Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: LR5: is there a compelling reason to upgrade from LR4?  (Read 10888 times)
dreed
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1170


« on: June 16, 2013, 07:33:40 AM »
ReplyReply

Subject says it all..

Going from LR3 to LR4 brought with it a new process that was remarkable in how it treated highlights.

But from LR4 to LR5 ... I'm stumped. I want to like the "straighten" feature but it just doesn't work as well as DxO. I've seen some say that LR is easier to use than DxO for this but I suspect that they don't understand what they need to do with DxO than it being a failure of DxO to deliver.

The most interesting addition to me (after the perspective correction attempt) is the Advanced healing brush. I think this should be a winner but PS already does this.

The most comprehensive list of new features appears to be here:
http://www.lightroomqueen.com/2013/04/15/whats-new-in-lightroom-5-0-beta/

which has much more information than any other 1st google page hits for Adobe's website when searching for "what's new in lr5".

What do others think?
Does LR5 bring with it killer feature/s that have you salivitating?
Logged
Rhossydd
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1862


WWW
« Reply #1 on: June 16, 2013, 07:49:18 AM »
ReplyReply

Nothing too compelling to me.

Whilst the new healing brush is very good, but I don't often need that sort of post processing. When I do PS CS4 does that well enough.

The straighten function is a curious feature. Most of the time it gets things completely wrong, however once in a while it's given an incredibly good result. My impression is that this is very much a 'work in progress' and, like many of PS's features, will mature into something useful after an upgrade or two.

It's the first version of LR that I haven't bought immediately on release. Maybe 5.1 will see something compelling added, but I'm not expecting much.


Logged
Rory
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 145


« Reply #2 on: June 16, 2013, 08:30:50 AM »
ReplyReply

Not really.  I think the most compelling reason would be performance, and that is a pretty subtle improvement.  Smart previews if you need to edit large numbers of files while on the road with a laptop.

Is it just me, but I am not impressed with the new healing brush.  I find the edges often quite visible after healing or cloning.  It is helpful for simple edits, like a sky, not not so much for things like tree backgrounds.  Again, a work in progress I hope.

I'm left with the feeling that a lot of energy went into fixing LR4, and with a shortened time between releases, not much else got done.  So, mostly, you are paying adobe for a performance tweak and some JDI stuff.  Even with the performance tweaks, the LR import module performance does not appear to have had an overhaul, and is still a poor second to most image browsers, and not in the same league as PhotoMechanic.
Logged
Rand47
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 513


« Reply #3 on: June 16, 2013, 09:28:33 AM »
ReplyReply

I find the performance increase in the final release fairly noticeable, most likely due to 5's ability to utilize more system RAM, and I've got lots of RAM in my machine. Also, the healing brush in the final works more subtly than the beta.  The radial gradient also had a 100% increase in the ability to feather, in the final, which makes it of great value to me.  And, once I heard Eric Chan's explanation of what each of Upright's buttons are attempting to accomplish, I've used it to go back and reprocess some problematic images I shot at the Capistrano Mission with vastly superior results from previous iterations of the files worked on in CS6's perspective tools. These and some of the other JDIs make it quite nice, IMO.

I think it's well worth the upgrade price.  The 3 to 4 upgrade was so huge in terms of process version change, soft proofing, etc. that I think it set the version upgrade expectation bar higher than might be reasonable.


Logged
PhotoEcosse
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 546



« Reply #4 on: June 16, 2013, 09:36:35 AM »
ReplyReply

I guess it was my irrational desire to stay up-to-date that was compelling, rather than any individual enhancement in LR5. I mentioned on another thread that my wordprocessing and spreadsheet needs would still be adequately met by the versions of WordStar and SuperCalc that I uses on a CPM+ machine in the early 80s. Despite that I was "compelled to upgrade to Office 2013 this year.

Having been compelled to purchase the LR5 upgrade (not least because Adobe now make them so inexpensive), I do find that I really love the radial gradient tool and find myself using it for quite subtle local adjustments.

Also (unlike Rossydd, above), I find the various functions of the Straighten tool do get it right most of the time.

A wee bit pee-ed off by the Jpeg export limitations bug, but assume that Adobe will fix that in v5.01

.
« Last Edit: June 16, 2013, 09:39:09 AM by PhotoEcosse » Logged

************************************
"Reality is an illusion caused by lack of alcohol."
Alternatively, "Life begins at the far end of your comfort zone."
Rhossydd
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1862


WWW
« Reply #5 on: June 16, 2013, 09:55:54 AM »
ReplyReply

Despite that I was "compelled to upgrade to Office 2013 this year.
Unlike a Scot to be compelled to spend more than he needs to ;-))
You need to get over that, it's costing you.

I still use Office 2002 and it does more than I ever need. I only upgraded from '97 because the 2002 CD was easier to use for installation than a pile of floppies.

Quote
I find the various functions of the Straighten tool do get it right most of the time.
Good to hear.
Jeff Schewe's mention that the straighten feature was a very late addition seems to fit in with it being a bit flaky (to say the least). I'm not the only one who has found it unreliable.
It smacks a little bit of some manager asking what's new, being told, then telling the developers that they need to add more, just anything new we can sell with.

Quote
A wee bit pee-ed off by the Jpeg export limitations bug
Yes, there's a few deal killer bugs that need fixing before I'll get the credit card out.
Logged
Glenn NK
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 235


« Reply #6 on: June 16, 2013, 11:27:13 AM »
ReplyReply

There may be some reasons to u/g, but there could have been more:

1)  The ability to duplicate an Adjustment Brush is very useful in some instances, but not being able to modify the first one after the second is created has limitations IMO.  I use AB to "paint" the BG of a flower to soften it using negative clarity etc. - at times the effect has to be repeated - on a complex image this is time-consuming.

2)  I think that the new Adjustment Brush finds the edges better than in LR4.4

3)  It would have been very useful to have the HSL panel available in the brush adjustments.

4)  The result using the clone/heal tool can be great or somewhat pathetic; at times better than LR4.4, at times not as good.  A previous poster mentioned visible edges - in LR4.4 one can often choose the cloning area better than the LR can.

Glenn
Logged

Economics:  the study of achieving infinite growth with finite resources
Rhossydd
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1862


WWW
« Reply #7 on: June 16, 2013, 11:34:33 AM »
ReplyReply

but there could have been more:
Just see any wish list for LR5, hardly anything suggested made it :-(
Logged
AFairley
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1100



« Reply #8 on: June 16, 2013, 11:50:00 AM »
ReplyReply

1.  If you do architecture and have to fix keystoning a lot, the automatic vertical correction applied as an import preset is a great timesaver for setting up your images for review after the shoot, though the adjustments always have to be tweaked for final output.

2.  The adjustable spot removal brush is great for removing things like phone lines, no longer need to do that In PS.

3.  The program strikes me as being faster, less lag seeing adjustments on large monitor.

#1 was easily worth the $80 to me.
Logged

HSakols
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 348


« Reply #9 on: June 16, 2013, 11:55:06 AM »
ReplyReply

Have there been any improvements in book module?  Or is it still easier to use indesign?  I'd like to make a book from Mag Cloud.
Logged
Peter McLennan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1628


« Reply #10 on: June 16, 2013, 12:24:31 PM »
ReplyReply

Have there been any improvements in book module?  Or is it still easier to use indesign?  I'd like to make a book from Mag Cloud.

If you're willing to spend the time learning it, InDesign knocks spots off the book module.  Infinitely more capable and flexible.
Logged
Rhossydd
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1862


WWW
« Reply #11 on: June 16, 2013, 12:32:01 PM »
ReplyReply

Have there been any improvements in book module? 
That's what they claim, but it's limited to page numbering and changing how page title is presented.
Quote
Or is it still easier to use indesign?
If you've ID available and any skill to use it, it'll still be the best choice for very many years at the current rate of progress.
Logged
Box Brownie
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 179



WWW
« Reply #12 on: June 16, 2013, 02:20:09 PM »
ReplyReply

I find the performance increase in the final release fairly noticeable, most likely due to 5's ability to utilize more system RAM, and I've got lots of RAM in my machine. Also, the healing brush in the final works more subtly than the beta.  The radial gradient also had a 100% increase in the ability to feather, in the final, which makes it of great value to me.  And, once I heard Eric Chan's explanation of what each of Upright's buttons are attempting to accomplish, I've used it to go back and reprocess some problematic images I shot at the Capistrano Mission with vastly superior results from previous iterations of the files worked on in CS6's perspective tools. These and some of the other JDIs make it quite nice, IMO.

I think it's well worth the upgrade price.  The 3 to 4 upgrade was so huge in terms of process version change, soft proofing, etc. that I think it set the version upgrade expectation bar higher than might be reasonable.




Was this in the new LuLa video part #9 or elsewhere Huh  Smiley
Logged

A collection of mine here http://500px.com/engramphotography
PhotoEcosse
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 546



« Reply #13 on: June 16, 2013, 03:03:26 PM »
ReplyReply

I think that what this thread is conforming is that many of us really want to ditch CS6 (or whatever version we still use) and be able to do most of our photo-processing in Lightroom.

Amateur photographers like us probably use only 5% of the capability of CS6. If that 5% was available within LR we would all be very happy, I suspect.

In the past it was always argued that Adobe would never allow this to happen as it would lose many amateur photographers from its CS customer base.

Perhaps the recent revelations that Photoshop is going into the clouds - a move likely to make it even less attractive to amateurs who may only use it for an hour or two a month - will remove us from that customer base anyway and, when that happens, maybe Adobe will start to regard Lightroom as its No.1 programme for photographic hobbyists and develop it more enthusiastically.

Just maybe.
Logged

************************************
"Reality is an illusion caused by lack of alcohol."
Alternatively, "Life begins at the far end of your comfort zone."
Rand47
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 513


« Reply #14 on: June 16, 2013, 04:11:18 PM »
ReplyReply

Was this in the new LuLa video part #9 or elsewhere Huh  Smiley

From the videos.  And I should add that Jeff & Michael's examples of when it worked well and when it didn't, also helped. Eric gives some insight into what it is attempting to do and how you can help it out a little with lens profile application or/and manual tweaks before applying.

Rand
« Last Edit: June 16, 2013, 04:17:14 PM by Rand47 » Logged
Rhossydd
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1862


WWW
« Reply #15 on: June 16, 2013, 04:29:04 PM »
ReplyReply

Perhaps the recent revelations that Photoshop is going into the clouds - a move likely to make it even less attractive to amateurs who may only use it for an hour or two a month - will remove us from that customer base anyway and, when that happens, maybe Adobe will start to regard Lightroom as its No.1 programme for photographic hobbyists and develop it more enthusiastically.
Now that would be nice.

<Looks at the latest developments in LR5 >....... maybe not then :-(
Logged
Box Brownie
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 179



WWW
« Reply #16 on: June 16, 2013, 04:42:54 PM »
ReplyReply

Now that would be nice.

<Looks at the latest developments in LR5 >....... maybe not then :-(

I think of note is the (stated) commitment that LR will continue to be perpetual license and included in the CC as part of the PS package [if I understood that info right?] but what caught my eye was the dead end as far as enhancements go for CSPS6, we will get new ACR updates such as the recent RAW 8.1 but somewhere I have the bookmark for an Adobe page that specifically announces CS6 improvements just for the "cloud" users......................so will there come a day when they introduce a breakpoint when LR ceases to improve unless you go to the "cloud" ~ I for one sincerely hope not as the CS6 announcements for the "cloud" do look quite appealing and I as CS6 perpetual license holder will it seems never see them Sad

Edit :- here is the link to the CC PS I mentioned above................ http://blogs.adobe.com/photoshopdotcom/2013/05/photoshop-cc-for-creative-cloud-members-coming-soon.html
« Last Edit: June 16, 2013, 05:26:31 PM by Box Brownie » Logged

A collection of mine here http://500px.com/engramphotography
kaelaria
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2184



WWW
« Reply #17 on: June 16, 2013, 05:15:00 PM »
ReplyReply

As a product and wedding photog, absolutely nothing twisting my arm at all and the bugs make me stay FAR away from it.
Logged

BartvanderWolf
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3019


« Reply #18 on: June 16, 2013, 05:15:30 PM »
ReplyReply

I think that what this thread is conforming is that many of us really want to ditch CS6 (or whatever version we still use) and be able to do most of our photo-processing in Lightroom.

Hi,

In a forum about Lightroom Q&A, that hardly comes as a surprise, or does it?

Cheers,
Bart
Logged
egd5
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 7


« Reply #19 on: June 16, 2013, 08:36:18 PM »
ReplyReply

The price is right and the new features would be nice, but since I'm only a lowly Vista user Adobe decided I wasn't worthy of Vr 5.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad