Reilly Diefenbach

Reilly Diefenbach

Lives in United States Washington State, United States
Joined on Jul 18, 2010

Comments

Total: 606, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Ken Aisin: I just spent $299 on Capture One Pro 10. That's the money Adobe could have pocketed by releasing a standalone Lightroom 7. I'm seriously abandoning Adobe for good this time.

"Yake @Ken Asin How is highlight recovery in C1?"
Short answer, it's not quite as good as LR/ACR. Close but no cigar. I check every new version of C1 that comes out, but Process 2012 is still the best for iron control of highlights and shadows. Wild claims of superiority for Capture One or other raw conversions are nonsense.

Link | Posted on Oct 23, 2017 at 21:42 UTC
In reply to:

Reilly Diefenbach: Should have known better than to scroll to the comments on this story. All the Chicken Littles under one roof :^)

I am. Thanks!

Link | Posted on Oct 23, 2017 at 21:37 UTC
In reply to:

Ken Aisin: I just spent $299 on Capture One Pro 10. That's the money Adobe could have pocketed by releasing a standalone Lightroom 7. I'm seriously abandoning Adobe for good this time.

Plus 99 for the C1 upgrade in two years. Or you could have had about 48 months of CC for the same money. C1 is okay, but Photoshop it isn't.

Link | Posted on Oct 23, 2017 at 19:43 UTC
In reply to:

Lee Saxon: At least they're sort of admitting how often Content Aware Fill is garbage.

And your alternative was what?

Link | Posted on Oct 23, 2017 at 19:28 UTC
In reply to:

tom1234567: Deep fill will be in on1 very sooooon so nothing new here

Joking, right?

Link | Posted on Oct 23, 2017 at 19:27 UTC

Should have known better than to scroll to the comments on this story. All the Chicken Littles under one roof :^)

Link | Posted on Oct 23, 2017 at 19:25 UTC as 144th comment | 7 replies
In reply to:

saiko: Adobe's stranglehold has to end.
Google should dump some money to create free and open source alternatives to Photoshop, Illustrator, Lightroom, Indesign and put Adobe out of it's misery.

Knock yourself out :^)

Link | Posted on Oct 23, 2017 at 19:23 UTC
In reply to:

thinkinginimages: "Creative Cloud" was always a nightmare to explain to anyone. But, I want to keep to Lightroom.

Like Photoshop it's became a mess of added features, but never really addresses the underlying issues: it's getting slower as computers are getting faster, and camera files are getting bigger. The streamlined workflow is getting bogged down. I can't imagine how long importing would take with medium format files.

Naming the desktop version "Classic", and everyone hearing that the web version "is the future" just reinforces that notion that the desktop version is on the way out. Add the very slow version updates, even patches, adds a bit of fuel to that fire.

Even I'm thinking "It's time to find something else - how do I get out of LR." That's been going on for a while. The updates aren't solving the core problems, primarily speed, and feature bloat.

Now there's Lightroom Classic CC, Lightroom CC, Lightroom (web) and Lightroom mobile. Four versions? What? No LR Elements?

Speed is excellent on the new version. If you're expecting instant open of 90MP raws, dream on. 40MB raws do open instantly.

Link | Posted on Oct 23, 2017 at 19:20 UTC
On article Hello Lightroom CC: Embracing the future (510 comments in total)
In reply to:

ThomasH_always: This is a horrible article, full of buzzwords and pro-corporate arguments. This kind of arguments is called sophistic. By the subscription Adobe
1) literally triples the cost of use for LR
2) hooks to stream of money, or else you will lose your editing work
3) exposes to risks of remote access and adds an additional point of failure
4) forces people into a way of live which is a "live on pump" and not live on what you can afford.

The author seems to "come from far afar" and seem to be either very naive, or disingenuous. As I said: A sophist. Subscriptions are understandable for goods which we consume, like a flow of water, flow of electricity, bandwidth on internet. I will never lease a car, I will drive the one I can afford. I will never lease a software.

As of now we are surely traumatized, because we are losing our editing work and craftsmanship.

Leasing a car gets you a new one every two years for $150-400 a month. What's so terrible about that?

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2017 at 16:47 UTC
On article Hello Lightroom CC: Embracing the future (510 comments in total)
In reply to:

esorensen: You can be sure there are a few neckbeards working their way into Adobe's cloud for revenge after this business structure shift.

Neckbeards, LOL!

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2017 at 16:44 UTC
On article Hello Lightroom CC: Embracing the future (510 comments in total)

My Frontier DSL is a whopping .4 MBPS upload speed, so I'll be a long while getting to cloud storage :^)

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2017 at 16:42 UTC as 66th comment | 2 replies
On article RIP Lightroom 6: Death by subscription model (1630 comments in total)

"Death" by subscription? Someone needs to switch to Decaf :^)

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2017 at 16:36 UTC as 253rd comment
On article RIP Lightroom 6: Death by subscription model (1630 comments in total)
In reply to:

vyusseem: Here we go again.
Picasa - discontinued because it didn't fit Google's business strategy.
Aperture - discontinued because it didn't fit Apples's business strategy.
Lightroom Standalone - discontinued because it didn't fit Adobe's business strategy.

The pattern is clear. Replacing Lightroom with other commercial tool (C1, ON1, ACDSee...) WILL bring us to the same point as we are in now - looking for a new tool to replace the discontinued one.

I don't have a solution, but i have some thoughts about my next tool/workflow:
- reduce dependency on any tool. Just use IPTC for indexing, OS's file browser for search and organisation. Whatever RAW processor of the day to process. There are a lot of disadvantages (semi-manual organization, scripts, redundant storage of RAW and finished pictures, probably many more)
- use ONLY open-source community supported tools for any integration points (like DAM, organization, etc)

looking for your thoughts, friends

ACDSee would be cheaper, Capture One twice the money.

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2017 at 16:33 UTC
On article RIP Lightroom 6: Death by subscription model (1630 comments in total)
In reply to:

GOVA: meh, Like Win7 is my last windows, then LR6 is my last LR.

There are always alternatives, looking strongly towards going back to SilkyPix.

If not, there are great free Lunux based alternatives. RIP LR.

Windows 7? Nah!

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2017 at 16:31 UTC
On article RIP Lightroom 6: Death by subscription model (1630 comments in total)
In reply to:

Bernard Pirenne: Bye bye Lightroom photoshop. I now use On 1 photo RAW and most happy with the change. I prefer using On 1 photo raw, more inutitive easier to combine effets and I do not think I will ever return to Adobe.
Regards
Bernard

What about the horrible raw conversion of On1 compared to ACR?

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2017 at 16:27 UTC
In reply to:

David Franklin: Well, it looks like Adobe is in serious training to finally "jump the shark" in imaging software. As a great (for) Adobe customer since 1996, who has bought literally tens of thousands of dollars of Adobe products over the years, I am greatly concerned by this mystical BS and corporate suck-upping about the "one true Lightroom" to come. If that means that I will soon only have a "cloud" version of Lightroom to choose, as Adobe will concentrate on the cloud version to the detriment of the so-called Classic version, in order to increase profits from storage and decrease double development costs, I will totally quit Adobe. Period. They might not care, but I do.
I will not have years of my work held hostage to their storage regime, and all the security and up/download speed and capacity issues that would go along with it. I am near fed up with the truly awful sluggishness of the program already; this is probably going to be the straw that breaks the camel's back. Wake up Adobe!

Again and again, they're charging in human waves :^)

"You can also specify that copies of the originals for individual photos or folders (or even the entire library) remain on the local drive."

Link | Posted on Oct 18, 2017 at 14:59 UTC
In reply to:

Reilly Diefenbach: 10 bucks a month (still) for the best only faster is fine with me. The rest of you cheapskates are going to have to use something else or just run your old standalones into the ground. Boo hoo!

Larry, Adobe is going in a different direction. Most people find it an excellent package at only $10 per month, Photoshop included. Six or seven hundred dollars was WAY more money than I ever wanted to part with for software, so I didn't. Until the subscription. After learning a few things, I don't know how I could ever do without it.

Link | Posted on Oct 18, 2017 at 14:57 UTC
In reply to:

sdgreen: What a miserable bunch of comments. It makes more sense for everybody to provide continual updates to a product than keep releasing new versions. I would bet it's easier to plan & implement. The photographers CC plan is excellent value for money especially compared to what cinematographers have to pay for software (that from a Ben Long tutorial).

"You can also specify that copies of the originals for individual photos or folders (or even the entire library) remain on the local drive. "
Sheesh!

Link | Posted on Oct 18, 2017 at 14:43 UTC
In reply to:

SolidMetal: Well, what is everybody raging about exactly? The subscription is for the same price or a bit cheaper than before and finally Lightroom is new from scratch and maybe a lot faster.
I mean, I understand that subscription is maybe not the best option but at least it means your product is always up to date, and even I - with sh*tty Eastern EU salary - think it's pretty affordable.

Too sensible. You just don't fit in here :^)

Link | Posted on Oct 18, 2017 at 14:41 UTC
In reply to:

Bing Chow: The writing is on the wall for me. I guess I have to commit the time to learn Capture One Pro.

At twenty dollars a month with no Photoshop. Why?

Link | Posted on Oct 18, 2017 at 14:39 UTC
Total: 606, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »