# Lr 2017?



## mcasan

So Adobe released Ps 2017 via CC.   Did not strike me as anything for photographers.

So when do we see Lr 2017 and what will be added to it?   A serious performance boast would not be a bad start.


----------



## Johan Elzenga

As usual: those you know can't tell, those who don't know will only speculate.


----------



## clee01l

JohanElzenga said:


> As usual: those you know can't tell, those who don't know will only speculate.


So, I will speculate.   Adobe MAX is an ongoing event through Friday.  If there is going to be anything on LR it could be to come. There is a session on the Agenda for this evening called (6pm – 7:30pm) MAX Sneaks.   Could that be some sneak peaks at other Adobe products not ready for release? This could include a future LR.  Stay tuned ... Adobe MAX—The Creativity Conference.


----------



## PhilBurton

clee01l said:


> So, I will speculate.   Adobe MAX is an ongoing event through Friday.  If there is going to be anything on LR it could be to come. There is a session on the Agenda for this evening called (6pm – 7:30pm) MAX Sneaks.   Could that be some sneak peaks at other Adobe products not ready for release? This could include a future LR.  Stay tuned ... Adobe MAX—The Creativity Conference.


IF LR 2017 is announced, IF, will there be or will there not be a companion *LR 7 perpetual*?

And what about Illustrator, InDesign, etc?


----------



## mcasan

If there will be a standalone Lr 7, it would not have same functional content as Lr CC, especially over  time.


----------



## Conrad Chavez

PhilBurton said:


> And what about Illustrator, InDesign, etc?


Illustrator and InDesign were both part of the wave of flagship applications updated yesterday, including Photoshop, Illustrator, InDesign, Premiere Pro, After Effects, and a few others.

During the Adobe MAX keynote there was a demonstration of Lightroom Mobile web and mobile device apps, but I don't remember the desktop version of Lightroom making any appearance at all.


----------



## PhilBurton

mcasan said:


> If there will be a standalone Lr 7, it would not have same functional content as Lr CC, especially over  time.


Did you attend this session?  If there was no desktop Lightroom announcement, then probably there isn't a new desktop release, whatever it is called.


----------



## johnbeardy

You can see the photography session at Adobe MAX—The Creativity Conference. where there's the full keynote and individual sessions.


----------



## mcasan

I am more and more disillusioned by Adobe.   They are doing far too little with Lr.  I will likely move to On1 Photo RAW when they have their migration tool ready in early 2017.   As for Ps.....never use it.   I don want to have to move an image from a raw file to a tif or psd just to do more advanced editing.   With Photo RAW, it is all done on top of a raw file with a sidecar, not tif or other raster.


----------



## tspear

mcasan said:


> I am more and more disillusioned by Adobe.   They are doing far too little with Lr.  I will likely move to On1 Photo RAW when they have their migration tool ready in early 2017.   As for Ps.....never use it.   I don want to have to move an image from a raw file to a tif or psd just to do more advanced editing.   With Photo RAW, it is all done on top of a raw file with a sidecar, not tif or other raster.



Lr is more of a digital asset manager then a photo editor. So you really are not comparing apples to apples.
In addition, even considering the import dialog fiasco, Adobe has continued to make steady progress on the Lr for the past year or more. Look at the shear number of bugs and improvements to new features added in the 6.X release. Look at Pano, HDR have steadily improved, look at Dehaze (first global, then local adjustments added). There are many more examples. Overall, I may wish Adobe adds some new features faster and improves some functionality, but when you sit back and look at the complexity of the items they have been working it is a fairly good accomplishment. 

If you decide to move on, may you have the best of luck with On1.


----------



## clee01l

mcasan said:


> I am more and more disillusioned by Adobe.   They are doing far too little with Lr.  I will likely move to On1 Photo RAW when they have their migration tool ready in early 2017.   As for Ps.....never use it.   I don want to have to move an image from a raw file to a tif or psd just to do more advanced editing.   With Photo RAW, it is all done on top of a raw file with a sidecar, not tif or other raster.


I've paid for the On1 PhotoRAW app. Waited patiently for the Fall Release, late Fall release and finally the Late November Pre-release.  I'm not very impressed with the Pre-release. One PhotoRAW is basically a counterpart to ACR with some canned presets included.   It does not do any image management (you still need LR for that) There is a big disconnect between what happens in LR as far as keywords ratings picks etc.  Everything has to be saved to Metadata in LR before ON1 PhotoRAW can pick it up.   Color indicators are the same but LR uses a color label set and Bridges uses a different color label set as a default. Neither seem to be picked up by ON1 PhotoRAW  Filters are incredibly slow as the App needs to scan every file in the folder to filter on some characteristics.  The filter options are crude and there is nothing like a Smart Collection.
As for Edit adjustments, I see nothing beyond what was available in On1 Photo10. Just that these can now be applied to RAW files.

PhotoRAW is just like PhotoShop if you want to create derivative file.  You need to create the export before you can use the On1 Photo RAW adjustments in another application. It is Like LR in that the adjustments can be generated in the app and applied to the original image  (i.e. RAW + Adjustments) You still need to export to make use of these outside of the app.   Lightroom keeps everything in one catalog database file.  Easy to backup when kept in one file.  ON1 Photo RAW by default doesn't save any edit adjustments.  If you turn this on in Preferences,  a side car file with an .on1 extension is saved in the folder with the master.  This develop meant data is not readable by any app other than On1 Photo RAW. Since there are lots of little files created it becomes like backing up an Adobe XMP sidecar Which can be utilized by any Adobe photo app.  I think since you spend time in the file browser, it might be quite easy to use Explorer/Finder to delete important sidecars unintentionally.

Another baffling thing is Crop.  It is not available in the pre-release. The same control is present in  On1 Photo10.    With 36mp images, I almost always crop not being able to do this in the prerelease is a setback. 

ON1 Photo RAW can be used in LR as an external Editor.  However, you must create an intermediate PSD file  (Just like PSCC) You can not work on a RAW file if used with LR as your image manager.

In summary, ON1 Photo RAW is several generations behind ACR and PSCC.  It does have some nice features, but nothing over its predecessor ON1 Photo 10.


----------



## PhilBurton

clee01l said:


> I've paid for the On1 PhotoRAW app. Waited patiently for the Fall Release, late Fall release and finally the Late November Pre-release.  I'm not very impressed with the Pre-release. One PhotoRAW is basically a counterpart to ACR with some canned presets included.   It does not do any image management (you still need LR for that) There is a big disconnect between what happens in LR as far as keywords ratings picks etc.  Everything has to be saved to Metadata in LR before ON1 PhotoRAW can pick it up.   Color indicators are the same but LR uses a color label set and Bridges uses a different color label set as a default. Neither seem to be picked up by ON1 PhotoRAW  Filters are incredibly slow as the App needs to scan every file in the folder to filter on some characteristics.  The filter options are crude and there is nothing like a Smart Collection.
> As for Edit adjustments, I see nothing beyond what was available in On1 Photo10. Just that these can now be applied to RAW files.
> 
> PhotoRAW is just like PhotoShop if you want to create derivative file.  You need to create the export before you can use the On1 Photo RAW adjustments in another application. It is Like LR in that the adjustments can be generated in the app and applied to the original image  (i.e. RAW + Adjustments) You still need to export to make use of these outside of the app.   Lightroom keeps everything in one catalog database file.  Easy to backup when kept in one file.  ON1 Photo RAW by default doesn't save any edit adjustments.  If you turn this on in Preferences,  a side car file with an .on1 extension is saved in the folder with the master.  This develop meant data is not readable by any app other than On1 Photo RAW. Since there are lots of little files created it becomes like backing up an Adobe XMP sidecar Which can be utilized by any Adobe photo app.  I think since you spend time in the file browser, it might be quite easy to use Explorer/Finder to delete important sidecars unintentionally.
> 
> Another baffling thing is Crop.  It is not available in the pre-release. The same control is present in  On1 Photo10.    With 36mp images, I almost always crop not being able to do this in the prerelease is a setback.
> 
> ON1 Photo RAW can be used in LR as an external Editor.  However, you must create an intermediate PSD file  (Just like PSCC) You can not work on a RAW file if used with LR as your image manager.
> 
> In summary, ON1 Photo RAW is several generations behind ACR and PSCC.  It does have some nice features, but nothing over its predecessor ON1 Photo 10.


So how is ON1 Photo RAW an improvement over Lightroom?  Better RAW conversion?  If nothing else, the lack of a catalog is a serious deficiency for some operations.

In a way, I'm disappointed.  I was hoping that Photo RAW would present serious competition for Lightroom, so Adobe would be forced to respond to both the functionality and the pricing model, e.g. with a perpetual license LR 7.


----------



## PhilBurton

Another thought.  Lightroom has a rich eco-system of third-party plug-ins and presets.  Does ON1 Photo RAW have anything similar, or even the potential for anything similar over time?

Phil


----------



## clee01l

PhilBurton said:


> Another thought.  Lightroom has a rich eco-system of third-party plug-ins and presets.  Does ON1 Photo RAW have anything similar, or even the potential for anything similar over time?
> 
> Phil


There are lots of Presets available.  I think most are home grown. Photo RAW will never be competition for LR although it might become a decent ACR/PSCC replacement when it matures in a few years.


----------



## PhilBurton

clee01l said:


> There are lots of Presets available.  I think most are home grown. Photo RAW will never be competition for LR although it might become a decent ACR/PSCC replacement when it matures in a few years.


There is an amazing eco-system of plug-ins for Photoshop, much bigger than for Lightroom.

I think it's a lousy business strategy for ON1 to try to compete head-on with Adobe.  (That's true in any market, not just software for photographers.)  They could do much better by reading the Adobe forums for feature requests and building plug-ins that all those requests without requiring that images be exported to an "external editor."

Since they are building a Lightroom Migration Tool, they seem to understand how Lightroom edits are stored in the catalog or in XMP files.  What if they built their capabilities to work directly with the Lightroom catalog?  Stuff like masks and layers, without leaving Lightroom?  With non-destructive editing?  THAT would be a great way to beat all the other external editor products, and that would be a competitive advantage over Adobe with PS.

But they won't do that.   Too much corporate ego.  I've seen this movie many times.


----------



## Michael Naylor

clee01l said:


> I've paid for the On1 PhotoRAW app. Waited patiently for the Fall Release, late Fall release and finally the Late November Pre-release.  I'm not very impressed with the Pre-release. One PhotoRAW is basically a counterpart to ACR with some canned presets included.


Its a similar story with Phase One.  I bought Media Pro SE and Capture One 9 and found both to be lacking with no sensible integration between the two.  On paper, MPSE would seem to tick all the boxes, with virtually no limit to manage any file type, but the UI experience is antiquated and idiosyncratic. CO9 has jazzier controls, but jumping between the tabs can be confusing.  And again, both products rely on sidecars.

I’d hoped their latest release, CO10, would finally lead the way to a viable LR alternative, but no.  No real improvement to its built in catalogue system.  It would seem Phase One are all about selling their cameras and digital backs.  Attracting disgruntled LR and Aperture users to pay over the odds for software is a lucrative sideline.

I’m back with Adobe now and happy to pay the monthly Photographers CC subscription, but longing for a massive update to the catalogue side. Why?  Because relying on third party plug-ins from talented individuals working from home makes me nervous.


----------



## johnbeardy

Mike Naylor said:


> It would seem Phase One are all about selling their cameras and digital backs.


That's where CaptureOne suffers from a conflict of interest - it won't support medium format cameras and backs that compete with PhaseOne's own. That won't affect many people, of course, but recently Fuji announced a GFX camera that's in the MF space for less than $10k. Who knows if it will be deemed to be a competitor product? 

John


----------



## PhilBurton

Mike Naylor said:


> I’m back with Adobe now and happy to pay the monthly Photographers CC subscription, but longing for a massive update to the catalogue side. Why?  Because relying on third party plug-ins from talented individuals working from home makes me nervous.



Adobe may have decided that if a particular user requirement has been addressed effectively via a plug-in, they will not expend their own resources just to duplicate that functionality.

Phil


----------



## johnbeardy

That's really not the case, Phil. In fact, plug-in authors often go to work only when they have given up on Adobe doing something.

John


----------



## PhilBurton

johnbeardy said:


> That's really not the case, Phil. In fact, plug-in authors often go to work only when they have given up on Adobe doing something.
> 
> John


John,

I don't think we are really disagreeing.  

There is a point of strategy, in which Adobe seems to be different from Microsoft.  Each new version of Microsoft Windows incorporates features that had already been developed by third-party authors. Microsoft is a much bigger company than Adobe, with greater resources. If you are a third-party author, you may find yourself in competition with Microsoft.  And when that happens, guess who wins?  

With Windows 10, you can now create PDFs.  Theoretically you no longer need to buy Acrobat from Adobe.  Or even use Acrobat Reader.


----------



## rthomaslyons

mcasan said:


> So Adobe released Ps 2017 via CC.   Did not strike me as anything for photographers.
> 
> So when do we see Lr 2017 and what will be added to it?   A serious performance boast would not be a bad start.




Yes, it has been awhile since the last update much less the expected upgrade of Lightroom CC to (2017). Seems to me we are going to get a massive upgrade which will blow us out of the water or we will continue to be billed monthly with not a word from mother Adobe. When I went subscription I thought updates and upgrades would be on-going but its been very quiet. OK go ahead and blow my socks off with a whole brand new Lightroom package, I am ADHD and I'm starting to get distracted by other offerings...


----------



## PhilBurton

rthomaslyons said:


> Yes, it has been awhile since the last update much less the expected upgrade of Lightroom CC to (2017). Seems to me we are going to get a massive upgrade which will blow us out of the water or we will continue to be billed monthly with not a word from mother Adobe. When I went subscription I thought updates and upgrades would be on-going but its been very quiet. OK go ahead and blow my socks off with a whole brand new Lightroom package, I am ADHD and I'm starting to get distracted by other offerings...


I was hoping that Adobe would announce Lightroom CC 2017 and Lightroom 7 at their Summit conference in March,  but they didn't.

Same for Photoshop world in April. The next likely venue announcement would be the MAX conference in October. That is if there is going to be an announcement.

Phil


----------



## Linwood Ferguson

PhilBurton said:


> Same for Photoshop world in April. The next likely venue announcement would be the MAX conference in October. That is if there is going to be an announcement.


Just to add some pure speculation fuel to that... the survey mentioned elsewhere might show Adobe focusing on a rearranged plan.  A new lightroom and pricing adjustment and/or new product(s) in the plan may be part of what they are waiting for. Positing they are looking at pricing, a "New wis-bang features, and a new way to buy". The interesting part, whatever they do, is whether there's a perpetual license.  My gut tells me the feeling around for price points is going to be accompanied by a lot of internal debate which path brings more revenue - perpetual + subscription or just subscription.

All pure speculation, I have zero contacts with anyone at Adobe.


----------



## clee01l

Ferguson said:


> My gut tells me the feeling around for price points is going to be accompanied by a lot of internal debate which path brings more revenue - perpetual + subscription or just subscription.


Any revenue from a perpetual license needs to first offset any additional costs that Adobe might incur managing and supporting a perpetual license.


----------



## tspear

clee01l said:


> Any revenue from a perpetual license needs to first offset any additional costs that Adobe might incur managing and supporting a perpetual license.



And how much bad press Adobe has to manage about perpetual versus subscription, and how come perpetual does not get the new features... blah blah blah...

Now thinking about it, how does Microsoft get away with a subscription model to Office 365 and yet I do not see complaints comparing the subscription Office 365 versus the stand alone purchase?

Tim


----------



## mcasan

So Adobe released Ps 2017 via CC.   Did not strike me as anything for photographers.

So when do we see Lr 2017 and what will be added to it?   A serious performance boast would not be a bad start.


----------



## Linwood Ferguson

@clee01l: Well sure, but they already spent all the development cost to support the license model.  @tspear do you really see any indication that Adobe cares about the bad press so far?   

Microsoft OTOH has muddied the water so much with confusing product names, features, giving Windows 10 away (with threats to charge for it later), a cloud Windows... no one really knows what to complain about there.  

I just hope that Adobe realizes what a big win it got with the photography bundle.  When that was not on the table at first, I think a LOT of people were looking for an exit path to photoshop especially.  Now that have a lot of people, some grumbling but all still paying $10/mo, potentially forever.  I think there is a lot of price sensitivity there.  I changed cloud vendors a few months ago to go from about $15/mo to $8/mo.  Took a bit of effort and setup (far more than a year's worth of $7/mo was worth), but I did it because I was annoyed as the $15 started about $8.  I think a lot of us will look hard at alternatives if we feel they treat us like a captive audience.

Now, if there really are wiz-bang new features, that might be different, but a lot so far have been mobile related, which has a huge, wide audience -- but not the core audience that originally made Lightroom successful I think.


----------



## johnbeardy

tspear said:


> Now thinking about it, how does Microsoft get away with a subscription model to Office 365 and yet I do not see complaints comparing the subscription Office 365 versus the stand alone purchase?



Because their subscription model is substantially more generous, five seats for the whole family, and the standalone option is equally visible. But it probably also has to do with its universality and lack of competition. If you want a fragmented pre-2006 style workflow instead of Lr/PS, you can choose from a range of apps for individual tasks.


----------



## tspear

@Ferguson I see what appear to be Adobe employees answering the questions a fair amount on Adobe forums, and in terms of press, if comes up here, dpreview and others often enough. I know the issue has cost Adobe customers, just based on comments online. 

@johnbeardy Interesting that it is the generous model aspect. Thinking of that, I have been tempted to switch to the standalone Lr model, and probably will for the next release. I went CC specifically because I thought I would use Photoshop. I have opened Ps exactly once in the last two years, and that was by mistake. I really only use Lr, so paying the extra to have Photoshop just does not make sense for me. And at the pace I am still learning Lr, I will never get to Photoshop until I retire in a couple of decades. I would like Adobe to release a hobbyist package that is Lr only. Oh well.

Tim


----------



## Gnits

As someone who in the past purchased massive volumes of Microsoft licences on behalf of small, medium and very large enterprises, my view is that the current Office 365 offering is really good value to individuals and businesses.  [I do disagree with some changes on licencing Access]

Pricing wise, you can get the full suite of Office products for a price not too different from the Adobe PS CC package, while the Adobe CC suite is substantially more expensive than the Microsoft Office Suite.


----------



## PhilBurton

clee01l said:


> Any revenue from a perpetual license needs to first offset any additional costs that Adobe might incur managing and supporting a perpetual license.


The ongoing cost is effectively zero, thanks to automated validation servers.  There is some additional expense in development and testing, but that isn't large.  There is some one-time expense in setting up the pricelist, but that is pretty small.

Phil


----------



## PhilBurton

tspear said:


> And how much bad press Adobe has to manage about perpetual versus subscription, and how come perpetual does not get the new features... blah blah blah...
> 
> Now thinking about it, how does Microsoft get away with a subscription model to Office 365 and yet I do not see complaints comparing the subscription Office 365 versus the stand alone purchase?
> 
> Tim


Do the math on the "breakeven point" between purchase and a monthly subscription.  For MS, the breakeven point is I think about 3 years.  They release Office on a 3 year cadence.  

For Adobe, the breakeven point is 15 months for a new purchase, or only 8 months for an upgrade.  But LR has had major releases about every 2 years.  What would you do?

Phil


----------



## tspear

PhilBurton said:


> Do the math on the "breakeven point" between purchase and a monthly subscription.  For MS, the breakeven point is I think about 3 years.  They release Office on a 3 year cadence.
> 
> For Adobe, the breakeven point is 15 months for a new purchase, or only 8 months for an upgrade.  But LR has had major releases about every 2 years.  What would you do?
> 
> Phil



For Office, effectively you always had to purchase the complete package.
With Lr, you have a choice/option related to Ps. When you include Ps, the CC Photography bundle is pretty good. And the calculation is not that straight forward. Problem is, I think hobby guys like me do not use Ps.

Tim


----------



## PhilBurton

tspear said:


> For Office, effectively you always had to purchase the complete package.
> With Lr, you have a choice/option related to Ps. When you include Ps, the CC Photography bundle is pretty good. And the calculation is not that straight forward. Problem is, I think hobby guys like me do not use Ps.
> 
> Tim


Tim,

In my particular case, I already own Photoshop 6. Since I use it very rarely I don't see the need for Photoshop CC.  However either way it is still an economic decision for me for Lightroom. Same as it is for purchasing Office 2016 or using office 365.

I think it's the same for you, ignoring Photoshop CC.

Phil


----------



## tspear

Found a feedback requesting Lr only. Added my vote to it:
Lightroom CC: Provide Lightroom CC membership only (without Photoshop) | Photoshop Family Customer Community

Tim


----------



## PhilBurton

tspear said:


> Found a feedback requesting Lr only. Added my vote to it:
> Lightroom CC: Provide Lightroom CC membership only (without Photoshop) | Photoshop Family Customer Community
> 
> Tim


And I just LIKEd your message and clicked on ME TOO.

Phil


----------



## mcasan

Lr and Cr both got a dot release for bug fixes and new camera support.   


*Lightroom CC 2015.10.1 now available*
The goal of this release is to provide additional camera raw support, lens profile support and address bugs that were introduced in previous releases of Lightroom.

Today, we also released versions of Lr for iOS and Android that provide updated camera support.    Check them out here.

*New Camera Support in Lightroom CC 2015.10.1 / 6.10.1*


Panasonic LUMIX DC-ZS70 (DC-TZ90,DC-TZ91, DC-TZ92, DC-T93)
Sony A9 (ILCE-9)
*New Lens Profile Support in Lightroom CC 2015.10.1 / 6.10.1*

*Mount* *Name*
Sony FE Zeiss Batis 2.8/135
*
Customer reported issues resolved *


Edit in Photoshop Erroneous Message Fixed
Fixed issue causing color cast on images from some Fujifilm X series cameras shot in CH/CL modes.
Fixed issue where images taken on the Fujifilm GFX 50s with top 3 extended ISOs appear over exposed.
Fixed issue where some images converted to DNG from the Hasselblad H6 contained a color cast.
Fixed issue with Hasselblad X1D images losing highlight details at high ISOs.
*Known Issues *


We have an issue where customers are unable to use the Develop module with GPU enabled.  This only occurs when using an AMD graphics card using driver Version 17.4.4 (released 4/23/2017) on Windows.  Please see this note for more details and workarounds.


----------

