# Luminous and Raw Coverters



## davidedric (May 8, 2020)

(Hope it's OK to post in this topic)
Has anyone read a recent article in Luminous Landscape?
Printing Part IV – Software Part 1 – raw converters and editors. - Luminous Landscape
Although it's part of series on printing, it's essentially a head to head comparison of Raw conversion and editing in Lightroom Classic, DxO Photolab and Capture 1.
I wouldn't necessarily agree with all the conclusions, but I think it's a serious attempt at a non-partisan comparison.


----------



## clee01l (May 8, 2020)

An interesting comparison. I think the premise of the article is looking for an alternative to Lightroom Classic. Their speculation that Lightroom Classic is not getting any attention from Adobe and will go away in 2-3 years is flawed on two points. 1. Lightroom Classic is a mature product. New features is not what is needed. Performance improvements are where the Adobe effort has been for a while. 2. Will Classic be replaced by a less than full featured product that is entirely cloud based. I think that can happen only after the Cloud based Lightroom has the features used most often in Lightroom Classic. Only in that sense will Lightroom Classic become redundant. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## RikkFlohr (May 8, 2020)

Stating the obvious:

If people continue to subscribe to Lightroom Classic it will continue
If people cease to subscribe to Lightroom Classic... What would any business do?
The future is literally in the customer's hands. It is also why development is active and robust for Classic today.  Its future is very exciting.


----------



## davidedric (May 8, 2020)

I think his analysis goes wrong when he asserts that Classic has had little development and so must be orphaned, which as we know is not so.  However, if Cloudy were the only product then I would be moving elsewhere for Development, though hopefully still using Classic for Library and Print.  The article does suggest that either PhotoLab (which I already have) or Capture 1 would be viable alternatives.

Adobe, by having in effect a single licence for the Plan, is in a very strong position to know how its products are being used and tune its licencing accordingly.


----------



## Roelof Moorlag (May 8, 2020)

RikkFlohr said:


> It is also why development is active and robust for Classic today. Its future is very exciting.


Now i'm curious!


----------



## clee01l (May 8, 2020)

davidedric said:


> I think his analysis goes wrong when he asserts that Classic has had little development and so must be orphaned, which as we know is not so.


That goes with my earlier statement that Lightroom Classic is a Mature product and few new features are needed .    What is not so obvious are the improvements that go on "under the hood" with Lightroom Classic.   There are a raft of changes that have been made to Classic since LR7 was introduced.  I'm sure someone has a list.


----------



## johnbeardy (May 8, 2020)

Texture is the most obvious, or at least one I use almost every day. Some people like Dehaze too. But see New features summary for the February 2020 release of Lightroom Classic and follow the links to each previous update.


----------



## Victoria Bampton (May 10, 2020)

This is everything since 6 up to September last year; What’s new in Lightroom Classic since Lightroom 6?


----------



## happycranker (May 11, 2020)

Rikk, Interesting that user base is the driver for continuation in Adobe's eyes, is this why Adobe Muse was canned?


----------



## Paul_DS256 (May 11, 2020)

davidedric said:


> I think it's a serious attempt at a non-partisan comparison


I got the feeling the author did not like Adobe "Adobe could pull the rug from under Lightroom Classic at any moment, and, since it is subscription-only software that requires updates to support new cameras (as of April 2020, it IS still getting updated to support essentially every camera on the market), *it is not viable to continue using it when and if Adobe pulls support*."


----------



## johnbeardy (May 11, 2020)

That's really a case of applying different standards in order to suit your underlying prejudice. In other cases, updating your software for new cameras also costs you money.


----------

