Lightroom 4 Beta

[Boatman]

I've been working hard with the Lightroom 4 beta software and finding I'm really liking it. I will certainly be upgrading from Picasa + CS4 as soon as the general release version becomes available.

If you are trying it out, what are your comments on the package?

[herbert]

For the most part I find that the altered development sliders can be used to create the same look as the old sliders. For reference:

New:
Exposure (mid tones), Highlights (upper tones tone mapping), Shadows (lower tones tone mapping), Whites & Blacks (clipping points, I think blacks is auto calculated per image by default)

Old:
Exposure (upper clipping point), Recovery (upper tones gamma shift), Fill Light (lower tones gamma shift), Blacks (lower clipping point)

Indeed I was not that impressed since my images looked the same and so stopped trying the beta and just returned to LR3. This may be because I like normal looking images and so never pushed the software to find out what its limits are.

However I had in the back of my mind that the new controls were driving more advanced tone mapping algorithms (and so can be driven to extremes) so I hunted for some tricky images. I shot some images in the snow of a squirrel that has a lot of highlight detail (snow texture) and dark tones (the squirrel) with nothing in between. This image took a few minutes tweeking in LR3 but the new tone controls in LR4 got a similar look within 10 seconds. I was impressed by that. I'll post the output (although the images look very similar) if you are interested.

I've not used the map feature but for GPS enabled images it looks nice. For a travel, landscape, wildlife or anyone-else-with-multiple-destinations photographer it would be very nice to be able to drag-select points on a map to build a quick collection of images. E.g. load map, select around the south of France, view collection.

If your camera does not support GPS direct then I've read about using an app on an iPhone to track GPS coords over time. This can then be sync to your photos and allows you to roughly Geotag them after capture using DateTime stamps. So you could get this to work if you cared.

I built a book as a bit of fun. I had about 50 pages in my book with titles and custom layouts. I got a quote for about £45 for the printed album version. I could have clicked order but I did not. That was my 10 minutes of fun with the Book module. I've never used an online service where you can build a book so cannot fairly compare to them. However it looked very capable. I might even use it the next time my brother looks at my photos and says, "They're nice, can you put them in an album for me".

I am not impressed by the instability. I managed to get LR4 to crash by doing something innocent within the Develop module on a certain image. Every time I loaded that image into the Develop module it crashed. I had to delete the image and re-import to reset the develop settings. Then it was fine. So I'm waiting for some more stability before I upgrade.

Alex

[Glenn NK]

I'm using LR 3.6, and will go to LR 4 when the rest of you finish the beta testing, and get the bugs out.

Glenn

[Boatman]

I've been thinking that custom books might make really unique Christmas presents. I'll have to have a run at it.

As far as instability goes, initially I had the 64-bit version crap out. Then the 32-bit version wigged out, so I went back to the 64-bit version and it has been rock-solid for about a week and I've been using it quite a lot. Now, I can't explain that, but the software seems to have settled down.

Of course, not knowing LR3 coming into this, I've had to scramble around a bit to figure out what I was doing, but it is quickly becoming natural to use. The develop module is particularly easy to use as it essentially ACR with slightly different controls and I'm well versed in CS4/ACR.

I'm a fan. Picasa will get dumped (on the desktop, I'll keep the web services) and CS4 will get relegated to those images that need special treatment in layers, masks and other tools that are not incorporated into LR4.

[Glenn NK]

Homer:

What you described about it being somewhat erratic is what I've heard elsewhere. Since I'm in the midst of setting up a new computer for photography, and yesterday put a new motherboard in the other one, the last thing I need is software that "wigs out" on me.

Glenn

[darkslide]

I've used Lightroom since migrating to Mac about 4 years ago. I'm currently running 3.6 and, like Glenn, I'll no doubt upgrade to the 4 when it becomes available. I've downloaded the Beta but as I can't use my current catalogs with it, I'll wait until it's finalised.

In general I find LR does more than enough for me - I can use NIK (or other) plugins when required, and the limited amount of 'enhancing' I do is more than ably catered for. I do have CS5 but frankly don't need it for treating my photographic images.

As with most 'amateurs' I probably use about 10% of the capabilities of the program - so I've a way to go before wearing it out!

A lot of Mac users compare LR with Aperture (obviously) and while I have used both, I generally find the Adobe software as intuitive as I need - or perhaps it's simply that I'm so used to using it now. Personally I can't find anything wrong with Aperture, but as my non-photo workflow is Adobe, I've pretty much stayed with them.

One last thing regarding Adobe - and Homer picked up on this too - the print modules (in terms of the GUI) are not at all similar between LR and Photoshop. Perhaps this will change with the CS6 and LR4 - fingers crossed as it's very useful to find the same options in similar places with similar names across different products from the same editor.

[jprzybyla]

I have been using Lightroom 4 beta for about a month. After a learning curve because I was new to Lightroom I can do almost all of my post processing with it. Rarely do I transfer an image to Photoshop for editing. When the beta testing is finished I will purchase the version for sale.

[Boatman]

jprzybyla, I have to agree fully with you. Lightroom will do 95% of what we need to do - and I'm not just saying anyone - I mean 'we' as in people who may not be professional but know their way around post processing.

Going back to the printing comments, the one thing really missing in LR is the ability to scale your print at the printer screen. Perahaps it isn't that necessary, but it has been a standard tool I use for making proofs - either at 100% of the image in small scale or 100% scale in a crop of the full print. Output to CS4 before printing is not an option because there are differences in the RAW processing and the image would not be the same when opened in CS4. Not to mention it would be a lot of extra steps.

I'm sure there is a reasonable workaround - I'll just have to learn it and incorporate it into my workflow.

[DanK]

the one thing really missing in LR is the ability to scale your print at the printer screen

I agree--I can do almost all of my editing in LR, with add-ons like stacking software. Probably 90% of my images never to to CS5. However, there is a lot more missing than just this. E.g., selections, masks, and channel-specific curves. Or another that I have come to rely on a bit: in CS5, by using luminance blending, you can increase contrast in luminance only, without affecting saturation. There are lots more.

The problem for me is that I need CS5 so infrequently that when I do need it, I often can't remember how to do what I need to do.

[Macmahon]

I too seldom use Photoshop. LR does it all for me most of the time.

BTW LR 4 beta does have channel specific Tone curves, and the auto masking in the Targeted Adjustment tool, and masking in the sharpening routines have always worked well.
It doesn't have layer masking because that's a property/requirement of a layer-based, pixel editing workflow which LR doesn't support.

Tim

[darkslide]

It doesn't have layer masking because that's a property/requirement of a layer-based, pixel editing workflow which LR doesn't support.

This is true - however, if you also have Photoshop you are able to open the file, from within LR, to further 'enhance' it...

[dksm]

I also have been using LR beta and I find the new basic sliders much better I will certainly be upgrading

[russellsnr]

Hi, Not tried it as I still try to learn L/R 3 but good news for anyone who has not got L/R you maybe get L/R3 at a knock down price very soon

[Snarkbyte]

LR3 is currently available at 50% discount, and can be downloaded from Adobe (http://www.adobe.com/products/discou...e-coupons.html). The offer is valid until March 5.

[russellsnr]

LR3 is currently available at 50% discount, and can be downloaded from Adobe (http://www.adobe.com/products/discou...e-coupons.html). The offer is valid until March 5.

Hi, Saw on a USA site last night that it was up on a special 24hr at $70
Also L/R4 is as far as I can find out (rumours) $400 full package, upgrade no idea but is it worth it or maybe better to stick with L/R3 and wait for L/R5

[Macmahon]

The new tone controls and soft proofing make LR4 a no-brainer for me. That said, LR3 is remains an excellent piece of software for post processing and printing.
Tim