Lightroom 6

I've downloaded the trail and it's not wowed me like I thought it would.

It doesn't seem much quicker than LR5 (It is using my GPU too!)
Face recognition is hit and miss - On my sample of c900 photos it got less than half correct.
HDR and Panorama are good but I don't need them as I already use PS for this.

Am I missing anything else?
 
Buck said:
Am I missing anything else?
Click to expand...

Ah, you've not discovered the functionality where it gives you a massage whilst you're processing your photos and serves you a bacon sarnie yet?
 
Buck said:
I've downloaded the trail and it's not wowed me like I thought it would.

It doesn't seem much quicker than LR5 (It is using my GPU too!)
Face recognition is hit and miss - On my sample of c900 photos it got less than half correct.
HDR and Panorama are good but I don't need them as I already use PS for this.

Am I missing anything else?
Click to expand...

How much VRAM do you have and have you updated to the latest drivers?

I did 3500 images and face recognition was pretty much spot on. It learns as it goes, so the more faces you confirm, the better it gets.

It did pick up a few non faces, but it's working on algorithms so you can never expect it to be 100% perfect.

HDR and Panoramas are much better than going to photoshop and the image it generates is a RAW image, not a PSD or TIFF.
Adobe have also stated that the HDR works best with just two images, 2 stops over and 2 stops under, so not more 3,5 or 7 shots.
 
Last edited:
fabs said:
Ah, you've not discovered the functionality where it gives you a massage whilst you're processing your photos and serves you a bacon sarnie yet?
Click to expand...

Dang I missed that! What's the shortcut to use it :D
 
ecoleman said:
How much VRAM do you have and have you updated to the latest drivers?

I did 3500 images and face recognition was pretty much spot on. It learns as it goes, so the more faces you confirm, the better it gets.

It did pick up a few non faces, but it's working on algorithms so you can never expect it to be 100% perfect.

HDR and Panoramas are much better than going to photoshop and the image it generates is a RAW image, not a PSD or TIFF.
Adobe have also stated that the HDR works best with just two images, 2 stops over and 2 stops under, so not more 3,5 or 7 shots.
Click to expand...

Hi Elliott

I'm the latest driver. IIRC my graphics card is 4GB (NVIDIA GeForce)

I read after I posted about the HDR and Panoramas processing as DNG files so yes, that's a good move.

I need to carry on using it over the next month to see how I get on with it more.
 
Buck said:
Hi Elliott

I'm the latest driver. IIRC my graphics card is 4GB (NVIDIA GeForce)

I read after I posted about the HDR and Panoramas processing as DNG files so yes, that's a good move.

I need to carry on using it over the next month to see how I get on with it more.
Click to expand...

I'd get on to Adobe re the graphics card. I know they have had some issues with ATI cards and I was disappointed that enabling GPU made my system much slower, but I discovered I only had 512kb VRAM so even though it said my card was supported and allowed me to enable GPU, the card just isn't powerful enough. However disabling GPU puts my performance back to where it was with LR5 which I've never really had a problem with.

As the GPU support is new in Lightroom, there will no doubt be a few hiccups and hopefully we'll see improvements over time.
 
ecoleman said:
Adobe have also stated that the HDR works best with just two images, 2 stops over and 2 stops under, so not more 3,5 or 7 shots.
Click to expand...

Thanks for clarifying that as I in the main do a 3 set and always thought one needed all 3 to ensure the HDR software had best chance of making the calculations and producing a balanced natural looking hdr ~ so taking 3 and discard one!!!
 
Last edited:
Box Brownie said:
Thanks for clarifying that as I in the main do a 3 set and always thought one needed all 3 to ensure the HDR software had best chance of making the calculations and producing a balanced natural looking hdr ~ so taking 3 and discard one!!!
Click to expand...
The one in the middle of the set is the recommended exposure which I find really handy while browsing the catalogue. I can see if I want to process the set or reject them.
Also - exposure blending (layer masks in Photoshop) is really difficult with exposures in large steps. Two shots 4 stops apart will pretty much make exposure blending impossible, I find 1 stop increments work best for me. If you want to keep exposure blending available as an option when HDR doesn't do what you want then avoid large exposure steps.

In summary, I recommend an odd number of shots separated by one stop.
 
DuncanDisorderly said:
The one in the middle of the set is the recommended exposure which I find really handy while browsing the catalogue. I can see if I want to process the set or reject them.
Also - exposure blending (layer masks in Photoshop) is really difficult with exposures in large steps. Two shots 4 stops apart will pretty much make exposure blending impossible, I find 1 stop increments work best for me. If you want to keep exposure blending available as an option when HDR doesn't do what you want then avoid large exposure steps.

In summary, I recommend an odd number of shots separated by one stop.
Click to expand...

Lightroom HDR is more like exposure blending and by default you get a very natural look. You can of course over cook the processing if you like that sort of thing.

It is Adobe that recommend only two images 4 stops apart for best results.

What you end up with is a natural looking 16bit RAW file that will allow you adjust exposure by 10 stops either way.
 
Last edited:
Sorry if this has already been posted, but i though ti might help clear up some of the GPU speed issues.
This came from Victoria in an email last week. for what its worth ive turned GPU acceleration off, even though i have a an up to date graphics card. For me the cons outweigh the pros.

GPU acceleration for interactive image editing
  • Lightroom can use the Graphics Processing Unit (GPU) to speed up interactive image editing. This provides real-time or near-time updates to the image while making adjustments in the Develop module using sliders.
  • The GPU is particularly helpful when using high-resolution screens, such as 4K and 5K displays.
  • Requirements
    • You need to be running Windows 7 or later, or Mac OS 10.9 or later. (Note that LR CC/6 can run on Mac 10.8, but without GPU accelaration)
    • The card needs to support Open GL 3.3 or later, which includes most cards from about 2010/2011 onwards.
    • It doesn’t need a top-spec graphics card. If you’re buying a new one, a recent mid-range graphics card with 2GB of RAM is a great choice.
    • You need to be running recent drivers, especially if you have problems. Windows Update often suggests outdated drivers – check the card manufacturer’s website instead.
  • There are pros and cons:
    • Interactive Performance – The biggest benefit is interactive performance in the Develop module. The preview updates much faster as you move the sliders, and tools such as the adjustment brush move much more smoothly.
    • High resolution screens – The higher the resolution of the screen, the greater the improvement, so it makes a world of difference on a 4K or 5K display.
    • Slower loading times – The biggest downside is it takes a little extra time to pass the data from the CPU to the GPU, so there’s a slight delay in initially the loading the photo.
    • Intermittent blurring – When you zoom in, it briefly switches to a lower resolution preview before sharpening up again, which can be slightly off-putting.
    • Slower Detail adjustments – The preview for sharpening, noise reduction and grain is slightly slower to update.
    • Second screen lag – If you work with the Lightroom’s secondary windows open, the lag in updating is more noticeable with the GPU enabled.
    • Buggy drivers – Some graphics drivers are buggy and may even crash Lightroom with the GPU enabled, so it’s important to check the manufacturer’s website and install the latest drivers. Some graphics cards have the GPU setting disabled automatically as the drivers are too unstable or the card specification is too low.
  • GPU support is enabled by default, and Lightroom automatically determines whether the system’s GPU can be used to accelerate image drawing. If it can, Lightroom displays the name of your graphics card below the checkbox in Preferences. To disable it, go to the new Performance tab in Lightroom’s preferences, and uncheck the Use Graphics Processor checkbox.
 
ecoleman said:
Lightroom HDR is more like exposure blending and by default you get a very natural look. You can of course over cook the processing if you like that sort of thing.

It is Adobe that recommend only two images 4 stops apart for best results.

What you end up with is a natural looking 16bit RAW file that will allow you adjust exposure by 10 stops either way.
Click to expand...
Lightroom HDR has two modes; toning on and toning off. There is no slider, if it looks overcooked there is nothing you can do about it.

With toning on I've tried cave images and indoor images and the result is horrendous; I've no doubt it will work better with landscapes. There is no control over the look; for example a storm cloud will be lightened to make it look less stormy and any deliberate lighting of a subject will be reduced in intensity. It doesn't do it for me even though it looks better than traditional full-fat HDR...

With no toning you end up with an image that looks remarkably like the middle exposure except in my examples it has less rim lighting around the model (probably depends on the camera, I use a 5DIII). You then need to alter the exposure to get the sky or ground looking right and dodge/burn to get the details back in the rest of the image.
The result looks quite good, but without taking the intermediate exposures you don't get the option of exposure blending and can't browse the originals viewing only the normal exposure.

There is one big advantage of exposure blending using layers; when something moves in the image like a tree, waves, or the model wobbling slightly.
Since each part of the final image is sourced from a single layer there is no ghosting to fix.
When I tried using LR HDR to merge a wide angle landscape taken under trees, the branches looked fine at first glance, but zooming in on them showed they were ringed with ghosting artefacts; I played with the ghosting setting but didn't get a significant improvement. With exposure blending this problem will never arise.
 
Here's an example...
The HDR merging used only the -2 and +2 exposures (as suggested).
View attachment 36714 1) the middle exposure that you are recommending we don't need to take, it's great for determining if I like the image enough to bother merging
2) -2 stops
3) +2 stops
4) What I ended up with after a quick late light edit using exposure blending
5) HDR, no toning - you can't see it here but flipping between the middle exposure and this one there is much more contrast in the highlights of the middle exposure
6) HDR, with toning - rock texture and no sense of depth. What you can't see at this size is that it has tried to lift the deep shadows in the chasm at the bottom to be brighter that the +2 image. The result is horrendous noise complete with a colour cast. The colour cast is what my sensor does at crazy high ISO when I lift the shadows; I would never do this!

As usual, the devil is in the detail.
These thumbnails are hard to see the problems, you need to zoom in and have a closer look.
In short - if you want to create an image capable of printing to exhibition quality then you can't beat old fashioned exposure blending with layers.
 
Last edited:
I think I definitely prefer it to Lightroom version 3 - I have an 18 month old mid range pc (i5-4670 cpu & gtx660 gpu) and there is a very slight delay of about a second when first loading an image (starts blurred then goes sharp) but not really that bothered by it. I'd imagine that people trying to run it on a laptop might have problems, or people trying to run it on a really old pc, but it always seems to be the case that running cutting edge software on "legacy" hardware is generally asking for disappointment.
 
I have a question. I bought LR5 at the end of March and it arrived in early April as a box. I contacted Adobe who directed me to a site where I could apply for a free upgrade with a scan of my receipt and my serial number. Does anybody know how long this will take? Thanks for your time.
 
Chipper said:
I have a question. I bought LR5 at the end of March and it arrived in early April as a box. I contacted Adobe who directed me to a site where I could apply for a free upgrade with a scan of my receipt and my serial number. Does anybody know how long this will take? Thanks for your time.
Click to expand...

When I contacted Adobe about an eligibility query/validation to get their student edition they got back to me in less than 48 hours.
 
Hi. Yes... I have had an email saying I will get. Link in 48 hours... Now I must just go and back up that catalogue...
 
Adobe really trying to push me into taking the cloud route, which I don't want. Maybe I'll stick with 5.7 until they iron out the bugs..
 
boliston said:
£8.57 per month for cloud vs £59.09 one off for standalone - i'd describe that as *pushing* standalone!
Click to expand...

Well if you consider you only have 7 months (roughly) of use from it before you go over the £59.09 then yes. CC route is ok for users of both PS and LR but for primarily LR users only that don't need all the upgrades straightaway then standalone is better value. I'm quite happy with Elements 9 and hardly ever use it. I'll upgrade my LR4 though as it looks like a good move [emoji106]
 
Always amazes me when people moan about Adobe's move to cc :rolleyes: They're a commercial business, the cc model is best for them for a variety of reasons, so that is the option they prefer customers to take.

At least they still offer the perpetual licence version and customers have a choice.
 
To be honest if they did LR only I would be interested. I use PS once in a blue moon and don't want to pay for a product I don't use. That's the bit that bugs me.
 
Anyone else come across the exif problem when exporting jpegs? I've GPS data in my pics and when I export them both the location and lens info is missing from Picasa. I'm definitely using the correct export options. A quick look on adobe forums and it's a know problem. I'm not impressed.
 
boliston said:
£8.57 per month for cloud vs £59.09 one off for standalone - i'd describe that as *pushing* standalone!
Click to expand...
Adrian,could you post a link to where the stand alone version can be bought for £59.09 please,I've googled around but still can't find it,
thanks
ps just seen that is for the upgrade from 5,sorry.
 
Last edited:
johnnypanic said:
Always amazes me when people moan about Adobe's move to cc :rolleyes: They're a commercial business, the cc model is best for them for a variety of reasons, so that is the option they prefer customers to take.

At least they still offer the perpetual licence version and customers have a choice.
Click to expand...

For the time being.......
 
jerry12953 said:
I've been a huge fan of Lightroom over the last few years, and have always upgraded as soon as a new version was released. I did start to worry that v5 was starting to become a little too complex. From the discussion so far it seems that v6 is taking this trend much further. Compatibility of software with video card? Aaaaarrrggggghhhhh.......!

I'm definitely hanging on to my cash for now.
Click to expand...


Well my determination to hang on to the cash lasted all of 3 weeks. The thought of being able to do hdr's and panoramas was just too tempting, and I downloaded v6 last week.

The fact that the software might use the GPU to speed itself up was neither here nor there in my decision, let alone whether it worked or not!
 
KAS said:
My Lightroom stand alone cost £107 direct download from adobe. I used Elements previously and I am finding Lightroom outstanding. I wished I'd chosen Lightroom years ago, however Element still has its uses.
Click to expand...


.....like content aware fill, although it doesn't always work. Any other uses for Elements for the LR user, Keith?
 
  • Like
Reactions: KAS
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top