Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 17 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: LightRoom6 Must have!  (Read 57966 times)
Phil Indeblanc
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 1228


« on: August 02, 2013, 07:49:39 PM »
ReplyReply

If I can get the majority of users to nod that they use dual screen, I can make my case for the NEED to seperate the Lib from Dev functionality!
This is LR achilies heel, and it is frustrating jumping back and forth.
If we can have LR 6 have the option to segment the 2 functions to the Grid view in the 2nd screen to behave as the Lib mode on screen 2, and stay with Dev mode on screen 1...Oh Boy would that be a major improvement in how the software and user interact. Right now it is a binary switch back and forth.

Anyone get tired of the switching, then finding the place where you left off, NOT being able to sort the Grid view in dev mode on the 2nd screen?

Seriously, I would think single screen users would rather Alt Tab then keep chasing locations and files ...If it weren't for the Go to Folder, I would be LOST!
But you can only do that in Dev to Lib mode, WhatInTheWorld!!! Then switch back to Dev mode to work!!! Just insane! 
How backwards and dumb do we have to be to not think there are better ways to go about doing something? I can just hear.."Leave it its FINE, they'll adjust and forget once we toss that other doodad feature..." (puffing out a think smoke from the cigar as the rest at the round table don't make a sound while holding their breath and their seat position.  Then the other reason, so conformed few individuals that think they are the END all of Adobe LR, and won't even stoop down to the level of a user standpoint, since they are the authoritative voice and all stops there...No sense in something they may have came up with..Why improve on a good idea?
Why! because nothing is constant...process evolve, and needs shift.

I can just see posts try to teach me how to work.  Go ahead, let me hear it. But really?! Really? we all have to comply to some single approach in working to be as efficient as you? Really?! Where are we?

(made a couple corrections in my initial post, particularly re screen 1 vs2, and more rant :-)
« Last Edit: August 02, 2013, 11:43:24 PM by Phil Indeblanc » Logged

If you buy a camera, you're a photographer...
kaelaria
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2228



WWW
« Reply #1 on: August 02, 2013, 11:17:40 PM »
ReplyReply

Agreed - I use dual monitors and LR is just about useless as far as that functionality.
Logged

ButchM
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 188


« Reply #2 on: August 03, 2013, 12:28:11 AM »
ReplyReply

There are many areas where Lightroom is more than a bit lackluster .... the Book and Slideshow modules are abysmal to say the least ... and there has been little to no effort to improve upon the Web module.

These and a few other concerns have forced me to move my RAW workflow elsewhere ... while my chosen solution (Aperture 3) may be considered inferior in some concerns, I have much fewer problems in my day-to-day use ... it does a fine job with multiple monitors as well ... and once Maverick is out ... chances are it will even be better ... Actually, with a true full-sceen mode that is available in Aperture ... I find the need much less for multiple monitors in my workflow ... it's only a quick keyboard shortcut to go from a thumbnail to full screen mode with the full RAW HUD available ...

In addition, I have zero issues with shooting tethered. In fact every DSLR I currently own is supported including my original Nikon D1 and D70s that mostly collect dust these days ... in fact my D4 and D600 were supported in Aperture 4-6 months sooner that it took for Adobe to offer support ...

I do realize that I am giving up just a bit in using a less than popular solution, I have discovered, if I do the best possible job before I trip the shutter release, I don't really need all the bells, buzzers and whistles that software solutions can address ...

While I laud the Adobe engineers in their efforts to make the Develop module (a.k.a. - Adobe Camera RAW ... which if that was all I needed to save the day, I could just use Ps and be done with the matter) as good as it gets ... when I purchased Lightroom v1, it wasn't just for ACR with a different UI ... but the whole app ... as long as Adobe includes those other modules and capabilities ... I fully expect them to attend to support and/or improve ALL the features and modules ... not just one ...

Unless or until Adobe gets off their high horse and shows significant improvement in the entirety of the the Lightroom application, I'm going to continue to use other solutions.

While I was once a staunch and avid supporter of the Lightroom concept to streamlining a RAW workflow ... I have to admit, Adobe has dropped the ball in a very significant fashion.
Logged
Phil Indeblanc
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 1228


« Reply #3 on: August 03, 2013, 01:00:06 AM »
ReplyReply

I'm glad to hear I'm not alone....
I have to say, if the developing wasn't as good as it is, we wouldn't have this post, and I wouldn't be so frustrated. I would be on another application(Likely DXO), and that would be it.
I can jump back on my Mac to use Aperture, but I never got into it, so I can't comment any positives from that. But in general, ANY app that doesn't force a DAm with Dev is on the right track.
I wish C1 was more intuitive to use in my workflow, but for me it is just too differnt of an animal. As many images do get a Ps at the end of edit, the interface of an app being familiar to a standard OS is always a smart core to build on.

I've been preaching that these 2 tools (Dev Dam/Lib) are 2 different animals and mixing them will only slow things down. But it makes financial gain sense to include them. It locks you into one platform, and A LOT of your organization depends on it. It makes such business sense that C1 adopted the idea, yet most users that are not "dummied" down on how to work, don't bother using it. Some have different needs and that approach surely fits. but not in any fast paced environment that is not "unioned" out doing the tasks.
Logged

If you buy a camera, you're a photographer...
john beardsworth
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2904



WWW
« Reply #4 on: August 03, 2013, 02:12:24 AM »
ReplyReply

I don't object to the idea of Library and Develop going onto separate screens, but I don't think I'd consider it a high priority. Learn your keyboard shortcuts and the separate organisation and adjustment workspaces are more or less irrelevant. D to Develop, G or E for grid or expanded views in Library. If you really have to keep swapping between folders, look at the filmstrip's Recent Sources list and particularly at the Favorite Sources.

In my view LR6 development effort would much be better spent elsewhere - eg making the books and slideshow features good enough for Butch and me, better recording of people (not necessarily face recognition), making all IPTC and adjustment data searchable (like Aperture smart albums) through smart collections and filters, custom metadata fields (Aperture since day 1), a list view (ditto), network capability, multi-user capability.... Oh, and a B&W auto button that responds to the image type*.

John

* eg where the top third of the image is mainly blue and the rest is mainly green, B&W should apply a "red filter" conversion to the top third and a "green filter" conversion to the remainder as if you're using B&W film with an (imaginary?) red-green glass lens filter. In other words, where colour contrasts are detected, apply more than one filtration so that neighbouring colours become different greyscale tones.
« Last Edit: August 03, 2013, 11:13:42 AM by johnbeardy » Logged

JRSmit
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 416


WWW
« Reply #5 on: August 03, 2013, 03:22:12 AM »
ReplyReply

In addition to John's comment: both in slideshow and in print to be able to have the tekst block function do word wrapping( just like tekst blocks in book module), so displaying a IPTC field or a custom text with a longer descriptive text is not just one line. For Book module to allow your own book templates or a development option for book templates so someone cn make them as a plugin at some reasonable cost. This would avoid the need to go to InDesign or Scribus for most book needs, with the huge advantage of full integration with the library functions of LR. Something i consider a real strength.
If printing of PDF files was added in addition that would be nice.

Another good idea would be the automation of printing, like we have already for exporting to HDD or Flick etc. So in the background the printing can take place, while you continue to prepare images for print.

Personally i do not work yet with dual screen (may go to that in the next month or so) , so i have no experience thus not yet the need for having a LR module active on each screen, but i can understand the need for others.

I still look forward to the concept of having extra LR module for pixel-editing (sort of limited PS functions, but with the intrinsic high image processing quality of PS)  as Jeff Schewe started in a thread a while ago in the aftermath of the CC launch.

Sometimes i work together with other photog's on a job, then we really do miss the Multi-use capability, would be great if you can have multiple users work on the images in one central catalog. Of course there are work-arounds, but that takes extra time and that is usually not available in such jobs.

So summarised: move the focus from mostly image development to image management and managed image publication, perhaps a dual focus? At the end of the day, i believe we shoot and develop images for publication, thus the kick we get from the responses of people looking at our images.

Logged

Fine art photography: janrsmit.com
Fine Art Printing Specialist: www.fineartprintingspecialist.nl


Jan R. Smit
Rhossydd
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2004


WWW
« Reply #6 on: August 03, 2013, 03:24:47 AM »
ReplyReply

If I can get the majority of users to nod that they use dual screen
You won't. I'm sure the vast majority of LR users only have a single screen.
Dual screen use is pretty much limited to a tiny percentage of high end users.

Quote
I can make my case for the NEED to seperate the Lib from Dev functionality!
This is LR achilies heel, and it is frustrating jumping back and forth.
Having used Lightroom since the very first beta I've never found this to be a problem. Use the keyboard short cuts and switching is effectively instantaneous.

Quote
I can just see posts try to teach me how to work.  Go ahead, let me hear it. But really?! Really? we all have to comply to some single approach in working to be as efficient as you? Really?! Where are we?
So you appreciate you're not working as efficiently as you could in LR if already expect other people have solutions to your issues.
Why should Adobe consider your individualistic problems with coming to terms with the program, when so many are happy with the whole paradigm of it's workflow.
There's a lot of features that need to be improved more urgently and will have much wider appeal.
Make the book module work as well as the free alternatives.
Adding floating text to prints.
Improving the keywording options.
Panorama sticthing.
HDR blending.
Logged
Phil Indeblanc
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 1228


« Reply #7 on: August 04, 2013, 12:38:51 AM »
ReplyReply

Good point about the other features. Though they are other features.  If I find my version of InDesign bamboozled for the sake of the cloud, I will switch to the book, so I can see how that function is integral for many users.

And good recommendation about the shortcuts for switching, as I use them....but obviously I'm not alone in my thoughts, so don't get too wound up on why it works just fine...

I use the shortcuts, but perhaps you think I need to apply myself more? Sure, why not. I didn't come on here to bash..I need multiple steps to get the file when editing out. If I open in TIF(default, and save in PSD, I have to do the Sync, then find the file(Goto folder)...3-4 steps just to get to the file is NOT MY WAY of working. But, I'm always looking to improve....so if you have the most efficient way of Opening a raw or tif file out of LR into Ps and then Saving it as a PSD, then getting back to that file to compare next to the other versions of the same (raw,Tif v1, maybe tif v2, PSD) without losing where the Sort is ...I'm totally open to it, and happy to try.
Logged

If you buy a camera, you're a photographer...
sniper
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 599


« Reply #8 on: August 04, 2013, 11:07:42 AM »
ReplyReply

You won't. I'm sure the vast majority of LR users only have a single screen.
Dual screen use is pretty much limited to a tiny percentage of high end users.
Having used Lightroom since the very first beta I've never found this to be a problem. Use the keyboard short cuts and switching is effectively instantaneous.
So you appreciate you're not working as efficiently as you could in LR if already expect other people have solutions to your issues.
Why should Adobe consider your individualistic problems with coming to terms with the program, when so many are happy with the whole paradigm of it's workflow.
There's a lot of features that need to be improved more urgently and will have much wider appeal.
Make the book module work as well as the free alternatives.
Adding floating text to prints.
Improving the keywording options.
Panorama sticthing.
HDR blending.

I'm pretty sure your wrong, almost all the photographers I know that use PS/LR use dual monitors, even many of the hobbists now use two two monitors  Yes a few years ago I'd have agreed with you but the worlds moved on.
Logged
Rhossydd
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2004


WWW
« Reply #9 on: August 04, 2013, 11:35:47 AM »
ReplyReply

I'm pretty sure your wrong,
I never met another photographer in person that use multiple monitors. I believe it's still a very rare configuration, outside of geeky forums like this.
Even I don't use LR across both of my monitors any more.
Logged
Martin Kristiansen
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 168


WWW
« Reply #10 on: August 04, 2013, 12:54:41 PM »
ReplyReply

I use LR as a capture workflow. Auto import from a watched folder. Either out of leaf Capture or from an Eyefi folder.

Point is I get client approval on the spot and they get to see nice big previews off the 2nd monitor while I work. Most of the photographers I know work in this way.

I never gave any thought to having the 2nd monitor display a different module such as having library on the one and develope on the other. It would be useful I think.
Logged
Rory
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 197


« Reply #11 on: August 04, 2013, 01:21:42 PM »
ReplyReply

I think LR needs a lot of TLC.  Besides the pedestrian slideshow, book and web modules, the import module and image previewing could sure use a little turbo charging.  I find it a tad embarrassing to be showing images to someone else and all of a sudden it takes 4-8 seconds to render a preview, then a little later a preview will only render fuzzy.  Then the questions come.  What is this program again?  Is it really for professionals?  You mean Adobe actually hasn't fixed this stuff?  They are up to version 5, really?

I now export jpgs and show them in PhotoMechanic.  It is a pain, but at least I am guaranteed to have a reliable, high performance experience.  Same thing for importing.  Review, select and ingest in PhotoMechanic and then use the import module to add to LR.

I still love LR (Develop, Print and some of Library), but it is a bit of a love/hate thing these days.
Logged
Glenn NK
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 308


« Reply #12 on: August 04, 2013, 01:25:08 PM »
ReplyReply

I never met another photographer in person that use multiple monitors. I believe it's still a very rare configuration, outside of geeky forums like this.
Even I don't use LR across both of my monitors any more.

I don't use two (have three computers on one screen though).

A poll would be interesting, but would have to include many more photographers than habituates this site or would be useless.  Different forums attract different levels/types of users.  This one seems much more technical (geeky) than the others I go to.

Dual monitors doesn't seem to be a high priority when there are still bug-like happenings.

G
« Last Edit: August 04, 2013, 01:27:12 PM by Glenn NK » Logged

Economics:  the study of achieving infinite growth with finite resources
Phil Indeblanc
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 1228


« Reply #13 on: August 04, 2013, 01:37:13 PM »
ReplyReply

Thank you for the confirmations, and on a personal note, I have visited many more dual display studios for editing than single. I do stress editing, as I use a single display for tether and ingesting.

If you want to be efficient with tools in PS, you realize quickly the value of 2 displays. I know I maybe in the rare with 2 30" 14bit LUT displays, but I think there are plenty 24" displays that beg to be used in dual mode.
If your doing close up editing for any public work, you will see very quickly the value of large display filled with close up pixels.
Logged

If you buy a camera, you're a photographer...
Phil Indeblanc
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 1228


« Reply #14 on: August 04, 2013, 01:48:08 PM »
ReplyReply

Priority?!!  Anything foundational IS priority, wouldn't you think? It is the basis that all is built on!
You sound like a factory owner that just got a huge order for parachutes that are being delivered to your enemy.
Logged

If you buy a camera, you're a photographer...
Rhossydd
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2004


WWW
« Reply #15 on: August 04, 2013, 03:40:03 PM »
ReplyReply

I have visited many more dual display studios for editing than single....
If your doing close up editing for any public work,
Do you not see that professional users are a small percentage of LR users ?

Yes, some pros and geeks use multiple monitors, but they're not the majority of users.
Logged
ButchM
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 188


« Reply #16 on: August 04, 2013, 10:32:04 PM »
ReplyReply


If your doing close up editing for any public work, you will see very quickly the value of large display filled with close up pixels.

I both agree and disagree with that statement ... While on one hand, there are times when I actually need to see individual pixels up close and personal ... that really is a small percentage of my work. Though, once you factor in mastering a few keyboard shortcuts, and the reality that the number of image that actually need the level of processing that will be displayed large enough to benefit from the processing is dwindling ... for every image that is destined for a 24"x36" print ... there are millions that will never be viewed larger than 1,000 pixels on the long dimension ... while prints are not a medium of the past ... the number of print created vs. the number of images prepared for viewing in the digital medium is quite a difference to consider.

This was the topic of a couple of dozen portrait/wedding and event photographers at our quarterly meeting a few months ago ... only two of the folks attending use a multiple monitor setup ... though many had used multiple monitors back in the day of CRT monitors due to the limited screen real estate. Also of note, the two folks in question were also big into video production as well ...

All that said ... I don't think it is out of line or unreasonable to ask Adobe to support a multiple monitor workflow in a more meaningful manner ... even if one recognizes it doesn't appear to be a high priority currently.
Logged
Phil Indeblanc
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 1228


« Reply #17 on: August 05, 2013, 01:50:29 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
for every image that is destined for a 24"x36" print ... there are millions that will never be viewed larger than 1,000 pixels on the long dimension

Those millions have hardly anything to do with LR or Raw processing. You just bridged the number of images people posting online with the number of people processing their raw images.
I see ZERO correlation. I can make the same argument with the # of iphone or cell users to the # of DSLR users.
I don't see a point in this example of use. If anything, you are mixing apples and oranges.

I'm glad you see the very little times that YOU see large or dual screens helpful. An industry has a need, and your personal perspective overrides that need on the error to limit a core function?
Why not error on the side NOT to limit in the first place. Everyone is happy.

Quote
Do you not see that professional users are a small percentage of LR users ?

I hate to ask this but, Can you define professional for me?
Then can you help me explain why LR is the ONLY application out of C1 that can process IIQ files. (other than 1 or 2 exotic non GUI usable application). I'm willing to bet that 90% of those users have at least tried LR.
These files are the ones so called professionals use to make agency quality work from your millions of 1000pixel images to the very few who make 180' billboard off the freeway, or the 20' duratran display on the wall of some Vegas boutique.

I can guarrantee you that the 10 pro shooters I come across in the next few days, USE LR..ok maybe a few on Aperture with 1 monitor(In case they have to fit the Apple status quo of "don't think, we got everything figured out for you. This IS how you'll do it").  Last time I was in an Adobe seminar, we were all LR users, and 80% were PC(out of over 120 users...What ever that is worth?)...Just 2 or 3 years ago. Some arguments are so narrow minded, I have to bring up Apple vs PC, ouch!
(please do take my input constructively to the issue, and not personally.Be understanding of how things might be beyond your needs, and how things may serve those other than you. Be open to a workflow that maybe flexible and adaptive. Not restricted).

Maybe I am hitting a wall where you shoot and only you process your own files for fine art work you do and sell on the boadwalk of some artsy town? Nothing wrong with that, but there is an idustry of users, from film posters to publishing material in glossy pages. Did you know that there is an industry of folks that get all the raw footage from shooters and do the heavy lifting of processing these files, and editing, retouching? These are called retouchers. Then there are some that fall into the small studio setting where the shooter also retouches while having 3 or so editors on staff. What do you think we should use besides LR? What options do we have with multi camera systems in the studio?

Sorry, but a few replies come from a very acute perspective, or experience pool... and I can't blame you...You don't know what you don't know.  Perhaps I don't know something I have no idea about. Very possible.
But unless you have some facts that say only 15% of professional photographers use LR, then maybe there is something...Of course you would have to define professional for me. Again, why error on the negative.

Logged

If you buy a camera, you're a photographer...
Martin Kristiansen
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 168


WWW
« Reply #18 on: August 05, 2013, 05:16:33 AM »
ReplyReply

Only a small percentage of LR users are professional is not the same as saying only a small percentage of professionals are LR users.

I think most professionals use LR. I think only a small percentage of LR users are professional.
Logged
Tony Jay
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2162


« Reply #19 on: August 05, 2013, 06:17:25 AM »
ReplyReply

...I think most professionals use LR. I think only a small percentage of LR users are professional.
I think that is exactly right!

Tony Jay
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 17 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad