Lightroom 6 is out.

[astroNikon]

I only listen to Ken Rockwell, that's why I only have a 16-1/2 to 800mm pancake zoom lens. It's as sharp as anything out there

I was only referencing the last paragraph about CC vs buying .. which is the (money limiting) camp I'm in.

 

[Derrel]

DGMPhotography throwing a little 4-post disagree button tantrum this AM...Maybe have the courtesy to post a few words, maybe make some kind of "point"???

I thought Thom Hogan's suggestion/hint was interesting. He closed with this thought:

"Finally, an interesting side note to all of Adobe’s Cloud-only aspirations. More than one site reader pointed out to me that with the inclusion of HDR and pano support as well as the improved brush capabilities, the need to actually use Photoshop has dropped considerably for quite a few people. At US$150, the standalone Lightroom 6 pretty much does everything a photographer wants and represents basically 15 months of the Photoshop/Lightroom CC photography bundle cost (less if you’re upgrading). More and more folk are going to be tempted to drop Photoshop and just use Lightroom. That’s especially true on the Mac side where you can pick up a very accomplished pixel-level editor with layer capability on the cheap (e.g. Pixelmator)."

from Adobe s Not So Smooth Rollout byThom Thom Hogan

 

[bribrius]

I only listen to Ken Rockwell, that's why I only have a 16-1/2 to 800mm pancake zoom lens. It's as sharp as anything out there

I was only referencing the last paragraph about CC vs buying .. which is the (money limiting) camp I'm in.

never had any of the light rooms. But if it anything like pse i think i will opt out. Pse does something odd with my nikon files. I run through nikon software, i am all set. Run through pse, it seems a little amiss in color, toning, something. i can't put my finger on it. Also using pse and nik collection. A few in nik collection are "okay". A few seem to totally fruck my nikon files. I don't know why, they just do and look different. i read a piece from a photographer a while back, which peaked my interest. while having a multitude of programs and avoided using anything but nikon software to edit nikon. If he had to bring something into lightroom or ps i guess he would. But it was on a HAVE TO basis. I didn't get the difference. But i started looking more closely on the effects on the color, toning, whatever. And realized he was on to something.. i send something to nik or pse i try to go it from one of my NON nikon cameras. And speaking of which, nik collection is "neat" but short of silver fx occasionally i can't find much use for the 150 bucks or whatever it costs me. Starting to strike me more as a toy.

 

[bribrius]

I only listen to Ken Rockwell, that's why I only have a 16-1/2 to 800mm pancake zoom lens. It's as sharp as anything out there

I was only referencing the last paragraph about CC vs buying .. which is the (money limiting) camp I'm in.

i wish nikon would step up with a full equivalent photoshop program. Two of my cameras are nikons i would pick that up in a heartbeat.

 

[tirediron]

I only listen to Ken Rockwell, that's why I only have a 16-1/2 to 800mm pancake zoom lens. It's as sharp as anything out there

I was only referencing the last paragraph about CC vs buying .. which is the (money limiting) camp I'm in.

i wish nikon would step up with a full equivalent photoshop program. Two of my cameras are nikons i would pick that up in a heartbeat.

Out of curiosity, why? Photoshop has been around for a LONG time, it's a very refined and very powerful program. Used in combination with LR, it's pretty much unbeatable. Nikon would have to put many years of work (and a LOT of $$$$) into producing a program that was even remotely close. They took a stab at it with NX2 which, did do a great job of processing .nef files, but had a horrible UI, and completely unintuitive method of operation. I would much rather have Nikon keep their efforts focused on great bodies and glass, and leave the software to those who do it best. What's next, the Adobe CC DSLR?

 

[bribrius]

I only listen to Ken Rockwell, that's why I only have a 16-1/2 to 800mm pancake zoom lens. It's as sharp as anything out there

I was only referencing the last paragraph about CC vs buying .. which is the (money limiting) camp I'm in.

i wish nikon would step up with a full equivalent photoshop program. Two of my cameras are nikons i would pick that up in a heartbeat.

Out of curiosity, why? Photoshop has been around for a LONG time, it's a very refined and very powerful program. Used in combination with LR, it's pretty much unbeatable. Nikon would have to put many years of work (and a LOT of $$$$) into producing a program that was even remotely close. They took a stab at it with NX2 which, did do a great job of processing .nef files, but had a horrible UI, and completely unintuitive method of operation. I would much rather have Nikon keep their efforts focused on great bodies and glass, and leave the software to those who do it best. What's next, the Adobe CC DSLR?

because i think it would be more inline with nikons digital processing engine and code (or whatever is in that soup). I use nx2 most of the time.

 

[tirediron]

.... I use nx2 most of the time.

But you also enjoy beating your head against bridge abutments too, so....

 

[astroNikon]

I don't see Nikon getting full blown in to the software business. I tried their nx2 once before I got the hang of LR. It kinda looked the same but was totally confusing to me (but so was LR at that time).

It reminds me of when I worked at Toyota/TG. My CAD lab had their in-house Caelum software, CATIA, Pro/E, Unigraphics etc systems. Toyota Japan HQ came over to evaluate their in-house Caelum vs the competition. After full comparisons and looking at how much resources was required to even attempt to catch up, they opted to use CATIA for future car development.

I see Nikon in the same boat. Their core business is not end-user software development. And selling it to non-Nikon folks would be even a harder chore, unless they had a spinoff business so ppl don't fully correlate the software with Nikon.

But you never know.

 

[astroNikon]

DGMPhotography throwing a little 4-post disagree button tantrum this AM...Maybe have the courtesy to post a few words, maybe make some kind of "point"???

I missed that
Wowzer. So someone disagrees that I go camping (or vacations), and take pictures, and may process them at a camp site (or other place that I may not have internet access) to see what I have ??

I guess some people's laptops are too cumbersome to travel with therefore no one can do it.

I also sometimes take my telescope with friends to empty fields in the middle of nowhere, attach the camera take pics and look at some on the laptop. But I guess that's just a pipedream too.

 

[bribrius]

I don't see Nikon getting full blown in to the software business. I tried their nx2 once before I got the hang of LR. It kinda looked the same but was totally confusing to me (but so was LR at that time).

It reminds me of when I worked at Toyota/TG. My CAD lab had their in-house Caelum software, CATIA, Pro/E, Unigraphics etc systems. Toyota Japan HQ came over to evaluate their in-house Caelum vs the competition. After full comparisons and looking at how much resources was required to even attempt to catch up, they opted to use CATIA for future car development.

I see Nikon in the same boat. Their core business is not end-user software development. And selling it to non-Nikon folks would be even a harder chore, unless they had a spinoff business so ppl don't fully correlate the software with Nikon.

But you never know.

it seems like adobe is on the ball trying to fit the processing of every camera company. I do wonder if such a generalized approach leads to the best development. Curious how fuji users make out, or olympus etc. As the tech improved it seems every camera company came up with their own version of the soup but not all the software to deal with that soup.

 

[bribrius]

.... I use nx2 most of the time.

But you also enjoy beating your head against bridge abutments too, so....

hey, a guy can dream right? For the amount of editing i do and my prowness (lack of) i actually have more than enough software already, most of which i barely use. After reading that tidbit i mentioned above i did start paying more attention to how photos looked going through view nx2 and nikon capture compared to dragging nikon photos into the the other software. Perhaps it is my imagination, but something seems to be going on i think the guy that first wrote about that had something there.

 

[astroNikon]

I don't see Nikon getting full blown in to the software business. I tried their nx2 once before I got the hang of LR. It kinda looked the same but was totally confusing to me (but so was LR at that time).

It reminds me of when I worked at Toyota/TG. My CAD lab had their in-house Caelum software, CATIA, Pro/E, Unigraphics etc systems. Toyota Japan HQ came over to evaluate their in-house Caelum vs the competition. After full comparisons and looking at how much resources was required to even attempt to catch up, they opted to use CATIA for future car development.

I see Nikon in the same boat. Their core business is not end-user software development. And selling it to non-Nikon folks would be even a harder chore, unless they had a spinoff business so ppl don't fully correlate the software with Nikon.

But you never know.

it seems like adobe is on the ball trying to fit the processing of every camera company. I do wonder if such a generalized approach leads to the best development. Curious how fuji users make out, or olympus etc. As the tech improved it seems every camera company came up with their own version of the soup but not all the software to deal with that soup.

That is true. Adobe has to figure out code for compatibility (I hope not has badly as the 3rd party lens manufacturers). I think they have some agreement with Canon but not with Nikon. Who knows. But i'm sure there's bugs and they have to tweak them from time to time.

 

[tirediron]

I don't see Nikon getting full blown in to the software business. I tried their nx2 once before I got the hang of LR. It kinda looked the same but was totally confusing to me (but so was LR at that time).

It reminds me of when I worked at Toyota/TG. My CAD lab had their in-house Caelum software, CATIA, Pro/E, Unigraphics etc systems. Toyota Japan HQ came over to evaluate their in-house Caelum vs the competition. After full comparisons and looking at how much resources was required to even attempt to catch up, they opted to use CATIA for future car development.

I see Nikon in the same boat. Their core business is not end-user software development. And selling it to non-Nikon folks would be even a harder chore, unless they had a spinoff business so ppl don't fully correlate the software with Nikon.

But you never know.

it seems like adobe is on the ball trying to fit the processing of every camera company. I do wonder if such a generalized approach leads to the best development. Curious how fuji users make out, or olympus etc. As the tech improved it seems every camera company came up with their own version of the soup but not all the software to deal with that soup.

I don't think it's that big a deal, there are actually only a few companies making sensors, and they all operate in a similar manner, so IMO, it's sort like making automotive diagnostic equipment. Yes, one made by Ford for use on Ford vehicles only might be a little better, but the Snap-On one that works on everything is pretty darn good!

 

[Dave442]

OK, they (Adobe) sure don't want you to buy the standalone. From within Lightroom the 'download' button takes you to the CC page. Took more than a few clicks to find the products page (should have read Thom's article first).

Might be time to move on to the photography CC package from my current LR 5.6 and CS4, (although those are not costing me anything right now, except the fun of the new features).

Already using some Microsoft and AutoDesk products with the subscription service model.
I do have Nikon View NX2 installed, but just prefer the photo management of LR.

 

[bribrius]

OK, they (Adobe) sure don't want you to buy the standalone. From within Lightroom the 'download' button takes you to the CC page. Took more than a few clicks to find the products page (should have read Thom's article first).

Might be time to move on to the photography CC package from my current LR 5.6 and CS4, (although those are not costing me anything right now, except the fun of the new features).

Already using some Microsoft and AutoDesk products with the subscription service model.
I do have Nikon View NX2 installed, but just prefer the photo management of LR.

yeah, i just don't like subscriptions. I have problems with commitment.