Add your LR 7 feature requests

[stamper]

All the features from PScs6.

[Chris Kern]

Improved demosaicing for Fujifilm X-Trans files (at least get rid of the high-contrast boundary haloing).

I was hoping this would happen in the LR 6 release.  I wonder whether there is something fundamental to the current LR processing pipeline that limits what it can do with data from sensors that don't have a traditional Bayer pattern.

What really would be helpful would be for Adobe to address this publicly and let Fuji shooters know what, if any, prospect there is for improving X-Trans processing—and, if there is work on doing so currently in progress, when we might expect to see the results (e.g., LRCC feature addition, LR 7 full release, etc.).

[mbaginy]

Improved demosaicing for Fujifilm X-Trans files (at least get rid of the high-contrast boundary haloing).

Reduce artifacting at high contrast boundaries at high amounts of shadows slider plus adjustments (all sensors).

+1
That's my wish as well.

[Morris Taub]

I do sometimes wish Lightroom had a 'save for web' feature like Photoshop has. I like being able to see two to four jpeg images, the quality of them, and weight, so I can shave down those kb's without too much image degradation.

[Robert55]

2. Do for focus stacking what you've done for HDR and Panos.

And also for Noise reduction stacking.

BTW: it seems HDR can be started by selecting a folded stack. As the autostacking feature  works well with photos you take at the rate of a bracket, that already is very nice. Another nice-to-have would be the possibility to select stacks and have each of them used to create HDR's. If you have a lot of them that require the same deghosting level that would make for a nice background task.

It is a bit strange that the created file is not added at the top of the stack from which it stems. For me not a problem, but I think that is what Hans Kruse was asking.

[dreed]

Is anyone even sure there will be a Lr7?

There are comments floating around the web that Lr6 will be the last non-CC version of Lr and as we all know, this time around Adobe have made it hard to get the non-CC version of Lr and easy to get the CC version.

[oronet commander]

Anything that makes it easier test printing, like printing a gradient of brightness/contrat/sharpening at the real output size of the image, would be more than welcome!

[stamper]

I think a lot of people are forgetting that LR is primarily a cataloguing program and Raw converter?

[Rory]

I think a lot of people are forgetting that LR is primarily a cataloguing program and Raw converter?

It feels like Adobe has forgotten too.  Not much love for the library module and image previewing at import basically still sucks.  Performance improvements to develop but not any new capabilities between Lr5 and Lr6.  I'm not counting the photomerge stuff, which is outside the "primarily a cataloguing program and Raw converter".

[ButchM]

I think a lot of people are forgetting that LR is primarily a cataloguing program and Raw converter?

Not at all ... from the very first public unveiling before the very first public beta, Lr included much more than cataloging and RAW image conversion. No one forced Adobe to include such items. Yet they are included and for a great many users (not all) these ancillary items are of great importance. We all pay for the license to utilize Lr, we ALL should be heard when it comes to our individual desires for future development.

That said, it was always my expectation in the early days that if Adobe truly desired Lr to be a "modular" offering, they would eventually open up the SDK further and focus solely on Library, Develop and Print and let the free market third party developers offer solutions to additional modules ... that way the market would dictate the amount and pace of further development for options like slideshows, books and web. Unfortunately Adobe doesn't think that is the way forward. Therefore, we all should be considerate of our fellow users and understanding of their desires as much as we support our personal wish list.

[rdonson]

I think a lot of people are forgetting that LR is primarily a cataloguing program and Raw converter?

Nope.  It's a content mgmt system for sure but it's also trying to serve photographers needs beyond the CMS and  RAW converter. No reasonable person expects it to supplant the all the features of PS that serve photographers but there are features that would make photons lives easier/better.

[James R]

Beyond LR's DAM capabilities, LR is pretty much just a repackaged Adobe Raw Converter.  As a LR user, I would appreciate Adobe adding some features not included in ARC.  Basically, treat LR as a truly separate program. Good starting point would be a complete rework of the adjustment brush that would increase selective capabilities.  Maybe include a selective color tool along the lines of Capture One Pro. 

[jjj]

Beyond LR's DAM capabilities, LR is pretty much just a repackaged Adobe Raw Converter.  As a LR user, I would appreciate Adobe adding some features not included in ARC.  Basically, treat LR as a truly separate program. Good starting point would be a complete rework of the adjustment brush that would increase selective capabilities.  Maybe include a selective color tool along the lines of Capture One Pro. 

Except the develop module is ACR. Not to mention there is zero benefit to losing parity of features between the two as it can makes for a seamless workflow between LR, PS and Br.

[James R]

Except the develop module is ACR. Not to mention there is zero benefit to losing parity of features between the two as it can makes for a seamless workflow between LR, PS and Br.

Obviously we disagree.  I don't want to lose parity with ACR, I want LR to offer more than just ACR so I can make fewer round-trips to PS.  I don't see how this would effect the seamless workflow between Adobe products.

[jjj]

Obviously we disagree.  I don't want to lose parity with ACR, I want LR to offer more than just ACR so I can make fewer round-trips to PS.  I don't see how this would effect the seamless workflow between Adobe products.

You obviously need to learn to use them better then! 
Different features in LR dev module will break parity with ACR or vice versa. So a backwards feature request in my view and very unlikely to happen.
LR not having parity with ACR will break smart objects for example, which is by far the best way to use LR with PS. Smart Objects mean I can do PS type things to my LR files which can stay raw. Most powerful feature in PS in my view.
 

[James R]

You obviously need to learn to use them better then! 
Different features in LR dev module will break parity with ACR or vice versa. So a backwards feature request in my view and very unlikely to happen.
LR not having parity with ACR will break smart objects for example, which is by far the best way to use LR with PS. Smart Objects mean I can do PS type things to my LR files which can stay raw. Most powerful feature in PS in my view.
 

Thanks for the advice on increasing my PS and LR skills--not sure what emoji to use for sarcasm.

Now for the issue at hand.  I use Smart Objects.  I'm not aware that adding a non-ACR function would prevent the use of Smart Objects; but I'm not a programmer.  I know as much about your programming skills as you know about my PS/LR skills.  However, if what you said is true, it would be nice for Adobe, at some point, establish that LR is limited to ACR.

[ButchM]

Thanks for the advice on increasing my PS and LR skills--not sure what emoji to use for sarcasm.

Now for the issue at hand.  I use Smart Objects.  I'm not aware that adding a non-ACR function would prevent the use of Smart Objects; but I'm not a programmer.  I know as much about your programming skills as you know about my PS/LR skills.  However, if what you said is true, it would be nice for Adobe, at some point, establish that LR is limited to ACR.

Lr is not limited to ACR ... but ... the Lr Develop modue IS ACR ... with a differnt UI.

I know it's picking on semantical differences, but there is a diffrerence.

Lr has been so much more than ACR, however, as I understand it, ACR is the lead dog in the pack. Features for RAW image processing happen there first, then the Lr team puts it in a different wrapper for what we know as the Develop module.

I may not be describing the inner workings of what the two teams perform in their daily tasks, but I doubt we will ever see the day when the Develop module has and significant feature that isn't part of ACR ... for comparable versions of course. I don't see Adobe adding additional manpower to create a duplication of effort.

[smahn]

Now for the issue at hand.  I use Smart Objects.  I'm not aware that adding a non-ACR function would prevent the use of Smart Objects; ...

It's not about conventional smart objects, but embedded raw smart objects -- the kind that are made when you send a raw from LR to PS as a smart object. When you double-click/open that embedded raw in PS it launches ACR for readjustment. It would be counter productive if you were then unable to make alter in ACR the adjustments you made in LR. The raw SO would no longer be "live"; the effects would be burnt in, which isn't what one wants in an embedded raw.

[Schewe]

Lr has been so much more than ACR, however, as I understand it, ACR is the lead dog in the pack. Features for RAW image processing happen there first, then the Lr team puts it in a different wrapper for what we know as the Develop module.

Correct, it's a top down (from Thomas Knoll, Eric and the other ACR engineers) migration from ACR to LR. However, it's not like LR didn't make a big difference to ACR in the beginning. When LR was first being developed, Mark Hamburg added a lot new functionality in the Shadowland LR precursor. Things like HSL, B&W, Parametric Curves first showed up in Shadowland before being adopted by ACR. However, that was back in 2005/6. At this point Thomas now "owns" the ACR processing pipeline. So, things won't migrate from LR>ACR.

However, there will always be UI and usability differences between ACR & LR. For some things, I really prefer ACR to LR, but for other things, LR beats ACR. It's not at all unusual that I'll choose Show in Finder and open an image in ACR to work on it then back in LR I make sure to read metadata from file so I can get the changes back in LR.

The new HDR & Pano came from the ACR team...pretty sure it was engineer Josh Bury that did the heavy lifting.

[Stephane Desnault]

One thing I'd really like to see is more powerful way to "grade" a picture than what we have today, more in line with what is available in video processing tools.

Today we basically have Temperature and Tint as global effects, and if we want to grade Shadow and Highlights separately, we can go to "DuoTone", or use the brush to alter part of the image.

Most video tools, Premiere first among them (no pun intended), allow you to grade separately shadows, mid-tones and highlights. Pro video editors can't live without that feature - it defines the mood, feeling and identity of a sequence (watch carefully any modern tv serie to get convinced!).

So, I dream of a drop down next to the two color balance sliders that would read "Entire image/Shadows/Midtones/Highlights", where the boundary between the three tones are the ones defined in the curves module.