: May 18, 2013, 06:45:22 PM by BartvanderWolf » Logged
Isaac
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2886


« Reply #21 on: May 18, 2013, 07:08:05 PM »
ReplyReply

That would of course be only available for first time subscribers, wouldn't it?

The price shown for Creative Cloud "Single app" is $19.99/mo for "annual commitment", $29.99/mo for "Cancel at any time" and $9.99/mo for "Requires CS3+ purchase".


Still scr€wing the users that got Adobe to where they are now ...

Did Adobe get those users to where they are now?
Logged
Isaac
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2886


« Reply #22 on: May 18, 2013, 07:16:38 PM »
ReplyReply

The best plans of mice and men...

Let's re-state the obvious - Adobe did continue to offer... blah blah - and do continue to offer... "While Adobe Creative Suite® 6 products will continue to be supported and available for purchase..."

The recent announcement was that -- "... the company has no plans for future releases of Creative Suite or other CS products".
Logged
BartvanderWolf
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 3758


« Reply #23 on: May 18, 2013, 08:20:58 PM »
ReplyReply

The price shown for Creative Cloud "Single app" is $19.99/mo for "annual commitment", $29.99/mo for "Cancel at any time" and $9.99/mo for "Requires CS3+ purchase".

Hi Isaac,

You seem to have some difficulty with the concept of 'future pricing' ("So, what happens to CC in six months or a year from now if PS/CS sales subscriptions plummet") ... Or are you suggesting that the introductory discount is also available for existing customers at a later stage, and the increased pricing will not change in the future? On what authority (or even credibility) would you be prepared to claim that?

Or are you indeed only reacting (without respecting context) to what you perceive as semantic issues (seemingly without grasping them) without adding real information to the thread???

Regurgitating 'Adobe speak' or 'fan-boyish' one-liners, doesn't picture an independent mind, capable of valuing the 'intricate' balance of "Pro's and Con's".

Quote
Did Adobe get those users to where they are now?

Since you're asking, NO. Sorry about having to put the emphasis on NO for the slower members, but judging from your (unavoidable, BTW not meant as an encouragement, but apparently/unfortunately a required clarification) earlier posts you seem to be incapable of understanding that in successful interactivity (between supplier and consumer) there is an implied synergetic interaction between both parties, in fact it is usually encouraged by the more clever suppliers.

Now, back on topic of the "Clarifications" ...

Anything remotely meaningful you would like to add for posterity?

Cheers,
Bart
« Last Edit: May 19, 2013, 09:22:49 AM by BartvanderWolf » Logged
jrsforums
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 744


« Reply #24 on: May 18, 2013, 09:58:31 PM »
ReplyReply

Let's re-state the obvious - Adobe did continue to offer... blah blah - and do continue to offer... "While Adobe Creative Suite® 6 products will continue to be supported and available for purchase..."

The recent announcement was that -- "... the company has no plans for future releases of Creative Suite or other CS products".

I thought the subject of this thread was LR and CC....and Jeff's reference to the LR Journal posting 

I cannot comprehend what your post is trying to communicate.
Logged

John
Isaac
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2886


« Reply #25 on: May 19, 2013, 11:42:27 AM »
ReplyReply

You seem to have some difficulty with ...

No :-)

Or are you indeed only reacting (without respecting context) to ...

I'm reacting to your snark and misinformation ;-)


Regurgitating 'Adobe speak' or 'fan-boyish' one-liners, doesn't picture an independent mind, capable of valuing the 'intricate' balance of "Pro's and Con's".

Regurgitating 'anti-Adobe hate-speak' or 'anything but Adobe fan-boyish' one-liners, doesn't picture an independent mind, capable of valuing the 'intricate' balance of "Pro's and Con's".
Logged
walter.sk
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1332


« Reply #26 on: July 29, 2013, 10:33:34 AM »
ReplyReply

I am currently a user of LR5 and Photoshop CS6.  I have read every thread here about CC issues and questions, but I am still not sure about the relationship of Photoshop CC and LR5, and I am also not sure of which tread would be most appropriate to deal with my question, so I am putting it here:

I have been a long-time Photoshop user who recently came to love LR for its non-destructive processing and ease of the Development module, and have also finally begun to manage my images using LR.  I am also fond of RAW editing in LR and editing further in Photoshop CS6, and am really comfortable with the ins & outs of this process.

I am considering (reluctantly) getting a single-application subscription to Photoshop CC, and I do understand that LR will continue to be upgraded for some time by Adobe.  I cannot afford the full CC subscription just to get LR in the cloud.  My concern is this:  As Photoshop CC gets new features (and presumably its Camera Raw features change), will I be able to continue to use LR as I have up to now to manage files and do RAW nondestructive edits, then send images to Photoshop CC where I would have access to the new features, and have them come back to LR after editing, just as I do now? Or would the new features in Photoshop CC sort of push me into using Bridge to manage my images because of growing differences between eternal LR and Photoshop CC?
Logged
madmanchan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2110


« Reply #27 on: July 29, 2013, 10:52:38 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi walter.sk,

Yes, you will continue to be able to round-trip image editing between Photoshop CC and Lr.  Furthermore, image rendering compatibility will be maintained between Camera Raw for Photoshop CC and Lightroom (assuming matching versions) in the same way that we've done in the past.  

To make this concrete with examples:

Using a current example, Lightroom 5.0 has image rendering compatibility with Camera Raw 8.1:  so, raw files edited in Camera Raw 8.1 (under Ps CC or CS6) will look the same when opened in Lr 5.0, and similarly raw files edited in Lr 5.0 will look the same when edited under Camera Raw 8.1.

Moreover, using standard round-trip editing workflows (e.g., begin adjusting images in Lightroom, use Edit-in-Photoshop or pano-merging or HDR-merging, finish edits in Photoshop, bring back image (as TIFF/PSD) into Lightroom for presentation, export, printing, etc.) will all continue to work.

Going forward, we have every intention of preserving interoperability between ACR, Lr, and Ps.
Logged

walter.sk
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1332


« Reply #28 on: July 29, 2013, 11:45:26 AM »
ReplyReply

Thanks for the quick reply and the explanation. I guess I'll try the cloud!

Hi walter.sk,

Yes, you will continue to be able to round-trip image editing between Photoshop CC and Lr.  Furthermore, image rendering compatibility will be maintained between Camera Raw for Photoshop CC and Lightroom (assuming matching versions) in the same way that we've done in the past.  

To make this concrete with examples:

Using a current example, Lightroom 5.0 has image rendering compatibility with Camera Raw 8.1:  so, raw files edited in Camera Raw 8.1 (under Ps CC or CS6) will look the same when opened in Lr 5.0, and similarly raw files edited in Lr 5.0 will look the same when edited under Camera Raw 8.1.

Moreover, using standard round-trip editing workflows (e.g., begin adjusting images in Lightroom, use Edit-in-Photoshop or pano-merging or HDR-merging, finish edits in Photoshop, bring back image (as TIFF/PSD) into Lightroom for presentation, export, printing, etc.) will all continue to work.

Going forward, we have every intention of preserving interoperability between ACR, Lr, and Ps.
Logged
Tim Lookingbill
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 1201



WWW
« Reply #29 on: July 29, 2013, 03:11:12 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Going forward, we have every intention of preserving interoperability between ACR, Lr, and Ps.

Will tiffs & jpeg LR edited previews reflected in their embedded (instead of sidecar) xmp edits and opened in future updates/upgrades to Photoshop change because of dissimilar Raw engines?

I've been dealing with how this works in LR4 over how it works in Bridge with regard to sidecars and I'm a bit perplexed on how embedded xmp edits to tiffs and jpegs would be handled in a round trip scenario between a newer ACR and older LR raw engine.

Been reading these two threads on how LR deals with LR edited tiffs here and how it stores them to the catalog and/or xmp sidecar...

http://forums.adobe.com/thread/838473

After reading up on this...

http://help.adobe.com/en_US/lightroom/using/WS638E3AC9-A04C-4445-A0D3-F7D8BA5CDE37.html

I'm just bewildered how complicated this has become after recently attempting to migrate out of CS3 Bridge/ACR4.6 into a LR4 workflow and noticing how convolutely different LR deals with these file management driven preview scenarios.

How would CC updates to Photoshop and ACR deal with LR's older Raw engine and how it deals with xmp edits and catalog system? I guess you'ld have to keep upgrading LR to keep up.

I really don't understand what the implications of LR's embedding xmp sidecar edits in tiffs & jpegs presents in future upgrades to Photoshop.

« Last Edit: July 29, 2013, 03:13:40 PM by Tim Lookingbill » Logged
john beardsworth
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2829



WWW
« Reply #30 on: July 29, 2013, 03:50:39 PM »
ReplyReply

Tim,

Don't look for complications where there need not be any. Despite the noise in that thread, Adobe has never given any indication that they have any intention to start creating sidecars for files other than proprietary raw , and I'd suggest they're unlikely to change that view.

Once you are using LR as the hub of your workflow, you need never think about sidecar files. Back up your catalogue and the originals, and you're 100% covered in terms of disaster recovery, and you don't need to have sidecar files to send files to/from Photoshop. When you send files to Photoshop, there's a message if the ACR and LR versions don't match. It gives you the choice to render with LR. Only if the ACR version is more recent than LR might you want to save the sidecar from LR, open in Bridge, update the raw rendering in ACR, then open the file in Photoshop.

John
« Last Edit: July 29, 2013, 05:32:20 PM by johnbeardy » Logged

David Budd
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 37


« Reply #31 on: July 29, 2013, 08:27:59 PM »
ReplyReply

The Australian Government held a Senate enquiry a few months into what is locally called here the, "Australia Tax", imposed by companies such as Adobe, Microsoft, and Apple on both physical and electronic downloads.

This is one of their recommendations released yesterday.


http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-07-29/geo-blocking-mps-committee-price-report-apple-adobe-microsoft/4850484

Logged
Tim Lookingbill
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 1201



WWW
« Reply #32 on: July 30, 2013, 12:29:29 AM »
ReplyReply

Tim,

Don't look for complications where there need not be any. Despite the noise in that thread, Adobe has never given any indication that they have any intention to start creating sidecars for files other than proprietary raw , and I'd suggest they're unlikely to change that view.

Once you are using LR as the hub of your workflow, you need never think about sidecar files. Back up your catalogue and the originals, and you're 100% covered in terms of disaster recovery, and you don't need to have sidecar files to send files to/from Photoshop. When you send files to Photoshop, there's a message if the ACR and LR versions don't match. It gives you the choice to render with LR. Only if the ACR version is more recent than LR might you want to save the sidecar from LR, open in Bridge, update the raw rendering in ACR, then open the file in Photoshop.

John

Telling me not to be concerned about sidecars doesn't answer my question, John, but I appreciate your attempts at reassuring me about adopting a completely different preview driven workflow with LR than I have in CS3 Bridge/ACR4.6.


Non-destructive Xmp sidecar edits in CS3 Bridge are applied to all files regardless of format, at least that's how it's working for me. I know it doesn't work that way with LR regarding tiffs, jpegs and PSDs which embeds the sidecar edits inside the file.


What I want to know is what is going on with these file format previews that have this embedded xmp data? An xmp sidecar with a Raw file is just instructions on how to render the preview for Adobe apps that can read it without altering the original Raw data.


Does it work the same when it's embedded in tiffs, jpegs and PSD's in LR?


And as for not looking for complications working with LR it seems quite unavoidable seeing LR4's pdf User's Manual is 205 pages long for what basically is an image preview editor. To do the simplest task of adding one photo to a folder by dragging and dropping in the Finder's OS interface (or doing it in Bridge) won't automatically update and show up in LR's imported folder catalog unless you rummage around within a slew of listed menu options and look for the "Synchronize Folder..." command (now there's intuitive nomenclature for ya') where you're given another dialog box to check and uncheck more options.

Who the hell designed the interface to work this way for this freakin' app?! It certainly wasn't from the POV of a photographer.
« Last Edit: July 30, 2013, 12:32:32 AM by Tim Lookingbill » Logged
john beardsworth
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2829



WWW
« Reply #33 on: July 30, 2013, 03:25:18 AM »
ReplyReply

Yes, Lightroom does often involve changing the way you may have worked - at least if you want to make the most of it. And I'm not sure loose analogies like the PDF's size justify looking for complications in specific areas such as this.

You probably need to investigate the origin of the sidecars you seem to have for the tiffs, jpegs and PSDs. I don't see how they were produced by Adobe software, and while you can force Bridge to create sidecars for DNGs by making the DNG files read-only, that's an exception and Bridge/ACR has always embedded the metadata in those file formats. Maybe, if you can explain how they were created, the question may make more sense?

Logged

Tim Lookingbill
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 1201



WWW
« Reply #34 on: July 30, 2013, 01:37:19 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
You probably need to investigate the origin of the sidecars you seem to have for the tiffs, jpegs and PSDs. I don't see how they were produced by Adobe software, and while you can force Bridge to create sidecars for DNGs by making the DNG files read-only, that's an exception and Bridge/ACR has always embedded the metadata in those file formats. Maybe, if you can explain how they were created, the question may make more sense?

Your dry, droll and dismissive responses tell me you really don't have an understanding or an answer to what I clearly put forth. I didn't mention DNGs so I have no idea why you brought it up. And who else creates sidecars but Adobe software in both Bridge and Lightroom? It says it in the links I provided.

The only portion of metadata I'm referring to are the edits recorded into (non-destructive) xmp data by both ACR/LR which allow a catalog or sidecar approach to latching it onto the image irregardless of format. Since Adobe Raw converter engines are the only software that can read such sidecar/xmp edit data that alters the original image's preview whether embedded/sidecared/cataloged, it stands to reason Adobe created it and put it there.

For the third time I'll ask it again, when LR embeds sidecar/xmp data EDITS (not IPTC, EXIF, etc.) into tiffs & jpegs, which Raw engine driven adjustments that form the previews does it go by when the engines aren't the same between LR & Photoshop's ACR?

And the very fact I'm having to ask such questions is confirmation of the complexities of the underpinnings of this software and why daisy chaining one or a set of software through a CC subscription that updates in increments but doesn't address OTHER WORKFLOW compatibilities to other NON-CC apps like LR is of major concern.
« Last Edit: July 30, 2013, 01:39:45 PM by Tim Lookingbill » Logged
jrsforums
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 744


« Reply #35 on: July 30, 2013, 02:17:10 PM »
ReplyReply

Your dry, droll and dismissive responses tell me you really don't have an understanding or an answer to what I clearly put forth. I didn't mention DNGs so I have no idea why you brought it up. And who else creates sidecars but Adobe software in both Bridge and Lightroom? It says it in the links I provided.

The only portion of metadata I'm referring to are the edits recorded into (non-destructive) xmp data by both ACR/LR which allow a catalog or sidecar approach to latching it onto the image irregardless of format. Since Adobe Raw converter engines are the only software that can read such sidecar/xmp edit data that alters the original image's preview whether embedded/sidecared/cataloged, it stands to reason Adobe created it and put it there.

For the third time I'll ask it again, when LR embeds sidecar/xmp data EDITS (not IPTC, EXIF, etc.) into tiffs & jpegs, which Raw engine driven adjustments that form the previews does it go by when the engines aren't the same between LR & Photoshop's ACR?

And the very fact I'm having to ask such questions is confirmation of the complexities of the underpinnings of this software and why daisy chaining one or a set of software through a CC subscription that updates in increments but doesn't address OTHER WORKFLOW compatibilities to other NON-CC apps like LR is of major concern.

Tim, I think this is pretty simple....and a bigger issue that you are making it to be.

My understanding is that a newer version of Camera Raw (CR), whether ACR or LR, will understand the commands from the older version.  Not so the other way around.

Interchangeably using different levels of CR is asking for trouble as you can never be sure if the new command will be just ignored or interpreted as something else.

Your best bet is to either keep the versions in sync or decide to use one or the other. 
Logged

John
john beardsworth
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2829



WWW
« Reply #36 on: July 30, 2013, 03:02:15 PM »
ReplyReply

My response certainly indicates I can't make much sense of your problem! If you don't read what I wrote, you'll have no idea why I mentioned read-only DNGs there. And for your information, lots of other programs can create xmp files - Media Pro in its various guises, Capture One, Photomechanic....

Anyway, if the PS/ACR version is more recent than the version of the LR editing instructions in the tif/jpeg, PS will apply those LR instructions when it opens the file. If not, it discards any specific instructions it doesn't understand.
Logged

madmanchan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2110


« Reply #37 on: July 31, 2013, 06:30:55 PM »
ReplyReply

As far as I'm aware, ACR/Lr will continue to deal with reading image settings (e.g., in XMP sidecars, embedded XMP metadata, etc.) in the same way as they have for several years:  Namely, they will be able to correctly read settings from current and earlier versions, but may not be able to read settings from later versions. 

Example:  ACR 8.1 can read image settings created from ACR 8.1 and earlier (ACR 8.0, ACR 7.4, ACR 4.5, ACR 3.7, etc.) but not necessarily later versions like 8.2.

For instance, ACR 8.2 introduces a new Color Smoothness slider and a Feather control for spot adjustments.  If you use these controls in ACR 8.2 to edit an image and save your settings (click Done in ACR), the settings will be written into XMP metadata.  However, if you then try to process the same image in an older ACR version (8.1, 4.5, 2.4, etc.) they won't read those new Spot Feather and Color Smoothness settings correctly, obviously, because those older versions don't support the new controls.
Logged

Tim Lookingbill
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 1201



WWW
« Reply #38 on: August 01, 2013, 02:48:14 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
As far as I'm aware, ACR/Lr will continue to deal with reading image settings (e.g., in XMP sidecars, embedded XMP metadata, etc.) in the same way as they have for several years:  Namely, they will be able to correctly read settings from current and earlier versions, but may not be able to read settings from later versions.


The embedded xmp edits in jpegs/tiffs created in LR will be rendered differently if the ACR plugin version (hog tied to Photoshop) is not the same as LR's, correct?

I take it then the non-destructive xmp edits embedded in jpeg/tiffs don't alter the image's internal pixels, just how the preview is rendered when it appears in Photoshop, upon which, if PS's/ACR Raw engine version is newer with newer settings/features than LR's, it will alter the intended preview.

This connection between the way LR integrates with Photoshop requires both Raw engines/features/settings be on parity with each other which means when you update/upgrade Photoshop now through the CC subscription in the future, LR will have to be upgraded as well or else the user has to turn their non-destructive xmp edits embedded in jpegs/tiffs into finished/altered pixels in the form of a copy>(jpeg/tiff). Correct?

« Last Edit: August 01, 2013, 02:49:47 AM by Tim Lookingbill » Logged
Schewe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5499


WWW
« Reply #39 on: August 01, 2013, 02:54:54 AM »
ReplyReply

The embedded xmp edits in jpegs/tiffs created in LR will be rendered differently if the ACR plugin version (hog tied to Photoshop) is not the same as LR's, correct?

Doh...it's as Eric explained, the most recent version of ACR/LR wins. If your ACR version is behind LR, yes, those features not found in that version of ACR will be ignored. If the most recent version is LR, then you want LR to do the rendering, not ACR. This is the way it's been since the beginning of ACR/LR versioning. Since you are new to this, it's up to you to learn this stuff.
Logged
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad