Previous news story    Next news story

Adobe issues Lightroom 4.1 release candidate with 5D Mark III support

By dpreview staff on Mar 29, 2012 at 19:34 GMT

Adobe has launched a release candidate of Photoshop Lightroom v4.1, including a series of bug fixes and support for Canon's EOS 5D Mark III. The release candidate tag means it has been well tested but could still benefit from user input. The update includes support for the 5D Mark III that appeared in the latest Adobe Camera Raw update.

Or, to find out more about the changes and improvements introduced in the latest version of Lightroom, click here to read our review of Lightroom 4


Press Release:

Adobe Announces Lightroom 4.1 Release Candidate

Adobe today announced the availability of Lightroom 4.1 release candidate on Adobe Labs. The update adds raw file format support for the Canon EOS 5D Mark III and corrects issues reported from the initial Lightroom 4.0 release.

Adobe encourages the community to provide feedback so it can ensure the highest quality experience for customers working on diverse hardware and software configurations. Special thanks to all community members who provided feedback via the community powered feedback site: feedback.photoshop.com.

Lightroom is the essential digital photography workflow solution, helping serious amateur and professional photographers quickly import, manage, enhance and showcase all their images within one application. The Photoshop Camera Raw plug-in provides fast and easy access to raw image formats produced by many leading digital camera.

Pricing and Availability

The Lightroom 4.1 release candidate is available as a free download for Lightroom 4 customers. For more information and to download the Lightroom 4.1 release candidate, visit http://labs.adobe.com (available for both Mac and Windows).

Users can connect with the Lightroom team directly on Facebook (www.facebook.com/lightroom), via Twitter (www.twitter.com/lightroom) or on the Adobe Lightroom blog (http://blogs.adobe.com/lightroomjournal).

Comments

Total comments: 70
David B McLaughlin
By David B McLaughlin (Jun 2, 2012)

How many megabytea s the LR4 update?---I aM getting 729 MB does that sdound correct?

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
BestExposures
By BestExposures (Apr 5, 2012)

To avoid paying 80 dollars for LR4, you can convert to DNG

BUT

I have never worked with DNG files, and having to add another needless step is not something I really want to deal with.

1st - Do DNG files have the same capabilities as RAW files?
2nd - Shouldn't Adobe release an update for new cameras to owners of their older software

The way I see it, they make BILLIONS selling their software - GOOD FOR THEM, I have no problem with that. And if they create a fantastic new piece of software I WILL buy it, but having to pay 80 dollars so my new camera works on their software - HORRIBLE

Chime in - should adobe make the 5D3 RAW capability available for LR3, or should we be forced to buy EXTREMELY similar software just so our camera's are supported.

Remember, they made those BILLION$ selling us the programs we already own, don't they have a responsibility to keep it a viable platform - if you turn it around, would it be acceptable to get our money back when we buy a new camera?

0 upvotes
Andy Eng
By Andy Eng (Apr 5, 2012)

Well.... LR 4.1 *does* let me work with the 5DMrkIII that showed up in the mail, which is a lot more than I can say for lots of other fine products out there for the while.... :-D

0 upvotes
onemoremile
By onemoremile (Apr 6, 2012)

Apple Aperture supports the 5D Mk III. Perhaps you should try that.

0 upvotes
Quantum3
By Quantum3 (Apr 3, 2012)

Lightroom 4 has nice improvements, but new features? None... Just a rearrangement of the old stuff. The Density Panel (wrongly named "Basic") is some how, unpredictable in certain types of adjustments and quite lame too. Should be another blacks slider, like in LR3, because this one moves too much pixel data from shadows (it's equivalent to fill light), washing out the image. Of course, this happens with underexposed images. I do many underexposed images in order to fill the shadows when shooting landscapes and in LR4, there is no way to put back some blacks like in LR3 with the blacks slider. I like how works the clarity, but it also increases the contrast (by radius enlargement) in higher values instead of keeping the fixed radius like in LR3.

They should keep some features of LR3 instead of changing their algorithms.

And as for the new features, all the LR community was asking for a more organic type of neutral density filter but nothing of that happened.

0 upvotes
Mollysnoot2
By Mollysnoot2 (Apr 3, 2012)

Density panel? I think 'Basic' is much more self-explanatory. Calling it ‘density panel’ may be logical to you, but not I suspect to most LR users. It's called basic because you carry out the basic tonal and colour adjustments in this panel - how can that be called density?

Personally, I'm finding the new adjustments to be far superior than the older PV2010 - itself an evolution of PV2003. You should stick with it and it'll start to become more logical to use. I think most users who've been feeding back to various forums are very happy that Adobe have spent so much effort re-writing their develop algorithms, and I bet this is more important to most than an improved neutral density filter effect. Would you prefer that Adobe just keep on using an old 2003 set of algorithms to process your raw files, or would you prefer them to make use of new techniques and thinking that allow for greater control and higher quality rendering of your images? I know which one I'd go for...

0 upvotes
frondot
By frondot (Apr 2, 2012)

A but with 4.1, it's don't work with wacom intros 4 !
I hope it's debuted in final version !!!!

0 upvotes
englishservices
By englishservices (Apr 2, 2012)

VERY slow reaction time with the adjustment brush. The Auto Mask function doesn't seem to work any more.

0 upvotes
Vinci71
By Vinci71 (Apr 2, 2012)

This new version seems to me better than 4.0, in terms of performance, on a PC that was very, very slow on 4.0. I can see the difference, maybe as it was too slow with the previous version. Maybe not as fast as with 3.6, but while with 4.0 I was already planning an HW upgrade, now I have some time to make a reasonable choice, not being in a hurry like before...

0 upvotes
NoCoShutter
By NoCoShutter (Apr 1, 2012)

Sorry, but I think it's LAME of Adobe to make users of LR 3.x pay for a full version (or update) to LR4 just to get camera support. If they MUST make more $$ for every camera… then sell the RAW support patches individually. Heck, I'd pay $$ for digital support for the 5DIII rather than have to update about 50 catalogs and 1,000,000 images. That'll be fun.

1 upvote
Lee Jay
By Lee Jay (Apr 2, 2012)

The don't sell raw support patches because they give them away for free. Just download the free DNG converter and you're good to go.

0 upvotes
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (Apr 2, 2012)

True, you can add another step by using DNG converter but would it have been so difficult to add the same capability to the "ancient" LR3? At some point they might feel the software was just too old, but not yet.

0 upvotes
ahsumtoy
By ahsumtoy (Jun 30, 2012)

I just purchased a Canon 5d Mark III and brought up my 3.6 Lightroom like others and got the familiar “The files are from a camera which is not recognized by the raw format support in Lightroom (14).” Well, like everyone else, I am happy with Lightroom 3.6 and don’t want to upgrade to 4.1. I found a work-around. Download DNG converter 7.1 for windows. It’s free.

http://www.adobe.com/support/downloads/thankyou.jsp?ftpID=5389&fileID=5027

I downloaded my CR2 Raw files to my PC from my camera, ran the DNG converter program, brought up Lightroom 3.6 and imported the DNG files and it recognizes the files. You can now edit and convert to JPG like before. Now you can use Lightroom 3.6 on newer cameras like the 5d Mark III. It should work for the new Nikon D800 as well. It adds an extra step but save us upgrading to 4.1.

0 upvotes
Wanchese
By Wanchese (Mar 31, 2012)

Library to Develop to Library is still very balky..maybe even worse than 4.0

0 upvotes
Wanchese
By Wanchese (Mar 31, 2012)

Much, MUCH better!

0 upvotes
mmcfine
By mmcfine (Mar 30, 2012)

I return LR4 and got my money back. LR3 is great and works well on my 08 MBP. LR4 has (may it's fixed) many import issues, files missing, some files can not be previewed on import, I could not import Jpegs if they where shot together as Jpeg+Raw, video playback sluggish and feature limiting and a few other annoying bugs.
And Adobe want's me to provide feedback??? what they are not making enough money to employ testers? I have given Adobe feedback for 15 years and the only think they where happy to accept is my upgrade money. Sorry Adobe, no more.

0 upvotes
Erik Johansen
By Erik Johansen (Apr 1, 2012)

May be your 15 yrs. feedback is the reason to the sluggish performance? ;-)
I'm totally happy with LR4. LR have been better though every new ver.

0 upvotes
mmcfine
By mmcfine (Apr 1, 2012)

well, if you're happy paying premium for minor updates then go for it. With Apps coming from every corner of the planet and a huge open source community, shelling thousands of dollars a year on licenses just to keep share holders happy is the way of the past.
Enjoy LR4

0 upvotes
Mark Alan Thomas
By Mark Alan Thomas (Apr 2, 2012)

This software gets better and cheaper with every version. Who's paying a premium, much less thousands of dollars per year?

0 upvotes
Lee Jay
By Lee Jay (Apr 2, 2012)

Thousands of dollars a year? It's $79, about every two years.

0 upvotes
mmcfine
By mmcfine (Apr 2, 2012)

I said "licenses"... true, LR is only $79 but I am talking about CS licenses in an agency. Each upgrade is a big hole in the budget. Times have moved and even Adobe acknowledged it. Subscription based SAAS is the way to go including Apps.
Don't get me wrong. I love LR. I think it's one the best products Adobe came out with in years, but Adobe as a public company can't stop adding ridicules features and software combinations (See Photoshop CS6). We as consumers have the option to say no.

0 upvotes
Forfie
By Forfie (Mar 30, 2012)

Maybe I'm crazy, but 4.1 feels faster, anyone else agree?

0 upvotes
coffeefrog
By coffeefrog (Mar 31, 2012)

Yep, it feels significantly faster

0 upvotes
JayK2
By JayK2 (Mar 30, 2012)

Can someone tell me if it's possible to add more than one tune to a slideshow in LR 4?

0 upvotes
Lee Jay
By Lee Jay (Mar 30, 2012)

Only if you splice files together using an outside tool.

0 upvotes
jeff_006
By jeff_006 (Mar 30, 2012)

Great, the bug with "edit in" should be solved, Color effex should work !

0 upvotes
Mr Fartleberry
By Mr Fartleberry (Mar 30, 2012)

Other than brush actions I never had a speed issue with LR3. Now it acts a bit like old NX, it works a while and then gets so bogged down you have to restart it. I wonder if there's a big memory leak in it. I'll try 4.1 when it's official. Seems the work was done on the develop module for speed (or performance as they say). Canon has a new camera?

0 upvotes
Dylthedog
By Dylthedog (Mar 30, 2012)

I have to say that the brush feature alone is worth the upgrade - much quicker/easier than trying to dodge and burn in Photoshop. And it's non-destructive!

On my i7 iMac with 8GB RAM I'm finding the performance OK - not really noticed a significant change in speed.

I prefer iPhoto for books though... but will read-up and try again. Might just be dumb-user syndrome at the moment!

0 upvotes
Hawaii-geek
By Hawaii-geek (Mar 30, 2012)

SPEED?
Win7 64-bit PRO ... 24gb, SSD ... and it seems to me there is a little slow down from v3.6 to v4 ... not huge.
Yes, the noticable one is the flip from Library to Develop on the first time.
But, there is other little things. That I cannot directly point to.
Think it is mainly to do when I press HOT keys .. like R , G , D , E ... and more speed and stability would be good on Brushes on Large folders of edits.
Yes, I like the new Sliders, and processing .. but
Now combine that with D800.
More SPEED ... not the same speed would be nice. Just saying. :)

IF say support for a type of Graphics Card will help (mine already has 512 Vram) ... well I am all over it.
But, let's put it this way ... PS CS5 seems to be fine. Problem is I spend a majority of my time in LR.

Ok now let me get back to my morning deadline to upload my shots to FTP :)

0 upvotes
Henry M. Hertz
By Henry M. Hertz (Mar 30, 2012)

i don´t know why people always expect MORE speed from newer software.
sure you can optimize software but for more speed you have to buy better hardware.

you dont´expect your car to run faster when you put more and more gimmicks in it and make it heavyer?
you can expect more speed when you put in a new motor or some nitro injection. :)

5 upvotes
ahoeflak
By ahoeflak (Mar 30, 2012)

Dear Adobe, Lightroom 4 is awesome. PLEASE have Fuji X-Pro1 support ready in time for the final 4.1 release.

3 upvotes
TomFL
By TomFL (Mar 30, 2012)

I bet they won't jump directly from beta to a production release again without having an RC as they did in Lr4.0

0 upvotes
Octane
By Octane (Mar 29, 2012)

Whoever writes these new articles must have ADS or short term memory LOL

In 5 lines of text they mention 5D III support three times. :)

Comment edited 20 seconds after posting
1 upvote
raincoat
By raincoat (Apr 2, 2012)

Canon pays for each mention.

1 upvote
icott
By icott (Mar 29, 2012)

Great the edit in now works with Viveza 2. This was the one thing that was driving me mad with LR4.

0 upvotes
Andkar 666
By Andkar 666 (Mar 29, 2012)

fujifilm X-Pro1, pleas, pleas, right now i am trapped in a dark cave. pleas some light.

1 upvote
ahoeflak
By ahoeflak (Mar 30, 2012)

Seconded!

0 upvotes
gabrielelopez
By gabrielelopez (Mar 30, 2012)

third! fuji x1 please!

0 upvotes
EchoCharlie
By EchoCharlie (Mar 31, 2012)

Andkar,
Do you already have the X-Pro1 already? Any good?
This camera got eyes also.
Thanks,
Edwin

0 upvotes
Henry M. Hertz
By Henry M. Hertz (Mar 29, 2012)

i have tested LR 4 in depth before making the switch and LR4 is as fast on my system as 3.6 was.

and with this bugfixed version anyone should be happy.

3 upvotes
D200_4me
By D200_4me (Mar 29, 2012)

LR 4 does seem slower than LR 3 on my system. I hope the final release of LR 4.1 takes me back to the same speed or better that I was used to with LR 3.

0 upvotes
Louis_Dobson
By Louis_Dobson (Mar 29, 2012)

No OM-D support? Grrrrr. Never did like Adobe much.

0 upvotes
Mssimo
By Mssimo (Mar 29, 2012)

We are still waiting for support for D800, K-01, D4, 1Dx and E-M5. I'm almost sure it will be a single update.

0 upvotes
WT21
By WT21 (Mar 29, 2012)

Louis,
What do you develop your OMD raw images in now?

0 upvotes
Henry M. Hertz
By Henry M. Hertz (Mar 29, 2012)

it takes some time to create a profile.
and if they don´t have a camera .. well it takes even longer... because they have to wait until they get one.

Comment edited 40 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
NinpouKobanashi
By NinpouKobanashi (Mar 29, 2012)

Er, why are you waiting for D800 and D4? It's already here.

1 upvote
compositor20
By compositor20 (Mar 29, 2012)

How about Olympus OM-D? Is it faster and with support for OpenGL?

0 upvotes
Mssimo
By Mssimo (Mar 29, 2012)

OpenGL? Maybe your referring to directcompute. I don't think that will be a feature till LR5.

0 upvotes
Henry M. Hertz
By Henry M. Hertz (Mar 29, 2012)

for what features you want openGL.... ?
LR (unlike PS) has not much features that would benefit from openGL.

there is no liquify, no filters...
on the other side openGL would introduce more problems.
just look at the PS6 beta fozum. many people, with outdated hardware, are puzzled that they can not use some of the features.

0 upvotes
compositor20
By compositor20 (Mar 29, 2012)

Well it could be CUDA... Its OpenCL i made a typo. Anything that would use our memory GPU and processor for rendering the raw when I change from image to image in develop would be great...

0 upvotes
HopeSpringsEternal
By HopeSpringsEternal (Mar 29, 2012)

When will Adobe start delivering Lightroom 4 updates as delta patches instead of forcing the download of more than half a gigabyte each time a new camera is released or few bugs fixed?

8 upvotes
theatrus
By theatrus (Mar 29, 2012)

It only took Apple 5 major releases to get the point, so by that metric, LR5 will have delta updates ;)

1 upvote
Octane
By Octane (Mar 29, 2012)

The problem is that there is great potential for user confusion when they need to do a re-install. They need to keep the first version and then each consecutive delta update handy.

But in general I agree, the delta updates were common in the old days before internet speeds were as fast as today. Now no one cares about optimization any more. Developers rely a lot on hardware power these days.

0 upvotes
HopeSpringsEternal
By HopeSpringsEternal (Mar 30, 2012)

I don't see where the user confusion comes in. I'm not asking Adobe not to still have the full downloads available. I asking why they don't support the same kind of auto-update facility that they already use for Adobe Photoshop and other members of the creative suite.

Just compare the size of equivalent updates for PS and Adobe Camera Raw versus the hundreds of megabytes for Lightroom.

Finally, each time you install a lightroom update the installer installs it into a brand new directory named after the minor version of the software. This means that all my shortcuts stop working as they point to the old version.

There is no reason to keep on doing things this way. There should only be one directory for version 4 and new minor version updates should install into that same directory. Shortcuts should not be changed. If someone wants to know exactly what minor version they are running they can go to the about screen.

2 upvotes
BJN
By BJN (Mar 29, 2012)

Lightroom 3 won't get any more camera updates now that LR4 is shipping. You can download the newest version of the Adobe DNG raw converter so you can convert and open MKIII raw files in LR3 or earlier versions.

Comment edited 50 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
NoCoShutter
By NoCoShutter (Apr 1, 2012)

Right. Like LR 3 is 10 years old and runs like DOS? It's just a reason to MAKE US UPDATE when we get a new camera. Not that LR3 isn't great. It's like making a 2012 Honda that requires the new "Honda gas for 2012 cars only." Better? No. Just costs the consumer more. Boooo, Adobe.

2 upvotes
Chris Florio
By Chris Florio (Mar 29, 2012)

Question - will support for the 5D mark III not come for LR 3? I've not made the leap to LR4 yet.

Comment edited 7 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Henry M. Hertz
By Henry M. Hertz (Mar 29, 2012)

nope it will not. LR 3.6 is the latest LR 3 version, there wil be no more updates.

0 upvotes
NoCoShutter
By NoCoShutter (Apr 1, 2012)

So there's nothing wrong with LR3? Go spend another $80 so you can use the software you already have. Yay. More money for Adobe to "support" your purchase of the last software. Sorry, I think that's a crock. Adobe should offer more updates to past versions. Likewise, they've locked out users of older PS from the new DNG converter that would be a workaround. Pay up, partners!

0 upvotes
raincoat
By raincoat (Apr 2, 2012)

you're lucky you don't get charged per image processed.......

1 upvote
MAubrey
By MAubrey (Mar 29, 2012)

They couldn't have waited another week and provide an RC with E-M5 support, too??

2 upvotes
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (Mar 29, 2012)

Well, given that this is a release candidate, there's still a chance it'll turn up in the final release version.

1 upvote
Mark K W
By Mark K W (Mar 29, 2012)

Adobe is under a lot of pressure from customers who have already bought LR4.0 and find it unusable for one reason or another. I would think this 4.1RC schedule is dictated by that rather than updating in new camera models.

2 upvotes
Mark K W
By Mark K W (Mar 29, 2012)

From the 4.1RC release page FAQ:
http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/lightroom4-1/

"Will additional camera or lens support be available in the final release?
It is possible that additional cameras or lenses will be supported in the final release."

0 upvotes
Henry M. Hertz
By Henry M. Hertz (Mar 29, 2012)

this bugfix is mainly because of the curve point issues.

sure some (but a minority) have performance issues but the curve point issue is a critical bug.

0 upvotes
ozpaul
By ozpaul (Mar 30, 2012)

Seems to me, an awfully large minority of people including me are finding LR4.0 performance slow and clunky. Personally, even the beta was slower than 3.6 and prone to crashing.... it was the first time I have ever had a corrupted database since v2. Certainly hope this has been resolved. (have been wondering if Adobe's quality control feedback software running in the background has been part of the problem....)

2 upvotes
Henry M. Hertz
By Henry M. Hertz (Mar 30, 2012)

well it is a minority....

the probem is more that of your impression.
the minority of unhappy people make more noise then the majority of people who have no reason to complain.

2 upvotes
Michele Kappa
By Michele Kappa (Mar 30, 2012)

...which is a phrase that should be printed when born, hung upon the cradle, studied and learned by hard, and repeated as a mantra for one's lifetime.

0 upvotes
Wanchese
By Wanchese (Mar 31, 2012)

Today is 'delivery day' for me, so I am wary of the new update. I will install tomorrow. On my 8 cores. LR4 felt like a Harley in the mud...slow and wobbly. The things I can do with the program are amazing. It just takes so damn long to get em' done....

0 upvotes
deep7
By deep7 (Mar 31, 2012)

I actually still do most of my work in LR1.4, using LR3 only as a RAW converter for newer cameras. That's mainly because LR1 is much, much faster. Now I have to ask, do I want to buy yet another version when I get my next camera? I like LR but wallet bleed combined with the increasing complexity and strain on my computer system makes me wonder how long I'll keep using it.

0 upvotes
Total comments: 70