Various articles on LR's 7th incarnation (previously Martin Evening article)

[john beardsworth]

Just noticed this by Martin An introduction to the two new versions of Lightroom and how to decide which is best for you (pdf)

UPDATE - title changed

[Mark D Segal]

John - thanks ever so much for this. I was hoping for a contribution from Martin and will read with interest.

[jrsforums]

As always, a great article by Martin.

I remain, however, left with the feeling that there are still a number of concerns, or rather unknowns, about what exactly happens when concurrently running CC and Classic.  Most concern is the existing physical database, where new images exist relative to that database, what happens to existing synced collections, etc.

[john beardsworth]

Derek Storey's podcast is also worth a listen this week http://thedigitalstory.com/2017/10/the-clouds-silver-lining-podcast-606.html

[rdonson]

Thanks, John, for sharing these resources.  Martin Evening is a master of detailed, accurate and easy to consume content on Adobe products.  This is a fine example of his skills.

[digitaldog]

I love the 'Sum it up" text which reinforces my opinion that for me, LR Mobile through LR (like the last experiment) isn't anything I have any desire to use. Too bad this new version has basically one major new feature (range masking). I recall in the day, you needed a good half a dozen or more serious and actual features (not claiming to make the product faster), to call it a new version. We get basically one. 

[john beardsworth]

One editing feature plus embedded previews if you are going from 2015.12 to "Classic". Another 4-5 decent sized features if you view 6 to 7 in the old manner. Maybe a bit light for a 2-3 year interval?

[rdonson]

Andrew, if the new Lr Classic can provide ANY performance improvements after 2+ years of stagnation it's worth it for me.  Range masking is a very welcome addition.

Time will tell if Lr Classic is worth the blather.  Its unknown to me if Classic fixes any of the performance issues with using a graphics processor. 

[digitaldog]

One editing feature plus embedded previews if you are going from 2015.12 to "Classic". Another 4-5 decent sized features if you view 6 to 7 in the old manner. Maybe a bit light for a 2-3 year interval?

Oh boy, embedded previews, what a huge engineering concept and task.
Interesting that the 'other 4-5 decent sized features' are not outlined, do tell us what I'm missing in this amazing new, feature clogged filled version. A bit late for a 2-3 interval, YES! Too much time wasted on mobile nonsense instead of the core product. Oh and Photoshop really isn’t that much different in terms of what features it is (and will) provide: Adobe is running out of ideas or time or the desire (or all three).

[digitaldog]

Andrew, if the new Lr Classic can provide ANY performance improvements after 2+ years of stagnation it's worth it for me.  Range masking is a very welcome addition.

Too little too late. And we're told that by subscribing we get regular new features but thus far, the history doesn't back that up. Even John has to admit: Maybe a bit light for a 2-3 year interval?

[rdonson]

Andrew I'm not apologizing for Adobe.  They're fat and happy according to their most recent quarterly profits announcement.  They're chasing where they see more money.  Lightroom doesn't have a serious contender (yet?).  When that changes they make wake up.  In the meantime they're more excited about their Sensei AI than Lightroom.

[john beardsworth]

Dehaze, Boundary Warp, Guided Upright, Reference View, extra local adjustments. And all the mobile stuff too.

[ekyndt]

Dehaze, Boundary Warp, Guided Upright, Reference View, extra local adjustments. And all the mobile stuff too.

But none of these features are native to Lightroom (I might be wrong). These all are improvement on the camera raw pipeline. There used to be a time where Lightroom had features that camera raw didn't have. Or at least pushed the camera raw a bit more to get it done. Soft proofing comes to mind.

[digitaldog]

Dehaze, Boundary Warp, Guided Upright, Reference View, extra local adjustments.

That's very old stuff John. Try again. And all the mobile stuff is fluff too!

[digitaldog]

But none of these features are native to Lightroom (I might be wrong). These all are improvement on the camera raw pipeline. There used to be a time where Lightroom had features that camera raw didn't have. Or at least pushed the camera raw a bit more to get it done. Soft proofing comes to mind.

Or how about one or more sampler points that stick? We have 10 in ACR, zero in LR. Massive, complicated, difficult to consider engineering? Or just something the mobile user's will not understand, hence, why have multiple sampler points. And how about the CMYK stuff we had that never properly worked so it was just removed. You'll not hear John mention previous broken functionality that's just gone a missing. 

[john beardsworth]

But none of these features are native to Lightroom (I might be wrong). These all are improvement on the camera raw pipeline. There used to be a time where Lightroom had features that camera raw didn't have. Or at least pushed the camera raw a bit more to get it done. Soft proofing comes to mind.

True - though they do still count as part of the 6 to 7 list of new features. The embedded previews and mobile features are outside editing, but Adobe will fail to improve Classic's sync capability. For now on, I doubt Adobe will add any more headline features like face recognition or Book, but they could deliver a lot of value to users by simply polishing existing half-baked features. Lots of small stuff like Title Is Empty, for example, as well as bigger things like embedded previews. But if the only improvements are in camera raw, that would be a bad sign - as if Adobe haven't provided enough already. It's a question of "where's the beef?"

[Mark D Segal]

................. Too much time wasted on mobile nonsense instead of the core product. .............. Adobe is running out of ideas or time or the desire (or all three).

Well Andrew, if Adobe wants "out of the box" suggestions for seriously core improvements to LR, I can suggest them; but if all they want to do is tinker at the edges of the existing structure, it's not worth my time or theirs'. I'd be happy to open a dialog with their core developers any time they want. The main technical constraint may be whether some of my ideas could be managed in the raw file metadata framework, but I suspect based on what they have added to date that it wouldn't be an issue. That said, all told, for a comprehensive solution from camera to print with minimum file size, high quality output, range of output options and so much flexibility to work between it, Photoshop and various plugins, it's not clear to me that one could push all those buttons simultaneously and do better amongst today's offerings.

[Alan Goldhammer]

That said, all told, for a comprehensive solution from camera to print with minimum file size, high quality output, range of output options and so much flexibility to work between it, Photoshop and various plugins, it's not clear to me that one could push all those buttons simultaneously and do better amongst today's offerings.

It may be that Adobe is approaching the point where they have pushed LR Classic as far as it can go and still provide the flexibility inherent in the program.  The new improvements, as noted, are not quite as groundbreaking as the introduction of soft proofing within LR was.  The question for Adobe is whether there will be a response if a good competitor comes along with a similar offering. 

[digitaldog]

Well Andrew, if Adobe wants "out of the box" suggestions for seriously core improvements to LR, I can suggest them; but if all they want to do is tinker at the edges of the existing structure, it's not worth my time or theirs'. I'd be happy to open a dialog with their core developers any time they want.

They don't. That's one of the issues today.
The older I get, the longer I see old time companies change, the more I think; not worth it.

[hogloff]

Well Andrew, if Adobe wants "out of the box" suggestions for seriously core improvements to LR, I can suggest them; but if all they want to do is tinker at the edges of the existing structure, it's not worth my time or theirs'. I'd be happy to open a dialog with their core developers any time they want. The main technical constraint may be whether some of my ideas could be managed in the raw file metadata framework, but I suspect based on what they have added to date that it wouldn't be an issue. That said, all told, for a comprehensive solution from camera to print with minimum file size, high quality output, range of output options and so much flexibility to work between it, Photoshop and various plugins, it's not clear to me that one could push all those buttons simultaneously and do better amongst today's offerings.

You might be able to acquire a handful of other applications that can achieve basically the same results...but for an easy flow from loading images into LR to labeling and sorting / organizing to processing them for both web view and ready for print...to finally making prints...nothing touches LR / PS combination. I just cannot see myself needing to wander through various applications all with different interfaces to just try accomplish what I can in LR / PS.

Just does not make any sense to me to look elsewhere when an elegant solution sits on my computer already.