[lightbox]

Adobe has a YouTube channel where they publish some tuts...

https://www.youtube.com/user/AdobeLightroom/videos

[derelict]

Thanks. I just went to go and correct for a lens and no Pentax lenses are there any more. I had them all in LR3 but now, no longer. Any hints as to where to find them?

[jatrax]

Lens corrections>Profile tab>
Check enable profile corrections
If the lens is not automatically selected open the "Make" drop down and select Pentax, that is usually all it takes the software then finds the lens.

[derelict]

Thanks. I did not have to do that with LR 3.x. I will check that out tonight. Is there a database somewhere for available profiles?

[jatrax]

Thanks. I did not have to do that with LR 3.x.

I remember having to do so with a couple of lenses. But it seems as if once you select a lens the software extrapolates to others. I'm just guessing there but when I have had to select a lens it has never re-occurred.

Lens profile information from Adobe: https://helpx.adobe.com/x-productkb/multi/lens-profile-support-lightroom-4.html
Profile downloader: Adobe - Adobe Lens Profile Downloader : For Windows for user supplied profiles (not many for Pentax)

You can make your own profiles as well: Adobe - Adobe Lens Profile Creator : For Macintosh : Adobe Lens Profile Creator 1.0.4

[mee]

With the resets to CC I decided to give this a go.

I currently own and use LR4 and have trialed LR5 earlier this year. I'm not seeing much difference in 6 from 5.

- The Pano feature works well for what it is (no-nonsense autopano) but it appears to be the same code from PSE's pano tool.

- HDR is also in there and works well for what it is.. gives seemingly more DR but the results weren't really bowling me over..

Everything else seems to be the same as it is in LR5.. oh there is facial recognition but 90% or more of my images don't have people in them so I didnt eventhink to check that..

one thing I did notice was the new version is very sluggish on my computer. I've been using LR for years and year and it has never been this slow.. it isn't show stopping slow.. but definitely noticeable. For instance, Sometimes it took a couple seconds to process what I wanted to (such as generating a gradient mask which is instantaneous in LR4.4) which does break my rhythm when processing.

So back to LR4 + Google Nik Collection (with PSE13 on the side) for me.

If one was just getting started now, LR6 is a fantastic deal. There is nothing inherently wrong with it (provided it isn't sluggish on your PC). But for upgraders (at least this upgrader) it isn't worth it. I will likely upgrade to whatever the latest version is when I need a profile for a newer lens that isn't in LR4 haha.

[kadajawi]

it is ironic that it is slower given that speed is supposed to be the main advantage of the new version. You can deactivate GPU acceleration to speed up LR6.

[Class A]

it is ironic that it is slower given that speed is supposed to be the main advantage of the new version.

It was the same story with LR 3.0. It was hailed as improving performance but was a lot slower than the latest LR 2 versions for many users.

They don't really know what they are doing.

[kadajawi]

I really wonder why. They are a quite capable company, doing lots of good software (and Adobe Flash). Why can't they get the performance part right? I suspect the database is a bit of a behemoth, and IIRC they used a database system that isn't particularly fast.

The GPU optimizations might be causing problems because there are some GPUs that are not fast at all, the CPU can do the job faster than them. In that case IMHO Lightroom could recognize their lack of performance and either use them to add a bit of performance... offload only a bit, or not use them at all. Instead it will simply use the GPU, and the CPU will sit idle while the user waits for the slow GPU to finish the job.

On my 2008 laptop, which I recently upgraded with an SSD, I have moved my LR6 catalog onto the SSD (the actual photos are on an external drive, sadly the USB interface of my laptop is rather slow). The performance is quite decent actually... when I am using LR6 on my desktop (which is a much faster computer, but only equipped with traditional hard drives) the database is on the external drive (and that computer has USB 3.0, so access is fast) it isn't much faster, perhaps even slower. So if you can, put at least the database onto your SSD. That should give you quite a boost. This database means lots of seeking and accessing little files scattered over the drive, and that is very slow on a traditional hard drive. Anyway, since I have that SSD my laptop has become quite reasonable to use, I wouldn't call it fast, but it doesn't feel that sluggish anymore. Best investment you can make... the 250 GB drive (Crucial BX100) was around 90 €, and it gave the machine a new life. I can see myself using this laptop for a couple more years, maybe it'll get to be 10 years old (not bad for a 600 € Dell Vostro). It is significantly faster than a 1 or 2 year old AMD laptop (which also has a SSD).

[Class A]

I really wonder why. They are a quite capable company, doing lots of good software (and Adobe Flash). Why can't they get the performance part right? I suspect the database is a bit of a behemoth, and IIRC they used a database system that isn't particularly fast.

The database is SQLite, you can inspect an LR catalogue with an SQLite client.

Database performance is not that important most of the time, though. I reckon their use of LUA and parallel threads puts them out of their depth.

The LR team is comparatively small and very different from that of Photoshop, for instance. There is overlap with people like Eric Chan who works on ACR that is used both in PS and LR, but somehow the LR team typically manages to make ACR (the Develop module) perform worse in LR, compared to PS.

I wish Adobe could make LR more performant and reliable, but they have been at it for so long already with little success. I guess sooner or later it will only be available through a subscription model at which point it will be dead to me anyhow.

[mee]

I'm pondering sticking with LR4 for longer and just making my own lens profiles if I can figure it out! I'm not sure this is an sqlite issue... I think it is an issue with the GPU use or all the network crap in the background.

I should have probably pointed out that PSE13 has a slight chug too on my system where as PSE11 is very snappy. There are a few extra processes running in PSE13 that weren't there that appear to use the network. Maybe it is a lot of little things. In any case, I'm not seeing 88 dollars worth (cost to upgrade) of improvements in LR6 over LR4.

[dcumpian]

If they would add Curves Adjustment Layers to PSE, it would do almost everything most photographers need. But, PSE is deliberately crippled in so many ways that I only use it now when I have no other tool that will do. I'm actually adding Paint Shop Pro X7 as an editor from LR 5 (which I am sticking with for awhile longer). With PSPX7, I get 90% of what's in Photoshop without spending $120/year.

And if LR ever goes CC-only, I'll finally force myself to figure out RawTherapee.

Regards,
Dan

[mee]

I have curves in LR, in Nik Collection, and in Elements with the Elements+ addon. Elements+ brings back some of the missing functionality in PSE.

[dcumpian]

I have curves in LR, in Nik Collection, and in Elements with the Elements+ addon. Elements+ brings back some of the missing functionality in PSE.

You don't have curves adjustment layers (with masks) in LR or Nik, as far as I know. PSE+ lets you edit a curve on a layer, but it isn't a true adjustment layer, and it can't be edited after you close the dialog.

Regards,
Dan

[mee]

You don't have curves adjustment layers (with masks) in LR or Nik, as far as I know. PSE+ lets you edit a curve on a layer, but it isn't a true adjustment layer, and it can't be edited after you close the dialog.

Regards,
Dan

Sure I do. In Nik they are behind the scenes with the nodes. But it seems you have a desire to save your curves layer settings for future editing. If that is what you are after, then I don't think this will work for you.