I have lr5 atm and wondering what are the benefits of upgrading to 6 ..
I am still using LR5, it does what i need and don't think there is a big difference between 5 and 6 stand alone. LR6CC I understand has new features.
LR5 won't support any new cameras that come out since its last update.
Im using a d7000
The only reason I upgraded to LR6 was raw support for my Canon 80D, otherwise I would have stayed with LR5.7.
Same for me although I went from LR3, adding the DNG process was a bind just for the sake of fifty quid
Dehaze is handy and can get it to work on the standalone version
Dehaze is only for subscription but not for LR6! Or you have to explain me how!
I think one thing in LR6 which was not in LR5 was the possibility to do panorama?
Here you are Tom, works fine with the latest version of LR6 (think its 6.10)
Used it yesterday on a landscape shot I posted in the X-T1 thread in the talk equipment section
Dehaze doesn't really interest me, and there are other ways to do it anyway.
There are lots of panorama stitching programs around, several are free.
LR5 works fine,i am quite happy using it.
I was going to create a thread about upgrading but saw this one.
I too am thinking about upgrading to LR6. I currently have 5.7. Not sure about it really.
Creating panos would be a lot better and LR settings won't be 'set in stone' after creatin.g them.
The brush on the radial filter and gradient tool would be great and would use it often.
The dehaze could be useful too (third party download above).
£64.66 to upgrade is a lot of money for only a few new features
If it helps at all, there are 2 new copies on LR6 selling at CEX for £75 (standalone edition). I got one myself a month or so back, its fully sealed
Some new guy or gal didn't read my comment properly.
I did read your comment, but I thought you were talking about the upgrade version (which requires a previous version of LR). I posted about a standalone version which normally costs £105-120 depending on where you buy from. Even though this may not be of benefit to you, it looks like it might have benefitted someone who just sent me a PM asking about it. Just trying to be helpful.
Benfits me, once i sort the laptop out. Not a wasted comment at all. cheers for the heads up.
I upgraded to 6 as it's the last standalone edition they are doing.
Dehaze isn't just for dehaze, works well on other shots as well. Performance is significant;y better than 5, IMHO.
The facial recognition actually works, I used it to find images in my 130,000 image catalogue of a friend that died
I didn't know Adobe has said there will be no future standalone versions after LR6? I can see many, including myself, not moving to CC and if they ever buy a new camera looking at different software or converting to DNG if really needing to. Whilst I understand CC is great value if you use LR and PS and you get new features as they are released, a subscription isn't for everyone. I wonder what the actual spilt CC v standalone users is.
I do not recall Adobe rescinding their 'original' statement that a perpetual license version of LR will continue
The test will be when they announce the next major release of CC and no Perpetual License version shortly after?
I wouldn't shell out that much just for the panorama facility.
Microsoft's ICE works great for panoramas and it's free.
Also free is Hugin and if you want a paid for there's PTGui which does a lot, and is my personal favourite.
I wasn't aware that the radial filter and gradient tools were any different between 5.7 and 6.1 and there are other ways of doing Dehaze.
I personally only bought LR6 because LR5.7 didn't support my new camera. otherwise I wouldn't have got it. Even still I don't purely use LR, I use capture one (express for free also) and DXO optic (older version for free) which IMO are better. LR6 is just nicer and quicker to use for me.
The nik collection is also free now. They also have some nice tools, which I am trying now for b&w pictures. Does a better job than lightroom as far as b&w goes.
When LR6 came out there were several comments/articles stating this would be the last standalone version and that Adobe wanted the CC model to be the one used. Hence the difficulty in finding the download link, how to buy on their website, the depreciation of features in the standalone model.
But were these comments and articles those made/published by Adobe? There was plenty of speculation but nothing I recall of an Adobe statement.
Probably a comment by one of the self-appointed "experts" that abound on the internet.
As I recall, Adobe themselves said something to the effect that "Lightroom will be available as a stand alone version indefinitely."
But be aware, indefinitely means "an undefined period" and does NOT mean "for ever" for which the word is infinitely - not the same.
It may be that Adobe have decided that Lightroom will no longer be available as a stand alone program, in which case I for one, will eventually find an alternative.
Confirmation will need to be from Adobe themselves.
Mine's not supported either. Didn't spend money on upgrading to LR 6; I just downloaded the free DNG convertor.
This was also my first port of call. For some reason I got better results especially while recovering shadows and highlights directly out of LR6 than when I went from Sony RAW > DNG > LR5.7. So I decided to buy LR6 after trialling it.
I'm on Fuji and the shadow and highlights recovery works very well even with DNG so I stuck with that. Always said I'll subscribe when my PC needs replacing but that shouldn't be for a few years yet.
It did work very well for me too, but was better with LR6. You can always get the trial and try it out for free to see if it makes much difference for you
Don't think I'll bother upgrading to be honest. But I'll keep thinking about it.
I have the free nik collection too. I think I first heard about it on Serge Ramelli or Anthony Morganti youtube channel. I uploaded some b&w images on to my flickr using the freeware. The first one wasn't done in the freeware.
Dehaze is one of the main reasons i was hoping to upgrade tbh .
So you say there are other ways to do it could you tell me how plz ..
Here you are Mark, I use it and works fine with the latest version of LR6 (think its 6.10)
awesome thanks for the head's up, I'll give it a go tonight
I found the slider didn't work well for my workflow, but the preset pack did
Petapixel write up
So reading the write up sounds like the backend already has the algorithms to make dehaze work. Adobe has simply not added the slider in UI. That's really dirty
I haven't tried it, but this looked pretty useful.
All a ploy to get users on to the CC version, never use PS and not keen on subscriptions so hope they carry on with standalone issues of LR
I will never subscribe, if they stop standalone version they simply lose me as a LR customer. I found it most user friendly when I first started processing RAW files. So I simply use it as a matter of habit, I don't think it provides the best result either.
It what way? As a workflow tool I think it's pretty sorted.
Now I admit the import could be quicker as it's slower than some other packages but on a good spec PC it's pretty decent. Ok I've a high spec PC with SSD's and fast disks but it's comparable to import using Capture one pro on a 1 year old high spec Mac with SSD. The ability of Lightroom to drop in and out of Nik software or Photoshop seemlessly is pretty good too for the additional layer editing etc.
Capture one pro is significantly more expensive, I've not found it better at processing my raw images and it corrupted its database several times with a client, but that was a Mac Cifs/SMB connection issue.
DXO optics pro is good for lens correction if your combination is supported. I think the noise reduction is slightly better than Lightroom 6
But then Lightroom isn't just about processing...
So then what's you're view?
I agree with you lightroom is pretty good as tool as a whole. Its also the fastest in my experience (I have a hight spec'd latest iMac). Its the most friendly and easiest to setup and use too. When I said it doesn't produce the best results I was purely taking about RAW processing. As you have already noted DXO is better for noise reduction and corrections. I find capture one is also better at skin tones, corrections and also retains more details than LR6.
Capture one express is free for Sony RAWs and capture one pro is like £30 for Sony RAWs, so for me its the cheapest option. Also LR6 is no good for IR photography which I do a fair amount of as well. I used to use DXO and gimp for that. I think I may have found a workaround using profile creator and LR6. we'll see....
If I was a paid professional I might even go as far as paying subscription to keep the LR workflow because it does really work very well. But as a enthusiast I am happy to put with others (than pay a subscription), and I currently use more than one tool anyway.
I too agree that as an integrated package, Lightroom is very good.
I find it easy to use, the raw processing results are excellent.and I find the cataloging facilities invaluable.
This talk of DXO or Capture One or anything else producing "better" results is purely down to personal preference but if you cannot get the results that satisfy you then you need to learn more about using the software.
It has been demonstrated by Martin Evening that Capture One can produce exactly the same results as Lightroom, just that their default settings are different.
As the user of a Sony "mirrorless" system I am eligible to use the free version of Capture one, but I choose not to, because I prefer to use the same (Lightroom) interface for ALL my raw processing, rather than learning the "features" of a different program.
However, should Adobe choose to make Lightroom CC only, then I for one, will be looking elsewhere for my raw processing software.