Adobe Lightroom 6 Coming This Week?

[Canon Rumors Guy]

It looks like we’ll see Adobe Lightroom 6 this week, most likely tomorrow if the speculation is correct.</p>
<p>From Scott Kelby</p>
<blockquote><p>OK, for us, things don’t get much bigger than this — now, unfortunately I can’t tell you actually what it is that’s coming Tuesday, but it’s SO BIG that we’re doing <strong>FOUR</strong> free live Webcasts on Tuesday and you’re invited (if you’re a photographer, you’re going to want to be there to see and talk about this big secret thingy).</p></blockquote>
<p>Source: [<a href="http://scottkelby.com/2015/something-really-big-is-coming-tuesday-for-photographers-and-were-all-over-it/" target="_blank">Scott Kelby</a>]</p>

 

[zim]

Really? a big secret thingy! wow, not trying to DRive interweb footfall in any way

 

[cayenne]

Hey, the main thing to me is...KEEP IT AVAILABLE as a stand alone licensed product...not CC only.<P>
I just am not ready yet (if ever) to *rent* my software.

 

[PureClassA]

Very much looking forward to big performance improvements from GPU acceleration. Finally we may have a LR that can really take advantage of things like the MacPro

 

[YuengLinger]

Hey, the main thing to me is...KEEP IT AVAILABLE as a stand alone licensed product...not CC only.<P>
I just am not ready yet (if ever) to *rent* my software.

Pretty sure Adobe has already made their decision--but I feel the same as you.

 

[AcutancePhotography]

Hey, the main thing to me is...KEEP IT AVAILABLE as a stand alone licensed product...not CC only.<P>
I just am not ready yet (if ever) to *rent* my software.

While I agree, I don't think that every Light Room discussion needs to rehash this. We have had several threads discussing this and I feel we have covered the opinions of both sides of the argument.

Let's talk about the software and what it does instead of how we will pay for it.

 

[ScottyP]

Hey, the main thing to me is...KEEP IT AVAILABLE as a stand alone licensed product...not CC only.<P>
I just am not ready yet (if ever) to *rent* my software.

While I agree, I don't think that every Light Room discussion needs to rehash this. We have had several threads discussing this and I feel we have covered the opinions of both sides of the argument.

Let's talk about the software and what it does instead of how we will pay for it.

Ok, but in fact I will NOT pay for it if it is a software rental. If that is the case, and this "big announcement" broadcast hoo-ha is going to be Kelby spinning and shilling it, with a big smile and a tub of petroleum jelly, I lose respect for Kelby too.

 

[m]

It took them long enough.

I hope it won't be too expensive given the big fuzz they are making about it.

 

[dhr90]

Good timing, I've just bought a laptop and was considering an upgrade to lightroom 5...

 

[Zv]

Sure Kelby, whatever.

Was there this much faffin' about with previous versions of lightroom? I had my hopes up the last time we heard similar rumors and nothing happened.

I bet they bring it out when I'm on my vacation and I'll get back to CR and it will be old news by then and everyone will be bored of it! ;D

 

[VeloDramatic]

New functionality is always welcome but if LR6 doesn't seriously address the performance issue with accelerated processing/rendering, I'll be disappointed. My file volume gets bigger while client turnaround time gets smaller. LR needs to help... in fact that was its raison d'etre. I hope the GPU rumors prove accurate.

 

[Jamesy]

I need EOS-M3 raw support to be included. It is not even in the DNG converter as of yet (v.8.8).

 

[distant.star]

New functionality is always welcome but if LR6 doesn't seriously address the performance issue with accelerated processing/rendering, I'll be disappointed. My file volume gets bigger while client turnaround time gets smaller. LR needs to help... in fact that was its raison d'etre. I hope the GPU rumors prove accurate.

I agree. I just got a new computer, and I got a decent video card solely in anticipation of this.

 

[Jamesy]

New functionality is always welcome but if LR6 doesn't seriously address the performance issue with accelerated processing/rendering, I'll be disappointed. My file volume gets bigger while client turnaround time gets smaller. LR needs to help... in fact that was its raison d'etre. I hope the GPU rumors prove accurate.

I agree. I just got a new computer, and I got a decent video card solely in anticipation of this.

Funny, I didn't know I was configured to use this in Photoshop until one day when my GPU got de-configured and Liquify was a total pig. It will be great if LR takes advantage of it.

 

[AvTvM]

http://photorumors.com/2015/04/20/adobe-lightroom-cc-to-be-announced-tomorrow/

no idea, if it's true. But if it is CC / pay every month cloud only, that will be it for me. I'd then move my RAW stuff over to Capture One.

 

[K]

LR6 desperately needs GPU acceleration.

I run the latest generation Intel i7 cpu and it gets sluggish at times. That is unacceptable on cutting edge hardware. This is RAW photo editing, not intensive 3D applications.

DXO on the other hand runs much faster - but I dislike their interface. DXO is useful for their advanced distortion correction tools and noise reduction. The rest of that software is mediocre at best.


It was rumored there would be GPU support. If so, that alone will be worth it.

 

[Lee Jay]

http://photorumors.com/2015/04/20/adobe-lightroom-cc-to-be-announced-tomorrow/

no idea, if it's true. But if it is CC / pay every month cloud only, that will be it for me. I'd then move my RAW stuff over to Capture One.

I'm not a fan of "rented software", but let me explain some things about CC.

First, the PS/LR bundle is $9.99 a month or $119.88 a year. That's right, you can pay for a whole year at a time, not once a month.

Second, Adobe's branding is seriously misleading. It's not cloud software, it's local software. It's installed locally, run locally, and you don't need a web connection to run it. In fact, there are even ways to do CC on stations that have no web connection, though this requires some special stuff. It's only "cloud software" in the sense that it's updated frequently and that it calls home to verify licensing at defined intervals.

For people who use PS, it's a great deal - it's much cheaper than PS was alone if you upgraded every version.

For people who use only LR, it's really only a 2x rip-off compared to perpetual licensing upgrades if you do them all, and about the same as LR upgrades cost before LR's price was cut in half.

 

[t.linn]

http://photorumors.com/2015/04/20/adobe-lightroom-cc-to-be-announced-tomorrow/

no idea, if it's true. But if it is CC / pay every month cloud only, that will be it for me. I'd then move my RAW stuff over to Capture One.

I'm not a fan of "rented software", but let me explain some things about CC.

First, the PS/LR bundle is $9.99 a month or $119.88 a year. That's right, you can pay for a whole year at a time, not once a month.

Second, Adobe's branding is seriously misleading. It's not cloud software, it's local software. It's installed locally, run locally, and you don't need a web connection to run it. In fact, there are even ways to do CC on stations that have no web connection, though this requires some special stuff. It's only "cloud software" in the sense that it's updated frequently and that it calls home to verify licensing at defined intervals.

For people who use PS, it's a great deal - it's much cheaper than PS was alone if you upgraded every version.

For people who use only LR, it's really only a 2x rip-off compared to perpetual licensing upgrades if you do them all, and about the same as LR upgrades cost before LR's price was cut in half.

You're right of course but I think the true objection to "rentalware" is that Adobe has you on the hook FOREVER.

 

[t.linn]

Hey, the main thing to me is...KEEP IT AVAILABLE as a stand alone licensed product...not CC only.<P>
I just am not ready yet (if ever) to *rent* my software.

While I agree, I don't think that every Light Room discussion needs to rehash this. We have had several threads discussing this and I feel we have covered the opinions of both sides of the argument.

Let's talk about the software and what it does instead of how we will pay for it.

I appreciate the fact that this issue has been discussed to death but it is still a relevant topic when a new version is announced and there is some ambiguity about the form in which it can be purchased. I'm not going to get too excited about discussing any new features until I know it will be available as a stand alone purchase.

 

[grainier]

CC? Did not Adobe swear that LR will be kept standalone? Whatever. I switched to DPP and never looked back.