Adobe Releases Lightroom 6.2 & CC 2015.2

3kramd5

EOS 5D MK IV
Mar 2, 2012
3,083
404
Re: Adobe Releases Lightroom 6.2 & CC 2015.2

privatebydesign said:
3kramd5 said:
privatebydesign said:
As for the Import change, I'll give it a while before I decide, if you think about it in a rational way the new feature is more intuitive just not yet to us long term users and should reveal any misplaced files (which I know I have!), but for any old dogs refusing to learn new tricks you can resort to legacy mode anyway, so what's the harm?
As long as it doesn't remind me all the time, I don't care. If it's like the "Do you want to back this up online Yes/No" splash screen which pops up every time I create a new catalog, I'll get annoyed.
Mine doesn't do that, you must have a preference option ticked that I don't (or the other way around!). I even just made a test catalog to make sure.
I may have found a preference at some point in time, because it started doing that with the initial release, then it stopped for a while, and it's started again.

It also actually moves the cursor up to the top left of the screen after I dismiss the popup. I'll have to go wander through the preferences again.

Also, I THINK it only does is on my windows machine.
 

KBStudio

EOS T7i
Oct 24, 2013
64
0
www.kimbrunstudio.com
Re: Adobe Releases Lightroom 6.2 & CC 2015.2

Just watched Laura Shoe's Import youtube post. Did not realize how many tools I use regularly are no longer available. Preview of new file name in "File Renaming". No more "Move" option. Destination no longer shows you a list of location options. And a very important one for me, no longer do you have the option to eject the memory card or hard drive after importing is complete. You now have to do it "long hand". This will really screw up our workflow!

Best go back to LR 6.1.1 or 5.7.1 for us.
 

KBStudio

EOS T7i
Oct 24, 2013
64
0
www.kimbrunstudio.com
Re: Adobe Releases Lightroom 6.2 & CC 2015.2

Another bug. Ligthroom CC2015.2 will not shut down. When the app is closed it hangs up and can only be "Force Quit" in Mac Yosemite 10.10.4 Great Update!!!
 

Batman6794

I'm New Here
Feb 26, 2015
24
16
Re: Adobe Releases Lightroom 6.2 & CC 2015.2

privatebydesign said:
Batman6794 said:
privatebydesign said:
AvTvM said:
De-haze ...
* Please note that this feature is not available in the standalone version of Lightroom 6
yes, Adobe ... just keep rubbing it in. I will still never RENT your software. And if you guys withhold features, I will also not BUY anything from you - like LR 6. All my current cameras are supported by LR 5.7 and my next camera upgrade is likely 2+ years out ... unless Canon brings a FF mirrorless system before then. :p ;D
That suits Adobe just fine, you are not the kind of customer they want. Bye.
LOL. Yes. Most successful businesses try to limit the "kinds" of customers that purchase their products. If EVERYONE bought their stuff, they might run out of places to put all their money.
If you were in sales and you had two customers, one spent thousands of dollars every year and was happy with your new business model because it saved them money, the other spend a few hundred dollars every few years whilst bitching and moaning and starting up petitions about everything you did, whilst not taking the time to even consider what you are actually offering at the same time taking up far more customer service hours and developer time than the big spending customer. Which would you spend your time and trouble and money trying to make happy?

I wouldn't be surprised if Adobe cut the amateur market out of their business model completely after the scaled 3/5 year transition to the subscription model, anybody that isn't prepared to spend $10 a month on their hobby really isn't worth bothering with even if there are thousands of them, save the developer time and money and concentrate on your core money making customer base.

Oh, and to make people realise what utter crap they are talking, who knows what you can still do with LR CC after you stop paying? Practically none of you.
Ummmmm. Do you live in a world where Adobe charges more to pro customers than they do amateurs? I live in one where their products cost the same no matter who is buying.

The average pro may buy more products than the average amateur, but that would mean its the pros that are taking up more of the developers time wouldn't it? The more products you own, the time the developers spend making you happy.

It is a false perception that pros are where the profit lives. The fact that an individual pro has more to spend than an amateur is far outweighed by the total number of amateurs with money to spend. (That's why canon new rebels and EFs lenses faster than pro bodies and Ls.)

The majority of the photography market share amateurs by a long shot. Not just in terms of numbers, but in terms of dollars spent. Companies only market to pros because amateurs follow what the pros do, and choose products because they know pros use them. The amatuers are where the real profits live.

The idea that subscription based pricing is "for pros" is ludicrous.

Lets look at the benefits of subscription:

Low entry price! - Any pro worth his salt sets aside the money they need for the tools their job requires. If you're trying to start a business subscription is a huge boon. You can pay a low price to get started, and put aside money to get the real thing once you've established yourself. For an established pro this befit offers nothing.

Always up to date! - Pros have constant deadlines that must be met to deliver products to clients. Any changes to their workflow, be it a new interface or worse, bugs, are a threat. No client I've ever worked would ever except "I'll be delivering the work late because I just updated my software and encountered unexpected issues" as an excuse. Even if I HAD a subscription, I would not allow updates when I've got projects in progress. Most pros do NOT upgrade unless a software change offers a very compelling feature to make it worth it. On the other hands amateurs love to be up to date! Just look at the sales of the T5i. Basically a more expensive and newer T4i. No new features, just said 5 instead of 4.

Only have to pay when you use it! Well that is great for amateurs who need professional tools for the few gigs they get. They can pay for what they need this month, and not pay when they're not using it. Do you know any pros who go a month without using the tools of the trade? For pros, paying the subscription fee every month is more expensive than simply buying a stand alone product. Does this really sound like a marketing scheme directed at pros?


These advantages offer nothing to pros. They are all directed at amateurs hoping to break into the business and become pros. Stop kidding yourself.
 

Famateur

EOS 7D MK II
Oct 9, 2012
774
88
Re: Adobe Releases Lightroom 6.2 & CC 2015.2

privatebydesign said:
infared said:
privatebydesign said:
infared said:
Adobe has become FAT & LAZY. The HDR software included in LR 6 is pathetic. It does not compete with freeware from 5 years ago. LR 5 has a better import interface than LR 6. Why was it changed to make it look "new"? The company was once an innovator....what happened? :eek:k
I disagree.

I find LR HDR to be far and away the best implementation of de-ghosting I have ever used and the most natural output short of the time and trouble of PS 32bit blending or layered exposures and luminosity masks. I have used multiple exposure blending since it began, I don't buy Plugins but did buy both LR Enfuse and Photomatix Pro before that to try to achieve the extreme DR I often encounter shooting indoor/outside view real estate.

As for the Import change, I'll give it a while before I decide, if you think about it in a rational way the new feature is more intuitive just not yet to us long term users and should reveal any misplaced files (which I know I have!), but for any old dogs refusing to learn new tricks you can resort to legacy mode anyway, so what's the harm?
LOL! Thanks for the pointer...I will switch back to legacy mode out of the mess that some 21yr old thought was cool. Of course, I would not have to do that if Adobe had written code that preserved all of my preferences when I paid to upgrade,(like every other software I have upgraded). The HDR is junk...I will just continue my work flow the way it was. The thing is..Adobe has wasted a lot of my time with a bunch of nonsense, and taken my money. That's annoying.
I am always looking to learn new and improved HDR, can you show me examples of LR created junk and what your workflow is that makes your HDR so much better?

Thanks.
I'd be interested as well -- genuinely. The results I've achieved with Lightroom' HDR feature have been satisfying, but perhaps I'm setting the bar too low? If I can achieve markedly better results with other software, I'm interested.

Still, there's enormous value for me in having so many good (if not the best) features in one tool.
 

Famateur

EOS 7D MK II
Oct 9, 2012
774
88
Re: Adobe Releases Lightroom 6.2 & CC 2015.2

Gonna watch the import video before I decide whether or not to upgrade. The announcement is misleading by listing Dehaze under the new features for Desktop:

New Features – Lightroom desktop

Dehaze as a Local Adjustment*


Then it contradicts it with the asterisk. Why list Dehaze under the "Lightroom Desktop" heading at all, other than to say, "Just kidding -- we're still reserving that for CC! Got your hopes up, though, didn't we?"

I very much appreciated the addition of brushes for the graduated and radial filters with LR6 -- I use that all the time. One niggle: If you use the erase brush and decide you'd like to paint back in, it paints with standard brush flow, density, etc, rather than painting back the mask of the graduated/radial filter. This means painting back full strength effect when I would expect/want it to restore the graduation of effect.

One of these days, I'll get around to communicating this desired functionality with Adobe. For now, I have to use Undo, but that's a bit of a hassle...especially if it's a change I want to make some time later...

Just thought of a feature I'd like: Undo (remove) a specific step from the History without losing all the steps that came after it (or can I already do this and just don't know?). Or be able to switch off a step as an additional alternative to removing it.
 

Famateur

EOS 7D MK II
Oct 9, 2012
774
88
Re: Adobe Releases Lightroom 6.2 & CC 2015.2

Just finished the video. Think I'll sit this one out for now. Here's why:

1. The tree for the destination folder is gone.
2. I have no use for the Add Photos screen, preferring the From panel.
3. I always use what is now collapsed in the Gear icon and don't want to click it.*
4. I don't see any new features**, just a new look and lost functionality.

The new Import seems geared more to novices than to power users, confusing visual efficiency for workflow efficiency. Is the majority of their user base overwhelmed with too many options at once? Just seems like they tried to make it a linear wizard. Good for novices, not so much for power users.

If Adobe was listening, here's what I'd request:

1) Make Import its own module, just like Library, Develop, etc. Maintain the same interface design philosophy as the other modules (and legacy import) and include all the advanced features.

2) Include an icon within the Import Module to toggle between Wizard View and Advanced View. Wizard View is the simplified version to accomplish whatever prompted Adobe to make the change to the import for LR6.2.

The above would make it feel more like the rest of Lightroom and satisfy both power users and novices that might be overwhelmed by all the detailed options available to them.

Question for PBD: Does resorting to legacy mode maintain the missing destination folder tree, Move option and other lost functionality? I might consider upgrading if it does, but then I'm gambling on how long that option will be available.

* Is this the start of a move away from the side-docking/hiding menus throughout LR? I hope not. I quite like them and losing that consistency in the import dialog feels disjointed to me.

** Okay, maybe scanning my system for images is a new feature...which I'd promptly disable...like I did face-recognition (seems like Adobe is adopting features from Picasa). In the video, it looks like it's just an on/off. Can it be fine-tuned (like Picasa :p) to select which drives and folders are scanned?
 

3kramd5

EOS 5D MK IV
Mar 2, 2012
3,083
404
Re: Adobe Releases Lightroom 6.2 & CC 2015.2

Famateur said:
New Features – Lightroom desktop

Dehaze as a Local Adjustment*

Then it contradicts it with the asterisk. Why list Dehaze under the "Lightroom Desktop" heading at all, other than to say, "Just kidding -- we're still reserving that for CC! Got your hopes up, though, didn't we?"
Because that's where it's available. It isn't available in Lightroom Mobile. The asterisk doesn't contradict.
 

LOALTD

EOS RP
Nov 24, 2012
230
0
www.andrewholmanphoto.com
Re: Adobe Releases Lightroom 6.2 & CC 2015.2

privatebydesign said:
LOALTD said:
As others have stated, if you are running OSX 10.11 El Capitan:


DO NOT UPGRADE!


This thing CRASHES NON-STOP!


Luckily, I was able to revert to 6.1.1 with Time Machine.


Insane that that'd release something this buggy.
I never update my OS, I find all Apple releases in recent years are as bad as Windows ever were. I am running 10.9.5 and today's Adobe releases are running 100% fine.

6.1.1 runs fine in El Capitan, there is a serious flaw with 6.2.
 

Famateur

EOS 7D MK II
Oct 9, 2012
774
88
Re: Adobe Releases Lightroom 6.2 & CC 2015.2

3kramd5 said:
Famateur said:
New Features – Lightroom desktop

Dehaze as a Local Adjustment*

Then it contradicts it with the asterisk. Why list Dehaze under the "Lightroom Desktop" heading at all, other than to say, "Just kidding -- we're still reserving that for CC! Got your hopes up, though, didn't we?"
Because that's where it's available. It isn't available in Lightroom Mobile. The asterisk doesn't contradict.
Ah...yes. I've been equating Desktop with standalone license (as in Desktop vs. CC). But it's clear now that Adobe is making the distinction between Desktop (standalone and CC) versus Mobile. Thanks for pointing that out.
 

privatebydesign

Would you take advice from a cartoons stuffed toy?
Jan 29, 2011
7,894
1,018
119
Re: Adobe Releases Lightroom 6.2 & CC 2015.2

Batman6794 said:
privatebydesign said:
Batman6794 said:
privatebydesign said:
AvTvM said:
De-haze ...
* Please note that this feature is not available in the standalone version of Lightroom 6
yes, Adobe ... just keep rubbing it in. I will still never RENT your software. And if you guys withhold features, I will also not BUY anything from you - like LR 6. All my current cameras are supported by LR 5.7 and my next camera upgrade is likely 2+ years out ... unless Canon brings a FF mirrorless system before then. :p ;D
That suits Adobe just fine, you are not the kind of customer they want. Bye.
LOL. Yes. Most successful businesses try to limit the "kinds" of customers that purchase their products. If EVERYONE bought their stuff, they might run out of places to put all their money.
If you were in sales and you had two customers, one spent thousands of dollars every year and was happy with your new business model because it saved them money, the other spend a few hundred dollars every few years whilst bitching and moaning and starting up petitions about everything you did, whilst not taking the time to even consider what you are actually offering at the same time taking up far more customer service hours and developer time than the big spending customer. Which would you spend your time and trouble and money trying to make happy?

I wouldn't be surprised if Adobe cut the amateur market out of their business model completely after the scaled 3/5 year transition to the subscription model, anybody that isn't prepared to spend $10 a month on their hobby really isn't worth bothering with even if there are thousands of them, save the developer time and money and concentrate on your core money making customer base.

Oh, and to make people realise what utter crap they are talking, who knows what you can still do with LR CC after you stop paying? Practically none of you.
Ummmmm. Do you live in a world where Adobe charges more to pro customers than they do amateurs? I live in one where their products cost the same no matter who is buying.

The average pro may buy more products than the average amateur, but that would mean its the pros that are taking up more of the developers time wouldn't it? The more products you own, the time the developers spend making you happy.

It is a false perception that pros are where the profit lives. The fact that an individual pro has more to spend than an amateur is far outweighed by the total number of amateurs with money to spend. (That's why canon new rebels and EFs lenses faster than pro bodies and Ls.)

The majority of the photography market share amateurs by a long shot. Not just in terms of numbers, but in terms of dollars spent. Companies only market to pros because amateurs follow what the pros do, and choose products because they know pros use them. The amatuers are where the real profits live.

The idea that subscription based pricing is "for pros" is ludicrous.

Lets look at the benefits of subscription:

Low entry price! - Any pro worth his salt sets aside the money they need for the tools their job requires. If you're trying to start a business subscription is a huge boon. You can pay a low price to get started, and put aside money to get the real thing once you've established yourself. For an established pro this befit offers nothing.

Always up to date! - Pros have constant deadlines that must be met to deliver products to clients. Any changes to their workflow, be it a new interface or worse, bugs, are a threat. No client I've ever worked would ever except "I'll be delivering the work late because I just updated my software and encountered unexpected issues" as an excuse. Even if I HAD a subscription, I would not allow updates when I've got projects in progress. Most pros do NOT upgrade unless a software change offers a very compelling feature to make it worth it. On the other hands amateurs love to be up to date! Just look at the sales of the T5i. Basically a more expensive and newer T4i. No new features, just said 5 instead of 4.

Only have to pay when you use it! Well that is great for amateurs who need professional tools for the few gigs they get. They can pay for what they need this month, and not pay when they're not using it. Do you know any pros who go a month without using the tools of the trade? For pros, paying the subscription fee every month is more expensive than simply buying a stand alone product. Does this really sound like a marketing scheme directed at pros?


These advantages offer nothing to pros. They are all directed at amateurs hoping to break into the business and become pros. Stop kidding yourself.
I live in the world where volume licenses can cost thousands of dollars, per month. You do know that the licenses you are all bitching about are limited to one user and two computers which can't both be logged into at the same time? Now email Adobe and ask how much for a 10 station unlimited user license, or even a five station one.

As for pros setting money aside, clearly you are not in business, you don't have an accountant, and you don't understand the difference between capital expenditure and leasing, along with the economic advantages for a company, even a one man band, to do the latter.

Seeing as how you are so far off the mark on those two comments I can't be bothered to address the rest of your drivel.
 
Nov 14, 2014
2
0
Re: Adobe Releases Lightroom 6.2 & CC 2015.2

I am also having problems with multiple crashes when attempting to import from a card reader.

Also, just my opinion, the new Import screens do not really address the confusion-issues that I have when importing. I still manage to import to the Apple Pictures folder when I am trying to import to a remote drive. I know, my fault, but the software still does not make it easy.
 

Batman6794

I'm New Here
Feb 26, 2015
24
16
Re: Adobe Releases Lightroom 6.2 & CC 2015.2

privatebydesign said:
Batman6794 said:
privatebydesign said:
Batman6794 said:
privatebydesign said:
AvTvM said:
De-haze ...
* Please note that this feature is not available in the standalone version of Lightroom 6
yes, Adobe ... just keep rubbing it in. I will still never RENT your software. And if you guys withhold features, I will also not BUY anything from you - like LR 6. All my current cameras are supported by LR 5.7 and my next camera upgrade is likely 2+ years out ... unless Canon brings a FF mirrorless system before then. :p ;D
That suits Adobe just fine, you are not the kind of customer they want. Bye.
LOL. Yes. Most successful businesses try to limit the "kinds" of customers that purchase their products. If EVERYONE bought their stuff, they might run out of places to put all their money.
If you were in sales and you had two customers, one spent thousands of dollars every year and was happy with your new business model because it saved them money, the other spend a few hundred dollars every few years whilst bitching and moaning and starting up petitions about everything you did, whilst not taking the time to even consider what you are actually offering at the same time taking up far more customer service hours and developer time than the big spending customer. Which would you spend your time and trouble and money trying to make happy?

I wouldn't be surprised if Adobe cut the amateur market out of their business model completely after the scaled 3/5 year transition to the subscription model, anybody that isn't prepared to spend $10 a month on their hobby really isn't worth bothering with even if there are thousands of them, save the developer time and money and concentrate on your core money making customer base.

Oh, and to make people realise what utter crap they are talking, who knows what you can still do with LR CC after you stop paying? Practically none of you.
Ummmmm. Do you live in a world where Adobe charges more to pro customers than they do amateurs? I live in one where their products cost the same no matter who is buying.

The average pro may buy more products than the average amateur, but that would mean its the pros that are taking up more of the developers time wouldn't it? The more products you own, the time the developers spend making you happy.

It is a false perception that pros are where the profit lives. The fact that an individual pro has more to spend than an amateur is far outweighed by the total number of amateurs with money to spend. (That's why canon new rebels and EFs lenses faster than pro bodies and Ls.)

The majority of the photography market share amateurs by a long shot. Not just in terms of numbers, but in terms of dollars spent. Companies only market to pros because amateurs follow what the pros do, and choose products because they know pros use them. The amatuers are where the real profits live.

The idea that subscription based pricing is "for pros" is ludicrous.

Lets look at the benefits of subscription:

Low entry price! - Any pro worth his salt sets aside the money they need for the tools their job requires. If you're trying to start a business subscription is a huge boon. You can pay a low price to get started, and put aside money to get the real thing once you've established yourself. For an established pro this befit offers nothing.

Always up to date! - Pros have constant deadlines that must be met to deliver products to clients. Any changes to their workflow, be it a new interface or worse, bugs, are a threat. No client I've ever worked would ever except "I'll be delivering the work late because I just updated my software and encountered unexpected issues" as an excuse. Even if I HAD a subscription, I would not allow updates when I've got projects in progress. Most pros do NOT upgrade unless a software change offers a very compelling feature to make it worth it. On the other hands amateurs love to be up to date! Just look at the sales of the T5i. Basically a more expensive and newer T4i. No new features, just said 5 instead of 4.

Only have to pay when you use it! Well that is great for amateurs who need professional tools for the few gigs they get. They can pay for what they need this month, and not pay when they're not using it. Do you know any pros who go a month without using the tools of the trade? For pros, paying the subscription fee every month is more expensive than simply buying a stand alone product. Does this really sound like a marketing scheme directed at pros?


These advantages offer nothing to pros. They are all directed at amateurs hoping to break into the business and become pros. Stop kidding yourself.
I live in the world where volume licenses can cost thousands of dollars, per month. You do know that the licenses you are all bitching about are limited to one user and two computers which can't both be logged into at the same time? Now email Adobe and ask how much for a 10 station unlimited user license, or even a five station one.

As for pros setting money aside, clearly you are not in business, you don't have an accountant, and you don't understand the difference between capital expenditure and leasing, along with the economic advantages for a company, even a one man band, to do the latter.

Seeing as how you are so far off the mark on those two comments I can't be bothered to address the rest of your drivel.
You're right. Volume licensing cost far more. I was under the impression that a CC subscription for multiple users would also cost more money. Was I wrong about that? If you can get 150 people working for $10/month that WOULD be a good deal!

On the other hand, if you have lots of users, wouldn't the extra cost of a subscription plan be multiplied by the number of users? Seems like that'd be bad.

You are correct that I'm not in business. I'm in PHOTOGRAPHY. However, I know enough to know that its not capital vs leasing. People in business use capital and EXPENSE.

Capital is a purchase of an asset that hits your bottom line once. Expense is something that hits it repeatedly.

Anyone in business will tell you capital expenditure is preferred because what you purchase can be considered an asset, which is added to the valuation of your company. (Minus depreciation) An expense is something you buy, that can not be considered a company asset.

Any subscription would fall under expense, because, were your company to fail and be sold off, their is no value to a subscription service which is no longer being paid for. A software license that is paid in full MAY be of value, if the license is transferable. If it is not, it would be expense just like the subscription, but at least a smaller expense. (Assuming your company is around long enough to realize the savings.)

As far a leasing goes. That is not the opposite of capital, but of owning. Lots of companies do lease things, but not if they intend to use it for long term purposes.

The advantages of a lease are a smaller upfront payment (only an advantage if you don't have the money, which means a small startup or bad at managing money) or that you can terminate if you need to. (If you are testing a new service, it can be nice to lease, because if the whole venture goes belly up you've limited your loses) These aren't of any value to an established photographer expecting to use a piece of software for years however.

You may want to have your accountant clarify some of this for you.
 

privatebydesign

Would you take advice from a cartoons stuffed toy?
Jan 29, 2011
7,894
1,018
119
Re: Adobe Releases Lightroom 6.2 & CC 2015.2

Batman6794 said:
You're right. Volume licensing cost far more. I was under the impression that a CC subscription for multiple users would also cost more money. Was I wrong about that? If you can get 150 people working for $10/month that WOULD be a good deal!

On the other hand, if you have lots of users, wouldn't the extra cost of a subscription plan be multiplied by the number of users? Seems like that'd be bad.

You are correct that I'm not in business. I'm in PHOTOGRAPHY. However, I know enough to know that its not capital vs leasing. People in business use capital and EXPENSE.

Capital is a purchase of an asset that hits your bottom line once. Expense is something that hits it repeatedly.

Anyone in business will tell you capital expenditure is preferred because what you purchase can be considered an asset, which is added to the valuation of your company. (Minus depreciation) An expense is something you buy, that can not be considered a company asset.

Any subscription would fall under expense, because, were your company to fail and be sold off, their is no value to a subscription service which is no longer being paid for. A software license that is paid in full MAY be of value, if the license is transferable. If it is not, it would be expense just like the subscription, but at least a smaller expense. (Assuming your company is around long enough to realize the savings.)

As far a leasing goes. That is not the opposite of capital, but of owning. Lots of companies do lease things, but not if they intend to use it for long term purposes.

The advantages of a lease are a smaller upfront payment (only an advantage if you don't have the money, which means a small startup or bad at managing money) or that you can terminate if you need to. (If you are testing a new service, it can be nice to lease, because if the whole venture goes belly up you've limited your loses) These aren't of any value to an established photographer expecting to use a piece of software for years however.

You may want to have your accountant clarify some of this for you.
Clearly you are the one who needs to see an accountant.

In the USA if you, as a business/working photographer purchase software outright, first you have to earn the money to buy it, or borrow that money (even if it is from yourself) which costs you money. Second, when it comes to tax time that capital expenditure can only be depreciated/amortized over three years (for software). So if I spend $1,500 on software, I am left owing myself, the business, or a bank, $1,500 for one year, $1,000 for another year and $500 for yet another year, I can't get that $1,500 back for three years as it takes three years to fully amortize it.

If, on the other hand, I take my accountants advice and rent/lease my software at $42 a month, $500 a year, I don't have to earn it first, my upfront cost is $42 not $1,500 so I have eased cash flow (which is the biggest killer of the majority of startup businesses), also the rental/lease payment is 100% tax deductible so I never have anything outstanding on my books, my business never owes anybody, including myself.

As for the capital valuation difference between a photography company with a perpetual license of three year old software, and a non transferable subscription, there is none, the three year old software has no value as it has been written off 100% on the books, if you try to charge for it you will be taxed on that amount too. Meanwhile the subscription is also worthless, but again, it is irrelevant as the cost of it too has been deducted 100%.
 

Bennymiata

EOS 6D MK II
Re: Adobe Releases Lightroom 6.2 & CC 2015.2

I originally hated renting Adobe software, but I needed to update from CS2, and thought it would be less hassle to pay $10 a month rather than thousands up front, and I'm very happy with my decision.
I now have Ps and LR on my desktop, laptop and tablet and I reckon it's a good deal.

Don't blame Adobe for your problems on Macs, it's Apple's fault.
Every time they update their operating system, it always causes problems with non-Apple software.
 

Stu_bert

EOS 7D MK II
Jun 29, 2011
559
1
London, UK
Re: Adobe Releases Lightroom 6.2 & CC 2015.2

On Win 7 64bit, LR 6.2 has a memory leak when generating previews. I went back to 6.1.1 and repeated the test and it works fine. Which is a shame, as LR 6.2 includes profiles for the 600mm II :(
 

AvTvM

EOS 5D MK IV
Nov 4, 2011
3,165
0
Re: Adobe Releases Lightroom 6.2 & CC 2015.2

@Private: looks like Adobe is sorely missing my business and my Euros ... and that of millions other amateurs, enthusiastas, semi-Pro's and Pro's who are also refusing to RENT from them, but would be willing to continue BUYING from them, if Adobe were to SELL the goods [e.g. De-Haze, global, local] ...
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/10/06/us-adobe-outlook-idUSKCN0S02P720151006

Looking forward to their full year numbers. :eek: ;D
 

infared

Kodak Brownie!
Jul 19, 2011
1,411
11
Re: Adobe Releases Lightroom 6.2 & CC 2015.2

Famateur said:
privatebydesign said:
infared said:
privatebydesign said:
infared said:
Adobe has become FAT & LAZY. The HDR software included in LR 6 is pathetic. It does not compete with freeware from 5 years ago. LR 5 has a better import interface than LR 6. Why was it changed to make it look "new"? The company was once an innovator....what happened? :eek:k
I disagree.

I find LR HDR to be far and away the best implementation of de-ghosting I have ever used and the most natural output short of the time and trouble of PS 32bit blending or layered exposures and luminosity masks. I have used multiple exposure blending since it began, I don't buy Plugins but did buy both LR Enfuse and Photomatix Pro before that to try to achieve the extreme DR I often encounter shooting indoor/outside view real estate.

As for the Import change, I'll give it a while before I decide, if you think about it in a rational way the new feature is more intuitive just not yet to us long term users and should reveal any misplaced files (which I know I have!), but for any old dogs refusing to learn new tricks you can resort to legacy mode anyway, so what's the harm?
LOL! Thanks for the pointer...I will switch back to legacy mode out of the mess that some 21yr old thought was cool. Of course, I would not have to do that if Adobe had written code that preserved all of my preferences when I paid to upgrade,(like every other software I have upgraded). The HDR is junk...I will just continue my work flow the way it was. The thing is..Adobe has wasted a lot of my time with a bunch of nonsense, and taken my money. That's annoying.
I am always looking to learn new and improved HDR, can you show me examples of LR created junk and what your workflow is that makes your HDR so much better?

Thanks.
I'd be interested as well -- genuinely. The results I've achieved with Lightroom' HDR feature have been satisfying, but perhaps I'm setting the bar too low? If I can achieve markedly better results with other software, I'm interested.

Still, there's enormous value for me in having so many good (if not the best) features in one tool.
I look for realism and quality in the shadows. The LR HDR program was giving me lots of noise in the shadows and even huge color shifts. The LR and Photoshop HDR software programs both are very rudimentary and are lackluster on controls, in my experience. I also found the LR HDR to be massively SLOW...and that was with photos from my Micro Four Thirds cameras (much smaller files and therefore much less information to process)...not my full-frame Canon. I did not bother suffering through any FF images in the LR HDR. Plus we do not know much about the files that the Adobe programs are processing??? Are they 16 or 32 bit. I use 32bit Photomatix. There are lots of comparisons out on the web. Here is a basic one here.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=v7HqcubeWkg

LR has a lot of strengths...HDR is not one of them.
 

Batman6794

I'm New Here
Feb 26, 2015
24
16
Re: Adobe Releases Lightroom 6.2 & CC 2015.2

privatebydesign said:
Batman6794 said:
You're right. Volume licensing cost far more. I was under the impression that a CC subscription for multiple users would also cost more money. Was I wrong about that? If you can get 150 people working for $10/month that WOULD be a good deal!

On the other hand, if you have lots of users, wouldn't the extra cost of a subscription plan be multiplied by the number of users? Seems like that'd be bad.

You are correct that I'm not in business. I'm in PHOTOGRAPHY. However, I know enough to know that its not capital vs leasing. People in business use capital and EXPENSE.

Capital is a purchase of an asset that hits your bottom line once. Expense is something that hits it repeatedly.

Anyone in business will tell you capital expenditure is preferred because what you purchase can be considered an asset, which is added to the valuation of your company. (Minus depreciation) An expense is something you buy, that can not be considered a company asset.

Any subscription would fall under expense, because, were your company to fail and be sold off, their is no value to a subscription service which is no longer being paid for. A software license that is paid in full MAY be of value, if the license is transferable. If it is not, it would be expense just like the subscription, but at least a smaller expense. (Assuming your company is around long enough to realize the savings.)

As far a leasing goes. That is not the opposite of capital, but of owning. Lots of companies do lease things, but not if they intend to use it for long term purposes.

The advantages of a lease are a smaller upfront payment (only an advantage if you don't have the money, which means a small startup or bad at managing money) or that you can terminate if you need to. (If you are testing a new service, it can be nice to lease, because if the whole venture goes belly up you've limited your loses) These aren't of any value to an established photographer expecting to use a piece of software for years however.

You may want to have your accountant clarify some of this for you.
Clearly you are the one who needs to see an accountant.

In the USA if you, as a business/working photographer purchase software outright, first you have to earn the money to buy it, or borrow that money (even if it is from yourself) which costs you money. Second, when it comes to tax time that capital expenditure can only be depreciated/amortized over three years (for software). So if I spend $1,500 on software, I am left owing myself, the business, or a bank, $1,500 for one year, $1,000 for another year and $500 for yet another year, I can't get that $1,500 back for three years as it takes three years to fully amortize it.

If, on the other hand, I take my accountants advice and rent/lease my software at $42 a month, $500 a year, I don't have to earn it first, my upfront cost is $42 not $1,500 so I have eased cash flow (which is the biggest killer of the majority of startup businesses), also the rental/lease payment is 100% tax deductible so I never have anything outstanding on my books, my business never owes anybody, including myself.

As for the capital valuation difference between a photography company with a perpetual license of three year old software, and a non transferable subscription, there is none, the three year old software has no value as it has been written off 100% on the books, if you try to charge for it you will be taxed on that amount too. Meanwhile the subscription is also worthless, but again, it is irrelevant as the cost of it too has been deducted 100%.
I couldn't agree more. I have said multiple times that the subscription option is excellent for a small startup that lacks cash flow.

I don't disagree that it should exist. I do disagree with your original assertion that adobe would be happy to lose a customer because they are not the type they are after, and your second assertion that the subscription is designed to cater to pros, when it is clearly designed to cater to people who are just starting out considering the myriad advantages I've listed that benefit smaller companies and offer nothing to larger established firms. (See parts of my post you couldn't be bothered to respond to.)

An established professional that should have far more than 1500 in monthly income, not to mention cash reserves. I just can't imagine a well established company in ANY industry where 1500 in a month is make or break.
Certainly true of a startup, but wasn't your argument that Adobe was after the big fish with the subscription, not the small ones?


One piece of your post I do disagree with: If you spend 1500 dollars from the business, that is 1500 that is not profit, and therefore not taxed. You should only be paying taxes on profits. If your accountant tells you something different, get another accountant.
 

JonAustin

Telecom / IT consultant and semi-pro photographer
Dec 10, 2012
641
0
Horseshoe Bay, TX
Re: Adobe Releases Lightroom 6.2 & CC 2015.2

Famateur said:
Just thought of a feature I'd like: Undo (remove) a specific step from the History without losing all the steps that came after it (or can I already do this and just don't know?). Or be able to switch off a step as an additional alternative to removing it.
I would love this feature, as well, and have searched exhaustively for a way to do it, but don't think it's possible.
Probably because the results produced by each step in the history depends on the state of the image based on the step immediately before it, and the ability to remove any step from the sequence might result in wildly unexpected or physically / logically impossible results. It still would be nice to have, since you could (theoretically) always undo it, if you didn't like the results.