Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Adobe Lightroom Q&A => Topic started by: RikkFlohr on June 16, 2015, 12:55:06 am
-
LR CC and 6.1
Camera Support
Lens Profiles
Bug Fixes
New Features in CC Version as well: Dehaze - Blacks and Whites Sliders in Local Adjustments
iOS Lightroom Mobile
Tone Curve
Vignettes
HSL/BW
http://blogs.adobe.com/lightroomjournal/2015/06/june-updates-to-cc-photography.html
-
New Features in CC Version as well: Dehaze - Blacks and Whites Sliders in Local Adjustments
So less than a couple of months after 6 was released they add significant new features, some requested for years, into the CC only version. It's pretty clear where the perpetual licence holders stand now :-(
-
It's pretty clear where the perpetual licence holders stand now :-(
Yeah, right where they stood in prior versions, no new features between major releases. So, what's new? Nothing...
-
However, they should have put the new haze function on the Basic panel instead of the Effects panel. It is more like Clarity.
-
Actually, they have addressed one thing a hell of a lot of Fuji users were waiting for :
-Reduced “color blur” artifacts when processing Fujifilm X-Trans raw images. In collaboration with Fujifilm, we are still investigating methods to improve fine detail rendering and overall edge definition.
So they seemed to have been working on better X-Trans processing, which was very overdue.
I hope this reduces the need to pre-process them in Capture One.
Will test it out tonight
-
So less than a couple of months after 6 was released they add significant new features, some requested for years, into the CC only version. It's pretty clear where the perpetual licence holders stand now :-(
Yeah, right where they stood in prior versions, no new features between major releases. So, what's new? Nothing...
Quite. Adobe said that CC will get incremental improvements more frequently than the 12-24 month update cycle of major releases with stand-alone software.
It's just one of their little ways of nudging people towards CC, while keeping to their stated intention to continue Lightroom as a stand-alone product.
-
iOS Lightroom Mobile
Tone Curve
Vignettes
HSL/BW
One other important addition - Video
-
Yeah, right where they stood in prior versions, no new features between major releases. So, what's new? Nothing...
I don't think that is entirely accurate?
http://www.lightroomqueen.com/whats-new-in-lightroom-5-2-rc/
The first dot releases have historically had a few little extra features, and 5.2 is no exception:
*A Smoothness adjustment slider...
*Refinements to the Spot Healing Tool...
This is Adobe doing just as they have told us. For the time being, I can live with my "outdated" 6.x.
-h
-
This is Adobe doing just as they have told us. For the time being, I can live with my "outdated" 6.x.
+1, I think it's logical that if you pay more you will get more. No regrets from me getting the perpetual license so far.
-
Actually, they have addressed one thing a hell of a lot of Fuji users were waiting for :
So they seemed to have been working on better X-Trans processing, which was very overdue.
I hope this reduces the need to pre-process them in Capture One.
Does this only apply to the CC version? It sounds like a camera support issue that should also be in the perpetual licensed LR6 updates?
Cheers,
Bart
P.S. I just read in another thread that it is an update to Camera Raw 9.1, so it should become available through the update mechanism in Photoshop CS6 and Photoshop CC., and presumably Lightroom CC (and LR6?).
-
And once more a big kudos to the ACR team giving us dehaze and blacks and whites in local adjustments. I have also noticed on my MacBook Pro mid-2015 15" with the new AMD graphics card that although it was supported in the previous LR CC version that now the srolling around in the zoomed 1:1 image looking for spots and/or things to remove it much smoother. One finger on the magic mouse moves the view around the image smoothly. Great! I see that the rest of enhancements from the Lightroom team are on the mobile side. Fine but not something I can get really enthusiastic about.
-
I have a perpetual license version of Lightroom 6.0. For the life of me, I can’t find a link where the updated version 6.1 is being offered. Via Lightroom (Help/Updates), the Adobe Application Manager did quickly find, upload and install an update for Camera Raw 9.1 (CS6) but claims my LR 6.0 is up-to-date. What gives? Could someone here offer me a link where I can download the new LR 6.1 update (standalone version)?
Many thanks!
Larry
-
Colour me impressed. So far The Develop module seems more responsive, the De-Haze seems genuinely good and the Black and white point local adjustment settings are a great addition to my workflow.
I did a mono conversion using Nik Silver FX last night and I've got damn near using Lightroom only within 10 minutes of playing with the new features. Nice one. Glad I decided to subscribe this time.
-
I have a perpetual license version of Lightroom 6.0. For the life of me, I can’t find a link where the updated version 6.1 is being offered. Via Lightroom (Help/Updates), the Adobe Application Manager did quickly find, upload and install an update for Camera Raw 9.1 (CS6) but claims my LR 6.0 is up-to-date. What gives? Could someone here offer me a link where I can download the new LR 6.1 update (standalone version)?
Many thanks!
Larry
Mine came up via Lightroom/Help/Updates.... without any problems ???
I looked for a straight LR 6.1 download (see it as a back-up strategy in case I need to load it on a new computer and don't want to install 6.0 first before upgrading to the latest version) but couldn't find one.
-
So less than a couple of months after 6 was released they add significant new features, some requested for years, into the CC only version. It's pretty clear where the perpetual licence holders stand now :-(
Exactly where they should stand. It was clear that the cc version would get incremental updates where as the perpetual version would have to wait until the next full release. I think rather than the glass is half empty, I think it's great news for cc users. You have a choice...live with the choice you made.
-
And once more a big kudos to the ACR team giving us dehaze and blacks and whites in local adjustments. I have also noticed on my MacBook Pro mid-2015 15" with the new AMD graphics card that although it was supported in the previous LR CC version that now the srolling around in the zoomed 1:1 image looking for spots and/or things to remove it much smoother. One finger on the magic mouse moves the view around the image smoothly. Great! I see that the rest of enhancements from the Lightroom team are on the mobile side. Fine but not something I can get really enthusiastic about.
Hans...why is it that you care so much which individual programmers provide the features? Why can you not be happy Adobe as a whole is moving their products along? I personally don't give a rats azz whole writes the code. I think it is well architected code which allows features to be developed once and shared between multiple products.
-
Does this only apply to the CC version? It sounds like a camera support issue that should also be in the perpetual licensed LR6 updates?
The X-Trans color-blur problem was considered a bug and the fix is included in the LR 6.1 release (https://blogs.adobe.com/richardcurtis/?p=4657).
I guess you could argue that some future improvement in "fine detail rendering and overall edge definition" of Fujifilm files would be either a new feature (available to subscribers only) or a bug fix (to be incorporated in a LR 6.X release).
-
Exactly where they should stand. It was clear that the cc version would get incremental updates where as the perpetual version would have to wait until the next full release. I think rather than the glass is half empty, I think it's great news for cc users. You have a choice...live with the choice you made.
Well said! But it was clear to some of us that when CC was released with new features but only bug fixes and camera support for perpetual, some would scream bloody murder even though this was discussed and outlined months ago. You're spot on, it was clear that the CC version would get updates and as the perpetual version would have to wait until the next full release. But no matter how often it's said, some don't get it and need a reason to complain and can't live with the choice they made.
-
And once more a big kudos to the ACR team giving us dehaze and blacks and whites in local adjustments. I have also noticed on my MacBook Pro mid-2015 15" with the new AMD graphics card that although it was supported in the previous LR CC version that now the srolling around in the zoomed 1:1 image looking for spots and/or things to remove it much smoother. One finger on the magic mouse moves the view around the image smoothly. Great! I see that the rest of enhancements from the Lightroom team are on the mobile side. Fine but not something I can get really enthusiastic about.
Hans -- This is completely off topic, but the next time you're looking for spots try pressing the PageDown key (Fn+Down Arrow on the Mac). It's especially interesting when you get to the bottom of the image :-)
-
Hans -- This is completely off topic, but the next time you're looking for spots try pressing the PageDown key (Fn+Down Arrow on the Mac). It's especially interesting when you get to the bottom of the image :-)
Well I didn't know that shortcut so thanks for sharing :)
-
Well said! But it was clear to some of us that when CC was released with new features but only bug fixes and camera support for perpetual, some would scream bloody murder even though this was discussed and outlined months ago. You're spot on, it was clear that the CC version would get updates and as the perpetual version would have to wait until the next full release. But no matter how often it's said, some don't get it and need a reason to complain and can't live with the choice they made.
I'd have agreed if there wasn't a long thread here in LL about what took so long to have not that many features in the new LR.
And just shortly after the release the CC gets new features.
A random coincidence?
-
Hans -- This is completely off topic, but the next time you're looking for spots try pressing the PageDown key (Fn+Down Arrow on the Mac). It's especially interesting when you get to the bottom of the image :-)
If you mean the visualize spots I know about this feature and I use it sometimes, but I actually prefer panning through to find the spots needed to be fixed.
-
I'd have agreed if there wasn't a long thread here in LL about what took so long to have not that many features in the new LR.
And just shortly after the release the CC gets new features.
A random coincidence?
Careful, some people might call you an Adobe hater for stating the obvious ... ;)
Cheers,
Bart
-
Careful, some people might call you an Adobe hater for stating the obvious ... ;)
Careful, some people might call you a conspiracy theorist for making assumptions that you believe are obvious without facts!
-
Hans...why is it that you care so much which individual programmers provide the features? Why can you not be happy Adobe as a whole is moving their products along? I personally don't give a rats azz whole writes the code. I think it is well architected code which allows features to be developed once and shared between multiple products.
We already had a long thread about that and the lack of new features in Lightroom (on the PC or Mac) except for what comes from the ACR team. This new release is just a continuation of this trend.
-
Please note before reading this post and responding to it ... I am both a subscriber to the Photography Package and also own perpetual licenses for Photoshop (v2 - CS6) and Lightroom v1-v6). I have more than a passing interest in the issue.
While Adobe did indeed make it quite apparent how they would handle additional new features between CC and perpetual versions of Lr ... one has to ponder the timing of certain things and the decision making behind the process.
Somehow the completion of all the new features released today for Lr CC took exactly 56 days more than what was included in the Lr6/CC release on April 21, 2015. Were any of these features, improvements/enhancements ready before today ... and if so, why were they withheld until today? Are they not to be released to subscribers "when they are ready?"
Ironically one of the reasons Adobe said they felt compelled to abandon perpetual licensing for the Creative Suite apps, because it was just too difficult to complete work for all the apps based upon a specific calendar date so as to schedule the next version release. It was just unfair to place such a burden on the engineers to meet such a fixed deadline ... I always thought that last part kind of silly since the vast majority Adobe software users must meet deadlines constantly.
Yet, since adopting the CC only licensing model ... there has been an annual reveal of new product features each and every year. Why? Why are they intentionally holding back features for this arbitrary deadline when such deadlines were impossible to achieve while selling perpetual licenses for CS? Was someone peeing on my leg and telling me it's raining back then?
Which brings us back to the most recent features released for Lr CC ... had they not been withheld or delayed these items from the April 21 release of Lr6/CC ... there would be nothing of note for Lr CC to be discussed today.
For me, all this just bolsters my opinion that the execs running the show at Adobe can't be believed. I don't mind that Lr 6 licensees won't be able to get the Dehaze slider until v7 ... that's not the issue. The issue is if we can trust any policy statements made by Adobe. Recent history is not a confidence builder in this area.
-
Somehow the completion of all the new features released today for Lr CC took exactly 56 days more than what was included in the Lr6/CC release on April 21, 2015. Were any of these features, improvements/enhancements ready before today ... and if so, why were they withheld until today? Are they not to be released to subscribers "when they are ready?"
The only people who know, those who can't nor would speculate are deep inside Adobe. Product managers, engineers, upper management. Those few who are prerelease testers (and I see none I recognize making the speculations) also don't know all the facts and are smart enough not to feed the conspiracy theorists.
So aside from those people, any text written here with respect to the timing of features and releases are speculation and questionably useful. Expect to vent. And there's a forum here for that.
-
The only people who know, those who can't nor would speculate are deep inside Adobe.
The only ones who know, aren't going to tell/admit. So all we (normal people) can do is observe what happens, and then apply the duck test (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duck_test), or if you prefer, inductive reasoning.
And as an aside, some new features are deliberately crippled for Lightroom 6.0 purchasers, which can e.g. be proven by this "solution" (http://discuss.topazlabs.com/t/lightroom-6-1-cc-2015-1-updates/5373)
So it's not due to maintaining two different versions, but rather deliberate discrimination between license models, as promised by Adobe.
Cheers,
Bart
-
The only ones who know, aren't going to tell/admit.
Bravo, you're catching on!
So all we (normal people) can do is observe what happens, and then apply the duck test (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duck_test), or if you prefer, inductive reasoning.
Which is justification for speculating which is a waste of your time and those reading the non factual writings. You can call it inductive reasoning but it's speculation and worthless! And as I said, if you wish to rant, there's a forum for that, this isn't it. This is a forum first and foremost about Raw & Post Processing, Printing if you care to use your inductive reasoning to see it's name!
-
Bravo, you're catching on! Which is justification for speculating which is a waste of your time and those reading the non factual writings. You can call it inductive reasoning but it's speculation and worthless! And as I said, if you wish to rant, there's a forum for that, this isn't it. This is a forum first and foremost about Raw & Post Processing, Printing if you care to use your inductive reasoning to see it's name!
The point is that LR version 6.1 does not do all the post processing. And the reason for that is that it follows from the deliberate different treatment of licenses, as promised by Adobe. No inductive reasoning required.
Cheers,
Bart
-
So aside from those people, any text written here with respect to the timing of features and releases are speculation and questionably useful. Expect to vent. And there's a forum here for that.
It's not speculation. Or venting. Merely an observation of Adobe's past statements as compared to their current actions. That's not speculation ... it's now historical fact.
You may wish to label such discussion as speculative, I'm merely asking the question. Adobe could eliminate the speculation by being a bit more honest with their customers. Saying one thing, then doing the opposite isn't an indication of honesty. I am questioning past statements about policy changes and now that some time has passed, I find it ironic in how Adobe conducts their feature release schedule. When at one time, such a release schedule was too arduous, complicated and nearly impossible for the engineers to meet the deadline.
Now three years into CC ... we have had three big reveals for CC software feature releases. To deny they were sandbagging at least some of those features for the Big Show would be considered incredulous by reasonable thinking folk. Seems the only thing that really changed was the licensing policy. They still like a big show on a specific date ... though just a short time ago it was unfair to work under such a burden therefore they were forced to abandon perpetual licensing for CS.
My, how the times have changed ... very little.
-
Which brings us back to the most recent features released for Lr CC ... had they not been withheld or delayed these items from the April 21 release of Lr6/CC ... there would be nothing of note for Lr CC to be discussed today.
Well, having been through the beta testing process and knowing when Dehaze showed up, I can tell you that Dehaze could not have been able to be finished before the release of LR CC/6.0. While the technology that Dehaze was based on had been a sandbox research effort that had been around since the last Adobe MAX, it wasn't productized until very recently.
-
Well, having been through the beta testing process and knowing when Dehaze showed up, I can tell you that Dehaze could not have been able to be finished before the release of LR CC/6.0. While the technology that Dehaze was based on had been a sandbox research effort that had been around since the last Adobe MAX, it wasn't productized until very recently.
Jeff, I've heard that Dehaze is adaptive to the image content, that there's really nothing in the ACR engine previous to it's introduction that follows suite. Can you or maybe Eric if still around comment?
-
Jeff, I've heard that Dehaze is adaptive to the image content, that there's really nothing in the ACR engine previous to it's introduction that follows suite. Can you or maybe Eric if still around comment?
"The Dehaze technology is based on a physical model of how light is transmitted, and it tries to estimate light that is lost due to absorption and scattering through the atmosphere"
http://blogs.adobe.com/jkost/2015/06/julieannes-top-5-new-features-in-photoshop-cc-2015-and-lightroom-cc-2015.html
-
... why were they withheld until today?... Why? Why..
Oh, please! Grow up. Adobe, like any other company, is in the business of making money. Crippling features, timing releases, discriminating versions and pricing policies... these are all time-proven, legitimate marketing strategies.
Instead of psycho-analyzing Adobe's strategy, just use and enjoy this damn good product, that is giving us tools today unheard of in the history of photography. They are giving us this phenomenal product, at the pace and with features as they are pleased, because, guess what, it is their product. You want better features, released at and for your convenience, write the damn code yourself.
-
Instead of psycho-analyzing Adobe's strategy, just use and enjoy this damn good product, that is giving us tools today unheard of in the history of photography. They are giving us this phenomenal product, at the pace and with features as they are pleased, because, guess what, it is their product. You want better features, released at and for your convenience, write the damn code yourself.
We are in violent agreement (see, that's now like three times) ;D
-
Oh, please! Grow up. Adobe, like any other company, is in the business of making money. Crippling features, timing releases, discriminating versions and pricing policies... these are all time-proven, legitimate marketing strategies.
Instead of psycho-analyzing Adobe's strategy, just use and enjoy this damn good product, that is giving us tools today unheard of in the history of photography. They are giving us this phenomenal product, at the pace and with features as they are pleased, because, guess what, it is their product. You want better features, released at and for your convenience, write the damn code yourself.
Well put. Nobody's forcing anyone to buy anything.
Jeremy
-
The new Lightroom features in action https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Ey0KQv6kLQ (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Ey0KQv6kLQ)
-
Oh, please! Grow up. Adobe, like any other company, is in the business of making money. Crippling features, timing releases, discriminating versions and pricing policies... these are all time-proven, legitimate marketing strategies.
Instead of psycho-analyzing Adobe's strategy, just use and enjoy this damn good product, that is giving us tools today unheard of in the history of photography. They are giving us this phenomenal product, at the pace and with features as they are pleased, because, guess what, it is their product. You want better features, released at and for your convenience, write the damn code yourself.
Yes...well said. If anything, let's bitch at the competition that is not driving Adobe's hind end. They are now in charge and can do whatever Adobe wants to do. Consumers are in charge of their own destinations and are free to look elsewhere. The constant Adobe bashing from the same crew here gets tiring very fast.
-
They are giving us this phenomenal product, at the pace and with features as they are pleased, because, guess what, it is their product. You want better features, released at and for your convenience, write the damn code yourself.
They are not giving us anything. We are purchasing the right to use it. As long as I'm paying for my licenses, I'll thank you to keep your advice to yourself. If I discover a discrepancy in their sated reasons for making such sweeping changes in policy ... then continue to conduct themselves as before ... I'll point that out and I don't need your permission or approval to do so.
When you step up and pay my licensing fess, I may take your sage advice under consideration. Funny, how you are conspicuous by your absence at such times ... but feel you have the right to dictate my opinion.
-
"The Dehaze technology is based on a physical model of how light is transmitted, and it tries to estimate light that is lost due to absorption and scattering through the atmosphere"
LOL...that's exactly what Eric said it did...but it's a bit deeper than that. This is what Simon Chen added:
Conceptually, Dehaze estimates two quantities from the original photo
1 a constant haze color (AKA the airlight color
2 a light transmission map which acts as a per-pixel blending parameter between the true image (without haze, not observed) and the estimated haze color that leads to the observed image (with haze).
With these estimates, one can run the process of removing haze and adding haze.
What does this mean? I have no friggin clue :~)
-
I’m sorry to post this question again, but does anyone here know if one can download Lightroom 6.1 directly; that is, not via Lightroom’s Application Manager (Help/Updates)? I’m really at my wit’s end. The Application Manager consistently claims my version of Lightroom (V 6.0/standalone) is up-to-date! I’ve sought help from Adobe and several suggestions were made including installing a ‘Patch Installer’ app which fails every time. Its ‘error log’ reads:
Lightroom CC/6 update – June 2015
Update is not applicable. Error Code: U44M2P2
Another Adobe agent with whom I chatted suggested deleting the Adobe Extension Manager, emptying the trash, re-booting, and reinstalling the Extension Manager which I downloaded from a link he sent me. Same result...nothing! What I find so strange is that Lightroom’s Application Manager quickly found and installed the ACR 9.1 (CS6) update. Why problems only with Lightroom? It gets even better. Though my main workstation is a Mac Pro (2009), I also have Lightroom 6.0 and Photoshop CS6 installed on a MacBook Pro, and here the problems are identical. Photoshop updates perfectly but Lightroom insists I already have the latest version.
I know there are some very savvy LR experts on this forum. I really would appreciate any help I can get on this. Even if the update for the standalone version is crippled, the bug corrections are certainly worth having (not to mention the support for new cameras and lenses). Thank you in advance for whatever help you may offer!
Larry
-
Have you tried going to Adobe's Lightroom page (http://www.adobe.com/uk/products/photoshop-lightroom.html) and clicking the big blue Download button?
-
John, thank you for responding! When I click on your link I can't find any "big blue Download button". I do find, however, quite a few big blue "Buy Now" buttons! Adobe offers a trial version, but I'm afraid it's a CC version and probably can't be converted to a perpetual license version. Is it really not possible to directly download LR 6.1 like it used to be in the 'good old days'? Thanks anyway for the link!
Larry
-
Larry,
Try not to think of separate versions. There is no "CC Version" or "perpetual license version". It's one program that behaves one way and with 6.1 branding if you install it and enter a serial number, and another way with CC branding if it's authorised by subscription.
It looks to me like Adobe's site displays Buy Now buttons if you're not signed into Adobe.com in your browser. I was logged in, and I see Buy Now very briefly before it changes to Download. Aren't they making it tough?
So, if you click the search box on that page and search for Lightroom, do you see "Download free trial" as a link?
John
-
Try not to think of separate versions. There is no "CC Version" or "perpetual license version". It's one program that behaves one way and with 6.1 branding if you install it and enter a serial number, and another way with CC branding if it's authorised by subscription.
Not any more. Have you not read the other threads here ?
LR 6.1 has different features to LR CC. The latest perpetual version 6.1 denies some features of CC from purchasers, notably dehaze and black ad white sliders in local adjustments.
-
Not any more. Have you not read the other threads here ?
LR 6.1 has different features to LR CC. The latest perpetual version 6.1 denies some features of CC from purchasers, notably dehaze and black ad white sliders in local adjustments.
Yes, I have read it and I'm well aware of the situation. Re-read what I wrote - I used the word "behave" - and it's one lump of code that behaves slightly differently depending on how it's licensed. There are not separate versions and it's not helpful for Larry to imagine that there are.
-
...... productized.....?.
Good one; I'm all for workmanlike vocabulary - got it.
One thing I don't get though, and perhaps you or others could help: When I installed Lightroom CC in April, it picked up everything I had in LR 5.x including the plugins very nicely. And LR5 still sits there, though I doubt I'll every go back to it. I took advantage of the upgrade to CC to also consolidate three previous catalogs into one master that holds everything from the past five years - very practical thing to do. Today I got the CC Update notice from Adobe offering LR CC Updated (I guess meaning 6.01). If I click that Update button, what happens? Will it keep everything I now have in April's CC version (catalog, plugins, prefs, you name it) whiling giving me the new stuff, or will it erase a bunch of previous structure and require that I repopulate the plugins, reset the prefs, (I assume it would leave the catalog intact?)?
-
...it's one lump of code that behaves slightly differently depending on how it's licensed...
You are of course right about it being the same code that configures itself differently depending on the licence applied. Which leads me to think that if someone downloads the free trial today they presumably will get to use all of the LR CC functionality, including dehaze, for the duration of the trial. If they then decide they want a perpetual licence, when they apply the licence code the “enhanced” features of the CC code will presumably be disabled, so the dehaze and local Whites/Blacks adjustment sliders will no longer be accessible in the product. That is likely to cause some confusion to people not familiar with the CC/Perpetual differences.
Which leads me to another thought, as LR CC and LR 6.1 are the same executable, I guess the “ACR engine” can process the dehaze commands whether the slider is present or not. So a perpetual licence user could perhaps run the CC trial and create some presets for dehaze (say, 0, + 5, +10 etc) and save them, then import those presets into a perpetual licenced version and have access to the dehaze functionality. Haven’t tried it as I’m a happy CC user, but it might work.
-
Which leads me to think that if someone downloads the free trial today they presumably will get to use all of the LR CC functionality, including dehaze, for the duration of the trial. If they then decide they want a perpetual licence, when they apply the licence code the “enhanced” features of the CC code will presumably be disabled, so the dehaze and local Whites/Blacks adjustment sliders will no longer be accessible in the product. That is likely to cause some confusion to people not familiar with the CC/Perpetual differences.
Correct. The CC-only sliders will be disabled, but the perpetual licenced software will understand the new adjustments whether they had been made with the sliders or via presets (which you can write in Notepad or TextEdit). I've already seen a few presets for dehaze and doubt Adobe are particularly worried about their existence.
-
Correct. The CC-only sliders will be disabled, but the perpetual licenced software will understand the new adjustments whether they had been made with the sliders or via presets (which you can write in Notepad or TextEdit). I've already seen a few presets for dehaze and doubt Adobe are particularly worried about their existence.
I too doubt that Adobe are losing any sleep over them. The fact that the preset files are plain text would mean you don't even have to run a copy of the CC version to create them providing you know the internal format that's required, and I suspect a bit of light googling would reveal that.
-
Yes, I have read it and I'm well aware of the situation. Re-read what I wrote - I used the word "behave" - and it's one lump of code that behaves slightly differently depending on how it's licensed. There are not separate versions and it's not helpful for Larry to imagine that there are.
Come on, be honest. CC now has extra functions beyond the cloud sync stuff, so CC has a greater feature set than LR6.1 CC is now Lightroom Plus(ultimate/extra/ghia/whatever the marketing people would think appropriate).
Adobe have made it abundantly clear through their actions that the perpetual licence version is a less well specified version. Let's just be honest about that policy from now on. They ARE different.
-
Which leads me to another thought, as LR CC and LR 6.1 are the same executable, I guess the “ACR engine” can process the dehaze commands whether the slider is present or not. So a perpetual licence user could perhaps run the CC trial and create some presets for dehaze (say, 0, + 5, +10 etc) and save them, then import those presets into a perpetual licenced version and have access to the dehaze functionality. Haven’t tried it as I’m a happy CC user, but it might work.
Hi Dan,
Since you brought it up here, apparently that does work (http://discuss.topazlabs.com/t/lightroom-6-1-cc-2015-1-updates/5373) ...
Cheers,
Bart
-
Which leads me to another thought, as LR CC and LR 6.1 are the same executable, I guess the “ACR engine” can process the dehaze commands whether the slider is present or not. So a perpetual licence user could perhaps run the CC trial and create some presets for dehaze (say, 0, + 5, +10 etc) and save them, then import those presets into a perpetual licenced version and have access to the dehaze functionality. Haven’t tried it as I’m a happy CC user, but it might work.
certainly... moreover - Adobe's DNG Converter for example has the fully functional ACR/LR raw conversion engine inside (because as you know it has to be able to recreate embedded JPG thumbnails according to the raw conversion settings done in full ACR/LR) - so it is naturally driven by parametric parameters stored for example in .XMP files... so one can just play with that data
-
Come on, be honest. CC now has extra functions beyond the cloud sync stuff, so CC has a greater feature set than LR6.1 CC is now Lightroom Plus(ultimate/extra/ghia/whatever the marketing people would think appropriate).
Adobe have made it abundantly clear through their actions that the perpetual licence version is a less well specified version. Let's just be honest about that policy from now on. They ARE different.
Sorry, but I can't be bothered arguing about the meaning of the word "version" in other contexts. I was helping Larry who was "afraid [the downloaded software]'s a CC version and probably can't be converted to a perpetual license version", and he shouldn't be. In that context, there are no separate versions, just one program that exposes different features depending on the chosen licence method. Technically you know that's absolutely correct, don't you? And yes, the v word is flexible enough to be used as you do, and in that sense no-one would deny the existence of "versions". Hold the front page....
-
Have you tried going to Adobe's Lightroom page (http://www.adobe.com/uk/products/photoshop-lightroom.html) and clicking the big blue Download button?
I may be a cretin, but I can't get that blue button to give me anything other than an option to purchase a CC plan.
-
Actually, if you scroll down a bit, a new header shows up that offers a Download.
-
John, I’m sorry you’re having so much strife with other members of the forum just for using a word I used - namely ‘version’ - while trying to help me with my problem. Just a quick update; your suggestions worked! Though I was logged in at Adobe, the ‘Buy Now’ buttons remained as they were. However, your suggestion with the search function was the key to the solution! There I found a download link after entering the search word ‘Lightroom’. I downloaded the ‘Lightroom CC’ file (I’m reluctant now to use the word ‘version’) but didn’t install it. What did get installed however was a new CC updater (I’m quite certain Adobe has another name for it). This morning, after booting up my computer, the updater showed a new update for Lightroom which I installed. To my surprise (and delight), my ‘perpetual licensed’ Lightroom was now at version 6.1! And so, I thank you kindly for your help and hope the other members of the forum cut you a little slack with the use of a word which I apparently used incorrectly.
With best wishes,
Larry
-
Great, glad it worked. For all I care, people can now get back to using the v word as loosely as they wish - and I'm sure I will do so too.
-
Actually, if you scroll down a bit, a new header shows up that offers a Download.
Thanks - got it (all the way down at the bottom).
-
So less than a couple of months after 6 was released they add significant new features, some requested for years, into the CC only version. It's pretty clear where the perpetual licence holders stand now :-(
The title of this URL:
https://blogs.adobe.com/richardcurtis/?p=4657 (https://blogs.adobe.com/richardcurtis/?p=4657)
suggests that the updates to CC are also available to 6.0->6.1
If not then someone needs to tell Adobe's Richard Curtis that he should call his blog entry "Creative Cloud 2015 – What’s new in Lightroom CC for Photographers?" because nowhere does he actually outline any improvements going into 6.1.
-
The title of this URL:
https://blogs.adobe.com/richardcurtis/?p=4657 (https://blogs.adobe.com/richardcurtis/?p=4657)
suggests that the updates to CC are also available to 6.0->6.1
If not then someone needs to tell Adobe's Richard Curtis that he should call his blog entry "Creative Cloud 2015 – What’s new in Lightroom CC for Photographers?" because nowhere does he actually outline any improvements going into 6.1.
To be fair ... Lr 6.0 - 6.1 perpetual license holders did receive the new camera support, new lens correction profiles and bug fixes ... but not the new features. Which is the same exact policy and method that has always been the case for Lr and perpetual licenses.
Though, the timing of this feature release so closely following the introduction of Lr CC - 6 could have been handled better IMHO.
-
Actually, if you scroll down a bit, a new header shows up that offers a Download.
It really doesn't. I can't find any way to download LR 6.1.
The in-app updater in LR 6.0 says I'm up to date.
This is a real shit sandwich of frustration; Adobe's installer team is pretty bad, and the way they try and obfuscate the standalone product is pretty damned shameful. There was a standalone installer for 6.0 but it was a real mess to find as well.
I should not have to spend 45 minutes trying to find a way to update the software I paid for, because Adobe still continues to try and force me to upgrade something I paid for.
If there is a link to the download (like, an ACTUAL FUCKING LINK) please provide it here, not to a page that buries it like it's Jimmy Hoffa.
-
The title of this URL:
https://blogs.adobe.com/richardcurtis/?p=4657 (https://blogs.adobe.com/richardcurtis/?p=4657)
suggests that the updates to CC are also available to 6.0->6.1
If not then someone needs to tell Adobe's Richard Curtis that he should call his blog entry "Creative Cloud 2015 – What’s new in Lightroom CC for Photographers?" because nowhere does he actually outline any improvements going into 6.1.
I looked at the link. I think the title is correct. He starts out by saying that there are updates to both LR CC and LR6 but when he gets down to the point where he discusses the Dehaze and white and black settings for local adjustments, he does so below a heading in Bold print which says "New Features for Lightroom CC" so he actually states in the article that these specific features are only for LR CC. He never suggests that those features are or will be available in the perpetual licence version.
Note that he also discusses changes to Camera RAW which flow on to the perpetual licence version, and also to the iOS version of LR. I think his title is fine. He does discuss changes to both versions, and he does distinguish which features are unique to LR CC with a bold heading. I think he could have made things a little clearer by adding another bold heading after discussing the Dehaze and local adjustment changes to make it really clear that the other changes flow to both LR CC and LR 6.1 but he does list the changes to both versions and he does say clearly that the Dehaze and local adjustment features are specifically for LR CC.
-
CatOne,
I feel your pain! This has become an absurd situation for users of the LR standalone version. I had the same problems as you (and so many others) but believe now to understand what the problem is and how to deal with it. First, I’m quite certain Adobe is no longer offering links to updates within major versions. Updates now function only via the updater (Help/Updates). The problem is, with LR 6.1, Adobe replaced the older ‘Application Manager’ (updater) with what they are calling the ‘Creative Cloud Desktop App’. Without this app, your older LR 6.0 Application Manager will continue to claim that you have the most recent version. This is what I did to update my LR 6.0 to 6.1 on both my workstation (Mac Pro) as well as my notebook (MacBook Pro). First I deleted Lightroom 6.0 (NOT the catalog or preferences!). Then I reinstalled Lightroom 6.0 (hopefully you still have the DMG/EXE file on hand). You’ll have to log into your Adobe account at some time during installation as well as enter your serial number. What you’ll end up with should be identical to what you had before with one very important exception...the older updater will have been replaced by the CC Desktop App. Since then I have learned that one can directly download the CC Desktop App at https://creative.adobe.com/products/creative-cloud, thereby circumventing the necessity of deleting/re-installing LR. More information about the app can be found at https://helpx.adobe.com/creative-cloud/help/manage-apps-services-desktop.html.
Now, here’s where things really get gruesome. Opening up the new updater (via Help/Updates), you’ll see it says that you have ‘Lightroom CC (2015)’ installed and that it’s up-to-date! Don’t worry, you don’t have Lightroom CC (2015) installed. It’s still a perpetual license version (you can check that via Help/System Info). However, your LR 6.0 version is definitely not up-to-date. If this wasn’t weird enough for you, don’t fret, it gets even weirder. On my workstation as well my notebook, it took approximately 24 hours before the CC Desktop App indicated that an update is available! Please don’t ask me to explain. I have no idea why it took so long. In any case, after clicking the ‘install’ button and letting the updater do its thing, my version info read ‘Lightroom 6.1’! So, have patience. The LR CC Desktop App will eventually offer an update to 6.1.
Basically, the standalone version (officially called ‘Lightroom 6’) has become a persona non grata. Adobe avoids using the name as much as possible. Do you remember your old Lightroom 5? The ‘5’ was very visible in the name. No more. It’s just called ‘Lightroom’. Okay, one could make the argument that since they are now offering two versions, it’s simply easier to call the app ‘Lightroom’ without further designation. However, the fact that the Creative Cloud Desktop App calls the Lightroom 6.1 version ‘Lightroom CC (2015)’ is unnerving, at best! Concerning the missing functionality improvements in V6.1, well, Adobe did tell us they were going to do this. It really shouldn’t have been a surprise to anyone. What I really object to is being treated by Adobe like a second-class customer! No one forced Adobe to continue offering the standalone version of Lightroom. It was their decision. Nevertheless, for those who have chosen to continue with their perpetual license version, every update has now turned into a nightmare. This is discrimination! If they did this with an ethnic or religious group, one could take them to court. However, we’re just customers who have chosen to use one of their products, a choice with which they are obviously not very happy. What they are doing is definitely not illegal, but it certainly is unethical! I, and many others, don’t want to be browbeaten into subscribing to the creative cloud. As long as Adobe continues to offer a standalone version of Lightroom we, as customers, should be treated just as well - with the same respect and consideration - as the CC users. It’s as simple as that.
I’m sorry this reply has turned out so long. Thank you for your patience and I hope my suggestions will be of help to you, as well as to others in the same predicament.
Best of luck,
Larry
-
Larry, if I were sitting in the Executive Suite at Adobe (totally hypothetical of course) I would make a once-and-for-all decision NOW, to discontinue perpetual licensing for LR ASAP and let those customers migrate to CC if they so choose. I think the recent experience indicates carrying the two streams is prone to more pot-holes and ill-will than it's worth. Anyone who doesn't think the LR+PS bundle at 10 bucks a month isn't worthwhile can migrate to Capture One or DxO for example, and I expect this loss of business will be the lesser of two evils for Adobe.
-
Larry,
I quite agree that Adobe is discriminating between CC customers and perpetual-licence customers, and I agree that it's not illegal.
However, I don't really think it's unethical - or rather, I don't think ethics come into it. It's a commercial decision made by Adobe, and they've been pretty public that they are able to offer a better service to rental customers (or some such guff).
As long as Adobe continues to offer a standalone version of Lightroom we, as customers, should be treated just as well - with the same respect and consideration - as the CC users.
I can sympathise with the sentiment, but why should Adobe treat all customers the same? Lots of companies differentiate their product by payment type - or however they please - in order to try to persuade customers to buy products in the way they want. Adobe has made it plain they want customers to rent not buy. They've been nudging us that way since CC was launched, and I expect the nudge to become more of a shove as time goes on.
Let's be clear: Adobe are providing a commercial service. They don't owe us anything except to honour their contractual obligations to us as customers, and to obey the laws of the countries in which they operate. In a competitive market, if we don't like the product, we go somewhere else. What's that? There's virtually no competition? Well, that's just our bad luck. Welcome to the world of oligopoly.
It's not that I like what Adobe is doing; I subscribe to CC, but I'd rather have a perpetual licence. But I think trying to make this a moral or ethical issue is unrealistic - and won't achieve anything. As my mother in law used to say: "Might as well save your breath to cool your porridge."
-
Simon,
When I wrote that all customers should be treated with the same respect and consideration, I wasn’t referring to the functionality differences between the two Lightroom versions. This we all knew about and, as you mentioned, is common practice among many companies. I was referring more to the nonsensical difficulties Adobe places upon perpetual license users (for example, having no visible links to the standalone version, making the whole updating process unnecessarily difficult, etc.) just to receive what is rightfully theirs. I can accept the disparity between the two versions (and wait until LR 7.0 is released). What I can not accept, however, is the childish way Adobe is trying to ‘nudge’ us (it’s more like a shove!) in the direction of the creative cloud.
Mark,
I tend to agree with you. Adobe is handling this double LR fiasco very poorly. If they can’t do it any better than perhaps it would be best for them to just offer their applications in the CC version. I wouldn’t be happy about it (I’ve used LR since version 1.0), but I could accept the decision. However (and I address this not only to you, but to all the forum members living in the States), if I could subscribe to the CC for $10 a month, I probably would. Living in Germany as I do, the same subscription costs me nearly $15 a month! If I’m not mistaken, in other parts of the world like Australia or New Zealand, the monthly costs are even higher. Not even Apple has such international price discrepancies, and they’re dealing with hardware which needs to be shipped halfway around the world. Adding to the 50% hike in price for members of the EU is the lack of financial flexibility a subscription offers if times get difficult. Until recently, one could always, if need be, skip a new version or update at a later date when one is on better financial footing. This option simply doesn’t exist any more; at least, not if one still needs the use of the develop module (and who doesn’t?). What I’m trying to say, Mark, is that there are many important reasons why one would prefer a perpetual license to CC. Quite often the decision is a tightly calculated financial one. Of course, Adobe has the right to charge what they want, as I have the right to buy what I can afford. But as long as the standalone version is being offered, we shouldn’t be forced to do backwards somersaults just to get a hold of it or update it to its latest version. Or, as you suggested, simply stop offering it!
Thank you both for responding! I respect your positions and, quite truthfully, I wish I could afford a subscription to the creative cloud. Maybe someday...?
All the best,
Larry
-
Hi Larry,
There should not be price discrimination in the range of 50%, but we need to recognize that exchange rates fluctuate in both directions all the time so there will always be some discrepancy - companies need to set a pricing policy that endures for a reasonable time period. I live in Canada and we have experienced about a 25% devaluation versus the USD in the recent months, so what used to cost me about 11 CAD is now costing 15. But that increase amounts to about 50 dollars per year. Every time I go to the supermarket the bill is no less than that because inflation of food costs has been remarkable here over the past year, partly for the same reason. So what to say. The software isn't cherries, but I use it daily and the photos will last a very long time.
I agree with you about the issue of people possibly needing to get off the subscription train and from the very outset of CC, on this Forum, I have recommended over and over again that Adobe should develop an "exit strategy" which allows users to retain the full functionality of their latest rented version indefinitely, even if they need to pay a one-time fee for the privilege of what would become a perpetual license on exit. There may need to be some designing to make this option viable, but in principle I think it would give a lot of customers comfort.
-
Point taken Larry.
The poor mechanism for updating the stand-alone version: I'd taken that as incompetence on Adobe's part, rather than a deliberate attempt to make it difficult. That might be wrong.
However, poor updating and incompetent handling of installation and user authentication is not restricted to the stand-alone software. CC customers have experienced pretty mixed service since CC was launched about 2 and half years ago. Difficulties in managing accounts and payments, difficulty in downloading and installing CC software, updates that trash your installation, half-baked updates with parts missing... You only have to go on the Adobe CC and downloading/installation forums to read the problems people have had. It's gradually getting better, but even this last upgrade was bungled, with updates not working properly for the first day. It's still far from smooth and seamless.
For example, when I subscribed to CC I had to spend several hours over 2 or 3 days on the phone and chat sessions with Adobe people to sort out my Adobe account. Updates don't always work, and sometimes you have to remove all Adobe apps and re-install - no joke with my download speed. This last one was also botched: The Photoshop CC 2015 downloads at first did not include ACR 9.1, and the separate ACR 9.1 download was faulty. By the time I'd got back to a working installation, that was another 6 hours of my life I won't see again.
It would be charitable to describe Adobe's software management and user account management as any better than mediocre. But I tend to put that down to screw-ups rather than conspiracy on Adobe's part. No one could be that malicious.
-
I think we all agree; work needs to be done over at Adobe. Yes, I am aware that many CC users are having extensive problems with downloading, installing, etc. The stories are sometimes quite harrowing, including your own! Perhaps it really is more a problem of incompetence than one of intention. Concerning Adobe’s ‘exit strategy’, Mark, it really is a shame you’re not sitting in that ‘Executive Suite’. I find your idea of a one-time payment for what would basically become a perpetual license version upon ending one’s subscription a very good one. I certainly would be much more willing to subscribe if I knew I wouldn’t be locked out of the develop module if I needed, for financial reasons, to unsubscribe. Good Idea!
Larry
-
Thanks Larry - I need that Executive Suite like I need two holes in my head - but "if only they would listen" !! :-)
-
Perhaps it really is more a problem of incompetence than one of intention. Concerning Adobe’s ‘exit strategy’, Mark, it really is a shame you’re not sitting in that ‘Executive Suite’. I find your idea of a one-time payment for what would basically become a perpetual license version upon ending one’s subscription a very good one. I certainly would be much more willing to subscribe if I knew I wouldn’t be locked out of the develop module if I needed, for financial reasons, to unsubscribe. Good Idea!
Larry
I've been a staunch proponent of the full exit strategy since the introduction of, CC. Though, to Adobe's credit, they did offer limited exit options with Lr CC in v5.5. I do agree that a buyout exit with full functionality would be awesome. If they would have introduced CC with a reasonable buy-out exit already outlined ... I would have signed up for the $50 per month whole enchilada package at once. Now, it would take a bit more encouragement to get me to do so.
It is also my opinion that those who currently occupy the Executive Suite at Adobe, Inc. are indeed the weakest link in the chain. It is not only their responsibility, but also their duty to not only keep their corporation profitable, but to do so with an even hand. If Adobe is going to offer both a perpetual license and a subscription, they should offer equally available and easily recognizable access to updates for both. While they may wish to favor and further promote one model over the other from a sales and marketing standpoint, once they take the customer's money for a product, they shouldn't play favorites for supporting that purchase.
If systems put in place don't meet expectations or fail to perform as intended, it is up to these supervisory executives to not only demand they be remedied, but follow through on changes to be implemented to correct those issues. After all, isn't that why they get those bonuses and stock options?
-
I've been a staunch proponent of the full exit strategy since the introduction of, CC. Though, to Adobe's credit, they did offer limited exit options with Lr CC in v5.5. I do agree that a buyout exit with full functionality would be awesome. If they would have introduced CC with a reasonable buy-out exit already outlined ... I would have signed up for the $50 per month whole enchilada package at once. Now, it would take a bit more encouragement to get me to do so.
It is also my opinion that those who currently occupy the Executive Suite at Adobe, Inc. are indeed the weakest link in the chain. It is not only their responsibility, but also their duty to not only keep their corporation profitable, but to do so with an even hand. If Adobe is going to offer both a perpetual license and a subscription, they should offer equally available and easily recognizable access to updates for both. While they may wish to favor and further promote one model over the other from a sales and marketing standpoint, once they take the customer's money for a product, they shouldn't play favorites for supporting that purchase.
If systems put in place don't meet expectations or fail to perform as intended, it is up to these supervisory executives to not only demand they be remedied, but follow through on changes to be implemented to correct those issues. After all, isn't that why they get those bonuses and stock options?
Butch...can you point out where Adobe did not live up to what they said they would regarding LR perpetual and LR CC? I've always believed the perpetual copy of LR would not get updates in functionality until the next major release while the CC version would get them as they are developed. Is this not your understanding?
I'd like to understand what Adobe failed to perform as intended.
-
Butch...can you point out where Adobe did not live up to what they said they would regarding LR perpetual and LR CC? I've always believed the perpetual copy of LR would not get updates in functionality until the next major release while the CC version would get them as they are developed. Is this not your understanding?
I'd like to understand what Adobe failed to perform as intended.
Read further upstream in this and other threads where perpetual license holders have had difficulties ... mostly by Adobe's design of their current web site ... to find manual downloads for their apps and their subsequent support updates. Place some attention on Larry's and CatOne's plight in easily finding a manual download for v6.1.
My comment you quoted had absolutely nothing to do with feature updates ... only support updates. If you think that was what I was referring to, you inferred incorrectly.
-
Read further upstream in this and other threads where perpetual license holders have had difficulties ... mostly by Adobe's design of their current web site ... to find manual downloads for their apps and their subsequent support updates. Place some attention on Larry's and CatOne's plight in easily finding a manual download for v6.1.
My comment you quoted had absolutely nothing to do with feature updates ... only support updates. If you think that was what I was referring to, you inferred incorrectly.
I don't think Adobe is out purposely targeting the perpetual license holders. There have been just as many CC upgrade problems...just read all the different threads.
So, I don't see any evidence that Adobebis out to make life hard for the perpetual users. I see them offering new features for CC features which is exactly what they said they would do.
-
I don't think Adobe is out purposely targeting the perpetual license holders. There have been just as many CC upgrade problems...just read all the different threads.
So, I don't see any evidence that Adobebis out to make life hard for the perpetual users. I see them offering new features for CC features which is exactly what they said they would do.
Well, if they're not going out of their way to make life hard for perpetual users, then they're flat-out incompetent. There is discussion of a Lightroom 6.1, but I've seen no evidence that such a thing exists. The in-app updater for Lightroom 6.0 says there is no update, and the download link is just a circle jerk of circular links.
And their installers are such pieces of shit, every time I run it Adobe plops Creative Cloud on my system.
-
Well, if they're not going out of their way to make life hard for perpetual users, then they're flat-out incompetent...
And their installers are...
...are rather a pile of poo, I agree.
Nearly 3 years after Adobe launched CC, software installation and update, and user management systems, are still seriously wanting. And now LR has been integrated into CC, the stand-alone version seems to have been messed up, too.
-
...are rather a pile of poo, I agree.
Nearly 3 years after Adobe launched CC, software installation and update, and user management systems, are still seriously wanting. And now LR has been integrated into CC, the stand-alone version seems to have been messed up, too.
That's exactly my point...their installers / updaters are useless...for both the perpetual licenses and the CC licenses. Adobe is not purposely making the perpetual upgrade hard...it is equally as confusing and hard on the CC side.
No big plan by Adobe to make the LR perpetual user experience awful so they would move onto CC. The way Adobe will entice users to CC is by providing some functionality in the CC version years ahead of when they release it into the perpetual license version.
-
That's exactly my point...their installers / updaters are useless...for both the perpetual licenses and the CC licenses. Adobe is not purposely making the perpetual upgrade hard...it is equally as confusing and hard on the CC side.
No big plan by Adobe to make the LR perpetual user experience awful so they would move onto CC. The way Adobe will entice users to CC is by providing some functionality in the CC version years ahead of when they release it into the perpetual license version.
So it a matter of equal opportunity incompetence? ;)
-
I'm a CC user in South Africa with p poor internet access. I updated PS, LR, Bridge, Muse and the Cloud Updater this yesterday.
I'm running on a Mac Pro. Absolutely no problems at all. Up and running importing images from a week shooting in the mountains. Processing in LR and PS.
Nice enhancements to LR. Loving the improvements to PS Heal and Spot Heal tools. A big productivity improvement for me and since that's how I earn a living I'm quite happy.
-
I'm a CC user in South Africa with p poor internet access. I updated PS, LR, Bridge, Muse and the Cloud Updater this yesterday.
I'm running on a Mac Pro. Absolutely no problems at all. Up and running importing images from a week shooting in the mountains. Processing in LR and PS.
Nice enhancements to LR. Loving the improvements to PS Heal and Spot Heal tools. A big productivity improvement for me and since that's how I earn a living I'm quite happy.
I think you were well advised to wait until yesterday. When the new software was first released on Monday, some of the downloads appeared to be faulty or incomplete. It seemed fine by the following day.