Lightroom "Classic" New Features Real World Experience

[[email protected]]

I figured I'd start a post regarding some of the new features in the "real" Lightroom - the one that runs on your computer and is fully functional. I think we need a specific post for this because the others have (inevitably) become primarily about the subscription/pricing model. This post is intended to have NOTHING TO DO with the pricing model.

I've been playing with the luminance and color mask features, and I have to say it's a game changer for me. I've always thought that the main reason why I'd use Photoshop at all was the selection tools, less the layers functionality. I'm supremely pleased with how effective these two selection methods are. I'm able to get much more accurate and natural-looking selections. Very pleased with that.

With the speed improvements, I'm not really seeing much in the way of that. I should note that I never really found Lightroom to be so slow as some have indicated, so perhaps my system has been configured in such a manner where I've been lucky, and others are seeing big speed improvements. I'm curious to see if others are noticing it being zipper AND whether they found it slow to begin with.

I also notice that there is a new "process"! We'd previously been on the 2012 process, and there is now a version 4/current process. Has anyone tested out to see what's different about the new processing method? An Adobe web page states: "Auto-masking with better noise reduction by updating to Process Version 4 (Current) under Camera Calibration." Not exactly sure what that means. Perhaps it is about the performance of noise reduction when making a local adjustment that is selected using auto masking. If so, that sounds like a particularly narrow set of circumstances.

 

[pwp]

Lr Classic looks very promising. My livelihood depends on a smooth running Lr so I'll be holding off for a week or so to see if any unlikely gremlins emerge.

My comfortably high specced quad core Windows 10 system is one of the unfortunate configurations that Lr runs erratically on. The local adjustment brush is the primary kiss of death, and Radial & Gradient tools need to be used minimally or the whole thing slows to a crawl. Great when you're on a deadline!

Therefore the promised speed boost is of huge interest to me, as is the headline new feature, the Luminence and Color masks. Adobe's Julianne Kost's demonstration video spells it out clearly.

If Lr Classic runs slow on my machine I'll be looking at a rebuild using a proven hardware configuration, provided such a component list is searchable and available.

-pw

 

[bitm2007]

I'm finding it quite refreshing to have a version of Lightroom (the all new LR CC) that isn't as bloated as Lightroom Classic has become, if the full functionality (tone curve, noise, sharpen options etc) of the classic versions develope module (but not the other modules which I never use) is added to it the future, it would be more suited to my needs that LR classic.

 

[LDS]

I'm finding it quite refreshing to have a version of Lightroom (the all new LR CC) that isn't as bloated as Lightroom Classic has become, if the full functionality (tone curve, noise, sharpen options etc) of the classic versions develope module (but not the other modules which I never use) is added to it the future, it would be more suited to my needs that LR classic.

Never found LR bloated, and I use the Map and Print modules quite a lot. I also have friend who like the Slideshow/Web modules quite a lot (i.e. to quickly show and sell photos at events, often outdoor). I don't use the Book module just because I create my books myself.

But I'm afraid, the people who designed LR are now mostly out of the project.

In one of the speeches, I noticed a disturbing assertion. Someone, in explaining why in CC the order of controls changed, said "we didn't find an explanation why exposure controls are between white balance and saturation".

Because the reason is LR was designed around a workflow-based interface, not a "group of controls related by some programming common factor". The former is what a competent application designer would study and design an UI around, the latter is what a lame programmer without a clue about how users work would do.

Why WB is the first slider? Because white balance is what a photographer would do first before further editing. While Saturation is something you may never touch (but oh yes, hypersaturated images are so fashionable today), and if you do, you'll do last.

The books about LR I read always said the controls order is the average order you should use them, and that makes sense - the order was a sort of "checklist" reminding you the steps to process your image, without having to jump among many tools scattered around the interface (as you do in Photoshop, or other applications alike).

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

There are some issues for me that seem to prevent me wanting to use LR CC on my desktop. There is no way to restrict it from uploading all my images, and no way to remove them from the cloud except to delete them totally from the cloud and from my computer. I asked about this, they can be removed if added by a mobile device, but not if uploaded by cc from the desktop. Even if on a removable drive, they will be deleted when its connected.

I think someone who wants to use it needs to review how files are handled first, because they could lock you into something you don't want. Unfortunately, write ups are not covering the aspect of file handling, addition and removal.

 

[Jopa]

There are some issues for me that seem to prevent me wanting to use LR CC on my desktop. There is no way to restrict it from uploading all my images, and no way to remove them from the cloud except to delete them totally from the cloud and from my computer. I asked about this, they can be removed if added by a mobile device, but not if uploaded by cc from the desktop. Even if on a removable drive, they will be deleted when its connected.

I think someone who wants to use it needs to review how files are handled first, because they could lock you into something you don't want. Unfortunately, write ups are not covering the aspect of file handling, addition and removal.

Try the Classic one (not CC, but CC Classic, a.k.a CCC ), it's no different from LR6. It also seems to be slightly faster.

 

[jd7]

I am not a fan of the LR Classic name, but it is definitely running faster for me than LR CC 2015 was running. I'm happy about that!

 

[Jopa]

I am not a fan of the LR Classic name, but it is definitely running faster for me than LR CC 2015 was running. I'm happy about that!

They could have called it "LR Old Fashioned" or "LR Oldster" or simply "LR Not Cool" to promote a faster switch to the pure CC version.

 

[bitm2007]

I am not a fan of the LR Classic name, but it is definitely running faster for me than LR CC 2015 was running. I'm happy about that!

They could have called it "LR Old Fashioned" or "LR Oldster" or simply "LR Not Cool" to promote a faster switch to the pure CC version.

I'm not a fan of the name LR CC classic either. Just Lightroom, Lighroom 7 or Lightroom Original would have been better in my opinion, after all LR CC classic has very little to do with the cloud, and the word "classic" implies that it is a high quality product that is out of date "which it isn't given that a new version has just been released, and there are future updates on the way.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

There are some issues for me that seem to prevent me wanting to use LR CC on my desktop. There is no way to restrict it from uploading all my images, and no way to remove them from the cloud except to delete them totally from the cloud and from my computer. I asked about this, they can be removed if added by a mobile device, but not if uploaded by cc from the desktop. Even if on a removable drive, they will be deleted when its connected.

I think someone who wants to use it needs to review how files are handled first, because they could lock you into something you don't want. Unfortunately, write ups are not covering the aspect of file handling, addition and removal.

Try the Classic one (not CC, but CC Classic, a.k.a CCC ), it's no different from LR6. It also seems to be slightly faster.

Of course, I use the classic, I'm referring to the CC version which is lacking in features and has several other drawbacks. Its definitely not fully functional compared to the classic, but does basic editing, which is all some need.

Do you want to print images? - I hope not

Rename images - Nope

Export as DNG, TIFF, or PSD - what are those?

3rd party plugins - Sorry

Red eye or pet eye elimination - you are supposed to like red!

By now, you get the idea, if you are a power user, or just a amateur who uses on camera flash to get red eye, you will be frustrated.

There are too many to mention individually, so here is one list, I suspect it will grow
.
https://www.lightroomqueen.com/lightroom-cc-vs-classic-features/

 

[Don Haines]

There are some issues for me that seem to prevent me wanting to use LR CC on my desktop. There is no way to restrict it from uploading all my images, and no way to remove them from the cloud except to delete them totally from the cloud and from my computer. I asked about this, they can be removed if added by a mobile device, but not if uploaded by cc from the desktop. Even if on a removable drive, they will be deleted when its connected.

I think someone who wants to use it needs to review how files are handled first, because they could lock you into something you don't want. Unfortunately, write ups are not covering the aspect of file handling, addition and removal.

WHAT!

If you are using Lightroom CC, it will automatically upload all your images to the cloud and there is no way to stop this from happening? I shot 100GB of files yesterday, and living in a rural area, I have a 250KB/ sec upload speed on my internet....on a good day! That’s 5 days to upload the files!!!!

Is this true? Is there no way to disable uploads?

 

[Talys]

I also notice that there is a new "process"! We'd previously been on the 2012 process, and there is now a version 4/current process. Has anyone tested out to see what's different about the new processing method? An Adobe web page states: "Auto-masking with better noise reduction by updating to Process Version 4 (Current) under Camera Calibration." Not exactly sure what that means. Perhaps it is about the performance of noise reduction when making a local adjustment that is selected using auto masking. If so, that sounds like a particularly narrow set of circumstances.

Hmm, nice catch! I went to some old mid-range ISO photos (1000-2000), and I can't tell the difference between v3 and v4 under 2x magnification. But hey, it isn't worse, and in some special cases, maybe it will come out better

So far, I really like everything about the new Lightroom (Classic), except... "Adobe Lightroom Classic CC". What genius came up with that tortuous name!

 

[Hector1970]

I'm not sure what Mt Spokane is referring to about loading to the cloud. He is not referring to the classic version. The other new Lightroom cc is cloud based so this is designed to load the photos into the cloud. This is probably the way of the future as fibre broadband takes off. City users get the faster speeds years in advance of more rural locations.
I've been using the new Lightroom classic now for a few days. I'm aware of new features but haven't spotted any of them yet. I'll have to watch the videos to work out where they are and what they do.
I am not finding it running any quicker. I have 16GB RAM.
There are people here who don't find Lightroom slow that have about a thousand photos in their catalog and 64GB of RAM and don't understand that most PC / Laptops sold struggle with Lightroom and Photoshop. Lightroom in particular is a bloated piece of software.
In summary for me it really like only a minor upgrade with obscure changes that most users won't use.

 

[Labdoc]

LRCC classic Import with 1:1 previews seems to take just as long as the last version. Merging HDR photos was faster and even with 30 MB files or larger it was better. I managed to get 12 processes going at once and that's where I hit a wall and everything slowed down. When I took the HDR's I made and merged them into a HDR panorama, it was as slow as ever with the system crashing once while I had 2 processing and tried to start a 3rd. For me, an improvement, but like most things, not perfect.

 

[LDS]

WHAT!

If you are using Lightroom CC, it will automatically upload all your images to the cloud and there is no way to stop this from happening? I shot 100GB of files yesterday, and living in a rural area, I have a 250KB/ sec upload speed on my internet....on a good day! That’s 5 days to upload the files!!!!

Is this true? Is there no way to disable uploads?

Ligtroom Classic works as usual. But if you import images using the new LR CC they will be uploaded to the Adobe servers, and there's no way you can disable it - it has been designed explicitly this way. You can select to keep a *copy* of the locally (but it supports a single destination), otherwise the image are only stored remotely, and locally they are kept in a cache for editing, if not already in cache they are retrieved as needed.

I also suggest the read the Adobe TOS about its cloud storage - which rights they have on your photos, how you could access it using non Adobe tools, etc. Especially, read about the clauses about what happens if they lose your photos - they put big limits on what you can ask in damages, and you're forced to go through arbitration, and no class action is allowed.

Cloud may be the future, but could be full of rain, hail, lightnings, and thunderstorms... a cloud backup solution could be great, but it has to be fully contracted as such.

 

[Talys]

I'm not sure what Mt Spokane is referring to about loading to the cloud. He is not referring to the classic version. The other new Lightroom cc is cloud based so this is designed to load the photos into the cloud. This is probably the way of the future as fibre broadband takes off. City users get the faster speeds years in advance of more rural locations.

No, I don't think so, not for volume photography. I have 180Mbps fiber (both ways), and sure, single 30MB files are individually fast to transfer one way or the other. But, for example, 30GB of data, or 60GB of data, which can be a half-day's shooting. As fast as fiber is, it isn't within the realm of SSD or RAID SSD storage on or 10gigabit LAN. The speed of going from 1 image to the next in Develop matters, and it won't be comparable.

Aslo, people with large libraries go through 10+ TB a year (or even double that). I'm not sure we'll be seeing 100TB+ cloud storage any time soon.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

don't understand that most PC / Laptops sold struggle with Lightroom and Photoshop. Lightroom in particular is a bloated piece of software.
In summary for me it really like only a minor upgrade with obscure changes that most users won't use.

My very old and ordinary Lenovo X100 sails along with Lightroom and Photoshop very nicely. I bought it in 2009. You would have to hunt very hard today to find a laptop that can't run circles around it.

 

[meywd]

I'm not sure what Mt Spokane is referring to about loading to the cloud. He is not referring to the classic version. The other new Lightroom cc is cloud based so this is designed to load the photos into the cloud. This is probably the way of the future as fibre broadband takes off. City users get the faster speeds years in advance of more rural locations.

No, I don't think so, not for volume photography. I have 180Mbps fiber (both ways), and sure, single 30MB files are individually fast to transfer one way or the other. But, for example, 30GB of data, or 60GB of data, which can be a half-day's shooting. As fast as fiber is, it isn't within the realm of SSD or RAID SSD storage on or 10gigabit LAN. The speed of going from 1 image to the next in Develop matters, and it won't be comparable.

Aslo, people with large libraries go through 10+ TB a year (or even double that). I'm not sure we'll be seeing 100TB+ cloud storage any time soon.

don't understand that most PC / Laptops sold struggle with Lightroom and Photoshop. Lightroom in particular is a bloated piece of software.
In summary for me it really like only a minor upgrade with obscure changes that most users won't use.

My very old and ordinary Lenovo X100 sails along with Lightroom and Photoshop very nicely. I bought it in 2009. You would have to hunt very hard today to find a laptop that can't run circles around it.

I don't have any inside info on Lightroom but I don't think the reason for it being slow is that its bloated, Sensors get higher and higher megapixel count, which needs more RAM, faster drives (SSDs or even SSDs in raid) and faster graphics cards.

My Home desktop which is from 2009 is doing good, I have an SSD for the main drive but I can't put the photos there, since its only 250GB and I have reached more than 1TB even after deleting many of un-needed photos, the 12GB ram is great for large Panoramas but still I face issues because I always like to keep my most used apps open and since I am a developer I always have few GBs reserved for the needed tools.

Now I am not saying that LR is not to blame, but having high res previews ready can cause serious load on the HDD and Memory, Having a fast enough PC is part of being a photographer these days.

 

[SecureGSM]

I found what seems to be a bug or inconsistency in camera profile generation via X-Rite Passport version 1.1.1 Lightroom module. Lightroom CC Classic.

I used Export with preset --> Color Checker Passport option to generate a camera profile. gave the new profile a name, OK. Profile was successfully generated and saved in:

C:\Users\My_User_Name\AppData\Roaming\Adobe\CameraRaw\CameraProfiles

I restarted Lightroom but new profile was not showing up in Develop --> Camera Calibration --> Profile.

I repeat the procedure again and again to no avail.


I found the problem and 2 solutions:

The problem:

Profile was created and file was copied to the right folder but the file name contains NO file extension. i.e.

5D IV 24 70 F2.8 II ISO 100 Day Light instead of 5D IV 24 70 F2.8 II ISO 100 Day Light.dcp
notice how .dcp part is missing in the plugin created camera profile file name.

That is why Lightroom did not detect the new camera profile upon restart.


The solution:

1. go to the folder where new camera profile was saved and modify the file name: add .dcp at the end of the file

or

2. instead of using Export with preset --> Color Checker Passport option, use the following procedure:

File --> Export -->Export to: X-Rite Presets

Give your new profile a name in DNG Profile Name box, click export, restart your Lightroom CC Classic.

I am sure that this issue will be fixed sooner or later but for now... this gets the job done.

 

[martti]

I am totally confused with all the new CC applications.
The LR CC started loading my library to the cloud which is a hopeless task with the connection I have on this island. The Bridge CC has fascinating new features but could not find some pictures on my HD. Photoshop CC seems to be working as well as the CS6 but I do not really understand what I am winning.


The modern world is divided sharply according to internet bandwidth.