Lightroom really DOES suck

[ButchM]

Look at the facts, the features you point out are the doing of Thomas and Eric for ACR, their baby. Take out the improvements to the ACR engine, the so called progress between LR4 and LR6 is pretty pathetic.

That's been a question I have pondered for some time. If the functionality of the Develop module is the result of those working on ACR ... what does the 'Lightroom Team' do? I whole heartedly agree, if you look at the recent past, most of the advancements/improvements are in Develop/ACR ... the breadth and depth of new/improved capabilities to the balance of Lr is rather unimpressive.

If you take a look at Terry White's videos for the past couple of his favorite new features for Photoshop CC and Lr updates (also ... a month later and his tech blog makes no mention of Lr v6.2/2015.2 whatsoever! ... the absence of such a posting by him is totally unprecedented) ... the lists of Terry's favorite new features are nearly identical for both apps ... seems if it were not for ACR ... the list gets shorter for what has been offered of late for Ps too. Are Thomas and Eric the only ones pushing the envelope at Adobe these days?

I'm not unappreciative of what the Lr Team has offered and I can appreciate that other users would find Maps and face detection valuable .... but if the bulk of items are in one bag ... it's not unrealistic to question where resources have been allocated and the direction of development. Like I have said before ... there should be a more balanced approach.

[rdonson]

Adobe is just following Google, Facebook and others in the new mantra for corporate $$$.  The mantra is called mobile.  We, hobbyists and pros represent a very tiny portion of what's going on in the world with regards to photography.  The vast majority of photography these days are photos from smartphones.  They don't require the power of PS or the breadth of Lr.  These photographers just need a place to store their jpg photos and make tweaks so they can post the photos online.  I suspect that Adobe is trying to position itself so that it might catch some of these people if they become truly interested in photography. 

Just my $.02

[digitaldog]

You just have a good moan....

Consistent, unnecessarily text from John ignoring the facts and argument

[john beardsworth]

Consistent, unnecessarily text from John ignoring the facts and argument

No, I gave enough examples of where there's been good progress. You just chose to be contradictory and ignore where I added a particular spin to each example. For instance, I point out some high end aspects of Mobile, and what do you come back with - the same old rant from last year. Do you really blame me for yawning?

[jjj]

It's not that hard. I guess 95% of the issues with Lightroom can be solved by… reading the manual.

Indeed. Some Guy sound like a farmer complaining that his Porsche is useless because it can't plough a field.

[jjj]

Honestly? There have already been better products than Lightroom.

There were? I tried them all, didn't find one sadly.

However, where Adobe absolutely flattens the opposition is in marketing.  The initial Beta program, getting hordes of influential photographers on-board, placing Lr as the choice of top pros, all that was a masterstroke.  That whole "Lightroom Adventure" thing, practically inventing an aspirational lifestyle for photographers - which could be theirs if they bought Lightroom.  George Jardine and co gave a stunning masterclass. Pity they've never deployed the same level of excellence on product development - apart of course from the core imaging engine.  Pretty much exactly the opposite of Apple's approach.

You seem to be missing one very important detail. Apple are the best company at marketing in the entire world and is why they are the so very dominant and incredibly rich. Adobe are small fry in comparison.

Really, how are you compete with that, with some kind of open source pipe dream ?

Make a better product and they will come.

[jjj]

Sure, Adobe seemed to underestimate resistance to change and some aspects of Import were handled awkwardly (features like Move that don't belong in Import should have been put where they do belong).

So where does it belong. I use it all the time to get LR to place my files where they need to be on import.
I'd be stuffed without it.
I do not use LR to copy from card. I prefer to do that manually and check all files are moved across without issue. LR doesn't always import all files from a card which is dangerous and data can be lost that way.
Only then do I import and LR now moves files from import folder to the date folders.

[digitaldog]

No, I gave enough examples of where there's been good progress.

And I pointed out, that progress was a direct result of ACR, not LR. We both know from our experience with Adobe how this works. We both know the role of Thomas and Eric, remove those contributions and you're examples are pretty piss poor 
WE don't agree there's been 'good progress', just the opposite.
What was the 'big' feature in LR6 that isn't tied to ACR, face detection? A useful function so pitifully implemented in LR6, you can't reanalyze and update images after the initial FD. Who's idea was this of a good feature?


Here's an interesting analysis of the new features in LR6: http://www.lynda.com/articles/new-photoshop-lightroom-cc-lightroom-6
As far as I see, only one, ONE feature isn't part of the ACR engine: face detection. Try not to ignore all the facts at once please.

[digitaldog]

So where does it belong. I use it all the time to get LR to place my files where they need to be on import.
I'd be stuffed without it.
I do not use LR to copy from card. I prefer to do that manually and check all files are moved across without issue. LR doesn't always import all files from a card which is dangerous and data can be lost that way.
Only then do I import and LR now moves files from import folder to the date folders.

This is exactly the way I work too, when I've got lots of images to import. That John (and the Adobe gang who provided Move in the first place) can suggest it's OK for it to be removed provides perfect example of the myopic view of the LR users they should be zeroing in on!

[john beardsworth]

So where does it belong. I use it all the time to get LR to place my files where they need to be on import.
I'd be stuffed without it.
I do not use LR to copy from card. I prefer to do that manually and check all files are moved across without issue. LR doesn't always import all files from a card which is dangerous and data can be lost that way.
Only then do I import and LR now moves files from import folder to the date folders.

In Library itself, as a separate menu command. Its underlying function is to reorganise files into folders, which is a real need in Lightroom - but it's not a need that is limited to when people are importing files. Why should people have to reimport files if they want to reorganise those files' physical location?

[digitaldog]

Its underlying function is to reorganise files into folders, which is a real need in Lightroom - but it's not a need that is limited to when people are importing files. Why should people have to reimport files if they want to reorganise those files' physical location?

You're way off base John, people use Move during import for all kinds of reasons, that's why it was implemented in the first place**!
Adobe is either wrong or wrong, you pick: They were wrong to provide Move in Import in the first place despite users finding it darn useful. Or they are more wrong removing a feature that's been available for years! You pick which is more wrong to you, those of us that use Move during Import know that the feature was useful and that removing legacy features like this break workflows and piss off customers. If Lightroom's PM had a bloody clues he would have:


Asked his customer base about removing the feature first (he didn't).
Asked his prerelease team about removing the feature (he ignored them).
Provided a preference for the new Import for 'dummies" or the existing Import for the rest of us (he didn't).


Oh and I'd like my Eject Card functionality back too!


I don't know how long you've used Adobe products, my experience dates back to about a month after Photoshop 1.0.9 shipped in 1990. I've been a 'beta' since version 2.5. I suspect I've spoken to more people about these products and been called an Adobe Fan Boy a lot more than you have. How anyone can defend what happened with the last release is beyond me and would be a perfect example of an Adobe Fan Boy. I simply can't accept Adobe wrecking long existing workflows and they deserve to be called out. IF that affects my Adobe Fan Boy monicker, so be it.


What we need is a person who can steer this LR ship. Hamburg could do this and provided proof running the PS program before LR was a concept in his head.


**From Victoria Bampton's superb FAQ:

• Move copies the photos to the folder structure of your choice but it also removes the files from their original location. The Move option is particularly useful if you want Lightroom to reorganize your existing photos while importing, as it doesn’t take up additional hard drive space.
 

[john beardsworth]

And I pointed out, that progress was a direct result of ACR, not LR. We both know from our experience with Adobe how this works. We both know the role of Thomas and Eric, remove those contributions and you're examples are pretty piss poor 
WE don't agree there's been 'good progress', just the opposite.
What was the 'big' feature in LR6 that isn't tied to ACR, face detection? A useful function so pitifully implemented in LR6, you can't reanalyze and update images after the initial FD. Who's idea was this of a good feature?
Here's an interesting analysis of the new features in LR6: http://www.lynda.com/articles/new-photoshop-lightroom-cc-lightroom-6
As far as I see, only one, ONE feature isn't part of the ACR engine: face detection. Try not to ignore all the facts at once please.

Try not to ignore I mentioned the improvements in slideshow. They came in 6, didn't they? Reckon Thomas and Eric rolled up their sleeves to write that code? Ah, they don't count as a new feature, while brush adjustments to grad/radial filters do? Yeah, right. etc....

[digitaldog]

Try not to ignore I mentioned the improvements in slideshow.

Yes, some minor ones, about time really since slide show has seen so little love over the years. Too bad it's still a far cry from FotoMagico 4 which I had to buy since LR's slideshow is still so weak.
So yeah, you got one that has nothing to do with Thomas or Eric's superb input to the ACR engine. So by your account, some tweaks to Slideshow and maybe the half baked Face Detection, please inform us of all the useful updates in LR6 that haven't been affected in Develop by T&E. Two minor 'features' are in your mind justification for calling this LR6 instead of LR5? If so, maybe there's a PM opening at Adobe for you 

[john beardsworth]

**From Victoria Bampton's superb FAQ:
• Move copies the photos to the folder structure of your choice but it also removes the files from their original location. The Move option is particularly useful if you want Lightroom to reorganize your existing photos while importing, as it doesn’t take up additional hard drive space.

And it would be even more useful if it wasn't restricted to when you're importing.... Yes, Adobe were wrong to put it there in the first place, and they should have taken this opportunity to relocate it. Those who find it useful don't seem to remember features that were removed before, but I'm sure they could quickly see how to adapt their workflows.

[john beardsworth]

So yeah, you got one that has nothing to do with Thomas or Eric's superb input to the ACR engine.

I said "etc"....

[digitaldog]

And it would be even more useful if it wasn't restricted to when you're importing.... Yes, Adobe were wrong to put it there in the first place, and they should have taken this opportunity to relocate it.

Again no, sorry. Move should remain where it was, a new option elsewhere is fine with me. You don't seem to understand the needs and workflows of others or you'd see how Move inside Import IS useful and IS used and how removing it pissed off, justifiably, the LR customer. What's so difficult about moving outside of Import using drag and drop?

Those who find it useful don't seem to remember features that were removed before, but I'm sure they could quickly see how to adapt their workflows.

By all means, provide a list.
Why should users be forced to adapt their workflows? 

[digitaldog]

I said "etc"....

Which like your earlier post (You just have a good moan....) is useless, ambiguous, without merit.

[digitaldog]

You don't seem to understand the needs and workflows of others or you'd see how Move inside Import IS useful and IS used and how removing it pissed off, justifiably, the LR customer.

Fortunately some users do understand:


https://fstoppers.com/lightroom/adobe-faces-harsh-backlash-after-removal-features-and-stability-issues-plague-90776:



   1   Ejecting cards: Gone is the feature that ejects a card automatically after Lightroom completes an import. I know that I personally loved this feature, as it saved me from absentmindedly removing a memory card after importing photos without ejecting it first and risking corruption of the files. I have a hard time seeing why a feature that really has no bearing on major functionality in the program and is only an added convenience would be removed. A glance over online forums indicated that I wasn't the only one who felt this way.
   2   Moving images: Also gone is the option to change the file location of images upon import. In previous versions, importing photos from the hard drive gave you the option to also move them to a destination of your choice. You might ask why you would be importing images from the hard drive and not the memory card. It turns out that Lightroom is very slow at importing photos from a memory card. It's much faster to copy them to the hard drive, then import them. For many of us who come back from a shoot with thousands of photos (wedding photographers, for example), the time savings are substantial, as I can attest to. With this option gone, one has to manually move the photos, then import them. This may seem like a pittance of effort, but for those of us who have been using Lightroom for years, it can be very easy to completely forget that extra step, very quickly leading to a fragmented catalog. In the worst case scenario, if you're like me and you keep your photos on an external hard drive that is backed up to the cloud, but only parts of your main hard drive are backed up, these photos might be inadvertently skipped in the backup process, leaving them at risk.

[john beardsworth]

Which like your earlier post (You just have a good moan....) is useless, ambiguous, without merit.

Other than illustrating boredom with your ranting? I gave one example that disproved your rant, and added "etc".

Me: Those who find it useful don't seem to remember features that were removed before, but I'm sure they could quickly see how to adapt their workflows.
You: By all means, provide a list.

Why, don't you know? Or were they really not that important when people were less hysterical?

[digitaldog]

Why, don't you know? Or were they really not that important when people were less hysterical?

No, that's why I asked YOU to provide a list. Can you?