Upgrading LR from 4 to 6?

[Nizztos]

I have LR 4 and have not seen any reason to upgrade it. I don't use it all that much as I'm a casual photographer. I do however only shot in RAW so when I do use the camera I always use LR to get my photos from camera to computer and do whatever post processing I need/want to do.

Now I would like to test HDR and I think that is included in LR6.
Ignoring HDR are there any reasons to upgrade to 6? I have read a lot of bad stuff about 5 and 6 but since I have not actually looked at what the changes are I'm assuming that that is just normal as you always hear more about bad things that the things that actually work.
How has things like performance, better algorithms etc been affected? Any new must have features for a casual photographer?

 

[Braineack]

the HDR function is a bit weak.

But from 4 to 6 you get better sliders + dehaze + perspective distortion controls.

It also allows you to use the GPU for performance dehancement.

 

[KmH]

I agree Adobe's HDR tools are somewhat lame.

To make HDR images I highly recommend hdrSoft's Photomatix.
But to really do justice to an HDR you need Photomatix (or any other HDR application) & Photoshop. Not LR. Photoshop.

Actually, LR is incomplete and can't do a lot of edits photographers (even casual photographers) want/need to do.
That's why Adobe includes LR 6 along with Photoshop CC in it's current $9.99 a month Photoshop Photography subscription package.

So you can pay just $119.99 a year and have both the full professional version of Photoshop CC 2015 and LR 6.
And with the subscription, as new features become available Adobe will let you know you can immediately download them so you never again have to wonder " How has things like performance, better algorithms etc been affected? Any new must have features for a casual photographer?"

 

[Nizztos]

Thanks for the input.
Pretty sure that the HDR in LR will be plenty good enough for me.
I have zero interest in Adobe CC or Photoshop so those are not in my future. At least not as long as I sometimes leave the camera on the shelf for months at a time.

 

[JacaRanda]

It is month to month.

 

[dcbear78]

You can still buy it as a stand-alone product. And if you have no need for Photoshop or the latest and greatest version of LR then that would probably be the way to go.

Also version 5 had quite a few new and improved tools over 4. I think you would notice quite a few improvements over your current version.

 

[Scatterbrained]

You can keep Lr4 and get the Photomatix "merge to 32bit Tiff" plug in for it. Then you can select your shots and use the plug in to merge them into a 32bit floating point Tiff file right in Lr.

 

[goooner]

This is probably a little off topic, but I'm a little disillusioned by Adobe's efforts to 'force' people to do the subscription. I bought LR5 about 8 months ago (also have the Photomatix plugin), and love it. I'm planning on upgrading my rig early next year, which means that LR5 will probably not be able to open the new RAW files. I also have PSE (got it for 30€), for pano stitching etc.

In Europe the CC is close to 15 dollars a month, and I really do not need Photoshop. The fact that the stand alone LR6 has less features than the subscription is really annoying. I've been doing some research and Paintshop pro X8 Ultimate looks like a great solution. Apparently it kicks Adobe's butt when it comes to performance and speed. I will probably download the demo version before committing, but if it has a similar cataloguing system to LR I will definitely consider getting it. Just my 2 cents...

 

[jaomul]

Lightroom 6 does also have a panoramic function, not sure if this is worth the upgrade either. As said above you could buy a hdr pluggin

 

[Braineack]

Pretty sure that the HDR in LR will be plenty good enough for me.

So you dont want to have any actual controls over the blending and end up with an image with obvious evidence of maniuplation?

Might as well just use Active D-Lighting and save jpgs... Im pretty sure the results would be better.