Processing software advice

axelm7 · 11-10-2014, 04:56 PM

Originally posted by LensBeginner

Do they still offer camera updates to, say, LR4?
They do for Camera Raw for CS6, but I'm not sure about LR...
And if they don't then at some point you're forced to upgrade because your K-FF isn't supported, regardless of new features...

I'm not sure what the updates were to LR4 as I've only had version 5, but besides some interface changes there's not a whole lot of things you can do to improve the software. Making it faster/more efficient on slower systems would be a huge improvement for me, however.

flaviopetrone · 11-10-2014, 05:04 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by axelm7

Making it faster/more efficient on slower systems would be a huge improvement for me, however.

The trend is exactly the opposite and even if I like to dream a different world, everything will be "cloud", "on demand "and similar. How sad.

axelm7 · 11-10-2014, 05:34 PM

Originally posted by flaviopetrone

The trend is exactly the opposite and even if I like to dream a different world, everything will be "cloud", "on demand "and similar. How sad.

Precisely. Cloud-based features also translate into subscription services, which I hate with a passion when it comes to software. What was wrong with a one-time payment for the program? Even if it was a little expensive...

mee · 11-10-2014, 05:40 PM

Originally posted by axelm7

The upgrades to each version at this point are usually not worth it imo. Same goes for Photoshop, I have CS6 and CC doesn't offer anything that makes me want to get it immediately. LR 5 will probably be just as useful in 5 years without the need to upgrade.

Unless you plan on keeping the same camera and lenses, I strongly doubt it.

That is the main sticking point with LR -- the camera and lens profiles only come with new versions; Adobe never back updates the profiles when newer camera products are released, they simply add them to whatever the current version is. So, if you get newer lenses or cameras, you either create your own profiles or are forced to upgrade if you want them.

axelm7 · 11-10-2014, 06:32 PM

Originally posted by mee

Unless you plan on keeping the same camera and lenses, I strongly doubt it.

That is the main sticking point with LR -- the camera and lens profiles only come with new versions; Adobe never back updates the profiles when newer camera products are released, they simply add them to whatever the current version is. So, if you get newer lenses or cameras, you either create your own profiles or are forced to upgrade if you want them.

I don't really use the camera and lens profiles at all. I've never had to use them, as I adjust everything myself. They're not necessary if you know how to handle the software, so in that sense what I said still stands true. No need to upgrade in 3-5 years.

**Mikesul** · 11-10-2014, 06:59 PM

If you upgrade your cameras regularly it is always a good idea to have he latest version so you can rely on getting the latest camera profiles and lens corrections.

flaviopetrone · 11-11-2014, 01:20 AM

Originally posted by axelm7

I don't really use the camera and lens profiles at all. I've never had to use them, as I adjust everything myself. They're not necessary if you know how to handle the software, so in that sense what I said still stands true. No need to upgrade in 3-5 years.

This is true.
To be honest, even when I use lenses profiles, I always need to change the settings. I have tried to avoid to use them and it is just a little bit slower, but it works.

LensBeginner · 11-11-2014, 02:03 AM

Originally posted by axelm7

I don't really use the camera and lens profiles at all. I've never had to use them, as I adjust everything myself. They're not necessary if you know how to handle the software, so in that sense what I said still stands true. No need to upgrade in 3-5 years.

This is not always possible, sadly.
Think about the distortion correction, for instance: were it a perfect barrel or a perfect pincushion distortion you'd just have to drag a slider and you'd be done...
Actually, from what I've seen, it's mostly non-linear, so you can't do it by hand.
You could create a lens profile for your lens-camera combination, but with multiple lenses, zooms, etc. it quickly becomes a nightmare...

Then again, it depends on the lenses... older SMC-M primes have so little distortion I never correct them at all...

axelm7 · 11-11-2014, 10:16 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by LensBeginner

This is not always possible, sadly.
Think about the distortion correction, for instance: were it a perfect barrel or a perfect pincushion distortion you'd just have to drag a slider and you'd be done...
Actually, from what I've seen, it's mostly non-linear, so you can't do it by hand.
You could create a lens profile for your lens-camera combination, but with multiple lenses, zooms, etc. it quickly becomes a nightmare...

Then again, it depends on the lenses... older SMC-M primes have so little distortion I never correct them at all...

You'd only have to correct distortion on very poor wide angles. On 90% of shots you most likely won't need to correct anything, or won't mind the very slight barrel distortion created by some lenses. I could see myself worrying about constantly upgrading camera and lens profiles if I was a profesional landscape photographer for an important publication, though.

flaviopetrone · 11-11-2014, 10:42 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by axelm7

You'd only have to correct distortion on very poor wide angles. On 90% of shots you most likely won't need to correct anything, or won't mind the very slight barrel distortion created by some lenses. I could see myself worrying about constantly upgrading camera and lens profiles if I was a profesional landscape photographer for an important publication, though.

This is true. It could be acceptable a little distortion if you are not a professional shooting with a very wide angle lens.

6BQ5 · 11-11-2014, 09:13 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by LensBeginner

Lightroom.
A logical and practical tool from the start (import) to the end of the workflow, and it gets better with every version...

Aperture has recently been discontinued, so I would avoid it...
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/32-digital-processing-software-printing/2...ure-users.html

I would avoid Aperture unless Apple has a fire sale on it. You can always hang in a bit longer and see what Apple Photos for OS X will be like. I'm an Aperture user and that's the path I intend to follow for now.

DXO was giving away DXO Optics Pro 8 recently. It's an older version of their software but it's not bad at all.

emalvick · 11-13-2014, 05:04 PM

The problem with upgrades isn't the profiles as much as just plain support of the files from our cameras.

If you shoot PEF files, you won't find the ability to use whatever the next camera is with the current version of LR. LR updates have the ACR updates built into them. I'm not sure whether this issue would occur with the DNG files, but it could. Then again, I suppose one could always get the DNG converter, which is external and essentially free (last time I looked).

LR with a subscription would have to be cheap and offered as standalone. I'm not going to pay $10 a month just for LR, which is what I would essentially be doing since Photoshop is not something I use daily.

LensBeginner · 11-14-2014, 01:54 AM

Originally posted by emalvick

The problem with upgrades isn't the profiles as much as just plain support of the files from our cameras.

If you shoot PEF files, you won't find the ability to use whatever the next camera is with the current version of LR. LR updates have the ACR updates built into them. I'm not sure whether this issue would occur with the DNG files, but it could. Then again, I suppose one could always get the DNG converter, which is external and essentially free (last time I looked).

LR with a subscription would have to be cheap and offered as standalone. I'm not going to pay $10 a month just for LR, which is what I would essentially be doing since Photoshop is not something I use daily.

Yes, I believe you'd have to convert everything, essentially doubling the disk space you need for RAW images (as I believe you'd like to keep the original file as well)...

axelm7 · 11-16-2014, 11:48 AM

Originally posted by emalvick

The problem with upgrades isn't the profiles as much as just plain support of the files from our cameras.

If you shoot PEF files, you won't find the ability to use whatever the next camera is with the current version of LR. LR updates have the ACR updates built into them. I'm not sure whether this issue would occur with the DNG files, but it could. Then again, I suppose one could always get the DNG converter, which is external and essentially free (last time I looked).

LR with a subscription would have to be cheap and offered as standalone. I'm not going to pay $10 a month just for LR, which is what I would essentially be doing since Photoshop is not something I use daily.

It probably won't happen with DNG.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Toronto film processing advice	jva59	Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras	4	05-09-2014 06:26 PM
Portrait processing plugins and software	skid2964	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	7	04-17-2014 11:40 PM
Post Processing Software Suggestions	lenorehig	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	35	12-01-2013 05:02 PM
Announcing the ArcSoft Post-Processing Software Contest!	Adam	Pentax News and Rumors	32	10-07-2013 03:03 AM
Advice on processing a photo	K5_Ltd_User	Photo Critique	16	05-12-2013 09:58 PM

11-10-2014, 04:56 PM	#16
axelm7 Forum Member Join Date: Dec 2013 Posts: 95	Originally posted by LensBeginner Do they still offer camera updates to, say, LR4? They do for Camera Raw for CS6, but I'm not sure about LR... And if they don't then at some point you're forced to upgrade because your K-FF isn't supported, regardless of new features... I'm not sure what the updates were to LR4 as I've only had version 5, but besides some interface changes there's not a whole lot of things you can do to improve the software. Making it faster/more efficient on slower systems would be a huge improvement for me, however.

11-10-2014, 05:04 PM - 1 Like	#17
flaviopetrone Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2014 Location: Reggio Emilia Photos: Albums Posts: 1,153	Originally posted by axelm7 Making it faster/more efficient on slower systems would be a huge improvement for me, however. The trend is exactly the opposite and even if I like to dream a different world, everything will be "cloud", "on demand "and similar. How sad.

11-10-2014, 05:34 PM	#18
axelm7 Forum Member Join Date: Dec 2013 Posts: 95	Originally posted by flaviopetrone The trend is exactly the opposite and even if I like to dream a different world, everything will be "cloud", "on demand "and similar. How sad. Precisely. Cloud-based features also translate into subscription services, which I hate with a passion when it comes to software. What was wrong with a one-time payment for the program? Even if it was a little expensive...

11-10-2014, 05:40 PM	#19
mee Veteran Member Join Date: May 2010 Posts: 7,403	Originally posted by axelm7 The upgrades to each version at this point are usually not worth it imo. Same goes for Photoshop, I have CS6 and CC doesn't offer anything that makes me want to get it immediately. LR 5 will probably be just as useful in 5 years without the need to upgrade. Unless you plan on keeping the same camera and lenses, I strongly doubt it. That is the main sticking point with LR -- the camera and lens profiles only come with new versions; Adobe never back updates the profiles when newer camera products are released, they simply add them to whatever the current version is. So, if you get newer lenses or cameras, you either create your own profiles or are forced to upgrade if you want them.

11-10-2014, 06:32 PM	#20
axelm7 Forum Member Join Date: Dec 2013 Posts: 95	Originally posted by mee Unless you plan on keeping the same camera and lenses, I strongly doubt it. That is the main sticking point with LR -- the camera and lens profiles only come with new versions; Adobe never back updates the profiles when newer camera products are released, they simply add them to whatever the current version is. So, if you get newer lenses or cameras, you either create your own profiles or are forced to upgrade if you want them. I don't really use the camera and lens profiles at all. I've never had to use them, as I adjust everything myself. They're not necessary if you know how to handle the software, so in that sense what I said still stands true. No need to upgrade in 3-5 years.

11-10-2014, 06:59 PM	#21
Mikesul Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Phoenix, AZ Posts: 7,594	If you upgrade your cameras regularly it is always a good idea to have he latest version so you can rely on getting the latest camera profiles and lens corrections.

11-11-2014, 01:20 AM	#22
flaviopetrone Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2014 Location: Reggio Emilia Photos: Albums Posts: 1,153	Originally posted by axelm7 I don't really use the camera and lens profiles at all. I've never had to use them, as I adjust everything myself. They're not necessary if you know how to handle the software, so in that sense what I said still stands true. No need to upgrade in 3-5 years. This is true. To be honest, even when I use lenses profiles, I always need to change the settings. I have tried to avoid to use them and it is just a little bit slower, but it works.

11-11-2014, 02:03 AM	#23
LensBeginner Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2014 Photos: Albums Posts: 4,696	Originally posted by axelm7 I don't really use the camera and lens profiles at all. I've never had to use them, as I adjust everything myself. They're not necessary if you know how to handle the software, so in that sense what I said still stands true. No need to upgrade in 3-5 years. This is not always possible, sadly. Think about the distortion correction, for instance: were it a perfect barrel or a perfect pincushion distortion you'd just have to drag a slider and you'd be done... Actually, from what I've seen, it's mostly non-linear, so you can't do it by hand. You could create a lens profile for your lens-camera combination, but with multiple lenses, zooms, etc. it quickly becomes a nightmare... Then again, it depends on the lenses... older SMC-M primes have so little distortion I never correct them at all...

11-11-2014, 10:16 AM - 1 Like	#24
axelm7 Forum Member Join Date: Dec 2013 Posts: 95	Originally posted by LensBeginner This is not always possible, sadly. Think about the distortion correction, for instance: were it a perfect barrel or a perfect pincushion distortion you'd just have to drag a slider and you'd be done... Actually, from what I've seen, it's mostly non-linear, so you can't do it by hand. You could create a lens profile for your lens-camera combination, but with multiple lenses, zooms, etc. it quickly becomes a nightmare... Then again, it depends on the lenses... older SMC-M primes have so little distortion I never correct them at all... You'd only have to correct distortion on very poor wide angles. On 90% of shots you most likely won't need to correct anything, or won't mind the very slight barrel distortion created by some lenses. I could see myself worrying about constantly upgrading camera and lens profiles if I was a profesional landscape photographer for an important publication, though.

11-11-2014, 10:42 AM - 1 Like	#25
flaviopetrone Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2014 Location: Reggio Emilia Photos: Albums Posts: 1,153	Originally posted by axelm7 You'd only have to correct distortion on very poor wide angles. On 90% of shots you most likely won't need to correct anything, or won't mind the very slight barrel distortion created by some lenses. I could see myself worrying about constantly upgrading camera and lens profiles if I was a profesional landscape photographer for an important publication, though. This is true. It could be acceptable a little distortion if you are not a professional shooting with a very wide angle lens.

11-11-2014, 09:13 PM - 1 Like	#26
6BQ5 Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2013 Location: Nevada, USA Photos: Albums Posts: 3,348	Originally posted by LensBeginner Lightroom. A logical and practical tool from the start (import) to the end of the workflow, and it gets better with every version... Aperture has recently been discontinued, so I would avoid it... https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/32-digital-processing-software-printing/2...ure-users.html I would avoid Aperture unless Apple has a fire sale on it. You can always hang in a bit longer and see what Apple Photos for OS X will be like. I'm an Aperture user and that's the path I intend to follow for now. DXO was giving away DXO Optics Pro 8 recently. It's an older version of their software but it's not bad at all.

11-13-2014, 05:04 PM	#27
emalvick Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Davis, CA Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,642	The problem with upgrades isn't the profiles as much as just plain support of the files from our cameras. If you shoot PEF files, you won't find the ability to use whatever the next camera is with the current version of LR. LR updates have the ACR updates built into them. I'm not sure whether this issue would occur with the DNG files, but it could. Then again, I suppose one could always get the DNG converter, which is external and essentially free (last time I looked). LR with a subscription would have to be cheap and offered as standalone. I'm not going to pay $10 a month just for LR, which is what I would essentially be doing since Photoshop is not something I use daily.

11-14-2014, 01:54 AM	#28
LensBeginner Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2014 Photos: Albums Posts: 4,696	Originally posted by emalvick The problem with upgrades isn't the profiles as much as just plain support of the files from our cameras. If you shoot PEF files, you won't find the ability to use whatever the next camera is with the current version of LR. LR updates have the ACR updates built into them. I'm not sure whether this issue would occur with the DNG files, but it could. Then again, I suppose one could always get the DNG converter, which is external and essentially free (last time I looked). LR with a subscription would have to be cheap and offered as standalone. I'm not going to pay $10 a month just for LR, which is what I would essentially be doing since Photoshop is not something I use daily. Yes, I believe you'd have to convert everything, essentially doubling the disk space you need for RAW images (as I believe you'd like to keep the original file as well)...

11-16-2014, 11:48 AM	#29
axelm7 Forum Member Join Date: Dec 2013 Posts: 95	Originally posted by emalvick The problem with upgrades isn't the profiles as much as just plain support of the files from our cameras. If you shoot PEF files, you won't find the ability to use whatever the next camera is with the current version of LR. LR updates have the ACR updates built into them. I'm not sure whether this issue would occur with the DNG files, but it could. Then again, I suppose one could always get the DNG converter, which is external and essentially free (last time I looked). LR with a subscription would have to be cheap and offered as standalone. I'm not going to pay $10 a month just for LR, which is what I would essentially be doing since Photoshop is not something I use daily. It probably won't happen with DNG.