The Online Photographer

Check out our new site at www.theonlinephotographer.com!

Tuesday, June 13, 2006

Adobe Lightroom Beta 3 for OSX

Adobe Labs released the Lightroom Beta 3 build late last night. The link includes further links to a Lightroom overview, the download area, and a Lightroom FAQ.

Posted by: MIKE JOHNSTON with thanks to NICOLAI GROSSMAN

Featured Comment by John Roberts: "Is digital photography finally exiting its infant years? That a program originally designed for graphic artists, and not photographers, remains the preeminent software for photo editing shows the need for something like Lightroom. Photographers need software designed for photography, and it's about time we got some. As amazing as Photoshop may be, its complexity and host of unneeded features make it a compromise solution. We don't know yet if programs like Lightroom and Aperature are the answer, but at least the software makers are finally looking in the right direction."

17 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Grr, still no windows release

2:09 AM  
Blogger John Roberts said...

Is digital photography finally exiting its infant years? That a program originally designed for graphic artists, and not photographers, remains the preeminent software for photo editing shows the need for something like Lightroom. Photographers need software designed for photography, and it's about time we got some. As amazing as Photoshop may be, its complexity and host of unneeded features make it a compromise solution. We don't know yet if programs like Lightroom and Aperature are the answer, but at least the software makers are finally looking in the right direction.

7:00 AM  
Blogger NESOHU said...

When will they have a version for Windows OS? Hm...

7:03 AM  
Anonymous Dan said...

A Windows Beta version will be released this summer as said several times by developers (via the podcast and blogs) and by George Jardine when I hadd a chance to talk to him.

Also, for those following the Luminous Landscape What's New page (June 7, 2006), Micheal mentioned he and Jeff Schewe have just finished filming their Beta 3 video tutorial which covers both the Mac and Windows versions of the program.

So "summer sometime" is the official word, but it may be a safe bet to say it'll be early summer rather than late.

9:59 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

MR over at LL has said that there will be a Beta 3 version for windows.

10:22 AM  
Blogger Ted Kostek said...

Meanwhile some of us have been happily using Picture Window Pro for several years now. Almost everything a photographer needs for editing, almost nothing they don't. Further, the excellent documentation has been supplemented extensively by Norman Koren.

I'll keep an eye on these new software tools, but I doubt I'll leave Picture Window.

11:27 AM  
Blogger Joe Reifer said...

Peter Krogh, author of The DAM Book, has an interesting take on Lightroom here: http://www.thedambook.com/lightroom.html

11:55 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I don't believe Photoshop was originally designed for graphic artists.

4:33 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well it wasn't, but there was no RAW at that stge so PS went the playstation way

7:07 PM  
Blogger Photo-essayist said...

I guess Photoshop has finally gotten most functions into 48-bit, but Picture Window Pro has been a totally 48-bit program for years. I got so fed up with Photoshop's photographic inadequacies a couple of years ago I vowed never again.

7:13 PM  
Anonymous Unbound said...

Adobe has everyone soooo fooled... Lightroom is not intended to be a Pro tool, just like Aperture is not intended to be a Pro tool. They are calling them a do-all tool for Pro's, but both of them are far from it. Think of both products as either Adobe Album or iPhoto on steroids, designed for advanced amateurs or low volume pro's, but not real tools for working professionals.
If you use either of the tools in a real Professional setting, you quickly find out how inadequate both of the tools are.
Neither of these tools offer a best-of-breed DAM, coming nowhere close to the Pro capabilities of iView or Portfolio.
Output is VERY limited in both systems, with lousy Web Gallery capabilities, and laughably limited print capabilities when compatred to even a pseudo-RIP like Qimage.
Editing... even Photoshop Elements offers far more flexibility and functionality than either product. Basically with both Aperture and Lightroom you WILL go to an external editor to 'finish' any real images.
So don't be fooled into believing the hype... these tools do far less than the collection of individual tools that they are meant to replace, far less efficiently and with huge compromises.
Advanced amateurs and weekend-Pro's will love Lightroom and Aperture, but for 'real' Pros there are far better solutions, leading to far better results, although they don't all come in one box.

12:53 AM  
Anonymous John Beardsworth said...

So Photoshop was apparently designed not for photographers but for graphic designers.

Perhaps closer to the truth is that it was designed for photographers who worked on individual images in the darkroom, not those photographers who sent their trannies or neg films off to the lab and asked for pushing and clip tests etc. Aperture and Lightroom etc are the result of digital capture now being the norm and making us all deal with images in bulk - that's the infancy out of which digital photography is emerging.

Repetition of this marketing spin about Photoshop not being for photographers doesn't make it any truer.

John

4:25 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Does it matter whether PS was made for graphic artists, photographers, airline pilots, or automatic transmission repairmen? It has several features that, unless added to Lightroom, make Lightroom useless for me. Top of the list are plug-ins and regional edits via masks (there are others).

I think Lightroom's Develop module for raw images is decent, but it does seem a jack of all trades and a master of none.

7:19 AM  
Anonymous Rap Rip said...

Unbound said it. The problem with Lightroom and Apperture is that they ignore the basic reality of a photographer -- that you need flexibility. Nearly every photographer uses (at one time or another) more than one raw editor. But these all-in-one solutions are closed systems that do not let you experiment like this.

And seeing how fast software is changing, it'd be foolish to lock yourself into one of these systems.

I'll keep my files managed myself, and keep the freedom to experiment with whatever program or method I need. As "imperfect" as Photoshop may be, its flexibility (in methods, techniques and workflow) is the reason it is the standard for most photographers.

9:04 AM  
Anonymous ken tanaka said...

I couldn't agree more that "flexibility" is essential for pro and semi-pro photographers. But criticism of Lightroom is premature; it's very much a work-in-progress.

Personally, I use iView MP for my main cataloging (DAM) system and a potpourri of other tools (PS CS2, ACR, Raw Developer, Bibble Pro (rarely), C-1 (rarely), DPP, and even LightZone) for image post-production. I do not look towards Lightroom as a potential iView MP replacement. But I would very much welcome an inclusive system that could replace the Bridge / ACR complex as my primary day-to-day, shoot-to-shoot image browser and raw developer with painless step-out/step-in flexibility. All indications thus far make me extremely optimistic about Lightroom's potential to fulfill that role.

No matter what Adobe, Apple, or any other yet unnamed photo work environment competitor offers there will be criticisms of features. Yes, we all want "flexibility". But flexibility imposes a commensurate productivity tax. Personally, I will welcome a working environment that accommodates 75-80% of my processing and organizational needs but also lets me out of the house (and back) for the other 20-25% of the needs. That's a marriage made in heaven to me!

12:18 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Am I the only one visiting this site that's not a "pro" photographer?

7:46 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I was unable to save files treated under Lightroom. How is this done?

I missed several features from Photoshop like lightening certain areas of a picture, like the eyes in a portrait.

What I liked was the excellent display for comparing before and after versions.

But I am only an amateur.

Chris

2:06 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home