ArticlesSoftware/App ReviewsLightroom 4 Review

Lightroom 4 Review

By Amadou Diallo | Published Mar 6, 2012 | Software/App Reviews

Tagged with: adobe lightroom photoshop

Enhanced video support

Lightroom 4 expands significantly on the range of options available with video files. You can playback and scrub video in the Library module. You can trim video clips non-destructively as well as apply a subset of Lightroom's image editing tools. Common video formats like .mov and .mp4 are supported along with .mts files generated from AVCHD output.

You can drag the trim handles (circled in red) to remove unwanted frames from both the beginning and end of the video clip. A time marker below the thumbnails shows the location of the playback head.

You can apply image enhancing edits by using the Library module's Quick Develop buttons. Note that the Crop, Highlights, Shadows and Clarity options are disabled for video files.

	You have access to a number of image editing tools in the Quick Develop panel.
	You can correct the WB of a video clip with a Lightroom Auto WB setting and/or by adjusting Temperature and Tint values manually.
	In addition to making exposure and contrast adjustments you can also convert the video clip to Black & White by selecting the option in the Quick Develop panel's Treatment menu.

While video files cannot be opened in the Develop module, you can apply a subset of the Develop module tools by selecting a saved preset.


The Saved Preset option at the top of the Quick Develop panel includes video-compatible presets.	If you choose a non-video preset containing settings that cannot be applied, the dialog box shown above appears.

You can export video directly from Lightroom in either DPX, H.264 or the file's existing format. Video files can be included in collections that are published to Facebook and Flickr via their Lightroom-supplied plug-ins.

A popup menu in the playback bar allows you to select the poster frame for a clip - the thumbnail that appears in Grid view. Additionally you can extract a single video frame as a JPEG file.

Other goodies

We've now looked at the headline features and additions to Lightroom 4. Here are some other noteworthy changes that have been included in the new release.

DNG lossy compression option and the ability to export reduced resolution raw files
New zoom ratios of 1:8 and 1:16 in the Library and Develop modules
NR effects are now rendered in image previews other than 1:1 view
One-click Chromatic Aberration (CA) removal in Lens Corrections panel
Ability to filter searches by saved versus unsaved metadata status
Ability to hide modules by right-clicking on the module picker
Crop tool supports four digit aspect ratios (facilitates using screen resolutions as aspect ratios)
Global flag status (regardless of image location)
Color managed Flash galleries
Email images directly from Lightroom (using desktop client or AOL, Yahoo, Hotmail and Gmail accounts)
Language options (Mac only)
Ability to simultaneously move multiple folders between volumes
Hierarchical presets display
Disk burning available on Windows 64-bit systems

Changes since the public beta

If you've already explored the public beta you'll find very little has changed with the final release. Here's a list of the differences that you will see in the shipping version.

Lightroom 3 (and earlier) catalogs can now be converted
Blurb books can now contain up to 240 pages
Reverse geocoding has been enabled in the Maps module
Video compatible presets have been added and Develop module presets have been updated
Auto tone settings in the Develop module have been updated
The range of temperature and tint WB adjustments in the localized tools have been expanded
Process Version (PV) is now an option in the copy/sync dialog
The Clarity slider has a gentler effect on overall image brightness when moved in a positive direction
The chromatic aberration (CA) algorithm has been adjusted

Conclusion

Lightroom 4 is a substantial upgrade and for many users will represent a significant change from their current Lightroom workflow. Yet it does not take long to get the hang of the changes to the Develop module, for instance, and after processing dozens of images in PV2012, I find I am consistently getting pleasing results in fewer discrete steps.

Users who are importing video from their cameras will be pleased with Adobe's decision for greater video support. It's clear that Lightroom is not aiming to compete with Adobe Premiere, or even iMovie for that matter. Yet the tools that are on offer represent a commitment to video and make a strong case for using Lightroom to manage your video content as well.

With GPS support clearly on the rise from camera makers, the Maps module may soon become a much more essential part of many photographers' workflow. The Books module still feels rather un-Lightroom-like at this point. It's not as intuitive to use as it could be, but to be fair does offer quite a number of options for tailoring content to your needs.

For many (myself included), the use of Lightroom is based first and foremost around image quality. Adobe can add all the bells and whistles they want in order to keep pace with the competition, but I have to be able to get great looking results from my raw files. With version 4 it's clear that the Lightroom team has kept its eye on the prize, so to speak.

The raw conversion engine introduced with PV2012 strikes a better balance between image sharpness, detail rendition and noise reduction. A new, automated CA correction tool works impressively well on a range of images. And the addition of more localized adjustment parameters saves some trips to Photoshop. Put simply, you can get superior results from raw files compared to previous versions. It's hard to think of a more compelling reason to upgrade than that.

And while the changes to Lightroom 4 are significant, keep in mind that Adobe traditionally saves at least another feature or two for their famed '.1' releases. So stay tuned.

Amadou Diallo is a technical writer at dpreview, a photographer and author who has taught Lightroom in seminars and workshops throughout the U.S. His fine art work can be seen at diallophotography.com.

LIKE 32

Flag as inappropriate

The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions held by dpreview.com or any affiliated companies.

Pin It

Print view

Comments

Total comments: 452

Except of some pretty bad stability issues that don't allow a consistent workflow, the interface and results I get from LR are great.
It seems like they released this product before it was ready, it hangs a lot and always stops responding/crushes within 30 minutes of using it (most of the time withine 10 minutes), Yes, Every single Time I work on it!!
It's a complete mess! so right now my advise is, stay with LR 3 till LR4 will be fixed because it's definitely broken.

0 upvotes

Okay people

Deal of the day and you only have 24 hrs so move quick Hunts photo has the deal of the day for Lightroom 4 till midnight tonight I just scored 2 copies for pretty much nothing I luv hunts always offering the best deal and service.
price $105.00

http://www.huntsphotoandvideo.com/detail_page.cfm?ProductID=65165063

0 upvotes

i am planning of purchasing lr4. but i cant decide yet till i figure this out.

im a new user of mac, i have a macbook pro. 10.6.8 but i don't know if im running a 64bit processor or 32 bit i have been turning over rocks to know this. can anyone help me.

0 upvotes

The system itself will run 64bit, there are some programs that run at 64bit and 32bit, the mac itself is 64 bit. A way to see if a program is running at 64 or 32bit is go to applications -> utilities -> and open Activity Monitor, on the right side it will show if app is running at 64 or 32 bit. Here is a link to a helpful page.
http://support.apple.com/kb/HT1342

0 upvotes

It's 64bit, all Macs are now and the OS itself changed to ONLY 64bit (and broke a lot of 32bit only apps) at Snow Leopard - play away!

0 upvotes

Just an update - 4 weeks ago Adobe released a 4.1 Beta release that was suppose to fix many problems that people were having. Fixed some but many remain. No word from Adobe when a non-beta release will be delivered with problems fixed. Little frustrating to pay for a product and not have it work properly. Reluctant to use it for production work.
Makes me have severe reservations about upgrading to PS CS6 after this experience.

0 upvotes

Beta is so that those problems can be found and fixed. Have you sent a bug report to Adobe?

0 upvotes

Dropping XP excludes lots of potential sales. adobe with photo shop update restriction make Microsoft look docile.

0 upvotes

This review is the best I have come across on LR 4. A big THANKS to the author!

I had been forced to upgrade to LR 4, as my camera (D4) is not supported in LR 3. This is a shame as I was actually quite happy with LR 3. However I wouldn't have any issues with LR 4, except I can't get a smooth operation and decent speed. I am happy to upgrade h/w, however I am not sure what more I can do.

Windows 7 64bit Professional; i7 920 cpu 12 GB of triple channel Corsair Extreme RAM; 2x1TB drives in RAID 0 with measured access speed of over 200MB/sec; 2GB video card.

I have even disconnected the internet and then turned off all anti virus (temporarily), but I still get jerky processing from moving the LR sliders, such as Exposure. I am on 4.1 RC. I tried putting LR cache on an SSD, but still no real benefits.

Interestingly, my MacBook Pro 13" i7 Dual Core laptop performs smoother for the same thing! So there must be something that I am missing on the Windows settings, but what?

1 upvote

I agree with Paul on the LR being super-sluggish. I've got 2 MacBook Pro's - an i7 and i5. Thought there was something wrong with my machine (we normally use the i7 for video editing and the i5 for stills). LR4 is running so slowly on the i5 that I thought there was something wrong with the machine and then tried it on the i7 as well - same problem - now I've changed back to LR3. As a so-called professional photographer I don't have the time to sit and wait and wait and wait for simple commands to render. This is disappointing Adobe.

1 upvote

Could be a GPU issue since Adobe is offloading much of the high needs video processing in other softwate to the GPU since it can do it much better. Try different hardware acceleration setings and make sure you have the latest GPU driver.

0 upvotes

I'm sticking with Apple Aperture, thanks.

Had it since first release and see no reason to change now. It's had most of these "new" features Adobe has just launched for some time already.

0 upvotes

All this Lightroom BS (been there; done that), is nothing but a marketing play thing, and that is just over-priced, for people who think they are pros, for paying the high prices. Get off, the tiered upgrade wheel of hell. Forget Lr catalog hell. Real editors, of Raw photos, don't care how pretty the interface is, for newbies. It's the output that matters. You can do the same things with completely open software (in MANY choices). A pretty face, will not educate you in the technology of digital photography. You either know; what you are doing, or you don't. Do not look to a closed program, to educate you, or give you editing abilities. Go open, or go home. I'm sorry to break this to you, but not everyone who claims to be a pro, is a pro. Wasting money down the Adobe rabbit hole, will be your regret. You don't need hand holding programs, you need open programs, that have the ability to do any thing you can imagine. Set your color profile in ufraw, or stay with JPEG. Use the Gimp!

Comment edited 1 minute after posting

3 upvotes

I completely agree with you. Ive been using Faststone. It's free, its simple - its blazingly fast compared to LR and it doesnt clutter your HD with a gazillion hidden files and folders.

0 upvotes

Obviously one of those who things he was a pro and figured it out. I wonder if it was his work or personality that was the unprofessional factor!

0 upvotes

LR3: 99.6 mb (mac OSX)
LR4: 909.4 mb
Adobe bloat?

4 upvotes

It's getting bigger and slower. It's now in the bloatware category with poorly designed user interface. I'm afraid either Java or similarly incapable technologies have a lot to do with it.

0 upvotes

User interface, colors (or absence of those), buttons, tabs, ergonomics is absolutely awful. It can compete with SilkyPix for the title of the ugliest modern software. Not that Adobe ever had any Photoshop with cleanly designed UI, but LR4 is especially bad in this department. On the other hand, all the basic functionality is there and quality of adjustments is good and price is almost reasonable.

2 upvotes

Learn how to use it properly and you'll change your mind LR4 is a FANTASTIC RAW converter

2 upvotes

@bigdaddave, I'm writing software for living, you don't tell customers, who abhors a poorly designed UI -- learn to use it properly. It's the stupidest thing to say, you will simply lose them. Rather, you find competent people to properly design user interface -- that's the easiest part of the software design. Adobe did a terrible job at that, it's shocking to see such an incompetence. The fact that they made it so slow and so fat also tells a lot about their software development competence, or should I say incompetence.

2 upvotes

he just dont like change

0 upvotes

This is the most amazing photo editing software package. Easy to use, a lot easier then the PS harecore version. I am not and expert, but this software makes it easy to work with your pics. I also have elements 10 and it is good but this is great to work with. It shows you all you need to know about each feature. I can hardly wait to try to book feature

0 upvotes

I used the book module and produced a finished book. Its templates only match Blurb, the only supplier it is linked to in the UK.

Blurb's output is extremely disappointing compared to DSCL Colour Labs or even Photobox. Hopefully they'll both attend to matters with templates of their own.

0 upvotes

For those who say it's slow, I don't see it. I'm wondering if your using 32bit computers. I just built a monster (64bit) 64 Gig of memory and three monitors because I edit video as well and it is doing things {For the good} that I've never seen before... LR4 will use the power and threads if you feed it.

0 upvotes

I was really interested in LR4 because of some of the new features in the develop mode. Would have helped my workflow a lot.

In short - I would hold off on buying LR4.
Especially if you use Photoshop CS5 to do further editing.

When I try to edit in CS5 it tells me i need new Raw Plug-in 7.0
Which is not available for CS5.

If I ignore the warning and edit in PS any way- CS5 hangs.
I've tried all the "work arounds" short of using the beta of CS6. Most do not work or are unacceptability cumbersome.
Who wants to use a Beta of anything for production work?
Not me. Especially after the latest upgrade to LR4.
LR is suppose to stream line work flow not complicate it. This version is a DOG.

Check out the Photoshop family forums at photoshop.com to get an Idea of all the issues.
Some of which did not exist in the beta version.
On top of all that it's slower than LR3.
Had to go back to LR3 for production work. LR4 is just too unreliable.
My recommendation for now is DO NOT BUY.

Comment edited 4 times, last edit 8 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

I'm sorry you feel that LR4 is a DOG. A lot of people using AMD processors have voiced their opinion about slowness. Have you tried 4.01? You can get the beta of it from adobe Labs. You might find many of the problems you are facing have been addressed in this version.

Personally, I've used LightRoom since Adobe gave me a free copy because I had bought RawShooter, the forefather of LR. I haven't been a huge fan of the program but I do use it. Since trialing 4.1 I'm very impressed with it. Particularly the way it handles noise and mild HDR corrections. I guess no one is twisting arms to make users buy it. I'll upgrade when 4.1 is out of beta. I'm fairly sure I'll find a lot more use for it too. I'm not so sure about Photoshop 6 though.

0 upvotes

Been using Lightroom 3 for many months now. From what I can read between the lines is that the L4 is just not worth the upgrade. I can do all I need on L 3. Some functions on the Basics Panel have been changed about. I prefer the old fill in light, black e.t.c. So what if it has slightly better noise level performance and usualy at a price on a slight Photo quality depletion. One does not need a better noise leve performance if one has a top Camera. It's all a sale gimmig. I am sticking to my trusted L3 and Gimp to do much of my real Pro work woth. The rest is just good photography to start with.

0 upvotes

I'm sticking. There's not enough in the new package to compensate for a huge loss in speed on my 18 month old Mac. Sliders very quickly stop sliding and adjustment becomes tedious. Giving up my second monitor speeds things up but overall it's still significantly slower than LR3.

More like a traditional Adobe product.

0 upvotes

While I will say that I love Lightroom, Lightroom 4 is very slow. Lightroom 3 was brilliant, and fast. Lightroom 4 crawls, and seems to page the disk a lot more.

I do love the new functions and features though, especially in the Develop module.

0 upvotes

Even though not really an upgrade I got LR4 for it's video archiving. this alone is a great way to archive and manage all the digital assets. You can do some simple trimming and color corrections to video clips but LR is not for that and hope Adobe won't make LR a mammoth as they so often do with other products. All in all, it runs the same as all other LR versions. I am running LR4 on a mid 08 MBP and it's OK.
If you need LR for it's core capabilities then you can skip this version.

0 upvotes

I recommend you explore some real DAM software. LR is mediocre DAM at best. Some possibly better are for example Canto cumulus, Extensis portfolio, iView MediaPro or Phase One Media Pro. Some of these are image managers, some real asset managers, which can manage all your documents (inc. doc, pdf, avi etc).

Those other programs have minimal or no image/video editing possibilities, but their asset management features rock.

1 upvote

Core capabilities are vastly improved from 3 to 4

0 upvotes

I am still using LR2 on my 3 year old MAC. I recently upgrade the MAC to OS10.6.8, so I'm ready. I am concern that so many are reporting LR4 to be slower than LR3. I have no use for the book and map module, but I could use the video managing functionality. Could someone give me their opinion on this? Should I upgrade?

0 upvotes

http://blogs.adobe.com/lightroomjournal/2012/03/lightroom-4-hot-issues.html#comment-50650

1 upvote

Yup a lot slower especially in the develop module & 2 screens increases the problem. It is all over the adobe forums. I would hold off on moving from 3.6 if you can. I have upgraded but will probably go back to 3.6 what a pain!

1 upvote

It is slower...i have noticed it too. The image adjustments seem to lag behind the changes I make through the dials.

2 upvotes

Curious, am I the only one that might think that LR v4 is slower than v3.6?
So, far ... it seems like it to me. :)

2 upvotes

Excellent review as always. Of course, going back to exposure and contrast brings LR closer to the old darkroom practice of fiddling with exposure and paper contrast, but we've finally learned to learn the other, LR1 & 3 way of working. It is almost as if another school of thought won the battle inside Adobe! Strange that saturation also seems to take a stronger role, I hardly use it in LR1.4 and 3.5, preferring "livening colors up" instead. Since I will continue with XP at least for another year, maybe even two, I will see what happens before moving over and will use my expensive LR books in the mean time. Windows 7 is only interesting for heavy applications like these and my MAGIX Video de Luxe versions in the 64 bit version, with its inbuilt support of higher capacity in RAM-memory. RAM puts the limits in image processing and video coding! But to end positively: LR price is finally brought down to OK.

0 upvotes

Can we now edit lens profile correction on JPEG instead of only RAW?

0 upvotes

Thanks, Amadou. Very helpful review.
I welcome the Book module and I'm really glad for the video handling.
Video represents about 10% of my photo/video work but it consumes 20% of my time. Having the LR interface for both is a great way to streamline workflow and save some time. Synergy!
I will upgrade from LR3.

Best,
Alan

1 upvote

Great review that covers all the additions. Very good real world examples. I will be upgrading to Lr4.

2 upvotes

All color labels I used for classifying pictures in LR3 have disappeared in catalogues updated to LR4. Is this normal? Does anyone know a way to keep color labels in updated catalogues?

0 upvotes

"NR effects are now rendered in image previews other than 1:1 view"

About freakin time!!!

2 upvotes

With regards to the soft proofing, I don't understand why software shouldn't automatically match the proof to the original. Given that the system is able to predict how each will compare, it seems like a case of a simple objective function to be optimized.

I'm tempted to make a plugin to do this, but in practice there aren't enough hours in the day for me...

1 upvote

How would that be different from what LR4 has now? Once you have the monitor calibrated and choose the correct printer profile, it is, as you say, automatically matched. You can't skip those earlier steps because you have to know what the exact variables are.

0 upvotes

For the G3 the new raw processing is worth close to a full stop in high ISO noise. Even 6400 is nice for 8x10's and I find myself wishing the G3 had a 12800 setting.

Oddly my E-P1 raw files show little change relative to LR3.6

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting

1 upvote

It is a good upgrade, many improvements, this way LightRoom continue to be the best, in my opinion Capture One the second and the third is the very good RawTherapy for FREE on windows also, and the fourth is Bibble Pro

Well done Adobe

2 upvotes

Bibble has now been acquired by Corel and rebranded "Aftershot Pro".

0 upvotes

RawTherapee is very good, but I would give Photivo a try. Photivo is free and a very powerful RAW editor with lots and lots of filters.

0 upvotes

Just bought it at 130 euros in France ! Great price move, I won't use my hacked version of lightroom 3 anymore...

1 upvote

What a low blow, disrespectful move by Adobe...

I mastered the previous versions well enough as to make an expeditious work flow for my LR Raw conversions. This included carefully evaluated and tested "initial Raw conversion" settings for all the files out of my 1DMKIV.

Now they decided not only to change the Process Version (PV) but actually to also change controls that do different things.

This means that I will now have to (1) re-train from scratch on how to use the software and (2) intensively re-work all my current catalog on previous processed images (...since the review states that the controls differ a LOT...) if I want my photos to be current with the most recent PV.

Even if I skip the reprocessing now, this is something that will inevitably be a problem in the future as I don't see Adobe indefinitely carrying PVs from versions to versions..I mean, only 5 years have past and they are already in their 3rd PV, so sooner or later this problem will arise.

Bummer...

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

Stay with PV 2010 if you prefer that (which will also leave the control sliders as you know them). Also, don't assume they will stop supporting old PV, unless they say so.

1 upvote

You are mistaken. In fact Adobe has gone to considerable effort to not disrupt your workflow. Process versions are still supported back to 2003. I tested the beta on some old images and the Basic panel adjusts to represent the earlier tool set when the version is set to 2003 or 2010. There is no need to update your old images unless you want to take advantage of the new process tools. If your pictures are fine the way they are, leave them alone. You could even, gasp, set the process version back on new images if you want to preserve your old workflow, which seems to be important to you. Even better, you can create a preset using an earlier process version, selecting the Calibration checkbox in the process creation dialog, based on an image with the version set to 2010, and apply that preset to any new file imports where you want to maintain the LR 3 settings.

You could also just not upgrade, depending on how important you think the other new features of Lightroom 4 will be to you.

0 upvotes

The new development module with the new highlights, shadows, white and blacks sliders is a bit different from what I am used to, but after fiddling a bit with the controls, I feel it offers so much better adjustment possibilities of the tonal range of a photo that I finally feel I have the creative I have wanted for my B&W work - and it makes me want to do more black and white conversions.

My biggest grudge with LR3, how one could adjust sliders only to find they jumped back to where they were seems to have been sorted out.

I have many photos to reprocess, but that will be enjoyable, and I might take the opportunity to reinterpret pictures I've pretty much left the way they were since LR2.

In conclusion: I like it. Good going, Adobe, and again I feel it's worth every penny to upgrade.

2 upvotes

Any comparison to Bibble? I always liked Bibble, but now I somehow lost confidence once they were bought by Corel :-)

0 upvotes

I use Bibble pro and like it a lot. I started looking for an alternative since Bibble will not open large scans of medium format film due to file size limitations. They compare favorably, but I think Bibble is faster and the controls are laid out a little better -- overall the UI in Bibble is better. I think it is easier to make simple corrections in LR and easier to make more complex corrections in Bibble. I like the integration of Noise Ninja in Bibble. Bibble also support a simple layer-like edit capability but I have always found that a little cumbersome to use. I like the "history" of edits in LR but would like the ability to enable or disable them to see kind of a "before/after" of an edit more easily. I like Bibble better but it doesn't meet all of my needs. Still looking for other options to handle large files.

0 upvotes

I was very excited to read that LR 4 had a book design module, but after reading the review I realize that the book module is worthless for me. As a wedding photographer, I design professional albums all the time, and being able to design an album within LR would be a huge plus. Unfortunately, it looks like this module does not allow me to design the kind of albums I need.

It looks like it is set up to design Blurb Books, which would be fine if it allowed you to do certain customizations to design other albums/books. This is my wish list:
1. Custom sizes so you can design any type of album.
2. Ability to do custom page layouts that can be saved as templates.
3. Ability to put stroke on images
4. Ability to draw guides to designate trim lines, gutter, and safe area.
5. Ability to output to jpg, and psd. None of the album companies I've worked with accept pdf's. They only take jpgs.
6. Ability to organize your custom layout templates.

0 upvotes

You will never see that, just like you will never be able to do a serious slideshow with the slideshow tab, remember, Adobe also sells InDesign...

0 upvotes

No Support for Windows XP means goodbye Adobe for me. I'm sick of being mugged by companies like Adobe and Microsoft milking us every 18 months to stay on their merry-go-rounds.

3 upvotes

Are you kidding me? XP is going on 11 years old. It is two (soon to be three) generations obsolete. Technology has moved on. That's just how it works. If every piece of software had to work on 11 year old OS's it will retard software development for decades.

Comparing dropping support for a near 11 year old OS that isn't even produced anymore to mugging is just ridiculous. It isn't adobes fault you insist on using an outdated OS's.

19 upvotes

I'm angry too.
Lightroom 4 won't even run on my C64.

21 upvotes

Did your LR3 stop working ?

So don't upgrade. Obviously you're not all that into upgrading anyway.What happens when your XP doesn't run ANYTHING new? Does that mean goodbye computing?

I hardly consider dropping support for an OS over a decade old.. "mugging".

... some people LOVE to complain...

Comment edited 32 seconds after posting

8 upvotes

I already need to upgrade my old XP workstation for the 32-bit memory limit. I constantly run out memory when running LR3 + PS-CS4 + a few 3rd party filters. LR4 is just making the upgrade that much more compelling. And, as was already mentioned, my LR3 still works just fine until I can afford a new computer.

1 upvote

Your are all entitled to your opinions. I've been with Adobe for a long time and started to get peeved with them a while back so although I'm still using Adobe design Standard and Web Standard as well as Lightroom 3.6 I will take them no further.
No TFergus my copy of LR3 works perfectly fine and never crashes even though it has catalogued 250k images. Josh 152 your defence of Adobe is wasted as many other companies latest software works perfectly with XP ie Sony Vegas 11 and Proshow Producer 5 ,which costs a bit more than lightroom but is written by a company that cuts there user base abit more slack than Adobe appears to do. The rest of the comments made are not really worth a reply.

0 upvotes

Sorry Tom, but you're diggin' a hole here. XP, as good as it was (mostly...) is now verging on ancient, in OS terms. By all means keep an old system with XP churning away on it if you must, but even Windows 7 is in its 4th(?) year now, so it's not like people are sheepishly following MS's every desire. In fact, I've only just today reinstalled my trusty XP gaming rig with 7 Pro 64bit in preparation for LR4, having already done so with my 'net PC (this one) about a year ago. I like XP, and I like 7, but I decided it was time to finally move on from XP before I find myself unable to use the software I want to.

1 upvote

I'm with ya Tom.

It's interesting they have us so well indoctrinated by now that we consider something at 11 years old as ancient!

They sure have got a lot of my money over the years, and yet when I was a kid I did not allocate even one cent to them in the 'lifelong budget forecast'! (that just shows my lack of vision)

0 upvotes

@markeast.

It is not "indoctrination" it is simply the pace technology and software improves. Ancient is a relative term. For example the pyramids were constructed around 3200 B.C. and are considered ancient but so is a man who is 100 years old. In technology terms 11 years IS ancient.

Think about it. When xp was released in 2001 digital cameras were still in their infancy. The iPhone was still 6 YEARS away. DDR 2 ram was still 2 years away and the fasts speed when released was only 266MHz. Facebook was still 3 YEARS away. In 2001 most computers were still running Pentium 3's. I could go on but you get the point.

It costs adobe money to keep supporting multiple , obsolete OS's. With windows 8 on the way it makes no sense to wast money supporting a no longer manufactured O.S.

Adobe is just the first. I am sure we will start seeing more and more software dropping xp support.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 6 minutes after posting

1 upvote

Complaining about adobe dropping support for xp is like complaining that the latest and greatest car stereo wasn't' tested and designed to work in a Ford Model T.

Comment edited 34 seconds after posting

0 upvotes

You mean, Cassette Deck.

0 upvotes

If you don't get the argument that I have a perfectly good PC that I do not want to throw into landfill just because the Software/ Hardware cartel needs to make more money out of me to keep the cash cow rolling then I guess you will never get it.

1 upvote

Given even Microsoft doesn't support Windows XP anymore, why do you expect anyone else to?

2 upvotes

It wasn't until I got all the way down here that I realized it was a conspiracy by the hardware/software cartel that was causing the problems.

So stick with XP. Personally I like the 64 bit capability I have with OS X

0 upvotes

Those like Tom who are sticking by XP are only harming themselves. XP was a great OS for its time, but it's vastly outdated and insecure for today's internet. The computing world changes very fast and OS updates aren't only to make the rich richer, it's also to redesign for usability and most importantly, security.

If you'd like to continue to look at it as only money, then feel free. You say you have a perfectly good PC but you honestly don't. Programs are capable of much more and need the security and features of a new OS as well as the hardware to run on. It's like you have a canoe but want to host a party for 20 on the lake. If you want to party, you need to buy a bigger boat.

0 upvotes

I use W7 and XP, you mention security, but that is for 80% up to the user. I you update all your software regurarly, etc, then XP is still very capable. In fact, W7 gives me more headaches as XP concerning stability and searching for docs and settings, etc.

0 upvotes

why not including A4 as a standard format within the book-module?

2 upvotes

Because Adobe needs to keep selling InDesign and Photoshop.

Comment edited 11 seconds after posting

0 upvotes

I'm using the Olympus E-30 camera. It does not have presets in 3.6 version or 4.0 I presume (don't know why). What are some major adjustments that you would suggest?

0 upvotes

As I read through this, I wonder if there'll need to be change the custom camera profiling tools like Color Checker Passport, and go through camera profiling again.

0 upvotes

No. All settings are imported from ACR/Lightroom 3

0 upvotes

Probably wouldn't hurt, i'll do the same i think.

0 upvotes

does anyone here work with aperture. I got into it as I am using mac computers and when the price dropped to something like 69euros in the app store. as far as I can say (as far as I could see :-) the noise reduction in light room seems to be better. in the new version of LR highlight and shadow handling seems to be improved. my main camera is a G3 and for more ambitious tasks I rent whatever it takes (the MKii it used to be, will check out the nikon800e soon). so is it worth getting the LR too or even switching ? the G3 RAW files have their limits (I like this little camera with the lovely pancakes) so GOOD processing seems to be even more of an issue... (I print the stuff on a epson 4900, very very good machine !)

0 upvotes

WHY ARE YOU RIPPING OFF AUSTRALIAN CUSTOMERS ADOBE?

Lightroom v4 has been offered at US $79 for an upgrade $149 full product.
At today's exchange rate that would be just under A$75 (upgrade) or A$141 (Full). The UK store would be even better for us on today's rates at A$73 (upgrade) or A$129 (Full).

Instead these are the prices on the Adobe Store here in Australia

Full Product (Boxed) $219.09 + GST = $241.00
Full Product (Download) $187.00 ex GST
Upgrade (Boxed) $111.25 + GST = $122.38
Upgrade (Download) $98.75 ex GST

I have been a loyal Lightroom user since Version 1 and have also paid for upgrades for both v2 & v3. I wouldn't expect that Adobe would offer it at today's exchange rate but you are not even close. I will be in no hurry to upgrade with the unfair pricing policy that Adobe Australia seem to have in place.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 1 minute after posting

10 upvotes

I've just made the same discovery.
According to the Google FX tool, the Aussie new price is about $254USD, and the upgrade cost is equivalent to about $128USD.

So we can just go fsck ourselves.

2 upvotes

The same thing in Adobe Brazil...
Full Product (Download) US $279,00 + GST
Upgrade LR3 (Download) US $145,00 + GST

I think these prices encourage piracy!

4 upvotes

I agree. It's always been this way in Australia. The publishers ad distributors used to give excuses like, the cost of providing local support lines (they no longer have them afaik, and if they do you pay for the support), localisation (which was always a lie, choose UK english dictionary and you still get US spelling) and anyway everything is internationalised by default now anyway. The internationalisation for Europe is much harder than Au and they get the cheaper price (and I assume most of the language for Portugal or Spain would be good for most of Srth America). It's not like they need to ores different DVDs for each region (though they may choose too) - still the price of DVDs explains zip when most ppl want to download. Ironically its cheaper for an Aussie to buy a DVD from a US retailer than to download from the Adobe site.
I can see no reason for it.
And I agree it encourages piracy.
Ironically Sweden, the home of The Pirate Bay, probably gets the cheaper EU prices.
Meh.

3 upvotes

Have you tried coding software upside down? It's not easy!

8 upvotes

after reading your post I tried other adobe sites.
in france, there is a promotion (free shipping).
then the download version is more expensive than the boxed (shipped) one!!!

0 upvotes

In Croatia they didn't list the price for 4 yet, but they have Lightroom 3 for 440 USD ;( so I'd say you guys are getting it cheap :D link: http://store.hsm.hr/kategorije.5ac9d416373d4178ba3cd5f224b7f792.adobe-photoshop-porodica.aspx

0 upvotes

Has Adobe ever addressed or given a reason for the large price differences? Curious why they might be pricing it that way. I imagine there has to be some kind of "internal pricing structure" they adhere to. I can't imagine it's complete greed, or they would have not dropped the price at all, but I am not an accountant or economics expert. Sometimes, with a lower price a larger audience can be reached, but if they are aiming for the general masses it's too pricey. And that goes contrary to selling it at a higher price overseas. I assume there has to be some reason, legitimate or not in our and their minds that would make them follow such a pricing model. I am also sure it was very calculated and researched to death, then settled on what they have now knowing the price discrepancies. I would really like to know if the have talked about it publicly. It does deserve addressing, because their customers have asked and are rightly frustrated.

1 upvote

I am sick and tired of Adobe ripping us off in Australia; I know where you can buy it for $19 US - it was posted yesterday on a particularly wonderful site.

1 upvote

I Like it! Worth the Upgrade.
Have been a LR user from the very first beta. and use LR every day.

The conversion of LRv3.6 to LRv4 is just ok ... you will want to tweak your settings in LRv4, and will get better results via more control imho. There might be a bit more detail. But, that might be from the improved Clarity slider.

With every version, I make fewer trips to PS.

But, Adobe ... Can we please have a LITTLE more SPEED in the v4.01 for Win7 64-bit update ? Please

Maybe a way for LR to use more Memory (preferance slider) or load all the program in memory.

Hello, 36mp Nikon D800 DNGs ... :)

No way to create "Custom Book Templates"?

0 upvotes

What specific settings did you tweak from 3.6 to 4?

0 upvotes

Hi all, I love the improvements Ive tried on the beta version. Ive got LR3 already bought in the box in my country (New Zealand). Everyone is advertising the upgrade of US$79 which is a good deal, and I have been trying repeatedly to purchase it online, like I can do on EBay, Amazon, WotIf or any business that values its international customer base. I even pay for the download traffic volume on my ISP here for the privilede of the download (no postage cost to Adobe). So why wont Adobe let me purchase it on their store. Instead I think they want me to pay an approx 30% premium and pay in Australian dollars (worth more)and then pay additional to convert that to my Kiwi dollars (worth less). Fellow photographers, the others of us in this planet of 9 Billion people who will get less product support anyway, would value your supportive comments to make it a level field. Phase One let me buy online their products at international pricing. Adobe: time to step up to the mark? Cheers, Brando10

1 upvote

Is anyone having trouble with print presets in LR4? I cannot get tehm to work for some reason.

0 upvotes

I have a small bug in Lightroom 4. When I mouse over the histogram in the Develop Module, the pop up tips are E-mail labels, such as "Mark as read", "Mark as spam" "delete", "reply"..etc..Anyone else have this happening to them?
Just curios if its just my system. Its a peculiar bug.

0 upvotes

I added a screen-cap to an album (LR 4) in my Galleries for those who are interested.

0 upvotes

Those tool tips most likely come from the app *under* LR. It might still be a bug in LR, but could also be a problem with Windows, or even the application underneath.

0 upvotes

I was using a mac, no other apps running, same thing happens, and I restarted the computer. Same result. Its not a big deal. I love it so far and havent had any serious issues. I found the tool tips funny because I thought I had something running underneath and kept trying to check my mail program to see what was happening. No big deal for me and good so far with LR 4.

Comment edited 36 seconds after posting

0 upvotes

I have noted that LR acts oddly in some cases when running in multi-monitor full screen mode. They have "topmost" window bug in there somewhere. If you are using dual monitors, see if cvhanges when only using one (F11).

0 upvotes

Only using one monitor, no other programs running..just a small bug, no bother, but I thought it was funny, how that could have ended up there.

0 upvotes

That IS bizarre, then! It's hard to imagine how those strings even appear in LR (or any Adobe program, come to that). I'd be interested to know if those tool tips are the same as the ones in whatever mail program you use...

0 upvotes

I dont use the mail app on my mac much, just webmail. The mac mail app is installed of course, but I have not used it in months. I will try an compare the tool tips to see if its from that. I video captured it just in case I needed to show support or something, I may upload it to youtube so others can see it.

Daing it I cant type I will try and re set up my mail program to see if anything happens.

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 4 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

Can't wait for full develop module support for video and also preview/export video from photos (timelapse).

0 upvotes

I really like it and I believe that it is much better than LR3. Thanks for the excellent review.

0 upvotes

I have the previous version 3.6. I use an Olympus E30. It does not have presets for my camera and I would assume that the 4.0 does not either. Any E30 users what do you use? Thanks

0 upvotes

Doesnt work with XP !!! Booo. May have to finally install Windows 7 . Been sitting on my shelf since october 2009, lol.

1 upvote

lol... same here. :D XP, you were great, but your time has come.

0 upvotes

Total comments: 452