Adobe Admit New Import Dialogue in 6.2 Is Not A New Feature With Any Value

[kirkt]

Given Adobe's Lightroom Team blog entry about the new update:

http://blogs.adobe.com/lightroomjournal/2015/10/update-on-lightroom-2015-2-lightroom-6-2-release.html

it seems that Lightroom may be "evolving" toward an application for users that have yet to use it, not the application that innovates for its legions of users that have made it one of the most popular pieces of photography software on the market.  Hopefully, Schewe's thread here on LuLa (remember this?):

http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=78240.0

was for real and photographers will ultimately have a modern, high quality, efficient, fast and flexible tool to look forward to that overcomes the trend toward oversimplification and an emphasis on mobile platforms and online sharing (Dear Lightroom, see Aperture users' reaction to Photos).  A "Lightroom for Photographers," ironically enough.  One can always hope.

That blog post from Adobe is interesting.

kirk

[Rory]

I didn't know anything about Sharad Mangalick and I found this somewhat vapid interview from May, 2014.  Here is an excerpt of one interesting Q/A (Italics are mine):

But there seems to be a move to cater Lightroom to more basic users, even bundling LR with low to mid range camera purchases. Does this stem from the more demanding amateur consumer?

“The trend is that post processing is coming into everyone’s view. People use it all the time in all different applications. Instagram is doing it, but people don’t notice it much, but they want it. The new cameras are exposing tech to a higher swatch of the market and putting a bigger spotlight on post processing. If people are more conscious of the photos they’re taking and their processing, the onus is there for our software to seize the opportunity.

We are going to make it so simple that they won’t have to think about it much differently. We won’t make Lightroom so the pros won’t use it, but so that people who want to do basic things can do that too in LR.”

I guess we are seeing the first manifestation of this strategy. 

[ButchM]

" ... We won’t make Lightroom so the pros won’t use it, but so that people who want to do basic things can do that too in LR.”

Well, v6.2/2015.2 proves that he was so hell bent accomplish the latter, he alienated many of the former ...

[Anthony.Ralph]

Well, v6.2/2015.2 proves that he was so hell bent accomplish the latter, he alienated many of the former ...

...and didn't achieve anything for the former either in my opinion.

Anthony.

[adias]

Sorry, there was no personal attack of any kind. I was responding to jjj - I should have quoted him.

Maybe not a direct personal attack, but passive aggressiveness? Do you work for Adobe?

Product forums are places to raise questions, criticism, praise, and even frustration. But not to poke others.

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

No, I am simply saying that interpreting "feature updates" as "updates to existing features" would be twisting its meaning to prove your case. The words are vague enough to allow that, but we all know it's not what they meant.

I disagree, a functional downgrade is just that. Sometimes it's justified, e.g. to remove interface clutter or features that are not used by anybody.

Updates, always, build on prior functionality and should be an improvement, like debugging, fixing errors, speedups, better accuracy, etc.

Upgrades introduce new functionality.

It's really not that hard to explain, unless one is trying to 'spin' things into meaning something else.

The plain truth is that Adobe wants to attract as many new users as possible to their subscription model, so they can drain their finances for as long as possible. Therefore they lower the bar for entry, like making mobile versions free.  From a business point of view, completely understandable. From a user perspective it remains a downgrade, on some aspects, but hopefully offset by the new features like local adjustment Dehaze so that users don't jump ship immediately.

Cheers,
Bart

[john beardsworth]

Maybe not a direct personal attack, but passive aggressiveness? Do you work for Adobe?

Product forums are places to raise questions, criticism, praise, and even frustration. But not to poke others.

Are you training to be an amateur psychologist? The poster misunderstood my comment because I'd not quoted and made crystal clear that I wasn't responding to his post. FFS.

[nicsut]

Are you training to be an amateur psychologist? The poster misunderstood my comment because I'd not quoted and made crystal clear that I wasn't responding to his post. FFS.

Speaking as the poster concerned, how about you go read the thread again and get you facts straight.  You criticised jjj indeed quoting him, and you criticised me in an earlier post.  I responded to both.  Get off your high horse, either that or live up to you promise and bow out of this one.

Thanks.

[john beardsworth]

Speaking as the poster concerned, how about you go read the thread again and get you facts straight.  You criticised jjj indeed quoting him, and you criticised me in an earlier post.  I responded to both.  Get off your high horse, either that or live up to you promise and bow out of this one.

Put your spectacles on and you get your facts straight..... I resplied to jjj and used "wilful misinterpretations" without quoting at 7:04, you posted that that phrase was a personal attack at 07:39. At 07:47 I said "I should have quoted him" and I edited my 7:04 post at 07:48:16 including the words "Updated to add quoted content." Get off your own high horse and shut up. FFS.

[Christopher Sanderson]

This thread has degenerated into name-calling. I am locking it.

The topic however is worthy of further and ongoing discussion. I encourage those that wish to hold a civilized (if hot) debate to start another thread and to avoid misunderstandings and name-calling.

Chris