Peter Jordan Posted January 14, 2014 Share Posted January 14, 2014 I am currently using LR4.4 for cataloguing and post processing my images. I know that LR5 has auto correction of "keystoning" but what other benefits has it compared to 4? Should I upgrade? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gervais Montacute Posted January 14, 2014 Share Posted January 14, 2014 Apart from not being able to use the Sony RX100 II in LR4 and the auto correction, can't think of that much else. I would still upgrade though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reciprocity Images Posted January 14, 2014 Share Posted January 14, 2014 Non-circular cloning and healing brush, and radial gradients were both very welcome additions for me and together have nearly removed photoshop from my workflow. The auto keystone corrections are hit and miss, so don't upgrade just for this, but it's a useful feature in straightforward cases that saves bit of time now and again compared to the manual adjustments. I think you can still download a free trial version to test out if the new features are worth the upgrade for your personal workflow, but it may be worth waiting... there are already whisperings of LR6 public beta to start in March FWIW. -Jason Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gervais Montacute Posted January 14, 2014 Share Posted January 14, 2014 Adobe are a lot like Apple. If one was in anyway cynical you could almost call it churning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Coombs Posted January 14, 2014 Share Posted January 14, 2014 Auto perspective correction can be useful, other than that, not much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Jordan Posted January 14, 2014 Author Share Posted January 14, 2014 Thanks all for your comments. I did watch the Adobe LR5 Video when it first came out and concluded it had little extra of anything much. I still finish off and add Keywords in PS. I am still using CS2 which I have had for about 10 years so I am a dead loss from Adobe's viewpoint. Jason: The added cloning options and radial gradient could indeed be useful I'll wait and see if any further useful ideas come in... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Betty LaRue Posted January 14, 2014 Share Posted January 14, 2014 Ah, belonging to CC, I'll get that LR upgrade! I had just installed LR4 on my computer and was trying to figure out how to use it when I decided to join the CC. So I really learned on 5, can't make comparisons. BTW, in CS6, they now have a filter to reduce small amts. of blurriness from camera shake. I developed a couple of pictures today using that feature, and wow, it works. Two images I had discarded for stock look great after processing. Stop and think about that a minute. All those shots that almost, not quite, make it, can now make it. Adobe doesn't recommend using the filter on grainy or more seriously OOF or more moderate camera shake images. Just those that barely miss being fine. Good enough for me. Those two images were ones I really hated to lose, one of a kind images. Pardon the digression from LR to PS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 14, 2014 Share Posted January 14, 2014 Didn't have LR4 but the upright tool and ACR 8 are worth the upgrade IMO. I use the upright a lot and it's hit rate for interiors is impressive. I also have found is a lot less buggy than previous versions, I actually can't remember LR5 freezing or causing any issues.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Jordan Posted January 15, 2014 Author Share Posted January 15, 2014 I am now beginning to think that the enhanced clone tools in LR5 might take me a bit further towards being able to do the entire PP process through to upload all in one piece of software. I would maybe need to also get the Alamy plug in for keywords.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paulstw Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 The cloning in LR5 is no way a substitute for doing it right in photoshop. It just samples another area of the photo much like the spot healing brush in photoshop. The leaning building correction is really useful, however, you need a lot of space as it crops areas out. I've gained some comments like "Where did you get this shot? Where you up a tree?" Just purely because it can change the perspective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 The cloning in LR5 is no way a substitute for doing it right in photoshop. It just samples another area of the photo much like the spot healing brush in photoshop. A little harsh IMO. It's useful for some types of spotting, clear skies and obvious patterns such as clothes material but it has severe limitations and needs to be viewed as such. I use it for low-res edits but not for finals. Not sure when it arrived in LR but the spot detector might well be useful for those that don't use a layer method for seeing spots. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gervais Montacute Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 When you boil it down, LR5 is very self contained and easy to use. Generally the results are very good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Jordan Posted January 15, 2014 Author Share Posted January 15, 2014 I have now ordered it and have made a resolution to learn how to use it better.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zigzagmtart Posted January 16, 2014 Share Posted January 16, 2014 Peter, most people seem to use Lightroom to catalog and keyword and then export to PS for final editing if needed. You seem to do the reverse, just curious if I`m missing something? What is the advantage of keywording in PS? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Jordan Posted January 16, 2014 Author Share Posted January 16, 2014 Zigzagmtart, No real advantage, just the way I have been doing it. I have been using PS CS2 since 2004 and only got LR3 in 2010 when I got a new camera that would not work with the old version of ACR. Initially I had to use LR3 for cataloging as that is the only way you can make the program work! I then did the RAW development in LR and sent 16-bit TIFF file to CS2 to finish off - maybe minor adjustments to levels and saturation then any clean up cloning etc. I then added keywords before saving as a jpeg in a folder to be uploaded when I had enough ready. So I have always done it that way. Now that I am getting LR5, I plan to learn how to do as much as possible in LR aiming eventually to export completed jpgs with keywords to my export folder. It will take a lot of practice before I am able to upload without a final check in PS... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zigzagmtart Posted January 16, 2014 Share Posted January 16, 2014 Thank you for the explanation. I started with lightroom and Photoshop seems foreign. All in what you are used to I guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Betty LaRue Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 Peter, I do as you do. Exception, I am only a few months into using LR. Using Photoshop for years, one develops a method and habits, and those are hard to break when a new kid (LR) arrives on the block. I have more been concentrating on learning the development part of LR, without getting into the cataloguing, keywording, etc. It's easier for me to nail one part before moving to the next. TMI (too much information) coming in causes me to forget some steps, where if I do them in small bites, they stick. Like you, I am determined to at last learn it all, but it may take me awhile to get there. What's hard for me to understand is everyone keeps saying it is easier to keyword in LR. Keywording in Bridge is easy as pie. Hard to think LR could be easier. Betty Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MDM Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 What's hard for me to understand is everyone keeps saying it is easier to keyword in LR. Keywording in Bridge is easy as pie. Hard to think LR could be easier. Betty That was probably me who said that. The basic process of adding keywords to single images is simple in Bridge - problems arise when one tries to do many images simultaneously, try to save keyword lists and do hierarchical keywording. If Bridge was a physical object then I would have flung it at the wall many times. Lightroom does what it is supposed to do in that respect. It does hierarchies, keeps the lists intact and it is orders of magnitude faster for searching. As for image previews and losing the previews randomly - don't mention the word Bridge. But if you have never tried to use Bridge as an image database, you may have never noticed its flaws in that respect. From what I read of your posts in the other thread, you probably don't use Bridge or Lightroom as a database in any case. That is where Lightroom really does the business but it means importing the images and keeping the links in place (i.e. don't delete the images and move them to a new drive after working on them - that does not work). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.