Reading mode: Light Dark

Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 3.0 Public Beta Available...

Go to last post
R

RobertBarnett

Senior Member
Messages
1,418
Reaction score
13
Location
Santa Rosa, CA, US
Thanks. Looks interesting. Not sure if it looks $200 interesting, but we'll see if the processing improvements are real or just real in the minds of the developers. LOL
--
Just for fun!

Jim
 
Thanks for the tip, downloaded it and from what I played with so far with I think it is a great improvement over version 2.5 much faster to load, sharpening and noise controlls are far better more subtle, less artifacts. I may even be able to delet Pictuer_Cooler, will need to test more, wow!
 
I haven't downloaded it yet, but there's a nice little preview on LL

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/software/lr-3-beta.shtml with the link to dl also.

There is quite a bit more to LR than just the Develop module, but even there it appears from the preview that they improved it. I've used their betas from the beginning and by the time the actual version appears, I'm comfortable with it. Then--they have added 'goodies' after the beta--like the gradient and brush tools which were great additions. The print module has been improved also. I'm looking forward to it--each upgrade has been well worth it and I'm looking forward to trying this one.

Diane
--
Diane B
http://www.pbase.com/picnic
G1 gallery http://www.pbase.com/picnic/temp_g1
 
I think most existing lightroom users will find this to be useless. Why? Because it does not support catalog upgrades. WTF?! Well, I'm assuming this is only temporary since it is impossible to imagine I'd have to recreate my catalog with all the info in it and so forth.
 
Keep in mind that in several places Adobe says that the new and improved features in the public beta are not all that their will be. Apparently there will be many more before it ships.

From what I can get from Adobe they are looking at a quarter two 2010 release as they also make to be able to do full testing both in house and with the public beta with Windows 7.

Hopefully they will release two or three public betas total, though they don't generally do that. However, I have to say what I see so far I like.

Robert
--
Ketchup is just over loved tomatoes.
 
Of course it doesn't. No public beta of LR has ever done that. The last thing Adobe needs is for some twit to not backup their catalog, load it in to a beta and then complain because a bug wiped everything out.

It states very clearly that LR 1.x and 2.x are kept very seperate from 3 beta and tha the way it should be.

They don't even promise that whatever work you do in the beta will be carried over to the final release. Again a smart movie considering they will be making changes and there are more features planned for 3 than are currently in the beta.

Betas are not for work. Betas are for testing and feedback.

Robert
--
Ketchup is just over loved tomatoes.
 
...at least for GF1 files. A bit disappointing. The new processing does seem to be able to extract a tiny bit more detail, but color splotching seems about the same and it certainly doesn't bring it much closer to the fine detail you get with things like Capture One or DPP with Canon files. Oh well.

--
Sam Bennett - http://www.swiftbennett.com
 
I agree--the other betas were the same (well, of course not 1.0 LOL). I'll make copies of my folder--upload to 2.5 and work as usual and just use 3.0 for learning it--and giving input for the final versin. That's really what its intended for---things will change between now and April. They are explicit in saying that all critical work should be done in your current version of LR--as Robert says--'as it should be'. I like having a workig beta--there have been changes from the beginning of LR based on user use.
RobertBarnett said:
Of course it doesn't. No public beta of LR has ever done that. The last thing Adobe needs is for some twit to not backup their catalog, load it in to a beta and then complain because a bug wiped everything out.

It states very clearly that LR 1.x and 2.x are kept very seperate from 3 beta and tha the way it should be.

They don't even promise that whatever work you do in the beta will be carried over to the final release. Again a smart movie considering they will be making changes and there are more features planned for 3 than are currently in the beta.

Betas are not for work. Betas are for testing and feedback.

Robert
--
Ketchup is just over loved tomatoes.
Click to expand...
--
Diane B
http://www.pbase.com/picnic
G1 gallery http://www.pbase.com/picnic/temp_g1
 
Diane B said:
I haven't downloaded it yet, but there's a nice little preview on LL

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/software/lr-3-beta.shtml with the link to dl also.

There is quite a bit more to LR than just the Develop module, but even there it appears from the preview that they improved it. I've used their betas from the beginning and by the time the actual version appears, I'm comfortable with it. Then--they have added 'goodies' after the beta--like the gradient and brush tools which were great additions. The print module has been improved also. I'm looking forward to it--each upgrade has been well worth it and I'm looking forward to trying this one.
Click to expand...
. . Do you LR users know when a stand alone LR3 might likely be available to the first timers? I'm just about ready to buy into LR but maybe not for a few months until the personal finances are back inorder again. Been spending a lot in the past few weeks . . . LOL

 
...so anyone can download it. All you need is an Adobe ID, which you can get for free just by registering.

--
Sam Bennett - http://www.swiftbennett.com
 
...the "Edge Detail" slider works as long as you've dialed in some LNR.
Diane B said:
I haven't used my installed version yet but....only the color noise slider is working (I know t his from the LL preview)---and they will work further with it as they get input from users.
Click to expand...
--
Sam Bennett - http://www.swiftbennett.com
 
...looks like even though "Edge Detail" is enabled, it doesn't actually do anything. But the LNR slider does work. Looks like in general, they've just improved the LNR so that it retains finer detail and doesn't suffer as much from NR "boogers". It's an improvement, but very slight.

--
Sam Bennett - http://www.swiftbennett.com
 
Hello Sam. Thanks for the comparisons. I don't know if I see any increase in actual detail. What I do see is an increase in Luminance Noise, which gives off the perception of increased detail. YMMV. -Norm
Sam Bennett said:
Here's an example of noise reduction on an ISO 6400 D700 shot - LNR 24, CN4 43 for both shots, with the "Edge Detail" turned up to 100 in LR3.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/sambennett/4035174312/



LR is rendering a bit more "fine" detail, but not something you'd really see in a print.

--
Sam Bennett - http://www.swiftbennett.com
Click to expand...
 
Tim in upstate NY said:
. . Do you LR users know when a stand alone LR3 might likely be available to the first timers? I'm just about ready to buy into LR but maybe not for a few months until the personal finances are back inorder again. Been spending a lot in the past few weeks . . . LOL

Click to expand...
Considering that the beta doesn't expire until April of next year, it's probably safe to assume the full version won't be out before that. So if you're going to purchase Lightroom, you might as well jump in now or you might be in for a long wait.

Travis
--
http://travisimo.smugmug.com/
 
..even if you turn off LNR entirely in 2.5, you don't get the same kind of noise - it's still "chunkier", vs. LR3's "finer" character of noise. This has been one of my main complaints with Lightroom for years - the character of its noise is much "chunkier" than other converters. This means that even if you're using an external Noise Reduction tool, LR's files do not "clean up" as well as say, Canon's Digital Photo Professional's un-NR'd files will - same goes for Capture One.

So, while you're correct that there is more apparent noise, there is in fact more detail there as well (look at the fur in his neck). But again, the difference is fairly slight and not a real, practical difference in my mind. It's not an a difference in character as you have with DPP vs. Lightroom, which is just night and day. When I have to print high ISO Canon files, I always reach for DPP first for exactly this reason.
nboyer said:
Hello Sam. Thanks for the comparisons. I don't know if I see any increase in actual detail. What I do see is an increase in Luminance Noise, which gives off the perception of increased detail. YMMV. -Norm
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top