Jump to content

Recommended Posts

See here. It's also available to download on trial.

I took the plunge today and upgraded (well TBH, on trial until I'm happy)

Well I guess I am happy, a few hiccups taking my catalog across:

1. Color label sets not transferring, Need to copy/paste from old catalog.
2. Settings. Again, need to copy the folders if you have your settings stored with the catalog, not general.

In use:

1. Defiantly more responsive. I took the opportunity to kill my old previews file so it rebuilds and the system is defiantly a lot faster now. Dual screens are now usable again on my old MBP (grid on secondary screen).
2. The re-worked clone tool not as useful as I hoped. It's ok for small areas against sky of foliage but detailed removals near importance edges is not possible.
3. The Auto straighten/perspective corrections are brilliant.

Like I say - overall, I am very happy. You could argue that the speed should not have been so bad in 4 and hence that is not a chargeable improvement but overall, yes I'm happy to pay for the upgrade :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good Lord, version 4 has not been out that long, I'm still on 3.6 and I'm still very  happy with it! 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

See here. It's also available to download on trial.

 

I took the plunge today and upgraded (well TBH, on trial until I'm happy)

 

Well I guess I am happy, a few hiccups taking my catalog across:

 

1. Color label sets not transferring, Need to copy/paste from old catalog.

2. Settings. Again, need to copy the folders if you have your settings stored with the catalog, not general.

 

In use:

 

1. Defiantly more responsive. I took the opportunity to kill my old previews file so it rebuilds and the system is defiantly a lot faster now. Dual screens are now usable again on my old MBP (grid on secondary screen).

2. The re-worked clone tool not as useful as I hoped. It's ok for small areas against sky of foliage but detailed removals near importance edges is not possible.

3. The Auto straighten/perspective corrections are brilliant.

 

Like I say - overall, I am very happy. You could argue that the speed should not have been so bad in 4 and hence that is not a chargeable improvement but overall, yes I'm happy to pay for the upgrade :)

The only thing that would entice me to upgrade now would be real speed enhancements. I generally find LR4 ok in that respect (comparing to Bridge - ACR which I used previously), except for the graphics speed when examining big images, which is one of the several reasons I open everything into Photoshop CS6. After import I set LR4 generating previews and come back when they are done. I've never had a problem with dual monitors. I'll wait a little while and hear more of what others are saying I think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Download myself this morning, upgrade from LR4.

 

First impressions. I agree with Julie regarding the reworked clone tool. It is useful, but not up to the healing tools in CS6. Nevertheless, when used with care it is an big improvement over a simple spot tool.

 

Agree the perspective correction is brilliant but, again, needs to be used with care.

 

These are first impressions only. I've processed 16 images from raw ready for upload to Alamy and it was a good experience. The upgrade price is good at $99. Even a full license if you can't upgrade, at under $200 (depends on your local pricing), seems good value for me. But of course, it all depends on your current workflow. LR does take a little effort and study to get the best out of it, like all reasonably complex applications. In my case LR since version 4 is almost a total processing workflow solution save for the actual upload.

 

Is it any faster? Not too sure about that. My desktop is reasonably fast in any case and I have worked on two 24" screens for about two years now. LR is a hungry beast in terms of processing and memory usage, so not sure how it will work on older systems. If in doubt, download a trial and give it a good workout.

 

Ken

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gotta stick with v4 for the foreseeable future until my Mac catches up with the OS. 

 

 

Richard.

(Languishing in 20th century tech oblivion .. )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gotta stick with v4 for the foreseeable future until my Mac catches up with the OS. 

 

 

Richard.

(Languishing in 20th century tech oblivion .. )

You are not alone mate, I am still on Lightroom 2 and CS3 on my trusty old G4, (due to be phased out soon!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

.. my trusty old G4 

 

You got your money's worth with that machine, David. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

^^ And once you upgrade your post processing system, have a look at the lastest versions of LR5 and CS6 (if you can still get CS6 while avoiding the coud), you will see a dramatic improvement in processing. I've been using PS since the early 90s and LR since LR3. The improvements in the latest versions are nothing short of astounding, particularly from LR3 to 4 and now to 5. Start with an LR5 and if you need the additional process that CS6 provides then that becomes a cost- benefit decision. But LR5 is a no brainier as far as I see. It is the best value in post processing software that I have found, and I've look extensively into this.

 

To put it in a language we all understand, think of your computer as the camera body and the software as your lense. Both are important, but lense quality always trumps a camera upgrade.

 

Ken

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Azure-images

...

Edited by Azure-images

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been using lightroom 3, but recently downloaded the trial of lightroom 4 just for working on my sony RX100 raw files ( as I am using Capture NX for my Nikon stuff ) the lightroom 4 trial runs out shortly and I was going to upgrade... but now lightroom  5 has been thrown in to the ring.. Do I go for lightroom 4 as I had planned or go for lightroom 5..???

 

any views on this.. Thanks, Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been using lightroom 3, but recently downloaded the trial of lightroom 4 just for working on my sony RX100 raw files ( as I am using Capture NX for my Nikon stuff ) the lightroom 4 trial runs out shortly and I was going to upgrade... but now lightroom  5 has been thrown in to the ring.. Do I go for lightroom 4 as I had planned or go for lightroom 5..???

 

any views on this.. Thanks, Steve

 

 

Definitely go for LR5. Always go forward with software if you can. In fact, can you, or will you be able to get LR4? Not sure. The other thing that needs checking is what OS requirement does LR5 need? If it runs on a Mac at 10.6.8 then I will certainly go for it just based on the auto levelling alone. I am going to download the LR5 trial if my system allows it right after I've finished downloading about 40 photos to Alamy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The LR5beta was a nice piece of software, from the limited use i made of it. Just downloaded the LR5 release version now and waiting as it chunders its way through updating my catalogue.....(at over 5g this may take a little while.....)

 

km

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could they come up with a more convoluted download? I thought they were going to ask for my first girlfriend's middle name. The perspective control is worth the update. Living here in the city, I really need that. I'll still be doing my spotting in CS5. You know where they can stick their Cloud. 

 

I really have come to rely on LR for my NEX system, and I'm overdue for a serious test for using it instead of Capture NX2 on my Nikon images. One thing I'm sure, I will not be upgrading CS5 or buying anything other than (maybe) PS Elements in the future. Nikon seems to have forgotten they have software. 

 

Teaching myself advanced PS techniques remains something that will never happen, like teaching myself French. (That went from learn good French to learn some French to stay out of France.) In my future I see remaining current with Lightroom as paramount and moving away from PS and Capture NX2. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quick first impression is that LR5 is much better at rendering the RAWs from the Fuji X100s than was LR4.....seem to be crisper and less prone to smearing.....

 

 

km

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to add to my initial impression, the sensor spot tool is great. I know that you can do this in CS but having it so easily accessible in LR5 is a bonus, and it's so easy to use. I have found sensor spots that I didn't known existed on earlier images.

 

Ken

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to add to my initial impression, the sensor spot tool is great. I know that you can do this in CS but having it so easily accessible in LR5 is a bonus, and it's so easy to use. I have found sensor spots that I didn't known existed on earlier images.

 

Ken

 

Ken, please don't toss the word "great" around so casually. It does very simple spotting okay, but is not anywhere near a match for PS's tools. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Just to add to my initial impression, the sensor spot tool is great. I know that you can do this in CS but having it so easily accessible in LR5 is a bonus, and it's so easy to use. I have found sensor spots that I didn't known existed on earlier images.

 

Ken

 

Ken, please don't toss the word "great" around so casually. It does very simple spotting okay, but is not anywhere near a match for PS's tools. 

 

Yes Ed, and if you look back to my original post in this thread you will see that I said just about the same as you.

 

But I acknowledge that I should have been a little clearer in my last post.  I was referring to the "Visualize Spots" tool in the Tool Overlay.  This finds sensor dust spots far more easily than I have been able to do in CS6,  In that regard I'll still give the Visualize Spots tool a "great".  Sorry for my lack of clarity.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"I agree with Julie regarding the reworked clone tool. It is useful, but not up to the healing tools in CS6. Nevertheless, when used with care it is an big improvement over a simple spot tool." -- Ken

 

Okay, I see you are disagreeing with yourself. Either way, we have to do about three moves to delete a simple spot in LR5 where one click gets it done in CS6 or even CS5. In Terry White's video on his 5 best new features of LR5  

 he's saying that now he doesn't have to go over to PS. Pull the other one, Terry. I'm most unimpressed with this feature. And as I've mentioned before, I unhappily find myself doing a great deal of routine spotting. I've been to Melbourne and remember it as being a much cleaner city than New York. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ed. I appreciate what you are saying and in your context you are right. CS content aware healing beats LR cloning hands down.

 

In my second post I was talking about finding the dust sensor spots:

 

"Just to add to my initial impression, the sensor spot tool is great. I know that you can do this in CS but having it so easily accessible in LR5 is a bonus, and it's so easy to use. I have found sensor spots that I didn't known existed on earlier images".

 

IMO experience in CS some are easily missed unless you do a manipulation of contrast or whatever else you do to make them prominent. And does your "single click" include opening image in CS, going to 100%, click on the healing brush tool, then click on the spot?

 

The "Visualize Spots" tool makes this very easy in LR5.

 

Anyway, happy to agree to disagree on this point <_<.

Edited by Bizair
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's not get picayunish (love that word!) about this. And yes, using CS is lots faster; you only open CS once and then make 25 to 50 spot fixes. We don't have to open the program every time. I don't know why you want to sell me this idea, but I ain't buying.

 

Personally, I've never had a dust problem on any of my cameras and never had a QC failure. 

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No one has mentioned the new Radial filter in LR5. I think it looks jazzy as used in Terry White's video, but so far I've not been able to find an image of mine where it would be useful or practical. (Maybe when I get into my new and mysterious specialty I'll be trying it out.) Are there any of you who think—this is what I've been waiting for!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Upgraded the other day and today gave it the first outing - about 1,000 images from a shoot this week!

 

No issues with the upgrade (from LR4)  being installed everything went over.

 

First and foremost it is quicker, that was noticeable - it made the  save/delete/keeps much quicker in my workflow.

 

Radial filter - nice!   Can see it being an regular alternative to the brush as much faster then 'painting an area' for adjustments.

 

Any one else have any feed back?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just picked up a new Dell Laptop so guess I am headed for LR5.  My old XP and Vista computers just was not up to the task.   :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Alamy plugin is not working with Lightroom 5. (In my case, at least.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.