1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Lightroom 4 upgrade

Discussion in 'Digital Image Editing & Printing' started by Barney, Mar 28, 2012.

  1. Barney

    Barney Well-Known Member

    I'm still wavering over upgrading to Lightroom 4 from 3.

    There are some new tools and extra control int he Develop module, but other than that nothing else that really interests me so the £60 it costs seems a little steep at the minute.

    Who here has upgraded and has it been worth it?
     
  2. IanJTurner

    IanJTurner Well-Known Member

    Me. And yes, I think it's worth it. The reorganising of the exposure panel has made it much more intuitive (I never really liked the way it was laid out before), and the extra local edit tools mean you can often avoid a trip to Photoshop. Plus - the ability to remove a picture from the 'Files to be republished' panel has fixed a small but annoying niggle for me.

    There's still some stuff I haven't explored yet - I haven't tried the upgraded print module, and I haven't really looked into the book publishing thing either, or the map for that matter!

    Also, I think it's great that the conversion of your existing libraries and photos to match the new version is completely pain free.
     
  3. Barney

    Barney Well-Known Member

    I haven't really got a problem with the Develop module's interface as it is, so any improvements will be of minimal value. Though I've used the publish part of it a few times, I've not used it enough to be frustrated by any failings.

    I use iMovie for video editing, and also to produce slideshows as you can match transitions to beat/sound effects in it. Slideshow production is an area where Adobe really could have made some significant improvements in Lightroom. This would have been of much more use to more photographers than producing photo books where most will be produced via printers' own software anyway.

    The one area where I'd like to see some changes is in importing. It would be nice if Lightroom could detect the last number used in the file renaming sequence and automatically start the next import at the following number. Also, it would be nice to be able to upload photos from different cards to a 'holding area' before renaming them and importing them fully. This would make it simpler to upload and rename files in capture time order when taken on two or more bodies.

    As a result, I'm only interested in the benefits to actual image manipulation. Are the additional tools actually worth the extra?

    As it is, I only export to Photoshop when I need layers or when I have some more than basic spot removal/cloning to do so I don't think there's anything in 4 that will change that.

    I understand that there's a new raw conversion engine, so I'll be interested if anyone has noticed any significant difference between the two version in that respect.
     
  4. Norman

    Norman Well-Known Member

    It sounds like you've already decided but, just in case, take a look here.
     
  5. PeteRob

    PeteRob Well-Known Member

    I tried the beta version after the free 30 day of version 3 ran out and my computer really struggled so I think the memory and speed requirements are more with 4. That said I am using a low end VIAO laptop with fixed 2GB memory bought in 2008 for keeping in touch with home while I am away here working. It runs DPP Ok though. I'll get 4 probably when I go back to UK and get a desktop.
     
  6. Barney

    Barney Well-Known Member

    No, I'm still undecided (see the OP ;) )

    I can google the differences, but it's actually user experience I'm looking for. If people see a significant improvement in the raw engine for example that alone could be worth the upgrade cost.
     
  7. Meredith

    Meredith Well-Known Member

    I think the changes made for the 2012 process version are worth the upgrade cost. The slider changes are great and The option to use RGB curves is something I have wanted for ages. I can see less going to Photoshop in the future.

    The map section is nice for me too as I geotag a lot of my photos.
     
  8. Barney

    Barney Well-Known Member

    I'm resurrecting this thread to see if anyone has any experience of any performance benefits gained since upgrading to LR4.

    It's been a while since the upgrade was announced, but it's only recently that I've seen people come out with actual, real world, reviews rather than the usual churnalism of simply reposting/YouTubing/Blogging what Adobe say it does differently.

    Some of the anecdotal experience suggests that LR4 uploads and processes much more quickly than LR3 and this alone will be worth me paying for the upgrade. Has anyone experience this?

    Also, I saw some compatibility issue when exporting LR4 files to CS5, but for the life of me cant find the article I read it in. Has anyone else any knowledge of this?
     
  9. Fen

    Fen Well-Known Member

    It's a little faster than LR3, but saying that LR3 ran very fast on my kit anyway!

    I've been exporting a few bits of CS5.5 lately (mainly for print labs) and not had any problems at all.

    Took a little while to get used to the changes on the 'Basic' panel (Highlights, Shadows, Whites and Blacks).

    The only annoyance I had was updating all the files in my library to the "2012 Process" which updates all the presets for the image. Got over 30,000 images in my library so left it going overnight rather than selecting to do it when I opened up an older image.

    Other than that, it works a treat.
     
  10. Fen

    Fen Well-Known Member

    It didn't actually take that long! Found out it took 15mins at most :rolleyes:
     
  11. GlennH

    GlennH Well-Known Member

    It's a a personal choice, but apart from the 2012 processing algorithm, map and colour control features, the new version 4.1 personally makes it a certified no-brainer—which suits me to a T!

    Getting control over purple/green defringing means using fast lens at wide apertures is a more viable choice, especially with high res cameras. Previously all non-Nikon users had no available weapon for dealing with axial CA.

    To be honest I haven't noticed much difference in speed, but that might be bottle-necked by my computer!
     
  12. Meredith

    Meredith Well-Known Member

    The advice I have seen says to leave images not in the 2012 process alone and only change them individually if you think the new process will improve them. Converting images from the 2010 process to 2012 will make them look different as you can't exactly map the older processing to the new version.

    If you are happy with images in the 2010 process leave them alone. Process all new images with the latest 2012 process.
     
  13. Fen

    Fen Well-Known Member

    Oh well... too late now ;)
     
  14. Barney

    Barney Well-Known Member

    The issue revolves around exporting files from LR4 into CS5 and then saving them back into LR. There's a gap in compatibility there somewhere but, as I can't find the original place I read it, I can't remember whether it is something that will be a significant issue or not.
     
  15. Meredith

    Meredith Well-Known Member

    Before ACR 6.7 came out for PS CS5 the latest version of ACR for CS5 couldn't understand the new process 2012 stuff in Lightroom so you had to have Lightroom render the picture for PS instead of ACR. That's not an issue now.
     
  16. Barney

    Barney Well-Known Member


    Ah, in that case, glad it's no longer an issue, and it never was an issue for me as I very rarely use ACR, preferring to use LR instead.

    Thanks Meredith! :cool:
     

Share This Page