Adobe, I will still use your products, but make no mistake, I hate you for this move.
It's pretty clear that only the financial guys and accountants are calling the shots now at Adobe.
This is just the latest screw job. They stopped allowing you to upgrade from CS4 to CS6 in January. Many people on this forum appear to think you can still do this. You can't.
So they estimate they can squeeze 2x the money out of over half the customers and come out a winner financially. And they are probably right, which is why it is so frustrating.
I like their products, but I really really hate this arrogant policy move. Adobe needs a competitor, a real one.
Idea: Allow customers to maintain a perpetual license after they have paid their dues (i.e. paid rental for 24 months straight).
Obviously the customer won't get any updates after they stop renting, but this would take a lot of the sting out of this rental scheme for me.
When I stop paying my cell phone bill, I do get to keep my subsidized cell phone when the contract is paid up. Here Adobe is taking away my cell phone no matter how long I have paid on my cell contract.
Arrogant move. It's hard to undo the "arrogance label" once it has been self applied. Ask Microsoft.
Round hole, square peg.
Storage limitations. Processing power.
Not gonna work. How many people who use LR on a regular basis believe they can shoehorn this app onto a tablet? It's frustrating enough on a high end machine.
So they will hopelessly cripple the functionality (no real RAW support, no cataloging, cloud storage over a low bandwidth connection, etc.) and leave the LR name on it.
But it will just be yet another middling photo editor on the iPad.
This reads like run of the mill Apple fanboy propaganda. The lack of expandable storage and limited storage are deal breakers just for a start. No color management. Moving large files on and off are painfully slow. Non-destructive editing of RAW files?
I recognize this is an attempt to make lemonade from lemons, but the author goes out of his way to avoid the real issues here.
It's simply not a serious tool. It's a toy.
And let me be clear, nothing wrong with toys. You just need to understand the difference between an actual tool and a toy.
Good article. Well written.
As to the question of why an engineer may choose a known inferior method, the answer in today's world is unfortunately PATENTS.
The US patent system is now polluted with an enormous number of bogus patents, especially software patents. Seemingly obvious methods of feedback related control get patented and a competitor can lock you out for 20 years.
And the irony is the patent system was created to foster innovation. If you have been in engineering more than 10 years, you will have probably been bitten by this already.
When I was reviewing sites to post my photos on-line (mostly for friends and family and on-line backup) about a year and a half ago, I dismissed Flickr out of hand because of their low resolution photo display and storage.
Talk about bone headed. I cannot imagine how this feature was dropped for so long. It speaks of corporate incompetence.
I eventually went with SmugMug.
I bet they won't jump directly from beta to a production release again without having an RC as they did in Lr4.0
HoustonPowers: I have a small bug in Lightroom 4. When I mouse over the histogram in the Develop Module, the pop up tips are E-mail labels, such as "Mark as read", "Mark as spam" "delete", "reply"..etc..Anyone else have this happening to them?Just curios if its just my system. Its a peculiar bug.
I have noted that LR acts oddly in some cases when running in multi-monitor full screen mode. They have "topmost" window bug in there somewhere. If you are using dual monitors, see if cvhanges when only using one (F11).
"Update DNG previews and Metadata..." does not appear to work when more than 100 files are selected. It just mysteriously grays out the menu item when this threshold is exceeded. ???
Lack of image resize seems to be a basic missing feature. Although I understand the export resize meme, I get some files such as way too big scans or a set of large photos that really don't need to be maintained at full resolution as examples. Simply too much disk space. Round tripping to PS seems crazy just to resize a photo.
Lossy DNG may be helpful here.
One question, do you still have to click EXACTLY on a slider to activate it?
I can't tell you how many times (approximately a billion) that I move my mouse up to a slider only to miss it by two frickin' pixels and start moving my mouse around for edits only to discover the picture isn't changing because the slider hasn't activated. I'm staring at the picture of course, not the slider. Aaaaaghhh....
From a GUI perspective, they can make the activation area of the slider much larger than the actual slider graphical representation.
Does anybody actually use the Quick Develop module in Library view???? And why on earth are these still not sliders????
I can't believe this wasn't removed or revamped. I think I must be missing something here. I get that these are intended to be relative changes to a group of pictures instead of absolute, but I find them almost never useful and they have a prominent place in the GUI.
Better sensitivity in exposure slider is a big plus, this drove me crazy.
I've put through 10,000+ scanned slides in Lightroom 3 and have found it to be an enormously useful tool. 50 years of my family photographs.
Face recognition would have been useful but I see that most people don't require this, I was able to hack through Picasa face recognition into Lightroom to get about 80% of it done, but even these algorithms are still not really ready for prime time, you still have to go back and check almost every photo.
Maps is a nice addition, wish Canon would put a GPS in 5D MK3.
Get a weekly update of all that's new in the digital
photography world by subscribing to the Digital Photography Review