I realise this opinion on the value of the new LR3 tutorial may not be liked or appreciated, but I feel like I need to express it anyway. If you don't agree, feel free to ignore me completely.
I purchased the original LR1 tutorial years ago and, while I don't remember exactly what I paid for it, I remember it was extraordinarily good value. Being new to Lightroom, I learnt an incredible amount about how to use the software and construct an efficient work flow. This efficiency was particularly important personally as some of this work is difficult for me as a result of a disability.
When LR2 and the corresponding new version of the tutorial came out, I purchased this on the basis of my previous good experience, a small discount for return customers and a vague promise that there would still be plenty of new and valuable information for those who already had the first tutorial. While I don't regret the purchase, I definitely learned far less from this second iteration. Furthermore, since the length of the tutorial had increased significantly, the cost had similarly grown. It's fair to say though that the value of the new tutorial for me, as someone who was very familiar with the original, was significantly less.
I find myself looking at the now even longer LR3 tutorial and, considering the relatively modest increase in features from LR2 to LR3 (which I am already very familiar with), I really find myself wondering if I would really get significant value out of the latest production. I understand there is a 10% discount for purchasers of the previous tutorial. But other purely quantitative basis, that implies that 90% of the information will be new. Clearly that's not the case, so the result is return customers are principally paying for the entertainment value. While the tutorials are definitely enjoyable to watch, I'm still not sure that's a great proposition, at least for me. There definitely seems to be an element of diminishing returns with each successive tutorial, and I wonder how many return customers will feel similarly. I understand this is quite likely to be ignored, but I feel like a collection of the parts from the larger tutorial covering the new features of LR3 for approximately $15-20 would make sense for myself, and perhaps many other previous customers. Failing that, I don't see myself purchasing this or future tutorials, barring the addition of significant, new and functionally-rich features to a future version of Lightroom.
You wrote that you felt the need to express your opinion anyway; regardless of wether its 'liked'.
Well.. fair enough. Its admirable or even courageous to express an opinion that you feel might not be shared by others. However, the forum may not have been the best place for this as you are opening up 'debate' - regardless of wether you 'want it'. Enough said on that point.
To the crux of the matter (And an analogy might be the best example). If I turn on my Apple TV and 'buy' a feature film movie in HD 720p I am going to pay somewhere between $25 and $35 Australian for the download. Not a lot of money - and not a lot of content. At best its probably going to be a three hour movie; that maybee I will watch more than once - but probably not (given the crap the big Hollywood machine regularly churns out). flip side of the coin....
The Lightroom 3.0 Tutorial runs 9+ hours for $40 including discount for early purchase and for being an adopter of the earlier tutorials. Entertainment value aside (and the entertainment value should not be understated as I think its considerable) that is an awful lot of content for a very small outlay - you could easily argue is 300%+ the value of a feature film in the example above. And, personally, I will watch more than once (and likely multiple multiple times to glean all there is)
Now I have been a LR user since the very first BETA - I have purchased every single LR tutorial Michael and Jeff have done. What you need to understand about learning any piece of software is that after the initial steep learning curve there is a plateau effect where your learning slows down as you become more familiar with the program. The things you learn are smaller, more infrequent (but no less significant) and includes tweaks such as keyboard shortcuts, better DAM management, or other productive ways of accomplishing a task you already knew how to otherwise do. Dont mistake the value of this later learning for people like yourself who are already familiar with the program. As an example, I live in Lightroom on a daily basis, and have done so since BETA1 - yet, in just the first 3 video segments of the new LR3 tutorial I learnt something about the program I didn't know - and that something makes a reasonably significant difference to me.
My last point is a general one and wether you take it on board depends on your circumstance (which I dont presume to know). And that is that $40 is not a lot of money. In fact, in photography terms its completely insignificant. $40 is 1/3rd the price of a single ink cartridge for my printer (it needs twelve of them!), its less than a box of decent printer paper, its less than a CF or SD card.. its less than pretty much anything else in photography. Heck.. its less than I personally spend on a couple of average take away lunches, or a good bottle of wine. But, as I said.. this is personal issue based on individual circumstance.
So lets keep this in perspective - 9+ hours of entertaining informative viewing for $40 is extraodinarily good value - no matter which way you look at it. If $40 seems excessive to you then right off the bat, this isnt a product for you - regardless of wether you were to get anything out of it.
Personally, I think (actually scratch that.. I KNOW) the value is there, regardless of wether you are an experienced LR user or someone new to the program. At the end of the day it makes zero difference to me if you buy it or not.. I just dont care. What I do care about is that Lula produces this kind of tutorial for me and those others like me who do find value in it. Sorry.. dont mean to sound like I am pushing the Lula 'barrow' (thats not my intention), its just that when you break down your arguments above for 'value' they fall flat smack bang on their face.
