The Future of Lightroom

[ButchM]

She has her own...and is actually an accomplished PS user in her day job. My daughter uses a mirrorless P&S camera and uses Lightroom all the time. My wife who takes snaps...now mostly with her new IPad uses my Lightroom to organize her photos.

One of the obstacles many newcomers to LR is it's complexity. Maybe this is what Adobe was trying to address since everyone needs to go through the import function to get their images into LR. Maybe LR light is the answer or LR heavy with Pro's in mind...but there are billions of photos being taken daily that are just crying for a way to organize and manage them. I see this future application seamlessly integrated into the phones, allowing automated download from the phone to cloud storage and to have it automatically be available on the computer or tablet or whatnot to be sorted and organized...and right out of LR...be able to upload to whatever social media they want. This automated, seamless integration is where things will be heading.

While the concept of offering a less complex approach to image importation for Lightroom is a lofty and considerate goal ... it wasn't this aspect that so many traditional Lightroom users took exception with. I don't think anyone would have been upset had v6.2 offered solutions, rather than loss of function. The loss of multiple functions and features that, more than a few folks, had come to rely upon for at least a portion of their livelihood resulted in great concern.

I too wouldn't give a 'Rat's azz' about culling during import if all I had to do was add a few dozen 8-20MP jpegs vs. several thousand 24-36MP RAW files. Lr can pop in a boat load of jpegs in the time it takes to import a handful of RAW images. Unfortunately, the time savings I strive for during import can have a direct impact on the amount of cash I can stick into my wallet. Conversely, the novice hobbyist who is crying their eyes out seeking a solution to organize their images they took of their lunch at Applebees aren't really concerned with paying their mortgage with those images. So, yes, different, very legitimate concerns for both ends of the spectrum.

While it is in everyone's best interest that Adobe broaden their horizons, there can be a penalty for most everyone involved if those expansion plans for that goal are implemented poorly, as Hogarty and company learned the hard way very recently. They really shouldn't spite ANY of their users no matter how sincere and legitimate the original goal is considered to be.

[chez]

While the concept of offering a less complex approach to image importation for Lightroom is a lofty and considerate goal ... it wasn't this aspect that so many traditional Lightroom users took exception with. I don't think anyone would have been upset had v6.2 offered solutions, rather than loss of function. The loss of multiple functions and features that, more than a few folks, had come to rely upon for at least a portion of their livelihood resulted in great concern.

I too wouldn't give a 'Rat's azz' about culling during import if all I had to do was add a few dozen 8-20MP jpegs vs. several thousand 24-36MP RAW files. Lr can pop in a boat load of jpegs in the time it takes to import a handful of RAW images. Unfortunately, the time savings I strive for during import can have a direct impact on the amount of cash I can stick into my wallet. Conversely, the novice hobbyist who is crying their eyes out seeking a solution to organize their images they took of their lunch at Applebees aren't really concerned with paying their mortgage with those images. So, yes, different, very legitimate concerns for both ends of the spectrum.

While it is in everyone's best interest that Adobe broaden their horizons, there can be a penalty for most everyone involved if those expansion plans for that goal are implemented poorly, as Hogarty and company learned the hard way very recently. They really shouldn't spite ANY of their users no matter how sincere and legitimate the original goal is considered to be.

I imported about 1500 images ( 36 mpix raw ) into Lightroom. Started the import off, went and did another errand and when the errand was complete...maybe 10 or 15 minutes, all my images were in Lightroom with previews...ready for culling. I then use the rating system and group them by rankings...the bottom ranking gets deleted.

I guess if you are used to culling during import...but I do deal with large number of files and don't see the need to cull during import. I rank...then review the lowest rank to ensure they need to be deleted...and with one quick command, delete all those lowest ranked images. Now not only are my images culled...but they are also ranked with the one's I feel would make prints having the highest rank. Works good for me, but I understand others have their ways.

[ButchM]

I imported about 1500 images ( 36 mpix raw ) into Lightroom. Started the import off, went and did another errand and when the errand was complete...maybe 10 or 15 minutes, all my images were in Lightroom with previews...ready for culling. I then use the rating system and group them by rankings...the bottom ranking gets deleted.

I guess if you are used to culling during import...but I do deal with large number of files and don't see the need to cull during import. I rank...then review the lowest rank to ensure they need to be deleted...and with one quick command, delete all those lowest ranked images. Now not only are my images culled...but they are also ranked with the one's I feel would make prints having the highest rank. Works good for me, but I understand others have their ways.

Once again ... it isn't a matter of 'culling' during the import process per se, it is a matter of selecting only the select few (relatively speaking) images needed right this minute for immediate delivery so as not to waste precious time for images that, while still valuable enough to retain, are not needed immediately for client use.

This is where if Adobe would implement a request many of us have been asking for since shortly after v1 was introduced ... where Lr would only import images tagged in-camera ... just like Photo Mechanic has done for well over a decade and Aperture offered well over five years ago ... life could be simpler for a significant number of users.

Perhaps you should not judge the workflow of others by your own personal situation. Sure, 10-15 minutes might sound like a very short period of time ... and you have the luxury to run errands during the import, other folks may have much more pressing concerns. Sometimes it is relevant to consider the time constraints other folks must contend with.

What if you are working a Division 1 college football game with three other shooters? The group of four has accumulated a couple thousand images on four or more cards from the first half action. Now you only have a total of 15-20 minutes to select the cream of the crop of couple dozen images for an online news gallery and the early edition print run. You need to import, crop, process, caption and keyword (to AP style) and upload to your publication's server so you can return to the field to shoot the third quarter .... then you do it all over again at the end of the game so your publication can get the presses rolling for the late  print edition and the followup stories on the online edition. ... then you do it a third time for the images captures from the post game celebrations or disappointment and the press conferences for the coaches and players.

Yep ... going through the entire workflow at least three full cycles in about as many hours.

I'm sure my clients and editors would love it if I told them they should hold the presses because I have to go run an errand while I wait for Lightroom to churn out thousands of previews I don't need because chez doesn't see the need to 'cull' during import ...

[chez]

Once again ... it isn't a matter of 'culling' during the import process per se, it is a matter of selecting only the select few (relatively speaking) images needed right this minute for immediate delivery so as not to waste precious time for images that, while still valuable enough to retain, are not needed immediately for client use.

This is where if Adobe would implement a request many of us have been asking for since shortly after v1 was introduced ... where Lr would only import images tagged in-camera ... just like Photo Mechanic has done for well over a decade and Aperture offered well over five years ago ... life could be simpler for a significant number of users.

Perhaps you should not judge the workflow of others by your own personal situation. Sure, 10-15 minutes might sound like a very short period of time ... and you have the luxury to run errands during the import, other folks may have much more pressing concerns. Sometimes it is relevant to consider the time constraints other folks must contend with.

What if you are working a Division 1 college football game with three other shooters? The group of four has accumulated a couple thousand images on four or more cards from the first half action. Now you only have a total of 15-20 minutes to select the cream of the crop of couple dozen images for an online news gallery and the early edition print run. You need to import, crop, process, caption and keyword (to AP style) and upload to your publication's server so you can return to the field to shoot the third quarter .... then you do it all over again at the end of the game so your publication can get the presses rolling for the late  print edition and the followup stories on the online edition. ... then you do it a third time for the images captures from the post game celebrations or disappointment and the press conferences for the coaches and players.

Yep ... going through the entire workflow at least three full cycles in about as many hours.

I'm sure my clients and editors would love it if I told them they should hold the presses because I have to go run an errand while I wait for Lightroom to churn out thousands of previews I don't need because chez doesn't see the need to 'cull' during import ...

Well...maybe Lightroom is not for you then...look at other solutions.

[ButchM]

Well...maybe Lightroom is not for you then...look at other solutions.

Sorry ... but as an Adobe license holder for over 23 years for multiple seats ... you'll forgive me if I ignore your advice. I don't think it's unreasonable to seek additional features ... or retain the features I have already paid for ... I should go elsewhere because my needs don't fit within chez's guidelines? ....

[jjj]

Alternate points of view and observations on imaging software are often seen by Jeremy as complaining. Nothing one can do about his arrogance to others input. It's all about what he thinks is the correct way to view and offer opinions.

No constantly complaining and whinging as you do about LR is well, complaining and whinging. 
Your posts comes across not as an alternative point of view which I have zero problem with, but are often full of barely comprehensible rants. Ones that only show you knew nothing about LR was created and possibly even less about how to use it.
I Like hearing alternative points of view. Constant negativity and carping however gets tedious. Try constructive, rather than destructive comments.

[jjj]

One of the obstacles many newcomers to LR is it's complexity.

Let's rephrase that more accurately.
One of the obstacles many newcomers to photography is its complexity.
 

Maybe this is what Adobe was trying to address since everyone needs to go through the import function to get their images into LR. Maybe LR light is the answer or LR heavy with Pro's in mind...but there are billions of photos being taken daily that are just crying for a way to organize and manage them.

The only way to do this is with some serious effort on the part of the person taking the photos. There is no shortcut. You need to put images into folder/collections/locations whatever than make sense to you.

I see this future application seamlessly integrated into the phones, allowing automated download from the phone to cloud storage and to have it automatically be available on the computer or tablet or whatnot to be sorted and organized...and right out of LR...be able to upload to whatever social media they want. This automated, seamless integration is where things will be heading.

This is already there with iPhones/iPads if you enable Photostream. You can already export/publish to numerous places inc social media from LR.

[jjj]

Well...maybe Lightroom is not for you then...look at other solutions.

So what else can do what LR does? i.e. efficiently organise your work and seamlessly integrate that with the processing, printing, exporting etc things you do with your photos.

[ButchM]

This is already there with iPhones/iPads if you enable Photostream.

And ... if you have a Mac desktop with Photos OS X, which is a more than adequate organizational and processing option for an all, or mostly jpeg workflow to easily distribute your work to all your devices, quick exports to social media, etc. ... and it's FREE (or at least no additional expense unless you outgrow the base iCloud storage.)

[jjj]

And ... if you have a Mac desktop with Photos OS X, which is a more than adequate organizational and processing option for an all, or mostly jpeg workflow to easily distribute your work to all your devices, quick exports to social media, etc. ... and it's FREE (or at least no additional expense unless you outgrow the base iCloud storage.)

That free* setup will probably do all that the people who struggle with LR ever need.

*once you've paid the rather pricey Apple Tax that is.

[Rory]

I imported about 1500 images ( 36 mpix raw ) into Lightroom. Started the import off, went and did another errand and when the errand was complete...maybe 10 or 15 minutes, all my images were in Lightroom with previews...ready for culling.

What type of computer do you have?  My skylake i7 6700 with SSD and 32GB RAM takes 5.5 seconds to create a 1:1 preview for a 36MP Nikon D810 NEF.  That takes well over 2 hours to do 1500 ...

[Tim Lookingbill]

Well, at least it's nice to know someone can sell 1500 images in such a competitive market. Time is money and there's no better app than LR for ease of use in developing an efficient workflow. 

[chez]

Well, at least it's nice to know someone can sell 1500 images in such a competitive market. Time is money and there's no better app than LR for ease of use in developing an efficient workflow. 

Who said anything about selling all those 1500 photos?

[sniper]

Well, at least it's nice to know someone can sell 1500 images in such a competitive market. Time is money and there's no better app than LR for ease of use in developing an efficient workflow. 

Well if your importing 2 selfies maybe.  Thats what it seems to be aimed at now.

[StephaneB]

If they feel they need to simplify LightRoom, what the hell is Photoshop Elements for?

[john beardsworth]

If they feel they need to simplify LightRoom, what the hell is Photoshop Elements for?

For people who find Photoshop too complicated or too much for their needs.

[Denis de Gannes]

If they feel they need to simplify LightRoom, what the hell is Photoshop Elements for?

The fact is that Lightroom is not an alternative to PS or PS Elements. Lightroom is an alternative to Bridge and Adobe Camera Raw with some other bells and whistles e.g Web, Slideshow, Publish, Book features.
Adobe needs to change the name of the application to Adobe Lightroom and completely remove the reference to Photoshop.

[luxborealis]

I'm shocked by the vitriolic app- and personality-bashing going on here, all over a miscue by Adobe. First World problems, as they say.

Did anyone stop to think that this new and seemingly wretched 2015.2 CC version of LR was brought out just to make those of who use the stand alone version happier, given that we were passed over when B&W and Auto-Fog were added?

Hopefully, the bugs will be ironed out for 7.0. I'm happy to wait.

BTW - Maybe nobody here actually prints photos, but the printing interface with LR is light years ahead of anything else. Although it is rather less-than-intuitive at times, it's a far cry better than PS.

[pluton]

BTW - Maybe nobody here actually prints photos, but the printing interface with LR is light years ahead of anything else. Although it is rather less-than-intuitive at times, it's a far cry better than PS.

A point that cannot be over stressed. 

[ButchM]

BTW - Maybe nobody here actually prints photos, but the printing interface with LR is light years ahead of anything else. Although it is rather less-than-intuitive at times, it's a far cry better than PS.

That's part of the problem with Lr ... If Adobe offered ALL the modules in Lr with full functionality and creative potential that they offer with the Print module, Lr would be a much better product.