Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down

Author Topic: Lightroom 2015.9  (Read 2401 times)

ButchM

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 618
Re: Lightroom 2015.9
« Reply #20 on: March 14, 2017, 12:16:15 PM »

... I understand being wary of updates, this is why I suggested updating other machines first and test the new version to make sure everything you need is working as expected.


Yes, great advice for yet another workaround. Though a workaround is not really a solution for the long term, simply more work.

On the update versions I had issues with, I followed your advice precisely. (Without you ever sharing it for my benefit beforehand) However, it still required extra time and effort on my part to restore the test workstation to a previously known working version from a backup. All as a direct result of Adobe not applying proper oversight and/or using a too narrow private beta testing field to ferret out such issues before the official release. Not to mention, one of my major problems with applying a Ps Droplet upon export took not 1, not 2 ... but 3 attempts to restore.

Trust should never be expected or offered blindly. It must be earned. Adobe hasn't done much to earn that trust over the past year or more. I'm also not inclined to become a pay-to-play public beta tester.

In my instance, there is very little paranoia involved. My views is based purely on factual accounts.
Logged

Wayne Fox

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3727
    • waynefox.com
Re: Lightroom 2015.9
« Reply #21 on: March 14, 2017, 10:32:55 PM »

Adobe has had some issues with a few of their updates which have caused some serious problems. On a percentage basis they haven't done that badly, considering they have issued dozens of upgrades and updates of Lr over the past ten years and only a few of those have caused serious issues.  But those have been serious enough and obvious enough it makes users wonder where their quality control is and why they don't utilize a little larger beta test group.

Regarding this update, I will say I've been using it since it appeared on two different Macs, including raw processing of IQ3 100 files and printing with no issues.  I haven't tried any pano merges  yet to see if they broke that functionality (which I believe has happened twice before, once in Ps and once in both Ps and Lr).  Maybe users who have tried that could chime in so those users wanting to "wait and see"  have some feedback to help their decision as to when to apply the update.

Wonder if this will be the last release of Lr 2015 ...

anyway, here's my first image from my IQ3 100 processed in Lr.  The use of the automask tool and brush adjustments gave me a better result than I achieved in C1.  Not saying that's C1's fault, but I've just found my technique for this works so well in Lr and haven't figured out how to do it in C1 with the same simplicity and degree of success.

(if anyone cares, here's the details on the shot and post processing ... Phase One XF with 75-150 lens at 75mm, 1/80th at f/9, 6 shot focus stack using XF focus stacking tool, process in Lr 2015.9, output to tifs into Helicon Focus for merging, back to Ps as smart object with raw filter applied for final tweaking)

Paul2660

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3482
    • Photos of Arkansas
Re: Lightroom 2015.9
« Reply #22 on: March 15, 2017, 08:03:59 AM »

Hi Wayne,

Very nice shot, I assume you had no wind?  I have tried the focus stacking in the field, but have found that Helicon can't handle the slightest amount of wind and creates very strange issues.  But when I have a solution where it works amazing.

LR, pano, not broken, but still not working 100% as it still pushes exposures beyond recovery.  I have opened several tickets on this, but have never gotten any word LR Adobe is working on it.  But often LR will take a shot that is not overexposed (but close) and when it makes the merge, the highlights will be pure white.  Same files exported to Adobe CC will work fine but you don't gain the benefit of the boundary wrap which I really like.

Paul Caldwell
Logged
Paul Caldwell
Little Rock, Arkansas U.S.
Photography > http://photosofarkansas.com
Blog> http://paulcaldwellphotography.com

Mark D Segal

  • Contributor
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9445
    • http://www.markdsegal.com
Re: Lightroom 2015.9
« Reply #23 on: March 15, 2017, 08:15:08 AM »

I'm still using Lr 2015.6.1 and Photoshop 2015.5.1 because both of them haven proven to perform the functions I need correctly. Except for panos in Lr. The algorithm for Photomerge>Pano fails to find enough pixels in common for lining up the images, whereas Photoshop has no such problem with exactly the same photos exported as TIFF or PSD files, and in fact does a much better job than I obtained trying them with a demo version of PTGUI. So if nothing has changed in this area between the version of Lr I'm using and the newest one, it would indicate that problems in this area remain to be resolved.
Logged
Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....." http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/scanning_workflows_with_silverfast_8.shtml

Paul2660

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3482
    • Photos of Arkansas
Re: Lightroom 2015.9
« Reply #24 on: March 15, 2017, 09:08:33 AM »

Hi Mark.

I agree LR often will not work well on a pano with a lot of fog or clouds. I just wish Adobe would add boundary warp to CC. It's so much better than the content aware option in CC.

Paul Caldwell
Logged
Paul Caldwell
Little Rock, Arkansas U.S.
Photography > http://photosofarkansas.com
Blog> http://paulcaldwellphotography.com

Mark D Segal

  • Contributor
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9445
    • http://www.markdsegal.com
Re: Lightroom 2015.9
« Reply #25 on: March 15, 2017, 09:56:51 AM »

Hi Paul,

I find panos in general are a hit or miss proposition in Lr, and the photos I'm stitching do not have clouds or fog. These days it's mostly street art, which tends to have a lot of high density detail and very distinct graphics. Where I made the photos intended for future stitching I of course ensured sufficient overlap. This is what's so troubling about the functionality. However, the saving grace is the 800 lb. gorilla waiting on the wings - exporting the files to Photoshop and stitching them there usually works very well. The two applications start with very different kinds of data and perhaps somehow or other this explains why one appears to work better than the other, but I have no real technical insight into this.
Logged
Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....." http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/scanning_workflows_with_silverfast_8.shtml

Mark D Segal

  • Contributor
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9445
    • http://www.markdsegal.com
Re: Lightroom 2015.9
« Reply #26 on: March 15, 2017, 10:14:02 AM »

Adobe has had some issues with a few of their updates which have caused some serious problems. On a percentage basis they haven't done that badly, considering they have issued dozens of upgrades and updates of Lr over the past ten years and only a few of those have caused serious issues.  But those have been serious enough and obvious enough it makes users wonder where their quality control is and why they don't utilize a little larger beta test group.


Hi Wayne - yes, I too am in the "wondering" mode, while I agree with your evaluation of the overall experience for the past decade. I have the impression, which could be disproved with real data, that the appearance of serious issues has been skewed toward the more recent period of the decade, suggesting perhaps changes in management approach that could be sub-optimal in these respects. As for the beta test group, yes bigger may be better, but I suspect conscious stratification of the sample may be also important, to assuredly capture a reasonably broad range of user computing environments. While I think we need to attune our expectations to the complexity of what they are working with, like many others I would like to see the day when I can return to being an early adopter with more confidence than I now have in a trouble-free experience.

Where I would really like to see a major evolution of Lr going forward, and I have recommended this to persons in Adobe a long time ago, is to see a broadened structure of editing capability in the local adjustment modes of the Develop Module (brush and gradient functions) whereby the controls available in this mode would be the same as the ones in basic mode, providing for much more powerful and refined local adjustment capability.

All this said, Lr remains my application of choice given the capabilities that have been developed over the years, its relative ease of use, image quality (in the hands of people who know how to use it), the strength of the Print module and integration with Photoshop.
Logged
Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....." http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/scanning_workflows_with_silverfast_8.shtml

ButchM

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 618
Re: Lightroom 2015.9
« Reply #27 on: March 15, 2017, 01:15:52 PM »

I'm still using Lr 2015.6.1 and Photoshop 2015.5.1 ...

Unfortunately, this is the case for more than a few users. While you are using a prior stable version that offers you the best workflow for your personal needs ... with the CC subscription you have been paying for all the subsequent updates, up to and including the most recent Lr CC 2015.9 and Photoshop 2017.0.1/ACR 9.9.

While working with an older version is not of great consequence in of itself, I do wonder how many folks would be content to drive a leased 2015 automobile all the while they are being charged for the most current 2017 model that remains in the garage because it is either unsafe or unable to be driven?
Logged

Mark D Segal

  • Contributor
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9445
    • http://www.markdsegal.com
Re: Lightroom 2015.9
« Reply #28 on: March 15, 2017, 02:13:55 PM »

Butch, the subscription remains worthwhile to me whether I hit the bleeding edge on day one or some time thereafter, because for my needs they haven't introduced anything compelling since the versions I'm using, and each update embeds a certain element of risk - small as it may be - so why bother until there is a more compelling reason? When there is, by having the subscription all I need to do is push the button. I think we all agree that the lower the upgrade risk the better.
Logged
Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....." http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/scanning_workflows_with_silverfast_8.shtml

donbga

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 314
Re: Lightroom 2015.9
« Reply #29 on: March 15, 2017, 02:17:06 PM »


(if anyone cares, here's the details on the shot and post processing ... Phase One XF with 75-150 lens at 75mm, 1/80th at f/9, 6 shot focus stack using XF focus stacking tool, process in Lr 2015.9, output to tifs into Helicon Focus for merging, back to Ps as smart object with raw filter applied for final tweaking)

Result == Excellent! Very nice.
Logged

hogloff

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 117
Re: Lightroom 2015.9
« Reply #30 on: March 15, 2017, 05:22:54 PM »

Butch, the subscription remains worthwhile to me whether I hit the bleeding edge on day one or some time thereafter, because for my needs they haven't introduced anything compelling since the versions I'm using, and each update embeds a certain element of risk - small as it may be - so why bother until there is a more compelling reason? When there is, by having the subscription all I need to do is push the button. I think we all agree that the lower the upgrade risk the better.

This is exactly what I do. I let the noise die down around a release, then I upgrade. So far doing this resulted in zero upgrade issues. The most I waited to upgrade to the latest was 2 months...I can live with that.
Logged

Hoggy

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 106
Re: Lightroom 2015.9
« Reply #31 on: March 15, 2017, 06:00:37 PM »

I agree LR often will not work well on a pano with a lot of fog or clouds. I just wish Adobe would add boundary warp to CC. It's so much better than the content aware option in CC.

A little pet peeve of mine..  You're not the only one I've seen do it, though - so I don't want you to think I'm picking on you or anything. :)

CC is really more of a payment model, not a program.  Kind of like if someone said:  "I exported from CC, then imported into Adobe CC, but I like CC better than Adobe - but not as much as CC".  Would you know what the world I was talking about?   ??? ;D

I haven't done a lot of pano merges yet, but I'd like to understand what people are saying about each program when referring to them so I can know for any future panos I might do.  I can kind of decipher by context here in the previous references to "CC" and "Adobe CC" (as CC wouldn't do context-aware panos like Adobe CC would  ;) ), but some I'm still unsure of.  (Albeit, the latest LR-CC does have boundary warp IIRC.)
« Last Edit: March 15, 2017, 06:09:48 PM by Hoggy »
Logged
Cams: Pentax K-3, K-30 & Canon G7X, S100
Firm supporter of DNG, throwing away originals.
It's the hash, man..  That good hash!

ButchM

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 618
Re: Lightroom 2015.9
« Reply #32 on: March 15, 2017, 07:06:19 PM »

Butch, the subscription remains worthwhile to me whether I hit the bleeding edge on day one or some time thereafter ...

It's quite apparent you don't have to be concerned with being on the bleeding edge ... Lr 6.1/CC2015.1 was released in July 2015 ... that's 18 months behind the curve. I don't think anyone would consider that pushing the envelope.  :)
Logged

Mark D Segal

  • Contributor
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9445
    • http://www.markdsegal.com
Re: Lightroom 2015.9
« Reply #33 on: March 15, 2017, 07:12:19 PM »

It's quite apparent you don't have to be concerned with being on the bleeding edge ... Lr 6.1/CC2015.1 was released in July 2015 ... that's 18 months behind the curve. I don't think anyone would consider that pushing the envelope.  :)

I'm on 2015.6.1 released July 25, 2016. So only 7 months behind the curve! :-)
Logged
Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....." http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/scanning_workflows_with_silverfast_8.shtml

Denis de Gannes

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 216
Re: Lightroom 2015.9
« Reply #34 on: March 15, 2017, 09:14:55 PM »

It's quite apparent you don't have to be concerned with being on the bleeding edge ... Lr 6.1/CC2015.1 was released in July 2015 ... that's 18 months behind the curve. I don't think anyone would consider that pushing the envelope.  :)
No not pushing the envelope, I would think that the envelop is lost to history.
Logged
Equip: iMac (Retina 5K,27"Mid 2015),OSX 10.12.1; 24GB Ram; HDD int 3TB; Ext 2TB & 1TB; Canon I-Jet Pro9000; Dimage ScanElite5400.
Imaging Software: LR CC2015.8; PS CC; C1 Pro-10; Qimage U.
Cameras: Oly OMD E-M1; m4/3 Zuiko Pro 12-40mm f2.8, 14-150mm f3.5-5.6 Mkii, 45mm f1.8, 4/3 8-18mm f3.5-5.6.

ButchM

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 618
Re: Lightroom 2015.9
« Reply #35 on: March 16, 2017, 12:59:43 PM »

I'm on 2015.6.1 released July 25, 2016. So only 7 months behind the curve! :-)

sorry ... cot my CC2015.x and v6.x  versions mixed up.
Logged

David Eichler

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 572
    • San Francisco Architectural and Interior Photographer
Re: Lightroom 2015.9
« Reply #36 on: March 19, 2017, 06:51:00 PM »

Hi Paul,

I find panos in general are a hit or miss proposition in Lr, and the photos I'm stitching do not have clouds or fog. These days it's mostly street art, which tends to have a lot of high density detail and very distinct graphics. Where I made the photos intended for future stitching I of course ensured sufficient overlap. This is what's so troubling about the functionality. However, the saving grace is the 800 lb. gorilla waiting on the wings - exporting the files to Photoshop and stitching them there usually works very well. The two applications start with very different kinds of data and perhaps somehow or other this explains why one appears to work better than the other, but I have no real technical insight into this.

I do a fair amount of two-shot panos with LR and can't recall the last time I had a problem with that. Perhaps more shots creates problems sometimes, or the size of the files?
Logged

Mark D Segal

  • Contributor
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9445
    • http://www.markdsegal.com
Re: Lightroom 2015.9
« Reply #37 on: March 19, 2017, 07:07:26 PM »

The recent ones I've done have been either two or three photos. The files are much larger in Photoshop because they are rendered, yet the stitching has been much more workable.
Logged
Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....." http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/scanning_workflows_with_silverfast_8.shtml
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up