Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Adobe Lightroom Q&A => Topic started by: ButchM on October 13, 2015, 12:43:55 am
-
"Update October 12, 2015: With 432 comments and counting I just wanted to let folks know that I’m reading all of the feedback and the team will provide an update this week."
The above statement is an addendum from his post on the Lightroom Journal Blog:
http://blogs.adobe.com/lightroomjournal/2015/10/lightroom-6-2-release-update-and-apology.html (http://blogs.adobe.com/lightroomjournal/2015/10/lightroom-6-2-release-update-and-apology.html)
Impressive to see this situation drawing ernest attention. It appears Hogarty desires to address the concerns raised. While I was extremely troubled by the initial situation the v6.2/2015.2 created, I hope this is an indication of a course correction that is beneficial to everyone involved.
Time will tell when we see what is offered later this week.
-
The above statement is an addendum from his post on the Lightroom Journal Blog:
http://blogs.adobe.com/lightroomjournal/2015/10/lightroom-6-2-release-update-and-apology.html (http://blogs.adobe.com/lightroomjournal/2015/10/lightroom-6-2-release-update-and-apology.html)
Impressive to see this situation drawing ernest attention. It appears Hogarty desires to address the concerns raised. While I was extremely troubled by the initial situation the v6.2/2015.2 created, I hope this is an indication of a course correction that is beneficial to everyone involved.
Time will tell when we see what is offered later this week.
As I posted on another thread if this is the real reason for the change:
Customers were universally unable to decipher the Import dialog without getting frustrated. Some people pushed forward, bolstered by spending time searching the web for help. They might have been successful in importing files, but they didn’t feel successful. Others gave up, deciding that Lightroom might not be the right product for them.
Why couldn't Adobe have simply included an import training video? A one man band like Qimage Ultimate can do it why not Adobe?
Simple cost effective solution IF their issue is as described above.
Ian
-
Nothing is simple, Adobe has around twenty multimedia products. They all have to work together and they all have to work with operating systems from Windows XP to the cross platform present. I'd hate to be a software developer.
Multiply the multimedia applications by the operating system combinations and you have a nightmare. Added together with the fact that many software users only use the software because it is the state-of-the-art (think reluctant photography software users), yes there are going to be problems.
Getting thing right the first time is going to become increasingly problematical. If anything, I must compliment Adobe on having so few software problems, the future will only make things more complex not simpler.
Cheers,
-
This is not the first time that Adobe introduces a change that upsets a large group of users. About a year ago when they released Photoshop 2014.2.1 the behaviour of the Move tool - toggle auto select- was changed and the graphic designer's community was outraged, with comments very similar as those expressed by photographers about LR this last few days.
In that occasion Adobe responded by rolling back the changes in the next update. Hopefully they will resolve this too.
-
Another update this week sounds encouraging, and we will wait and see. I still have not heard Tom Hogarty say they will reinstate all the functionality.
-
Why couldn't Adobe have simply included an import training video? A one man band like Qimage Ultimate can do it why not Adobe?
I agree. If a novice user doesn't have the 15 minutes or the innate desire to learn and still can't grasp the import function of Lightroom after watching Kost's tutorial, I'm not sure any group of computer engineers could ever code a function to solve the issue.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=867ysQfh4sU (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=867ysQfh4sU)
Nothing is simple, Adobe has around twenty multimedia products. They all have to work together and they all have to work with operating systems from Windows XP to the cross platform present. I'd hate to be a software developer.
No doubt Adobe faces daunting tasks and issues to achieve their end goals ... but they also have decades of experience, resources measuring in the billions of dollars and employ some of the best minds in the industry. While I have empathy for the task they have taken up, I really am struggling with coming up with any sympathy for the current situation. It was purely a bad decision and poor implementation.
In that occasion Adobe responded by rolling back the changes in the next update. Hopefully they will resolve this too.
Let's hope there is a similar offering in this instance
-
How about Adobe offering free beer coupons for all of it's LR customers? Wouldn't that smooth things out?
Until they restore the old import interface I won't be happy.
-
As I posted on another thread if this is the real reason for the change:
Customers were universally unable to decipher the Import dialog without getting frustrated. Some people pushed forward, bolstered by spending time searching the web for help. They might have been successful in importing files, but they didn’t feel successful. Others gave up, deciding that Lightroom might not be the right product for them.
Being the curious sort I simply clicked uo the gear button (upper right corner) and found almost all of what had been been hidden.
Still: I'm miffed about the lack of the Eject after downloading option and the removal of the Move options.
-
It's on dialogue after you get past the initial splash screen I believe.
Still lots of very useful/essential stuff missing though.
-
'Customers were universally unable to decipher the Import dialog without getting frustrated'
Well I was able to decipher it, and I'm no more frustrated than usual, so that's nonsense.
-
Here's what I fail to understand: I was a novice user, granted some time ago, but still. I am a serious non-pro and it took some time to set up import as I wanted it. But with one camera and never more than one card to import, once it was set up, that was it! So what's the big deal? Why are all these folks so frustrated? I can't imagine that Adobe is making it up, it just doesn't compute. And even so, is the answer to screw up existing users' work flow in exchange for new customers... OK, maybe I know the answer to that...
Marco
-
Some of these guys are pros and shoot for a living. Some part of their craft is LR-centered - their workflow is optimized around LR features. When it comes to process large amounts of pics and deliver to customers, time is important. A brand new import system requires time to adapt, and that's bad becasuse they don't need a new system and don't want (or have the time) to build a new workflow.
-
"No doubt Adobe faces daunting tasks and issues to achieve their end goals ... but they also have decades of experience, resources measuring in the billions of dollars and employ some of the best minds in the industry. While I have empathy for the task they have taken up, I really am struggling with coming up with any sympathy for the current situation. It was purely a bad decision and poor implementation."
I hated layers when first introduced into Photoshop, I was mainly scanning images and saw no need for them and they took up so much disk space. I have since learned to embrace them. I have seen brilliant illustrations as a result of layers.
I love the new toys when I update a computer and software but I also have frustrations when tools that I have been using for twenty years seem to be changed for the worse. Such is life.
Cheers,
-
To me a better investment of Adobe's time, may have been fixing the GPU acceleration issues within LR (windows 7 & 10). Amazing that CC 2014 and 2015 seem to take full value from a Video card GPU, but LR still can't. This is true on 2 different Nvidia cards I am running, 1GB and 5GB.
Paul
-
Some of these guys are pros and shoot for a living. Some part of their craft is LR-centered - their workflow is optimized around LR features. When it comes to process large amounts of pics and deliver to customers, time is important. A brand new import system requires time to adapt, and that's bad becasuse they don't need a new system and don't want (or have the time) to build a new workflow.
On in this case a far inferior workflow.
-
"No doubt Adobe faces daunting tasks and issues to achieve their end goals ... but they also have decades of experience, resources measuring in the billions of dollars and employ some of the best minds in the industry. While I have empathy for the task they have taken up, I really am struggling with coming up with any sympathy for the current situation. It was purely a bad decision and poor implementation."
I hated layers when first introduced into Photoshop, I was mainly scanning images and saw no need for them and they took up so much disk space. I have since learned to embrace them. I have seen brilliant illustrations as a result of layers.
I love the new toys when I update a computer and software but I also have frustrations when tools that I have been using for twenty years seem to be changed for the worse. Such is life.
Imagine Adobe removed layers as newbies found them confusing, which they often do.
-
Imagine Adobe removed layers as newbies found them confusing, which they often do.
Wrong analogy - Photoshop is not for noobs (buying noobs). Photoshop Elements is already positioned as an "entry level PS" and includes layer functionality.
-
Wrong analogy - Photoshop is not for noobs (buying noobs).
Not when Adobe is offering both Lightroom and full Photoshop (actually the full Extended version of Ps) for under $10 ... on sale now for $7.99 with a Creative Live offer ... while Ps as we know it, is not 'intended' for new or novice users ... it's still quite accessible to anyone who is willing to pony up the equivalent of a couple of cups of Starbucks ...
-
Wrong analogy - Photoshop is not for noobs (buying noobs). Photoshop Elements is already positioned as an "entry level PS" and includes layer functionality.
Not wrong at all since 'Noobs' have used PS ever since it was invented. LR was aimed at serious photographers by the way.
Not that skill level was relevant really anyway and all people new to PS are newbies, by definition.
Pro photographers in my experience aren't necessarily any more technically minded than amateurs either as it happens.
-
Tom Hogarty's latest update (http://blogs.adobe.com/lightroomjournal/2015/10/lightroom-62-import-update.html (http://blogs.adobe.com/lightroomjournal/2015/10/lightroom-62-import-update.html) around 23:20 UTC 16th Oct) is much more placatory:
"We can now confirm that, in our next dot release, we will restore the previous import experience."
"We will continue to investigate ways to improve the ease of use of our photography products and will do so via an open dialog, with both existing and new customers."
-
Reading the comments on that blog link does suggest that some of the users are also hoping that the memory usage issues for them at least are also sorted/restored in the promised next dot release!
Maybe they will even through in an Easter egg or two for perpetual license users whilst they are at it ;)
-
To me it is obvious that a person who uses language as Mr. Hogarty, using multiple layers of vague expressions and double negatives, cannot possibly think clearly, either. Seeing his apology he was immediately recognizable as a part of the problem himself.
"Uploading experience..." as if getting your pictures into your computer should be 'an experience' at all!
They should just get in there, like you blink your eyes or scratch your head, without thinking.
Like, you connect the card reader and the computer screen pop up asks you whether you want to copy the shots to your HD in the folder 'folder' with your usual presets yes/no...if no, shows the alternatives. You go 'return' if the default yes.
Uploading experience my foot.
-
I can live with the enhanced import experience I can't live with the freezing and needing to be Force Quit experience.
-
They should just get in there, like you blink your eyes or scratch your head, without thinking.
I think a lot of the furore has been due to people DO think when importing. Choosing where to put the images, getting metadata added, import presets applied and basic keywording done all in one stage.
Making the right choices and adding extra information on import saves time later.
-
"Uploading experience..." as if getting your pictures into your computer should be 'an experience' at all!
They should just get in there, like you blink your eyes or scratch your head, without thinking.
I've heard that LR7 will have a new feature which will mean you don't even need your mouse any more. Why? It use mind control to determine what you want doing to an image and then moves sliders accordingly and fills in metadata etc too.
Unfortunately this will involve some thinking, but by LR8 that part will be taken care of too.
-
I've heard that LR7 will have a new feature which will mean you don't even need your mouse any more. Why? It use mind control to determine what you want doing to an image and then moves sliders accordingly and fills in metadata etc too.
Unfortunately this will involve some thinking, but by LR8 that part will be taken care of too.
The optional brain probe for Photoshop has been on the plans for decades for just the same reason.
-
The optional brain probe for Photoshop has been on the plans for decades for just the same reason.
I sometimes think all of us on the LL forums could use one of those. ;D
-
Brain probes have been in existance for a very long time, read everything Ansel Adams wrote, then pick up Shewe. Go to the the Center for Creative Photography. Go to the Eastman House. Learn how to cook from Beaumont Newhall.
-
Adobe would seriously need somebody to threaten their monopoly position.
They are getting ridiculous. No, they ARE ridiculous already.
My hunch is that something has been outsourced....(see http://www.amazon.com/The-Outsorcerers-Apprentice-Tom-Holt/dp/0316368792) to another realm of reality where we the mortals do not really count.
-
FWIW, there's a petition to bring back the old import here:
https://www.change.org/p/adobe-adobe-lightroom-import-dialog
Fun to see my comments on the page from Tom awaiting moderation now for 4 days. Telling! What's Tom so afraid of:
Andrew Rodney says:
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
October 16, 2015 at 5:52 am
Exactly! Tom should apologize to the beta (pre-release) testers, LISTEN to them and maybe stop fearing negative feedback from those who “work” for Adobe for free because our goals are the creation of a better product. Tom should consider that when his beta testers vocally complain about the direction of the product in mass, they have a bloody clue what the results of inaction can and will be. Rather, in recent history, the opposite happens; those who attempt to point out the issues with new directions of the product (like LR Mobile) are not invited back to the beta program and like I saw in LR6, BUGS! And missing functionality that break workflows (unacceptable Tom)!
-
FWIW, there's a petition to bring back the old import here:
I thought that had already been addressed.
Adobe are going to restore the 'previous import experience' .. in the next 6.2 release.
http://blogs.adobe.com/lightroomjournal/2015/10/lightroom-62-import-update.html
-
I thought that had already been addressed.
Adobe are going to restore the 'previous import experience' .. in the next 6.2 release.
Adobe still needs to hear, in mass, from users in differing locations, how poorly they executed the last release.
-
Adobe still needs to hear, in mass, from users in differing locations, how poorly they executed the last release.
Andrew,
I really don't think they're in any doubt !!
This has to be THE worst software upgrade decision of all time. Perhaps there was an OS rollout that created some controversy ( Windows) but no dot release that I can recall ever came close to the blitzkrieg Hogarty et al faced on this one.**
Anyway, I doubt they're listening too much anymore. Programmers locked away in dungeons until the 6.2 release is out and probably 24-hr counselling for all of them. How would you be feeling right now if you'd presided over such an unmitigated 'cock-up' ?
In boxing terms, they're out for the count !
Edit:
Perhaps just one - Creative Cloud ;D
-
This has to be THE worst software upgrade decision of all time. Perhaps there was an OS rollout that created some controversy ( Windows) but no dot release that I can recall ever came close to the blitzkrieg Hogarty et al faced on this one.**
Ahem FCP X.
-
Ahem FCP X.
Not to this degree, and FCP X is still going.
-
There was an enormous outpouring of angst re FCP X and a lot of people changed editors as a result.
Possibly far more upset than for LR percentage wise, as basically the entire programme has the LR import simplification makeover. And if that wasn't bad enough, loads of essential features dropped and with no backwards compatibility.
FCP X improved massively with time, but it still not taken seriously as was its predecessor with film editors. Some one man bands who shoot, cut and grade however seem to like it.
No pro in their right mind should entrust their professional work flow to Apple products after that debacle and Aperture being replaced by the new version of iPhoto.
No-one has made a Hitler rant about LR's messup. Though the amusing Hitler rant re FCP X (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZVV9wEQZmGE) could have LR + Adobe substituted in subtitles for FCPX + Apple, as it tells the same story.
-
If the people who manage the product and design the software listened more to those who use it, this would not have happened.
-
Jeremy,
There was a degree of flippancy in my original post to Andrew Rodney. Didn't really intend it to be the catalyst for a debate on the greatest balls-up known to mankind. Nevertheless, FCP X wasn't a dot upgrade but a version release ... 8)
Best,
M
-
If the people who manage the product and design the software listened more to those who use it, this would not have happened.
Exactly !
-
If the people who manage the product and design the software listened more to those who use it, this would not have happened.
+1 ... there seems to be all too much shoot first, aim later, when it comes to decision making at Adobe in recent years.
-
If the people who manage the product and design the software listened more to those who use it, this would not have happened.
On the other hand - I recall an interesting discussion with John Nack a while back about ACR's deficiencies and he commented that maybe they listened a bit too much to the photographers at the time.
ACR and the concepts of digital photography in general were so new, people actually had no real idea what to do with it and tried to keep it like previous paradigms. Which later led to LR and Aperture being designed because the old methodologies were simply not working.
Generally speaking if you ask experienced people to change their workflow to a better one, almost all of them will moan. A lot.
I think LR's introduction was an exception because film was rapidly being replaced by digital and photographers desperately needed a new workflow for their new cameras.
-
John Nack would never have released LR6 this way! I say that as someone who's known every PM for Photoshop since 2.5 when I started 'beta' testing for that product. Under John, there would have been a means to access the legacy import, not cripple it.
-
Absolutely. I've said exactly that at some point during this farrago.
His moving to Google was a big loss for Adobe users.
-
Absolutely. I've said exactly that at some point during this farrago.
His moving to Google was a big loss for Adobe users.
+ 10
-
If the people who manage the product and design the software listened more to those who use it, this would not have happened.
Trouble is there are hundreds of thousands of users all with varying needs, wants and opinions. If we all could agree on a feature set...their task would be very easy...but that is not the case. You see, I'm not influenced by the changes to the import function one bit and I'd rather Adobe not spend time and resources to putting back functionality...but spend more time enhancing the soft proofing feature. I've heard people on this board to want Adobe to focus more on the slideshow abilities which I have zero interest in.
Now WHO should Adobe listen to...you or me?
-
Now WHO should Adobe listen to...you or me?
I was specifically referring to the pre-release (beta) testers. Adobe should have listened to them.
-
Trouble is there are hundreds of thousands of users all with varying needs, wants and opinions. If we all could agree on a feature set...their task would be very easy...but that is not the case. You see, I'm not influenced by the changes to the import function one bit and I'd rather Adobe not spend time and resources to putting back functionality...but spend more time enhancing the soft proofing feature. I've heard people on this board to want Adobe to focus more on the slideshow abilities which I have zero interest in.
Now WHO should Adobe listen to...you or me?
Perhaps if Adobe had shown a bit more wisdom and actually listened to some of there longtime beta testers ... so much effort and resources would not have been wasted on this latest fiasco and those same efforts could have been applied to your desires for Lightroom.
Apparently they aren't listening to you about how unimportant the lost features are in the Import dialog due to the unprecedented response of over 780 votes on feedback.photoshop.com and over 1,200 comments on the Lr Journal Blog, overwhelmingly in support of returning functionality that was arbitrarily removed. I think Hogarty does indeed know exactly who he should be listening to.
Secondly, if a multi-billion dollar worldwide interest such as Adobe chooses to offer a software solution to such a wide user base ... knowing full well doing so will also bring a much wider pool of goals and desires ... they also should be willing to allocate a reasonable amount of resources to the maintenance and development of that solution. That is the price large companies must pay if they wish to serve such a diverse audience. If they are not earning a large enough monetary return on that effort, perhaps they are in the wrong line of work.
Perhaps Shantanu Narayen could cut his bonus by a million dollars or so and they could allocate that cash for the Lr team to hire another engineer or two if resources are so tight.
-
Perhaps Shantanu Narayen could cut his bonus by a million dollars or so and they could allocate that cash for the Lr team to hire another engineer or two if resources are so tight.
Ya know, you had me agreeing until the point you decided to get mean and snarky...what Shantanu does or doesn't do should have no bearing on LR's development. You know that, right? So, you were just being mean and snarky, right? Less of that would be useful...
-
Perhaps if Adobe had shown a bit more wisdom and actually listened to some of there longtime beta testers ... so much effort and resources would not have been wasted on this latest fiasco and those same efforts could have been applied to your desires for Lightroom.
Apparently they aren't listening to you about how unimportant the lost features are in the Import dialog due to the unprecedented response of over 780 votes on feedback.photoshop.com and over 1,200 comments on the Lr Journal Blog, overwhelmingly in support of returning functionality that was arbitrarily removed. I think Hogarty does indeed know exactly who he should be listening to.
Secondly, if a multi-billion dollar worldwide interest such as Adobe chooses to offer a software solution to such a wide user base ... knowing full well doing so will also bring a much wider pool of goals and desires ... they also should be willing to allocate a reasonable amount of resources to the maintenance and development of that solution. That is the price large companies must pay if they wish to serve such a diverse audience. If they are not earning a large enough monetary return on that effort, perhaps they are in the wrong line of work.
Perhaps Shantanu Narayen could cut his bonus by a million dollars or so and they could allocate that cash for the Lr team to hire another engineer or two if resources are so tight.
Firstly Butch, you have no idea how many resources are involved with LR. Secondly, your ignorance on software development rears it's head again when you think you can improve the quality of the product or speed up feature development by throwing more resources at it.
Best you stick to photography rather than thinking you know more about how to manage something huge like Adobe products than the people running those products.
-
Ya know, you had me agreeing until the point you decided to get mean and snarky...what Shantanu does or doesn't do should have no bearing on LR's development. You know that, right? So, you were just being mean and snarky, right? Less of that would be useful...
No sir. I was not trying to be snarky or mean ... Simply pointing out that Adobe has resources if they choose to apply them. I realize they don't have unlimited resources, but neither should there be undue hardships for offering a well-rounded approach.
-
Firstly Butch, you have no idea how many resources are involved with LR. Secondly, your ignorance on software development rears it's head again when you think you can improve the quality of the product or speed up feature development by throwing more resources at it.
Best you stick to photography rather than thinking you know more about how to manage something huge like Adobe products than the people running those products.
Funny, you always seem to have an opinion on anything I may offer ... On any subject matter ... And you do so without pre-qualifying your contributions ... But any opinion or observation I may offer is not worthy of consideration because you have deemed I lack the insight and qualifications to form an opinion?
While I fully accept that software development does indeed have certain nuances and challenges I may not have experienced, but the business of developing, marketing and selling ANY product has many similarities and basic rules for success that do not cease to exist just because one may not understand the full complexities and problems encountered when producing a particular product.
These general truths are quite evident if you scrutinize history and recognize how many successful business people have been able to achieve great accomplishments across multiple product types and genres in varied and complex markets.
As someone who has been self-employed for over 40 years and have done well for my family, I hope you don't mind that I will not yield to your attempts to silence my views. Your are certainly welcome to disagree with my premise. Though I refuse to be cowed into silence simply because you feel I am unworthy to express my thoughts.
If you wish to convince me you have a superior intellect on such topics, impress me with your knowledge and communications skills ... Don't waste your precious time attempting to bully me into silence simply because you have nothing of value to offer other than to disagree with anything I may say.
-
Trouble is there are hundreds of thousands of users all with varying needs, wants and opinions.
I'm willing to bet that very few of them include "constant crashing" or "hanging and requiring a Force Quit" on their list of must-haves.
-
As someone who has been self-employed for over 40 years and have done well for my family, I hope you don't mind that I will not yield to your attempts to silence my views. Your are certainly welcome to disagree with my premise. Though I refuse to be cowed into silence simply because you feel I am unworthy to express my thoughts.
You may have some useful thoughts indeed, but you also seem to be equating experience of being self employed with being knowledgeable of the ins and out of running a multinational company. It a bit like an embroidery expert telling a surgeon how to do their job as sewing is involved in both jobs. ;)
-
Funny, you always seem to have an opinion on anything I may offer ... On any subject matter ... And you do so without pre-qualifying your contributions ... But any opinion or observation I may offer is not worthy of consideration because you have deemed I lack the insight and qualifications to form an opinion?
While I fully accept that software development does indeed have certain nuances and challenges I may not have experienced, but the business of developing, marketing and selling ANY product has many similarities and basic rules for success that do not cease to exist just because one may not understand the full complexities and problems encountered when producing a particular product.
These general truths are quite evident if you scrutinize history and recognize how many successful business people have been able to achieve great accomplishments across multiple product types and genres in varied and complex markets.
As someone who has been self-employed for over 40 years and have done well for my family, I hope you don't mind that I will not yield to your attempts to silence my views. Your are certainly welcome to disagree with my premise. Though I refuse to be cowed into silence simply because you feel I am unworthy to express my thoughts.
If you wish to convince me you have a superior intellect on such topics, impress me with your knowledge and communications skills ... Don't waste your precious time attempting to bully me into silence simply because you have nothing of value to offer other than to disagree with anything I may say.
Butch, I'm not trying to silence you...but your rants about Adobe...especially when you bring your ignorance about software into the realm, are just inaccurate and need to be challenged. Having 40 years...you have been saying this for over a year one so adjust to 41 years..., has zero to do with how soaftware is developed and managed. Your naive view of just adding more resources would accelerate LR and release it with better stability is just not true.
Would adding more painters enable a portrait to be painted faster and the result better?
-
I'm willing to bet that very few of them include "constant crashing" or "hanging and requiring a Force Quit" on their list of must-haves.
Really...and I bet many of those people that purchased automobiles with faulty air bags requested that feature...or the people who purchased original 5d asked that the mirror would spontaneously eject out of the camera.
SH*t happens everywhere...even I'm sure in your backyard.
-
You may have some useful thoughts indeed, but you also seem to be equating experience of being self employed with being knowledgeable of the ins and out of running a multinational company. It a bit like an embroidery expert telling a surgeon how to do their job as sewing is involved in both jobs. ;)
No, that's an incorrect assertion. If one must be directly experienced and knowledgeable of the ins and out of software development by multi-billion dollar, multinational company in order to have an understanding, that's a pretty high bar. By that standard, I'm pretty sure there extremely few people participating on this forum that meet that qualification to express an opinion.
I was pointing out, that my life experience offers me some insight in to such matter even though that experience may not be an all-inclusive direct knowledge of the situation. Besides, chez already is well aware that I have admitted I am not an expert on such topics, yet he spares no expense to or effort in pointing out how naive and ignorant ... yet he seems to place no limitations on his own opinions that may be outside his wheel house. A very noticeable double standard, if you will.
Secondly ... While it may be out of place for an 'embroidery' expert' to offer unsolicited advice to an experienced surgeon on how to sew ... I don't think one must be an expert at sewing or surgery to have an opinion if either miss a stitch.
-
No, that's an incorrect assertion. If one must be directly experienced and knowledgeable of the ins and out of software development by multi-billion dollar, multinational company in order to have an understanding, that's a pretty high bar. By that standard, I'm pretty sure there extremely few people participating on this forum that meet that qualification to express an opinion.
Not saying you have to be directly involved. But claiming that running your own photography business means you know how to allocate resources in an area incredibly different is a claim too far.
I was pointing out, that my life experience offers me some insight in to such matter even though that experience may not be an all-inclusive direct knowledge of the situation. Besides, chez already is well aware that I have admitted I am not an expert on such topics, yet he spares no expense to or effort in pointing out how naive and ignorant ... yet he seems to place no limitations on his own opinions that may be outside his wheel house. A very noticeable double standard, if you will.
I blocked Chez a long time back. I have no issue with people having alternative opinions to myself as it can be enlightning, but some posters..... ::)
Secondly ... While it may be out of place for an 'embroidery' expert' to offer unsolicited advice to an experienced surgeon on how to sew ... I don't think one must be an expert at sewing or surgery to have an opinion if either miss a stitch.
Certainly true.
-
Not saying you have to be directly involved. But claiming that running your own photography business means you know how to allocate resources in an area incredibly different is a claim too far.
I never made such a claim ... I merely pointed out I am allowed to have an opinion and I base that opinion on my life experience ... there is a difference.
-
Butch, I'm not trying to silence you...but your rants about Adobe...especially when you bring your ignorance about software into the realm, are just inaccurate and need to be challenged. Having 40 years...you have been saying this for over a year one so adjust to 41 years..., has zero to do with how soaftware is developed and managed.
So .. what is more important to you ... the anniversary date of when I started in business or the pleasure you seem to take in pointing out I am too naive or ignorant to be allowed to express an opinion?
...Your naive view of just adding more resources would accelerate LR and release it with better stability is just not true. ... Would adding more painters enable a portrait to be painted faster and the result better?
Once again, I'm not sure you read as carefully as you should. How about we perform a small review ...
In your first comment of this thread, you intimated that Adobe had limitations on who they may 'listen' to ... that somehow they were incapable of maintenance and improvements to multiple modules/feature sets simultaneously. Like it may be difficult for them to handle your concerns as well as the slideshow module for which you have no desire to see improved at all. You questioned who they should listen to. I am of the opinion they have the resources to address most if not all concerns. While I fully accept not very user will receive everything they request in the time frame they expect, there can be a balanced approach.
I merely pointed out, that Adobe has the resources to apply a well-rounded approach to ALL the modules if they choose. There is no reason that the Slideshow module should be ignored while improvements are made to other aspects of the application. I understand that resources are not limitless, but I also don't think they are as constrained as some would like us to accept.
I am of the opinion that Lightroom is not a singular application or 'portrait,' if you will ... while multiple artists would certainly conflict if they were working on the same small canvas ... it is quite possible for multiple artists to work on separate canvases (i.e. modules) simultaneously without causing too much conflict. That way you may get some improvements to your favorite aspects of Lightroom and the Slideshow module does not have to take a back seat in order to satisfy your concerns.
Instead of detailing why you may disagree with that premise, you choose to focus solely on pointing out why I am not qualified to express an opinion. Curious, that.
-
So .. what is more important to you ... the anniversary date of when I started in business or the pleasure you seem to take in pointing out I am too naive or ignorant to be allowed to express an opinion?
Once again, I'm not sure you read as carefully as you should. How about we perform a small review ...
In your first comment of this thread, you intimated that Adobe had limitations on who they may 'listen' to ... that somehow they were incapable of maintenance and improvements to multiple modules/feature sets simultaneously. Like it may be difficult for them to handle your concerns as well as the slideshow module for which you have no desire to see improved at all. You questioned who they should listen to. I am of the opinion they have the resources to address most if not all concerns. While I fully accept not very user will receive everything they request in the time frame they expect, there can be a balanced approach.
I merely pointed out, that Adobe has the resources to apply a well-rounded approach to ALL the modules if they choose. There is no reason that the Slideshow module should be ignored while improvements are made to other aspects of the application. I understand that resources are not limitless, but I also don't think they are as constrained as some would like us to accept.
I am of the opinion that Lightroom is not a singular application or 'portrait,' if you will ... while multiple artists would certainly conflict if they were working on the same small canvas ... it is quite possible for multiple artists to work on separate canvases (i.e. modules) simultaneously without causing too much conflict. That way you may get some improvements to your favorite aspects of Lightroom and the Slideshow module does not have to take a back seat in order to satisfy your concerns.
Instead of detailing why you may disagree with that premise, you choose to focus solely on pointing out why I am not qualified to express an opinion. Curious, that.
Butch obviously everyone can have an opinion...its that some come from ignorance while others come from experience. Which would you rather listen to?
-
Perhaps Shantanu Narayen could cut his bonus by a million dollars or so and they could allocate that cash for the Lr team to hire another engineer or two if resources are so tight.
I think you're a bit confused about how this product is (was) developed and who is badly attempting to drive this ship into iceberg waters! It's not the engineers, it's the product manager. As such, your suggestion would make a lot more sense IF that million dollars was used to say, lure back John Nack to take over this poor product. Shantanu Narayen should severely clip Mr. Hogarty's wings and those above him who allowed such awful decisions about the products direction to be made. The engineers do what they are told to do.
-
Butch obviously everyone can have an opinion...its that some come from ignorance while others come from experience.
So, you are still focused on applying qualifications on my opinion rather than share your insights on the topic itself?
If you are more 'experienced' to share insight on the matter, why not focus on how you could apply that experience to enlighten me, rather than never pass on an opportunity to paint me as ignorant?
Which would you rather listen to?
I'm willing to listen to your thoughts ... if your thoughts offer more than simply trying to disqualify my opinion out of hand.
-
I _do_ work for a multi-national, multi-billion dollar company. It's my day job. On one of my current projects a wrong bit of coding could impact 40 million customers in real time.
I am critical of Adobe's poor performance in figuring out where LR is going. The import process, as changed, is a good example of being tone deaf when it comes to listening to users' desires and expectations. It appears that their architectural planning is haphazard.
But I will take strong issue with the suggestion that "throw a few more engineers at the problem" will solve anything.
First, the skill sets required are rare. There ain't that many folks out there that can do it.
Second, LR is complex. In fact, it's a wonderful testament to the engineers that have worked on it all these years that much of that complexity is hidden from the users.
Third, a new engineer, even an incredibly skilled one, has to spend a lot of time learning how the program actually works...how the pieces and parts all go together. It takes time, at least many months, for an engineer to understand how even a small part of it works. As an analogy, any reasonably competent photographer understands exposure, but asking a competent Canon shooter to explain the ins-and-outs of Nikon's autofocus system the first time you hand him a D810 would be ridiculous.
Fourth, LR is now at version 6. Even with the best code management processes in place, there's going to be kruft, places where a small change in one place will impact a completely different part of the program. I'm sure there's lots of shared code for rendering an image that is used by every module. Making a change in that code to speed up rendering when moving the highlights slider in Develop may break the Print module's use of that same code. Frankly, I'm amazed that Adobe's folks got GPU processing working in LR as well as they did. All of this means that regression testing, which really boils down to "I fixed it here, now let me find out if my change broke any of the myriad other uses of that routine," is an exacting process that only gets more involved in time. It also means that bringing an engineer up to speed takes a lot more time.
I would hope that Mr. Hogarty will indeed learn to listen better to the current user base...and, perhaps, allow more opportunity to allow that base to respond to proposed changes. I miss the public beta program; it would have prevented a lot of heartache in this particular case.
I would also hope that ways to communicate what users want could be qualified more clearly. Too often, users are proposing solutions instead explaining the problem. For example, the problem was slow rendering, but many posts asked for "GPU processing." Maybe that is the right answer, but I'd rather let the engineers address the real problem instead of telling them how to fix it.
-
I think you're a bit confused about how this product is (was) developed and who is badly attempting to drive this ship into iceberg waters! It's not the engineers, it's the product manager. As such, your suggestion would make a lot more sense IF that million dollars was used to say, lure back John Nack to take over this poor product. Shantanu Narayen should severely clip Mr. Hogarty's wings and those above him who allowed such awful decisions about the products direction to be made. The engineers do what they are told to do.
Andrew ... my reference to the CEO was a bit tongue-in-cheek (not to be mean and snarky) to point out that as a corporation, decision making has come under scrutiny over the past few years (which seems to have trickled down to the individual product level) and how those decision makers are rewarded. While I begrudge no one the opportunity earn as much as they are capable of ... and I have empathy for how difficult some aspects such large interests face in their endeavors, I don't have much sympathy for the premise of limited resources when the coffers are calculated using so many digits.
-
But I will take strong issue with the suggestion that "throw a few more engineers at the problem" will solve anything.
First, the skill sets required are rare. There ain't that many folks out there that can do it.
Second, LR is complex. In fact, it's a wonderful testament to the engineers that have worked on it all these years that much of that complexity is hidden from the users.
Third, a new engineer, even an incredibly skilled one, has to spend a lot of time learning how the program actually works...how the pieces and parts all go together. It takes time, at least many months, for an engineer to understand how even a small part of it works. As an analogy, any reasonably competent photographer understands exposure, but asking a competent Canon shooter to explain the ins-and-outs of Nikon's autofocus system the first time you hand him a D810 would be ridiculous.
While it's true that my suggestion of additional engineers was simplistic, it was not ridiculous in the respect that Adobe is not without the means if they chose to do so.
The matter is not how ridiculous the explanation of how a competing AF system works ... the matter I was discussing when I referenced additional engineers was in response to the question of who Adobe should 'listen' to. The reality was they didn't seem to be listening to anyone. I am of the opinion, that Adobe is more than capable of offering a more balanced approach where most every user receives at least some attention to their desires for the further development of Lightroom.
Had the Lr team not invested all those resources in a failed attempt to simplify and streamline the Import dialog, other, possibly more valuable, improvements could have been accomplished. Such choices by management can be much more costly than the additional payroll for another engineer. The difficulty of discovering, hiring and training said engineer notwithstanding.
-
I never made such a claim ... I merely pointed out I am allowed to have an opinion and I base that opinion on my life experience ... there is a difference.
Life experience in something unrelated.
-
Life experience in something unrelated.
Are you sure? It's been my observation that human nature is rather consistent. While we would like to believe our own specific paths are rather unique and only understandable to the relatively few who have ventured forth in our particular calling ... as it turns out, the similarities of basic truths between varied vocations are indeed strikingly similar. Of course the jargon, scale and minute details may be quite different ... the basics are very similar across the board.
-
Are you sure? It's been my observation that human nature is rather consistent. While we would like to believe our own specific paths are rather unique and only understandable to the relatively few who have ventured forth in our particular calling ... as it turns out, the similarities of basic truths between varied vocations are indeed strikingly similar. Of course the jargon, scale and minute details may be quite different ... the basics are very similar across the board.
Needing to breath and eat, that's certainly consistent. Motivations, morals and such like are extremely varied with individuals though.
You can predict some aspects of the behaviour of large groups of people however, but that's a very different thing.
-
I think you're a bit confused about how this product is (was) developed and who is badly attempting to drive this ship into iceberg waters! It's not the engineers, it's the product manager. As such, your suggestion would make a lot more sense IF that million dollars was used to say, lure back John Nack to take over this poor product. Shantanu Narayen should severely clip Mr. Hogarty's wings and those above him who allowed such awful decisions about the products direction to be made. The engineers do what they are told to do.
Excellent point, Andrew. Must be frustrating for the Engineering team as well.