# Adobe Lightroom 6 Information Update



## Canon Rumors Guy (Mar 9, 2015)

```
A few weeks ago we posted that <a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2015/02/adobe-lightroom-6-coming-very-soon/" target="_blank">Adobe Lightroom 6 would be released on March 9, 2015</a>, as per an Amazon UK date leak. We were told a couple of days later that this date was incorrect, but we failed to update the post to reflect that. We’ve seen a second date from an Amazon Japan leak that stated the release date would be March 20, 2015. We cannot confirm this date either.</p>
<p>All that we do know is Adobe has said Lightroom 6 would be released some time in March, so we don’t have too long to wait.</p>
<p>Some key features coming in Adobe Lightroom 6:</p>
<ul>
<li dir="ltr"><strong>Environment nondestructive

</strong>Unleash your creativity in a nondestructive editing environment that allows you to test your ideas freely. The originals remain intact and you can easily cancel your edits or save multiple versions of a cliché.</li>
<li dir="ltr"><strong>Advanced conversion feature black and white

</strong>Monitor closely the tonal qualities so essential to the black and white photos. Combine precisely the information of eight color layers in the grayscale conversion.</li>
<li dir="ltr"><strong>Face Recognition

</strong>Quickly find pictures of loved ones, even without metadata tags. You select a face on the photo, Lightroom and search the person it belongs to all of your other shots. Sort and group your photos by faces.</li>
<li dir="ltr"><strong>Sophisticated Healing Brush

</strong>Get best pictures with one touch. Set the brush size and move it according to specific plots. Unwanted items and other imperfections, including irregular shapes son type, magically disappear.</li>
<li dir="ltr"><strong>Upright (Vertically)

</strong>Straighten skewed images with a single click. The Upright tool (Vertically) analyzes the image and detects horizontal or vertical lines inclined. It can even recover images without horizon.</li>
<li dir="ltr"><strong>Fusion panoramas

</strong>Realize XXL ultra detailed panoramas. Photo merge technology lets you merge multiple images, including raw files, to create panoramas out of the ordinary.</li>
<li dir="ltr"><strong>Performance gains

</strong>Import and refine your photos in record time. Lightroom leverages compatible graphics process to get you better performance, especially when you edit your images in the Develop module.</li>
</ul>
```


----------



## Marsu42 (Mar 9, 2015)

Canon Rumors said:


> Some key features coming in Adobe Lightroom 6



Never mind the features, but I do hope they'll have the courage to drop the "perpetual" licenses and switch to a pure subscription model!

The PS+LR deal is incredibly good, and the more people participate and don't cling to "buying" the software the cheaper the rates might get! What do you think?


----------



## naylor83 (Mar 9, 2015)

The only *new* feature in that list is the panorama merging, no?

Marsu42: I hope for the opposite. Or at least I hope they keep the old scheme, which I much prefer.


----------



## martti (Mar 9, 2015)

And what if all this face recognition that has become such a powerful and ubiquitous feature would be used to maintain a database on a central agency computer telling all kinds of things about who met whom and who else was there. Maybe I am paranoid for nothing but I just do not want any face recognition software anywhere near me. Should I grow a beard or wear a souvlaki...I mean a baklava..no, a balaclava every time I get out of my house?
I do not like it.


----------



## Marsu42 (Mar 9, 2015)

naylor83 said:


> The only *new* feature in that list is the panorama merging, no?



* CR forgot HDR merging (at least this was on an older list)
* The mask editing tool will be extended (you can add or subtract from radial or linear masks) - this is already in PS CC, but LR withheld it from LR5.
* Face recognition is completely new, but I'd rather have focus peaking...
* The automatic healing brush might really get better, as it stands now the algorithm screws up sometimes while finding content and there's a bug when healing near the picture border.



martti said:


> I do not like it.



With Facebook using face recognition with a direct pipeline to the NSA, do you really think LR (which isn't even browser- or cloud-based) does make a difference?



naylor83 said:


> Marsu42: I hope for the opposite. Or at least I hope they keep the old scheme, which I much prefer.



Well, CR folk are rather conservative, so maybe there a few 'round here who favor the legacy concept of "ownership". I'm sure other people are willing to share their thoughts on this


----------



## naylor83 (Mar 9, 2015)

Marsu42 said:


> * CR forgot HDR merging (at least this was on an older list)
> * The mask editing tool will be extended (you can add or subtract from radial or linear masks) - this is already in PS CC, but LR withheld it from LR5.
> * Face recognition is completely new, but I'd rather have focus peaking...
> * The automatic healing brush might really get better, as it stands now the algorithm screws up sometimes while finding content and there's a bug when healing near the picture border.



Thanks, I had missed the bit about face recognition. I'd like that. And I'd like the HDR merging!


----------



## c-law (Mar 9, 2015)

Canon Rumors said:


> *Environment nondestructive* Unleash your creativity in a nondestructive editing environment that allows you to test your ideas freely. The originals remain intact and you can easily cancel your edits or save multiple versions of a *cliché.*



It's nice to know that Adobe has such a high opinion of our work. ???


----------



## Ivar (Mar 9, 2015)

Marsu42 said:


> ..
> * The automatic healing brush might really get better, as it stands now the algorithm screws up sometimes while finding content and there's a bug when healing near the picture border.
> ..



Based on the description the healing brush might unfortunately be the same old brush.
Setting a size and movement is already there, "sophisticated" might be just a translation issue meaning "advanced", as it was called in LR5.

"Sophisticated Healing Brush

Get best pictures with one touch. Set the brush size and move it according to specific plots. Unwanted items and other imperfections, including irregular shapes son type, magically disappear."


p.s. I very much prefer perpetual license, I have zero interest in PS.


----------



## sleepnever (Mar 9, 2015)

I'm really looking forward to the performance increases, specifically if they are going to use my nVidia 970GTX 4GB. After that, the HDR merge and any enhancements. I'm waiting for LR6 before I jump on the PS + LR subscription bandwagon.


----------



## lintoni (Mar 9, 2015)

c-law said:


> Canon Rumors said:
> 
> 
> > *Environment nondestructive* Unleash your creativity in a nondestructive editing environment that allows you to test your ideas freely. The originals remain intact and you can easily cancel your edits or save multiple versions of a *cliché.*
> ...


----------



## martti (Mar 9, 2015)

It sounds as if they are going to buy Alien Skin soon.
"One click creativity unleashed. Just pay 80 dollars for the entry level version and 18 dollars a month to become a real Artist...."

I really like LR5 and Alien Skin, it is just the infomercials that I hate.


----------



## Marsu42 (Mar 9, 2015)

sleepnever said:


> I'm really looking forward to the performance increases, specifically if they are going to use my nVidia 970GTX 4GB.



I wouldn't hold my breath there - with the current architecture, you cannot just speed up all operations with the gpu but have to offload dedicated tasks. Question is how many of LR's operations qualify, and if only boxes with large-memory monster-gpus will profit.

Afaik the manufacturers are working on the next-gen gpu designs that can access/share the main memory of the computer, because as of now OpenCL and so on have their bottleneck when copying data between main/cpu and gpu memory.


----------



## pclark2 (Mar 9, 2015)

I am most excited for the facial recognition part (and of course any speed enhancements). I have been waiting on this feature for years and could really use it in my catalog (includes family photos dating back decades).

@Marsu42 - Personally I want to own the software. The main reason for this is simple, I only want Lightroom and not Photoshop. If I need Photoshop for something I can just use it at work. The cost of doing the photography package is far greater than just buying the software. $140 to buy the program, or just rent it for barely over a year. Considering it has been 2 years since Lightroom 5 came out, paying the subscription is a worse deal if all you want is Lightroom. And when you take into account the upgrade price is only $88, that is even better.


----------



## AcutancePhotography (Mar 9, 2015)

Marsu42 said:


> Never mind the features, but I do hope they'll have the courage to drop the "perpetual" licenses and switch to a pure subscription model!



Not every one wants the subscription schema.


----------



## martti (Mar 9, 2015)

Marsu42: "With Facebook using face recognition with a direct pipeline to the NSA, do you really think LR (which isn't even browser- or cloud-based) does make a difference?"

Yes actually I do.
More of a bad thing is a bad thing.


----------



## tron (Mar 9, 2015)

+1 on perpetual license.


----------



## dpetry (Mar 9, 2015)

Am I the only one that's expecting something new in the LR Mobile end?


----------



## cayenne (Mar 9, 2015)

Marsu42 said:


> Canon Rumors said:
> 
> 
> > Some key features coming in Adobe Lightroom 6
> ...


'

GOOD LORD Why???

I do *not* want to rent my software...why not have the option to rent if you want, and purchase if you want?

I'm hoping that LR6 will still be available in a standalone configuration. Right now I have CS6 and am quite happy to remain there until either Adobe opens back up to perpetual license for its products, or others come to replace them from competitors.

So far, yes, Adobe has some nice additions in Photoshop and other tools, but nothing so ground shaking that I feel compelled to rent my software from them.


----------



## martti (Mar 9, 2015)

Whereas now having gone back to Photoshop to fix skin and hair and eyes and stuff, I most certainlty welcome any detail tools LR will introduce. I cannot understand I actually had the time to airbrush the skin, correct the color globally and in the patches and fool around with the Wacom pen like for an hour for each shot.
I am really yearning to see what LR has come up with.
I turn the wifi off while I am manipulating photos.
_They_ will hate that!

Yes, I know. If you have the make-up and the lights right and you focus on what you are doing you will not need 60 minutes of Wacom time for each shot. Unless you are crawling up the learning curve. To get...somewhere?


----------



## -pekr- (Mar 9, 2015)

Hmm, I wonder noone really misses better work with presets? Come on - one hit do it all presets, with zero ability to tweak its opacity or selectively brushing them in-out? I think my on1 suite is still going to be an useful addition


----------



## jpaana (Mar 9, 2015)

Marsu42 said:


> * .. but I'd rather have focus peaking...



Until then there is a plugin that does something like this called Focus Mask (http://www.capturemonkey.com/focusmask). Not quite as sophisticated as integrated solution in Capture One for example, but works surprisingly well.


----------



## YuengLinger (Mar 9, 2015)

Marsu42 said:


> Canon Rumors said:
> 
> 
> > Some key features coming in Adobe Lightroom 6
> ...



Why would you deny others the choice of one-time? If you like the subscription, great, go that way. I hope you are being just tongue-in-cheek provocative; otherwise, it will be hard for me to take anything you post seriously, even when you do have good intentions.

Could you please supply an example of where going from one-time purchases to a subscription model resulted in cheaper prices? If anything, Adobe is using the cheap prices to lure people away from PS CS6/5, whatever, and then will be able to charge whatever they want, and issue as few updates and improvements as they want. 

You think that this is like a pool of insured? Don't forget, anybody who buys insurance is a liability and could cost a company 10 or more times whatever premium has been paid. This isn't insurance, so I don't see where you came up with such an idea of the more people "in," the cheaper for all.


----------



## Marsu42 (Mar 9, 2015)

jpaana said:


> Until then there is a plugin that does something like this called Focus Mask (http://www.capturemonkey.com/focusmask). Not quite as sophisticated as integrated solution in Capture One for example, but works surprisingly well.



Thanks a lot, I didn't know this plugin site (and I thought I'd have tried 'em all). And it's a very fair price for their plugin collection, esp. seeing how other authors want to have for a few lines of Lua code.

But you're correct, getting this integrated in LR itself and LR being able to use the in-cr2 jpeg previews would speed up selecting the best shot from a bulk series over any plugin approach. PhaseOne seems to have it, I really don't get why Adobe doesn't - with so many 10+ fps cameras around nowadays, quick "in-focus" filtering should be requested a lot?


----------



## Don Haines (Mar 9, 2015)

YuengLinger said:


> Marsu42 said:
> 
> 
> > Canon Rumors said:
> ...



Yes....

I am sure that Adobe came up with the subscription model in an effort to lower their revenues.... <SARCASM>

They went to the model because they believe that in total, they will make more money than with the perpetual licenses. Yes, it is cheaper to subscribe everything than to buy it individually, but then again, how many do? They have to be betting on making more money with combo subscriptions than individual package sales with having more people subscribed than would have bought stand alone software. Photoshop is expensive and the sales can't be that good... it's sort of like making $800 from a single sale or $120 each for a dozen combination subscriptions. 

That said, if you are on of the people who just wants Lightroom and upgraded every 2 years, now you get the privilege of spending twice as much.....


----------



## LarryC (Mar 9, 2015)

A couple of weeks ago one of these sites, I can't recall if it was CR, NR or PR, was posted a leaked video of the panorama feature. On the drop down list could be seen "panorama" and "HDR". The problem was there were no apparent controls over these features and it appeared to operate in the Library module, not the Develop module. I would be nice if these turned out to be a useful, but it sure looked to me to be more of Instagram-competing LR-mobile feature set.


----------



## NancyP (Mar 9, 2015)

What's the buzz on LR6: perpetual license available or just subscription?
I prefer perpetual because of the cataloging nature of the software.


----------



## dpetry (Mar 9, 2015)

NancyP said:


> What's the buzz on LR6: perpetual license available or just subscription?
> I prefer perpetual because of the cataloging nature of the software.



With the subscriptipn model once you stop paying adobe will let you use the catalog portion of lightroom for life, for free.


----------



## steve7 (Mar 9, 2015)

If Adobe drop the perpetual licence with Lightroom I suspect a lot of people will move across to Capture One where they can get a perpetual licence. I use Lightroom 5 but am well aware that the reviews for Capture One are very good.


----------



## kelpdiver (Mar 9, 2015)

Marsu42 said:


> sleepnever said:
> 
> 
> > I'm really looking forward to the performance increases, specifically if they are going to use my nVidia 970GTX 4GB.
> ...



I'm having a hard time resolving your "don't hold your breathe" along with your statements that licenses are old thinking, and subscriptions are better.

The promise Adobe made was that with subscriptions, they could continuously develop and deploy new functionality. And yet, they still made a major CC release. Yet...how many features have actually been added since CS6? Keeping that, and paying $70-90 every couple years for LR has proven far cheaper than the CC subscription, and even the $10 PS+LR they eventually had to offer us to get some takers. When and if they start showing value, I'll consider the $120/year plan, but it hasn't happened yet. 

I find it equally likely that they'll eventually cry uncle and offer me a CC16 license. I'll wait.


----------



## emko (Mar 9, 2015)

LarryC said:


> A couple of weeks ago one of these sites, I can't recall if it was CR, NR or PR, was posted a leaked video of the panorama feature. On the drop down list could be seen "panorama" and "HDR". The problem was there were no apparent controls over these features and it appeared to operate in the Library module, not the Develop module. I would be nice if these turned out to be a useful, but it sure looked to me to be more of Instagram-competing LR-mobile feature set.



what? what are you talking about? they made a HDR .DNG from there you get expanded exposure,highlight and shadow sliders with this you can edit your expose as you like add grads etc nothing about this is instragram wow, or are you wanting to do those crazy painting looking HDR's?


----------



## pwp (Mar 9, 2015)

cayenne said:


> ...right now I have CS6 and am quite happy to remain there until either Adobe opens back up to perpetual license for its products, or others come to replace them from competitors...


I feel your pain! It's you and lots of others from what I'm reading. However you may be working with CS6 for a very long time.

Initially I felt affronted by the new Adobe structure, but couldn't see much point in wasting time and energy going ballistic about it. As the industry giant, Adobe will keep doing it their way and hopefully this will trigger the emergence of genuinely viable competition. But 25 years of refinement and experience by Adobe may be too big for an interloper to muscle into the market with any genuine penetration. 

In the meantime I've got the full CC subscription and use maybe half a dozen of the apps most days. They are familiar, powerful and do the job almost perfectly in my view. This frees me up to concentrate on the main game which is creating images.

I've been locked onto LR since its first beta, and FWIW I look forward to every new release.

-pw


----------



## Click (Mar 9, 2015)

cayenne said:


> GOOD LORD Why???
> 
> I do *not* want to rent my software...why not have the option to rent if you want, and purchase if you want?




+1


----------



## Lee Jay (Mar 10, 2015)

Canon Rumors said:


> All that we do know is Adobe has said Lightroom 6 would be released some time in March, so we don’t have too long to wait.



Does someone have a link to where Adobe said that?


----------



## Lee Jay (Mar 10, 2015)

Marsu42 said:


> Canon Rumors said:
> 
> 
> > Some key features coming in Adobe Lightroom 6
> ...



How good a deal is it for people who don't use Photoshop? Crappy, that's how.


----------



## BroderLund (Mar 10, 2015)

Hope they lower the RAM requirements. Lightroom 5.7 is currently using all of my 16GB of RAM, crazy!. Editing is speedy enough, but the browsing so painfully slow when shuffling trough pictures from an event.


----------



## Don Haines (Mar 10, 2015)

Lee Jay said:


> Marsu42 said:
> 
> 
> > Canon Rumors said:
> ...


If you don't use photoshop, you get to pay twice as much as before. I hope that they get a sudden drop in revenue and rethink this cloud foolishness...

Besides, my computer at work is not connected to the internet (security issues) so no cloud for it either.....


----------



## Hjalmarg1 (Mar 10, 2015)

Canon Rumors said:


> A few weeks ago we posted that <a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2015/02/adobe-lightroom-6-coming-very-soon/" target="_blank">Adobe Lightroom 6 would be released on March 9, 2015</a>, as per an Amazon UK date leak. We were told a couple of days later that this date was incorrect, but we failed to update the post to reflect that. We’ve seen a second date from an Amazon Japan leak that stated the release date would be March 20, 2015. We cannot confirm this date either.</p>
> <p>All that we do know is Adobe has said Lightroom 6 would be released some time in March, so we don’t have too long to wait.</p>
> <p>Some key features coming in Adobe Lightroom 6:</p>
> <ul>
> ...


I will finally upgrade my LR4 with the LR6


----------



## Marsu42 (Mar 10, 2015)

kelpdiver said:


> I'm having a hard time resolving your "don't hold your breathe" along with your statements that licenses are old thinking, and subscriptions are better.



You're right, it doesn't connect  ... please take don't take the licensing part too seriously, I just felt that after a dozen of threads only ranting about CC licensing that I should deliver an inspiration :->. In any case, the main point is that LR6's hdr function won't save the low dynamic range of Canon vs. Sonikon!


----------



## pixyl (Mar 10, 2015)

Hjalmarg1 said:


> I will finally upgrade my LR4 with the LR6



I just upgraded from LR3 to LR5 yesterday because I was in need of an upgrade, uncertain if LR6 will be CC only (I have no interest in renting my software) and knowing that Adobe gives you a free upgrade if a new version appears within a month of your purchase (having read that Adobe has confirmed LR6 will appear some time in March I should be fine no matter if LR6 will be perpetual or CC-only).


----------



## funkboy (Mar 10, 2015)

Let me guess: installation requires OS X Yosemite in order to work?


----------



## Lee Jay (Mar 10, 2015)

Marsu42 said:


> kelpdiver said:
> 
> 
> > I'm having a hard time resolving your "don't hold your breathe" along with your statements that licenses are old thinking, and subscriptions are better.
> ...



Good thing it doesn't need saving.


----------



## bergstrom (Mar 10, 2015)

Will this have batch rotate of images, CW or CCW? It would be really helpful when you take a pile of pictures, but you somehow forget or accidentally have the do not rotate in camera setting on and you have to rotate them manually, one by one.


----------



## Lee Jay (Mar 10, 2015)

bergstrom said:


> Will this have batch rotate of images, CW or CCW? It would be really helpful when you take a pile of pictures, but you somehow forget or accidentally have the do not rotate in camera setting on and you have to rotate them manually, one by one.



It has since version 1.


----------



## nvettese (Mar 10, 2015)

naylor83 said:


> The only *new* feature in that list is the panorama merging, no?
> 
> Marsu42: I hope for the opposite. Or at least I hope they keep the old scheme, which I much prefer.



I will not "rent" my software. Personally, I think the subscription model is a scam, and would definitely rather own what I am paying money towards. One day, you will no longer be able to afford the subscription, and then what?


----------



## privatebydesign (Mar 10, 2015)

nvettese said:


> One day, you will no longer be able to afford the subscription, and then what?



In the case of Lightroom you will be able to open your library and see all your images with the edits you did before you stopped paying, you can export those images too. You won't be able to access the develop module to do new edits.


----------



## cayenne (Mar 10, 2015)

funkboy said:


> Let me guess: installation requires OS X Yosemite in order to work?



Ooh...I'd not thought of that.

I hope not...I'm in the middle of some projects moving stuff between FCPX and Davinci Resolve, I finally have two versions that work together, and last time I upgraded, I had to go Mavericks which meant new FCPX which meant new Resolve....and took a few iterations to get versions of everything that worked and played well together.

I can't afford to be down right now..so, no upgrades on any for me at this time.

C


----------



## bergstrom (Mar 10, 2015)

Lee Jay said:


> bergstrom said:
> 
> 
> > Will this have batch rotate of images, CW or CCW? It would be really helpful when you take a pile of pictures, but you somehow forget or accidentally have the do not rotate in camera setting on and you have to rotate them manually, one by one.
> ...



where??


----------



## Zv (Mar 10, 2015)

bergstrom said:


> Lee Jay said:
> 
> 
> > bergstrom said:
> ...



Ctrl + A (select all) then just hit the little arrow under the preview in Library module to rotate. You can also use the shortcut Ctrl + ] (clockwise) or Ctrl + [ (counterclockwise). 

For Mac replace Ctrl with Command key. 

A full list of shortcuts can be found here - 
http://help.adobe.com/en_US/lightroom/using/WS18e2013dd74eab5fe275e2711d1b186fe9-8000.html


----------



## Fatalv (Mar 10, 2015)

Marsu42 said:


> Never mind the features, but I do hope they'll have the courage to drop the "perpetual" licenses and switch to a pure subscription model!
> 
> The PS+LR deal is incredibly good, and the more people participate and don't cling to "buying" the software the cheaper the rates might get! What do you think?



This would be the worst possible "feature". If Adobe moves to only subscription models they will have lost me as a customer. I see no reason to add a monthly fee to my workflow. I've been happily using LR4 and if it wasn't for the panoramic and HDR features rumored to be coming I would skip LR6 as well.


----------



## curby (Mar 10, 2015)

martti said:


> More of a bad thing is a bad thing.



I don't consider any algorithm inherently evil, so I'd disagree with your premise that facial recognition is a bad thing.

Regardless, stopping the adoption of advanced algorithms in publicly-available software leaves them solely in the hands of those shadowy organizations you are right to distrust. In cryptography we've long known that keeping algorithms secret does not advance understanding, or trust, or security. 

Do we need more laws and oversight to rein in certain organizations? The case in support of that is pretty clear, but none of that's relevant to Lightroom.

Anyway the features list does seem rather sparse and filled with rehashes of existing features. It seems like a typical "top 10" list with 3-7 relevant items and fluff to pad out the list. If you only have two new features and two improved tools, brag about those. Watering down a short list with filler doesn't improve the list.


----------



## Ivar (Mar 10, 2015)

Fatalv said:


> This would be the worst possible "feature". If Adobe moves to only subscription models they will have lost me as a customer. I see no reason to add a monthly fee to my workflow. I've been happily using LR4 and if it wasn't for the panoramic and HDR features rumored to be coming I would skip LR6 as well.



This monthly fee has another catch - you can pay monthly but the minimum contract length is 1 year, when cancelled earlier you still have to pay 50% for the remaining period until the end of contract.

However I believe it will be most certainly available also with the perpetual option.


----------



## Marsu42 (Mar 10, 2015)

Lee Jay said:


> Marsu42 said:
> 
> 
> > In any case, the main point is that LR6's hdr function won't save the low dynamic range of Canon vs. Sonikon!
> ...



Indeed, word is any photog who cannot handle any situation with an 11ev sensor is no good and should learn to shoot properly! Well, this or go to the Hogwarts School of Magic to learn to freeze the environment around you so you can hdr-bracket any scene with movement :->



curby said:


> In cryptography we've long known that keeping algorithms secret does not advance understanding, or trust, or security.



That's right, public disclosure of *encryption* algorithms is a success since the "Lucifer" cipher of IBM which was used for the NIST's DES. That's smart because they kept the *decryption* method hidden and where the only ones to quick-decrypt DES on their dedicated hardware :->

Another point to public trust into public ciphers by committee: How else could the NSA introduce a backdoor into the hardest cryptographic methods, it's not like people would take it directly from our big brother  ... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cryptographically_secure_pseudorandom_number_generator#NSA_backdoor_in_the_Dual_EC_DRBG_PRNG


----------



## curby (Mar 10, 2015)

No one ever claimed that public disclosure solves all issues. Any system can be gamed and examples exist where peer review has failed. But are you actually suggesting that you'd prefer a system where others could develop crypto algorithms in secret and mandate that you use them? Didn't think so.

EDIT: To elaborate, I'm curious why you cited those examples. Your sarcasm makes me think you're trying to poke holes in my argument for transparency and openness in the cryptographic community. Those examples don't argue against me, because it's obvious that a less transparent process would provide MORE opportunities for intelligence agencies or companies to influence development in their favor. On the contrary, we should be happy that openness allowed us to more easily detect these activities, correct the damage they've done, and learn from them to improve future developments. Hopefully that's something we can all get behind.


----------



## Lee Jay (Mar 10, 2015)

bergstrom said:


> Lee Jay said:
> 
> 
> > bergstrom said:
> ...



Select as many images as you want in the grid, click one of the rotate icons on the Toolbar.


----------



## Marsu42 (Mar 10, 2015)

curby said:


> EDIT: To elaborate, I'm curious why you cited those examples. Your sarcasm makes me think you're trying to poke holes in my argument for transparency and openness in the cryptographic community. Those examples don't argue against me, because it's obvious that a less transparent process would provide MORE opportunities for intelligence agencies or companies to influence development in their favor.



I 100% agree on this, and review by *competent* peers is the one thing that discovered my cited examples of cryptography manipulation. Alas, in the case of DES it was only suspicion for decades, the NSA was discovered quicker with their latest scheme only a few years after introducing their trojan horse algorithm.

The thing I'm arguing against is the popular fallacy that open source equals high quality (yo, u there, OpenSSL?) and that security by obscurity is a bad thing. Imho there's nothing wrong with obscurity once you have a solid foundation to build it upon and always assume the obscurity layer won't protect you. 

That's why I think that...



 curby said:


> Regardless, stopping the adoption of advanced algorithms in publicly-available software leaves them solely in the hands of those shadowy organizations you are right to distrust.



Is questionable. Do you really think the most hardened algorithms are public, like the facial recognition tech of LR6 is up to NSA standard? Do you trust your SSL connection or SHA hash of your digital signature with your life when trying not to be hit by a drone-based missile? It's true we're only up to this level due to fellows like Zimmerman, but my guess is that those shadowy organizations are still way ahead and will probably even expand their lead in the future.


----------



## curby (Mar 10, 2015)

Marsu42 said:


> I 100% agree on this, and review by *competent* peers is the one thing that discovered my cited examples of cryptography manipulation. Alas, in the case of DES it was only suspicion for decades, the NSA was discovered quicker with their latest scheme only a few years after introducing their trojan horse algorithm.
> 
> The thing I'm arguing against is the popular fallacy that open source equals high quality (yo, u there, OpenSSL?) and that security by obscurity is a bad thing. Imho there's nothing wrong with obscurity once you have a solid foundation to build it upon and always assume the obscurity layer won't protect you.



Good to hear we're on the same page. The rule of thumb about security through obscurity often gets boiled down to "it's bad," but a more nuanced view is that it's an important part of a layered security model as you say.



Marsu42 said:


> but my guess is that those shadowy organizations are still way ahead



An appeal to authority isn't worth much***, but Schneier says that the Snowden documents (incl. those that haven't been published) suggest that the NSA has no fundamental cryptanalytic breakthroughs beyond what's public, and they have no computation breakthroughs beyond what's public. 



Marsu42 said:


> Is questionable. Do you really think the most hardened algorithms are public, like the facial recognition tech of LR6 is up to NSA standard?



Getting back to LR facial recognition, it's likely not as sophisticated as what an intelligence agency would use ... which is all the more reason to not fear it in commercial photo management software. This started with me wondering what facial recognition in Lightroom has to do with overzealous intelligence agencies. From what we've talked about, not much!

*** (1) Schneier could be in the dark about their current capabilities (2) he could be lying (3) the NSA still has a ton of supercomputers, and (4) NSA does a lot outside of breaking public crypto that's still cause for concern.


----------



## Lee Jay (Mar 10, 2015)

martti said:


> Maybe I am paranoid for nothing but I just do not want any face recognition software anywhere near me.



Paranoid is right.

This would be local, not shared, and either way face recognition is far from the best way to track you.


----------



## Lee Jay (Mar 10, 2015)

Lee Jay said:


> Canon Rumors said:
> 
> 
> > All that we do know is Adobe has said Lightroom 6 would be released some time in March, so we don’t have too long to wait.
> ...



Hearing none, I think I'll assume Adobe never said that.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Mar 10, 2015)

martti said:


> Maybe I am paranoid for nothing but I just do not want any face recognition software anywhere near me.



Do you own a mirror?


----------



## NancyP (Mar 10, 2015)

Yep, Adobe might require Yosemite for Lr6. BIG update for me coming, with significant catalog reorganization and trimming first.


----------



## soldrinero (Mar 10, 2015)

From an Adobe blog post, it looks like Lightroom 6 will require Mac OS 10.8 Mountian Lion or newer. In Windows, it will require 64-bit Windows 7 or newer. The post is here: http://blogs.adobe.com/lightroomjournal/2015/01/update-on-os-support-for-next-version-of-lightroom.html


----------



## el_grapa (Mar 10, 2015)

Marsu42 said:


> Canon Rumors said:
> 
> 
> > Some key features coming in Adobe Lightroom 6
> ...



I'm curious. You have the option to rent the software, and others like me have the option to buy it. Why do you care if I get the option to buy a license, as long as you can keep renting it?

I got version 4 in 2012 for 80€, and skipped version 5. If I buy version 6, and I intend to, lightroom 4 would have cost me roughly 2€/month. Nowadays, the price of the LR+PS CC in Europe is 12€. That's 6x the price I pay with a perpetual license. So it doesn't make sense for me to go that route. If they 

You are happy with the rent model, good for you, but keep in mind that the needs of others might differ from yours.


----------



## pootle (Mar 11, 2015)

*Re: Adobe Lightroom 6 - still hopeless batch performance then?*

Improving the develop performance is nice, but it is not generally a big issue for me. The "performance" aspects that really bugs me is the dire speed of bulk operations (such as import, mass update from xml, export and others).

When I come back from a serious shoot with maybe 400 raw files and want to import (copy from card on a fast card reader) and generate decent (1:1) previews so I can quickly do a first triage on them. Dorky Lightroom slowly copies ALL the files over, and then when they are all copied it SLOWLY generates the previews.

I can actually spped things up quite a lot (i.e. twice as fast) by importing and generating previews in batches of 100 so that after the first hundred have copied and are busy previewing, I can start on the second 100 (you can't have multiple imports running at once, but once the generating previews stage is reached, you can start another import).

And when I say slow on both parts of this, I mean that neither phases remotely stresses the CPU, RAM or disc I/O capabilities of my machine.

Lightoom appears to run multiple threads, but appears to be utterly hopeless at actually making use of them.

I have an i7-3770 machine with 16Gb RAM and the OS on a solid state disc, Lightroom catalogue (approx 2.25Gb) and photos (about 12,000) are on a whirly disc which never even breaks into a mild sweat. (I have tried tests running the catalogue and catalogue + photos on SSD but the performance gain was neglible)

cpu utilisation rarely manages to hit even 25%, RAM never seems to go above around 4Gb, and the disc never seems to exceed around 30% busy, so as I see it some of these big batch operations should be able to go at least 4 X faster if the software got its act together.


----------



## curby (Mar 11, 2015)

*Re: Adobe Lightroom 6 - still hopeless batch performance then?*



pootle said:


> photos (about 12,000) are on a whirly disc which never even breaks into a mild sweat. (I have tried tests running the catalogue and catalogue + photos on SSD but the performance gain was neglible)



Yeah I've heard of people putting Lightroom libraries on a NAS and having no slowdown, which at the time I thought was props for the NAS being quick. Maybe it's just Lightroom not being able to make use of faster storage.


----------



## pclark2 (Mar 11, 2015)

*Re: Adobe Lightroom 6 - still hopeless batch performance then?*



curby said:


> pootle said:
> 
> 
> > photos (about 12,000) are on a whirly disc which never even breaks into a mild sweat. (I have tried tests running the catalogue and catalogue + photos on SSD but the performance gain was neglible)
> ...



I store all my photos on my home file server (modified desktop sitting in my basement with far too many drives running FlexRaid to create a storage pool with parity, all backed up to Crashplan). I then use btsync to sync the catalog and preview files between the server and my laptop. So all the preview files are stored on both, thus Lightroom only has to look locally for those which is fast. The only times my setup is somewhat slow is when I import or am generating the previews. My server was recently reformatted and setup so I don't have Lightroom installed on it yet. Once LR6 comes out I'll install it on both (more reason to sync previews and catalog) and that will allow me to do all the imports and previews locally on it before doing edits on my laptop. This will also be very helpful for the new facial recognition since I'm sure that process will take awhile and I can just leave that running on my server when I don't have my laptop on.

I'm very excited for this new version. I've been someone disappointed in recent versions with the exception of the Maps feature. I wish that worked a little differently, but I am just thankful it was added. This new version sounds like it should add plenty of nice new features, with the facial recognition part being the main reason I will buy it. Increased speed will be a plus, and very easy HDR will be fun just to play with (but not a selling point for me).


----------



## emorin (Mar 11, 2015)

Oh, I'm just giddy about facial recognition! I've been begging for it since LR2. I know I'm not the only one that hates keywording as part of their workflow.

Now if only recognition extended to ... wedding, landscape, portrait, macro, flower, sunset, animal, yellow.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Mar 11, 2015)

el_grapa said:


> Marsu42 said:
> 
> 
> > Canon Rumors said:
> ...



Read the bold part. I don't necessarily make a connection between more people adopting Software as a Service and lower costs, but that's his why.


----------



## mackguyver (Mar 11, 2015)

Sorry to tell you guys, but resistance is futile (to the Adobe CC model). See below from Yahoo Finance - the subscription model has been a huge success and I recently read that it "saved" Adobe. Note that the graph starts around the time they began the CC only push through today:


----------



## privatebydesign (Mar 11, 2015)

I have linked ti the share price pretty much every time this Adobe bashing comes up, and Adobe don't seen to care.

The worrying bit is that as the new model has been so successful and as the doubters are still so vociferous and loud Adobe might decide it is better to get rid of them entirely, the vocal low paying few will be killed by their own sword. Can't wait!


----------



## mackguyver (Mar 11, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> I have linked ti the share price pretty much every time this Adobe bashing comes up, and Adobe don't seen to care.
> 
> The worrying bit is that as the new model has been so successful and as the doubters are still so vociferous and loud Adobe might decide it is better to get rid of them entirely, the vocal low paying few will be killed by their own sword. Can't wait!


It's true and I wasn't happy when they first announced it, but I was able to get the educational discount (the best part of teaching) so it isn't too bad for me at $30/month. I have actually ended up using Premiere, After Effects, and Audition which I didn't have in the previous Creative Suite, so it's been a good deal for me. They have kept up their commitment to release new features faster and subscription prisoner or not, I'm happy with the software.

And yes, they are making a killing financially so why would they ever go back to the old model?


----------



## Lee Jay (Mar 11, 2015)

mackguyver said:


> And yes, they are making a killing financially so why would they ever go back to the old model?



For Lightroom and much of their other software (such as Photoshop Elements and Premier Elements) they have never left the perpetual license model. They may well recognize that people currently paying $100 for a perpetual license do not have the same tolerance to a rental model as the people who were paying $700 for a perpetual license.


----------



## mackguyver (Mar 11, 2015)

Lee Jay said:


> mackguyver said:
> 
> 
> > And yes, they are making a killing financially so why would they ever go back to the old model?
> ...


That's probably true, but I wouldn't be surprised if they test the waters on this at some point. If both Elements packages were 99 cents a month or something like that, I bet their sales would increase more than enough, especially if it was bundled with a mobile app.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Mar 11, 2015)

Lee Jay said:


> They may well recognize that people currently paying $100 for a perpetual license do not have the same tolerance to a rental model as the people who were paying $700 for a perpetual license.



Or course, LR used to cost $299. They're keeping the perpetual license option around, but I've seen no mention of the price. With Aperture out of the picture, they might see fit to raise it back up.

10 bucks a month assuming a 2-and-a-half year update cycle could be break-even without even considering Photoshop.


----------



## Lee Jay (Mar 11, 2015)

3kramd5 said:


> 10 bucks a month assuming a 2-and-a-half year update cycle could be break-even without even considering Photoshop.



How do you figure? LR's upgrade cost is $89 about once every 18 months or so.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Mar 11, 2015)

Lee Jay said:


> 3kramd5 said:
> 
> 
> > 10 bucks a month assuming a 2-and-a-half year update cycle could be break-even without even considering Photoshop.
> ...



My assumptions are pretty obvious: old price without discounted version upgrades.

The point being: we don't know the new cost structure. If they want to promote SaS, they may nake perpetual versions costlier.

Maybe they'll continue the current practice, I'll personally adopt whatever ends up being most economical.


----------



## curby (Mar 11, 2015)

Did LR5 debut at $300? It's $150 non-upgrade on Amazon right now, but I know the cost may have gone down over time.


----------



## Lee Jay (Mar 12, 2015)

curby said:


> Did LR5 debut at $300?



No.


----------



## curby (Mar 12, 2015)

Lee Jay said:


> 3kramd5 said:
> 
> 
> > 10 bucks a month assuming a 2-and-a-half year update cycle could be break-even without even considering Photoshop.
> ...



In that case, I'm also wondering about this math. Gotta use more recent numbers when making a comparison to current CC pricing (unless I'm missing the point of the comparison entirely).


----------



## 3kramd5 (Mar 12, 2015)

curby said:


> Lee Jay said:
> 
> 
> > 3kramd5 said:
> ...



Meh, it wasn't meant to be conclusive. The point is we don't know what perpetual versions will cost, nor upgrades or how far back upgrade support will be (perhaps 5-6 but not 4-6).

Eventually with CC you will cancel. That's wheh you lose since the software's key functionality dies. If that is problematic, plan to keep buying perpetual or to change packages down the line (or give up processing). But depending on how the costs come out, it's possible that the subscription will cost less on an ongoing basis than standalone licenses, and to other people that may be compelling.

Nobody really knows at this point.


----------



## camdude (Mar 14, 2015)

I'd like to see very enhance slideshow and book software, I am comparing to Aperture 3, Lightroom 5 is subpar, hopefully 6 will be much improved.


----------



## RLPhoto (Mar 14, 2015)

Marsu42 said:


> Canon Rumors said:
> 
> 
> > Some key features coming in Adobe Lightroom 6
> ...


I disagree. The subscription software model only switches the power from the user to the company, and especially with Adobe software, being pretty much unrivaled on the market now. Adobe was making lots of money with perpetual licensing and the subscription model will rake in even more cash. (Hence a cash grab in my book) I don't blame them but will holdout on buying CC until CS6 can't do more for me.

If lightroom goes CC only, it makes adobe a liar and would completely bankrupt my trust in them. I'd immediately switch to another alternative for LR.


----------



## Diko (Mar 14, 2015)

Any update on that date? I am quite eager already and nothing happens.


----------



## martti (Mar 14, 2015)

Adobe is dropping 32-bit support which means that I have to upgrade a system that worls as it is right now.
I'll probably upgrade the hard disk at the same time...get a hybride or something. I'll do it when the weather cools down here...maybe.


----------



## YuengLinger (Mar 14, 2015)

martti said:


> Adobe is dropping 32-bit support which means that I have to upgrade a system that worls as it is right now.
> I'll probably upgrade the hard disk at the same time...get a hybride or something. I'll do it when the weather cools down here...maybe.



Why can't you just keep using your current version?


----------



## Jan (Mar 14, 2015)

Diko said:


> Any update on that date? I am quite eager already and nothing happens.


Photorumors.com suggests the 25th of March. Somewhere I also read "definitely in March"... we will see.


----------



## Marsu42 (Mar 14, 2015)

Jan said:


> Diko said:
> 
> 
> > Any update on that date? I am quite eager already and nothing happens.
> ...



There's really no telling how much ad revenue the usual suspect's sites generate with good seo and pushing the release date forward a bit all the time :->



RLPhoto said:


> I'd immediately switch to another alternative for LR.



Reminds me of people (not necessarily you) saying "I'll switch to Sonikon if the 5d3/whatever doesn't deliver xyz" just before upgrading anyway. To what will you switch to? DxO with the inferior library management? Acdsee? Windows Paint?

Adobe have build themselves a near-monopoly buy eliminating or (mostly) buying out the competition, so that's that.


----------



## privatebydesign (Mar 14, 2015)

Marsu42 said:


> RLPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > I'd immediately switch to another alternative for LR.
> ...



It always makes me laugh, we have pros and keen amateurs with thousands, often 10's of thousands of dollars worth of gear who bitch and threaten to throw their toys out of the pram over $10 a month.


----------



## Halfrack (Mar 14, 2015)

RLPhoto said:


> If lightroom goes CC only, it makes adobe a liar and would completely bankrupt my trust in them. I'd immediately switch to another alternative for LR.



What is there that is a complete alternative to LR? Think library management and keywording in addition to editing, batching and export. There are specific products that do one thing much better, but to do it all, that's kind of a hard place.


----------



## wtlloyd (Mar 14, 2015)

Exactly.
Whatever floats their boat. The rest of us can just watch them recede in the distance, tilting at their windmills.





privatebydesign said:


> Marsu42 said:
> 
> 
> > RLPhoto said:
> ...


----------



## RLPhoto (Mar 14, 2015)

Marsu42 said:


> Jan said:
> 
> 
> > Diko said:
> ...


I will and that's because adobe will raise the prices. Have fun and I'll be laughing when they force you on 99$ monthly photography plans or even 199$ a month pro plans. You turn the heat up slowly and afterall, it's professional software, it should be a professional price and the above prices are not unrealistic in 5 years. 

No. If you like the power given to the company instead of the end user, that thinking is backwards. The only way is to not support them, which I won't. Even Microsoft wasn't brash enough to end the perpetual license yet with office and they tried. Instead they offer incentives to subscription and that makes sense but I'd rather have my license. 

IE: please don't drink the CC kool-aid


----------



## RLPhoto (Mar 14, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> Marsu42 said:
> 
> 
> > RLPhoto said:
> ...


It makes me laugh at users who have tens of thousands of dollars worth of gear and have little to show for it. Oh well. :


----------



## emko (Mar 14, 2015)

RLPhoto said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > Marsu42 said:
> ...




you guys know the switch to subscription is all for Adobe to make more money with less work. They said it them self's they can not keep adding such amazing new features that make people want to upgrade to the new version, with subscription it does not matter they get your money every month without having to do add anything new. People where sticking to older versions because they didn't see anything that they really needed in latest version and this was bad for business.


----------



## martti (Mar 15, 2015)

I am sure the move has something to do with the enormous amount of people using pirated illegal versions of Photoshop. Also to reduce the shock when your old Photoshop does not support your new camera and there are no more upgrades for the Camera RAW. That one has pissed me off more than once!


----------



## emko (Mar 15, 2015)

martti said:


> I am sure the move has something to do with the enormous amount of people using pirated illegalversions of Photoshop. Also to reduce the shock when your old Photoshop does not support your new camera and there are no more upgrades for the Camera RAW. That one has pissed me off more than once!



100% false, just google it and you will find that Photoshop is just as easy if not easier to get pirated version.This is purely for profit nothing else, makes the companies profits look good not some huge spikes during new versions and then down until the next.


----------



## privatebydesign (Mar 15, 2015)

martti said:


> I am sure the move has something to do with the enormous amount of people using pirated illegalversions of Photoshop. Also to reduce the shock when your old Photoshop does not support your new camera and there are no more upgrades for the Camera RAW. That one has pissed me off more than once!



Pirated CC is as easy to download and use as pirated CS6.

Adobe supply a fully supported free program for those that get left behind in the unsupported RAW area, DNG. It is free, fully supported, and totally non destructive, tell me another software company on earth that freely supports a product that essentially allows you to not upgrade.


----------



## privatebydesign (Mar 15, 2015)

emko said:


> martti said:
> 
> 
> > I am sure the move has something to do with the enormous amount of people using pirated illegalversions of Photoshop. Also to reduce the shock when your old Photoshop does not support your new camera and there are no more upgrades for the Camera RAW. That one has pissed me off more than once!
> ...



It isn't even about the bottom line, though Adobe will eventually milk that too, it is mainly about, as you point out, the smoothing of cash flow, and they have been exceptionally successful at it.

As for price, compare it to your cable bill, I pay $115 a month for basic cable tv and internet, there is nothing on the TV I want to watch and the internet gets me a whopping rated 15Mbs with a realisable 8-9 at the best of times. I'd rather drop the tv portion of my cable bill and add the full CC if I was a keen photographer, but to bitch about $10 a month for Lightroom, Lightroom Mobile and Photoshop just seems so petty to me when put in the context of the cost of our other gear.


----------



## martti (Mar 15, 2015)

Why can't the camera manufacturers finally put an option there: RAW/DNG/JPG in their menus?
As I've understood they have a put miniature supercomputer or two there to crunch data. It should not be a big stunt with all that processing power.
Why is it Leica only using the .dng format as default?


----------



## emko (Mar 15, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> emko said:
> 
> 
> > martti said:
> ...



ISP and Cable is a service provider you get charged monthly for that, for editing software i don't see the reason not to let user buy a copy they don't have to pay per month.

If this was not for profits why not offer CC 2014 CC 2015 etc as standalone and updates for a fee?

Adobe admits it them self's they can not make such amazing new features to make people upgrade to new PS that is the only reason they did this so their profits are all ways up no matter if they add new features or not. Many people stick with old PS because they don't need the new features and Adobe as a business does not like this.


----------



## Marsu42 (Mar 15, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> Pirated CC is as easy to download and use as pirated CS6.



I'm hesitant to discuss the elephant in the room, but I've worked as a C++ programmer for some time and was the one implementing the copy protection mechanism in the software. I sympathize with everyone who has to do this, it's a hellish amount of work not to shut down legit copies, and you could implement tons of features and/or bugfixes for code that - if it works - does nothing good for legit users.

That's how I can say: Easy download "yes", easy upgrade "no". With all rolling release models like CC, introducing updates all the time, it's way easier for the manufacturer to shut out pirated copies than with a fixed release every couple of years. And with a subscription, you make sure people have to have a server connection, i.e. enabling you to detect piracy.

However, this isn't what Adobe wants anyway - the one reason they've killed the competition is that every Joe Sixpack with his p&s camera uses Photoshop, makes you wonder how that works. Same as Microsoft: "If they pirate our software, at least they're not buying from the competition."




martti said:


> Why can't the camera manufacturers finally put an option there: RAW/DNG/JPG in their menus?



I'd like that, but redundant choices like this (both cr2/dng wrap exactly the same data) add code and thus bugs to the firmware so it won't happen. If at all, it would make sense to drop cr2 completely, there's really no upside other than not being tied to Adobe and that some apps don't support dng - but the latter would change if Canon switches.

At least Magic Lantern has made the jump: For their "full res silent pix" (grabbing the full frame off the sensor in live view w/o moving the mirror) they're saving dng files. With the good documentation of the format Adobe provides, this is the natural choice over cr2.


----------



## martti (Mar 15, 2015)

My experience with Adobe's politics with different countries has been filled with frustration.
To get an English version of Photoshop delivered to France I had to buy it from eBay. When I blew a hard disk and needed to reinstall the Photoshop I got the message that It was already installed the maximum amount of times and should be deactivated on the other machine. I called the Adobe 'customer service' (a misnomer if ever I've seen one) and they did not acknowledge the user ID. They said that I should contact the seller...which of course I did not but took the easy way out.

Another experience was with Lightroom. I tried to download it from the US site but they redirected me to the French site where it was available in French, only. After which I used a proxy placed in Norway and finally got the download as I wanted. For two years they kept sending me member emails in Norwegian. _Kämpetorsk!_

Lately it has been smoother. Probably some old bones retired from the international sales department.


----------



## martti (Mar 15, 2015)

Thanks Marsu42. One thing you do when you pirate the CS is tell it not to contact Adobe. How do people with a fragile internet connection manage with the subscription version? I imagine there will be DVDs for sale on eBay pretty soon.


----------



## privatebydesign (Mar 15, 2015)

It's just a phone home verification handshake, the data transfer is miniscule, besides, you can be not connected for two months before CC will start to ask what is going on.

eBay are pretty good at not letting the DVD thing happen, Craiglist is another thing altogether though.


----------



## Marsu42 (Mar 15, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> It's just a phone home verification handshake, the data transfer is miniscule



How would you know it stays this way for future versions (it's a rolling release, after all)? Adobe might not be as bad as Microsoft, but the latter has proven time and again they're more than willing they're willing to grab any data they can get their hands on - not to speak of EA Origin scanning everything as allowed by the eula.



martti said:


> Thanks Marsu42. One thing you do when you pirate the CS is tell it not to contact Adobe. How do people with a fragile internet connection manage with the subscription version?



That's the main problem why this solution isn't all over the place - it's not just about fragile, but about security. You cannot expect a high-profile company to have client terminals connected to the net, so no can do with this simple solution but you need an elaborate licensing server scheme like with expensive software (including Microsoft Windows' enterprise versions).

But with games, they're starting to implement this approach (EA Origin, Valve Steam) dropping any "offline mode" even if losing some customers and getting a lot of bad press. Esp. for games piracy destroyed whole platforms like the Commodore Amiga.

For their mid-level image editing, Adobe has chosen the "harassment" approach, you can kind of offline-ish use the software, but only after calling them and explaining in sufficient length why you don't like the online version.



martti said:


> I imagine there will be DVDs for sale on eBay pretty soon.



This will always be the case, it's about those people who are "hesitant" to purchase, but would if harassed a little. You cannot stop anyone really determined to kill the president (even if you state otherwise on you in-flight immigration form). If the NSA picks this up: I'm not going to, he's a nice guy. And I'm definitely not planning to even if he wouldn't be :->


----------



## Valvebounce (Mar 15, 2015)

Hi Marsu. 
It's been nice knowing you my friend,  : let us know if you get internet inside! ;D ;D ;D
Knock knock, who's there, 8) 8)

Cheers, Graham. 



Marsu42 said:


> If the NSA picks this up: I'm not going to, he's a nice guy. And I'm definitely not planning to even if he wouldn't be :->


----------



## RLPhoto (Mar 15, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> RLPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > privatebydesign said:
> ...


I laugh right in your face. You take an image for demonstrative purposes, not even in my main portfolio, from a pre-fabricated home less that 80k and you put your image, massive interior, multi-million dollar home and call it the same? Bah! Even then your image is lackluster, dead and clinical. I've seen much more inspiring work for such an expensive home and it reflects your dryness. 

I'd expect the same uninspired work even if I saw your portfolio. Otherwise your just starting to clatter like a toolbox.


----------



## Jan (Mar 15, 2015)

*@RLPhoto & privatebydesign:
Could you please pursue your foolish dick-measuring contest via pm?*


----------



## martti (Mar 15, 2015)

Get some popcorn and watch them fight.


----------



## Marsu42 (Mar 15, 2015)

Jan said:


> @RLPhoto & privatebydesign: Could you please pursue your foolish dick-measuring contest via pm?



Nononono, photogs need to vent their ego somewhere, and you're missing out on one of the main attractions of CR, and no one has even mentioned dynamic range yet :->

Rest assured: I'm not running out of "bitch fight" pictures anytime soon


----------



## martti (Mar 15, 2015)

The chicks were fighting for you?
What aftershave are you using, man, I want some also!


----------



## privatebydesign (Mar 15, 2015)

Jan said:


> *@RLPhoto & privatebydesign:
> Could you please pursue your foolish dick-measuring contest via pm?*



Why foolish?


----------



## privatebydesign (Mar 15, 2015)

Marsu42 said:


> Jan said:
> 
> 
> > @RLPhoto & privatebydesign: Could you please pursue your foolish dick-measuring contest via pm?
> ...



Thanks Marsu,

How else would I get my avatars?


----------



## Marsu42 (Mar 15, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> How else would I get my avatars?



Indeed, I did notice immediately and am happy my input is appreciated  ... and in this case, pulling out rlp's "magic door" indoor shot again definitely fits the current avatar :->


----------



## 3kramd5 (Mar 15, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> As for price, compare it to your cable bill, I pay $115 a month for basic cable tv and internet, there is nothing on the TV I want to watch and the internet gets me a whopping rated 15Mbs with a realisable 8-9 at the best of times. I'd rather drop the tv portion of my cable bill and add the full CC if I was a keen photographer, but to bitch about $10 a month for Lightroom, Lightroom Mobile and Photoshop just seems so petty to me when put in the context of the cost of our other gear.



Even considering only computer software, LR is cheap (whether we're talking CC or Standalone). Other than the OS and my antivirus (both of which are always running and the latter of which is subscription-based), LR is my most used software. Hell, turbotax costs me more and I only use it for a few days a year.


----------



## RLPhoto (Mar 15, 2015)

Marsu42 said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > How else would I get my avatars?
> ...


In this case, pointing out PBDs missing portfolio would fit that photo perfectly.


----------



## fragilesi (Mar 15, 2015)

3kramd5 said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > As for price, compare it to your cable bill, I pay $115 a month for basic cable tv and internet, there is nothing on the TV I want to watch and the internet gets me a whopping rated 15Mbs with a realisable 8-9 at the best of times. I'd rather drop the tv portion of my cable bill and add the full CC if I was a keen photographer, but to bitch about $10 a month for Lightroom, Lightroom Mobile and Photoshop just seems so petty to me when put in the context of the cost of our other gear.
> ...



I think that's a good point. In terms of quality and use I get more than my money's worth out of the current subscription prices. That said, I'm not going to even consider stumping multiple times that so this has prompted me to start looking at what the options are.


----------



## troy19 (Mar 15, 2015)

sh*t, I read this topic hoping to get more news about LR, but there are no news.

But luckily the battle RLP vs. PBD and the spot on comments by others made my day.

I love CR


----------



## privatebydesign (Mar 15, 2015)

troy19 said:


> sh*t, I read this topic hoping to get more news about LR, but there are no news.
> 
> But luckily the battle RLP vs. PBD and the spot on comments by others made my day.
> 
> I love CR



This is rarely (ever) the place to get breaking news, unfounded rumour that by the law of averages must turn out right one day, yes, but actual useful news, I don't think so.

But I am very glad I added to making your day, when the children get bored they are apt to throwing their toys out of the pram. I don't know what irked RIP this time, but he has had a bee up his butt for me for the longest time. Though how a pro photographer can bitch about $10 a month for THE best, most universally accepted, powerful, taught, understood, supported etc photo software package on the planet does strike to the heart of his professionalism. He is happy to drop $8,000/$10,000 on a Hasselblad and lens, that I said would break (and it did), meanwhile he would be better off buying a Mike Kelly video course and learning how to turn out some pro quality work with that $10 a month software and a 60D.

But all the best to you Troy and lets hope RPG can come back with something a little more interesting than, "whaaaa, where are your pictures, sob".


----------



## Lee Jay (Mar 15, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> Though how a pro photographer can bitch about $10 a month for THE best, most universally accepted, powerful, taught, understood, supported etc photo software package on the planet does strike to the heart of his professionalism.



PS? It's a P_O_S for photo editing. It's slow to use, clogged full of bloat for graphic artists, and generally has the worst user interface on the planet.

Once upon a time it was for photographers. No more.


----------



## privatebydesign (Mar 15, 2015)

Lee Jay said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > Though how a pro photographer can bitch about $10 a month for THE best, most universally accepted, powerful, taught, understood, supported etc photo software package on the planet does strike to the heart of his professionalism.
> ...



No it isn't, it is the benchmark. You might not have the skill levels to get the results you want easily, so what? I'd like an actual percentage of non sponsored pro photo retouchers that don't use Photoshop. Sure many pro photographers might shoot tethered to Capture One or Lightroom, but the actual retouchers are almost universally using PS, and for a very good reason.


----------



## RLPhoto (Mar 15, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> troy19 said:
> 
> 
> > sh*t, I read this topic hoping to get more news about LR, but there are no news.
> ...


I find it very humorous how bent out of shape PBD gets over such a little thing. Enough that he's willing to type out responses like this one. It's really funny how much he studies what I do and it's really interesting to see that in this post. I'm sure PBD has many, many books and countless hours in study, and it's sad that I expected to see more from his photos but as usual, sorely disappointed. 

Back on topic, I paid 699$ for CS6 PS and it's more expensive than CC, sure. I was using CS3 until adobe announced CC only and bought CS6. So I used CS3 just fine for 5 years and I could use CS6 easily another 5 years. Adobe did little to warrant me paying them more money for CS upgrades and even now I see little need to pay them more money for CC PS. It wasn't all about cost and willing to pay more than CC costs for a perpetual license. I'd be willing to double the monthly rate if I kept a frozen version after two years. No problemo, but an endless pit, especially with LR, I wouldn't put my money into that. I feel even worse for users who use all the apps and will have to continue paying even though they no longer work in those industry's but have to keep access to edit legacy files. To keep paying the toll.


----------



## Lee Jay (Mar 15, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> Lee Jay said:
> 
> 
> > privatebydesign said:
> ...



I do photo restorations with it. I know how to use it. It's powerful, but horrible to use. I actually prefer using an older version of Elements over CS6 or CC, even though even that is pretty poor.

But that's not for photo editing, it's for restoration and compositing. I use Lightroom to actually edit photos.


----------



## privatebydesign (Mar 16, 2015)

Lee Jay said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > Lee Jay said:
> ...



_"Horrible to use"_ and _"worst user interface on the planet"_ are entirely subjective, many find it a delight to use and entirely intuitive when put in the context of feature set and growth. It seems a company can never please everybody, but Adobe have made efforts to try, they very rarely remove an outdated feature for fear of annoying people who love the older version, if they were to force you to use the newer tool they would be accused of all sorts, they leave in the old tool and they are accused of bloat. I am so glad i am not a project manager at Adobe!

What can't be argued is the power and capability of the thing, oh, no wait, it is Adobe, you'll argue it..................

Photoshop is still the photo editing benchmark, that you can't get on with it shows a deep misunderstanding of how you can make it work how you want, start making custom keyboard shortcuts and learn to use a Wacom well and the thing is effortless and fast.


----------



## privatebydesign (Mar 16, 2015)

Do what you like, I am just saying that if you keep on and on and on belittling my input whilst questioning my background despite the fact that I have answered you both privately and in public, both pleasantly and rudely, I will react.

I don't understand why you feel the need to pick the scab incessantly, but is you that does it.


----------



## RLPhoto (Mar 16, 2015)

My original comment had nothing to do with you, and just like a lot of these threads, ends up with you. Maybe it's just a Ying-yang thing or maybe it's just we disagree.


----------



## privatebydesign (Mar 16, 2015)

RLPhoto said:


> My original comment had nothing to do with you, and just like a lot of these threads, ends up with you. Maybe it's just a Ying-yang thing or maybe it's just we disagree.



That wouldn't be quite so hard to believe if you hadn't included a quote of mine to start it all off. 



RLPhoto said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > Marsu42 said:
> ...



See? Your comment is directed at mine, mine was directed at Marsu's. It isn't a Ying Yang thing, you take every opportunity to take a pop at me and I don't understand why, sometimes I rise to the bait sometimes I don't.

But I am bored now so have the last word.......


----------



## RLPhoto (Mar 16, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> RLPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > My original comment had nothing to do with you, and just like a lot of these threads, ends up with you. Maybe it's just a Ying-yang thing or maybe it's just we disagree.
> ...


It's like me having a conversation with marsu, and some guy yells in the background his opinions, and I yell back something quick and return to the conversation at hand. I mean, did you have to include Marsu's comment at all to say that? I think your point was very clear on its own.


----------



## wtlloyd (Mar 16, 2015)

You guys ought to stop this schoolyard behavior, what an embarrassment. Just walk away from each other, or at least take it to PM.
Really looking like a couple idiots. It stopped being amusing 2 pages ago, so I thought I'd let you know.


----------



## Hjalmarg1 (Mar 16, 2015)

Hopefully there will be an "upgrade option" for already LR users.


----------



## martti (Mar 16, 2015)

I have noticed a bit all over in the Northern hemisphere that people are picking fight for reasons I cannot see. 
It might be the Celestial Waves produced by the Spring Equinox. Or the fact that the winter has lasted too long.
A mood epidemic seems to be going on there, whatever the cause. 
I see mood epidemics here during the cyclone season that is just about to finish. The air here is already lighter to breath. I think we made it...now towards the Austral Winter at an increased speed.

As for LR upgrades, with only one dealer who can deliver, he pretty much calls the shots.
We can hate it all we can, ALLCAPS and flame but Adobe has the image industry hooked up in such a big way that whatever we might come up with here, they will Nike it. ("Just Do It")

Meanwhile, how to take better pictures....


----------



## AcutancePhotography (Mar 16, 2015)

So just to recap nine pages of replies

Some people like the subscription option for Adobe products.
Some people don't like the subscription option for Adobe products. 

Nine pages... so far to say something that only takes two lines. 

Gotta love CR.


----------



## martti (Mar 16, 2015)

what do you do when you machine is crunching through a PS filter?


----------



## Lee Jay (Mar 16, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> Photoshop is still the photo editing benchmark, that you can't get on with it shows a deep misunderstanding of how you can make it work how you want, start making custom keyboard shortcuts and learn to use a Wacom well and the thing is effortless and fast.



So, all I need to do to make a commercial piece of software work well is custom short cuts, a clunky and expensive piece of hardware, and an entire industry of educators built up to teach people how to use this moderate-complexity piece of software.

Yep...sounds like a first-rate product to me.

To put this in perspective, I learned to hand-code assembler faster by a factor of 10 than I learned how to use Photoshop. In fact, I've learned every programming language faster than I learned PS. Matlab is 10 times as new user friendly as PS, and it has a better user interface!


----------



## Jan (Mar 16, 2015)

To get back to topic:
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/photoshop-lightroom-6-windowsmac/8236055.p?id=1219320550936&skuId=8236055
...and offline again. ;D


----------



## neuroanatomist (Mar 16, 2015)

AcutancePhotography said:


> So just to recap nine pages of replies
> 
> Some people like the subscription option for Adobe products.
> Some people don't like the subscription option for Adobe products.
> ...



Total oversimplification. 

Some people like other people not liking the subscription option for Adobe products. 
Some people don't like other people liking the subscription option for Adobe products. 
Some people just don't care. 




martti said:


> I have noticed a bit all over in the Northern hemisphere that people are picking fight for reasons I cannot see.
> It might be the Celestial Waves produced by the Spring Equinox. Or the fact that the winter has lasted too long.



Well, Boston just broke the annual snowfall record, we've had >3 m of snow this season. Ugh. Maybe now that the record has been broken, Spring can come?


----------



## martti (Mar 16, 2015)

Three meters of snow? I take you are talking vertically, like in depth. Like two quarterbacks, one standing on the shoulders of the bigger one.
Where will you put all the water when it melts?

We only get torrential rains down here, two people reported missing and bodies not found.
A mudslide took down the only highway on the east coast. Falling rocks blocked the same highway on the west coast. The price of tomatoes went from 0.89 to over 3 euros.

While I am pondering whether I should buy the 50mm f/1.2 at 850 euros or not....

The world is so strange at times, just so strange that if you cannot find anything to laugh about, you cry your eyes dry.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Mar 16, 2015)

Yes, 108.6" total depth, most of it in February and March. Indeed, there will be flooding if it melts too fast...

Sure, buy the 50L


----------



## martti (Mar 16, 2015)

You know, Réunion Island is carrying the World Record of rain in 12 hours and in 24 hours. I thought we had the world's highest rainfall / year also but I cannot find the references so I shut up. It should have been on the east coast where the monsoon rains down something like 13'000mm per year.
Whatever, if you say I should buy the 50mm L, I probably should.


----------



## AcutancePhotography (Mar 16, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> AcutancePhotography said:
> 
> 
> > So just to recap nine pages of replies
> ...



Good point. Who should really care what other photographers chose for their LR license?

I like that Adobe is giving their customers a choice. Choice is good.


----------



## sdsu1982canon (Mar 16, 2015)

Typical issues with Best Buy.....notice release date of 10/01/2014. They never check the accuracy of their ads :-[


----------



## martti (Mar 16, 2015)

I do not like Adobe as a company, their politics or their customer care.
Their products are top notch.
So I pay.


----------

