items - Three Reasons to Upgrade to Lightroom 3
After a months-long public beta, which featured two releases, Adobe has released the final version of their Lightroom 3 software application. Thanks to the long beta, developers were able to make refinements to the application based on user feedback, resulting in an extremely functional, polished, and stable software application. Lightroom 3 boasts numerous compelling reasons for users to upgrade; here are three.
1: Improved RAW Processing & Noise reduction
Thanks to improvements in digital CMOS sensor design, it’s now possible to take photos in very low-light situations. High-end DSLR sensors are capable of ISO speeds up to 102,400. That's faster than even the fastest push-process black-and-white film stocks, and it dwarfs the 1600 and 3200 speeds that were the mark of high-end cameras a few scant years ago. Still, with high-ISO shooting, comes noise. Lightroom 3’s improved RAW processing engine does a much better job at noise reduction than Lightroom 2, allowing you to capture cleaner images in lower light conditions, even if you don’t have the cash for a Nikon D3S with an f/1.4 lens.
ISO 1250 image processed in Lightroom 2 (Left) and Lightroom 3 (Right); Click for 100% crops
2: Lens & Perspective Correction
Shoot with an extreme wide angle or fisheye lens? Like to take architectural photos, but find yourself wanting to adjust the perspective of the photos for better results? In the past, to remove distortions in these scenarios you’d have to edit your photos in Photoshop – which was not only a hassle, but also a cost-prohibitive exercise if you didn’t own a copy of Photoshop already. Now these adjustments can be done within Lightroom, without having to leave the program, and without having to make permanent changes to your original photo.
Unadjusted image (left) and image with a corrected perspective (right)
3: DSLR Video Support
If the DSLR you currently own doesn’t already shoot HD video, chances are that the next one you purchase will. DSLR video is good enough for television production (just ask the producers of House or SNL), and chances are you’ll find yourself shooting some moving pictures with your camera at some point. Now you can view your videos side-by-side with your photos in Lightroom. You’ll even be able to add keywords, ratings, and metadata to videos.
There are plenty of other new features in Lightroom 3 – enhanced performance, faster catalog backups, Flickr export, film grain simulation, and more. If you’re interested in learning more about the new features, or are unfamiliar with Lightroom’s capabilities, please check out the B&H Product Description.
Comments
06/15/2010 - 15:47.
Woo boo!
06/15/2010 - 15:45.
While, I'll grant you the two improvements in terms of RAW imaging processing and lens perspective correction, the video support is a real joke. It simply allows one to link or view a video. The absence of editing features is a big minus.
The bottom line is that Adobe made a small incremental improvement but they could have enabled/created many more features. It's another $99 shakedown of current users - what a business model.
06/15/2010 - 15:46.
My staff is absolutely going nuts on how great this program is...Adobe never seems to amaze me.... they simply keep getting better and better
06/15/2010 - 15:52.
The bottom line is that Adobe made a small incremental improvement but they could have enabled/created many more features. It's another $99 shakedown of current users - what a business model.
06/15/2010 - 15:57.
A shakedown to a degree, but no worse than iPhones with irreplaceable batteries or versions of Windows that really are a joke. At least this stuff works. For what I do with it, and not so much really, and for the absolute pleasure of its workflow capabilities, I will gladly pay $99.
06/15/2010 - 16:02.
Does anyone know how does the noise reduction compares to Imagenomic's Noiseware.
If I don't have to take every noisy photo over to photoshop, this is easily work $99 to me.
06/15/2010 - 16:11.
A shakedown to a degree, but no worse than iPhones with irreplaceable batteries or versions of Windows that really are a joke. At least this stuff works. For what I do with it, and not so much really, and for the absolute pleasure of its workflow capabilities, I will gladly pay $99.
I would never never want a user-replacable battery in an iphone. That would create a whole another world of 3rd party crap.
06/15/2010 - 16:11.
I like the idea of managing videos in LR. I don't want to edit there. I'll use Premier, Pinnicle Studio, etc. If we can bring the video up in LR library and go to EDIT IN and choose our video editor, that should be all we need, assuming you have a video editor. (Windows movie make and Mac imovie included.
While, I'll grant you the two improvements in terms of RAW imaging processing and lens perspective correction, the video support is a real joke. It simply allows one to link or view a video. The absence of editing features is a big minus.
The bottom line is that Adobe made a small incremental improvement but they could have enabled/created many more features. It's another $99 shakedown of current users - what a business model.
06/15/2010 - 16:08.
Shakedown is right. They need to learn a little bit about how print packages work. When I offer a customer an 8x10 2 5x7s and 12 Wallets I don't want to have to place each image separately (15 times) I want to place three images. The image they want for the 5x7 might not be the one they want for the wallets and I need to be able to frame/crop them differently since the aspect ratios are different. The only way to get close right now is to duplicate the image once for each aspect ratio but then I still have to place each image independently and this is a clumsy approach to begin with.
For a program that purports to be designed to aid the workflow of people printing that's pretty dumb. You need to let people tag the cells that share an image. Placing an image on one tagged cell automatically fills the other cells that have the same tag. Sizing/cropping the image on one cell automatically adjusts other cells that have the same tag. How easy is that Adobe, and here we are at version 3.0 and Lightroom still doesn't get it.
06/15/2010 - 16:09.
I couldn't see any significant differences on the comparison screen images. Sometimes, upgrades are smoke-and-mirrors more that a real view quality.
06/15/2010 - 16:09.
I will gladly torrent this program. Seems to be worth every penny.
06/15/2010 - 16:12.
Before I bought Version 2 less than a month ago I asked Adobe if I should wait for the next version. They said it wasn't even on the release schedule yet. So I bought V2. Surprise! I called to see if they could work something out other than a $99 upgrade and they said MAYBE ... if I can send them the original receipt ... but naturally I no longer have it since I assumed that registering it designated the date of purchase on their records. Nope! I am not a happy camper..
06/15/2010 - 16:11.
I agree with Anonymous.
The biggest shakedown is locking key photographic development capabilities into the CS module. To process in LED, apply image, real sharp controls, etc., you must have CS. I would like Adobe to place all of the photo development processes into Lightroom, and let the designers and manipulators of reality have their processes in the Custom Suite modules.
06/15/2010 - 16:18.
While, I'll grant you the two improvements in terms of RAW imaging processing and lens perspective correction, the video support is a real joke. It simply allows one to link or view a video. The absence of editing features is a big minus.
The bottom line is that Adobe made a small incremental improvement but they could have enabled/created many more features. It's another $99 shakedown of current users - what a business model.
I was debating whether to highlight the video support or the film grain simulation for this post, but felt that the video would be more interesting to the masses. I'm more excited about the grain simulation, as it does a lot of what Nik's Silver Efex Pro does, without having to convert files to TIF and deal with another application.
Personally, I don't own a camera that does video at this point -- a lot of my shooting is still done on 35mm film, which I dutifully scan and then post-process in Lightroom. I have cut video in the past on Final Cut Pro (and going way, way back, Media100), and it's a very involved process -- to expect Adobe to include it in Lightroom is asking for the sky -- that's not the what the program is built for. If you're looking for a photo management suite with editing support, take a look at Aperture 3 -- it supports trimming of clips, but not much else -- no color correction or other manipulation.
This post was written a few hours after the final version of LR3 became available to download, so I had not had a chance to really get in depth with the new and improved aspects of the program. Only three of the dozen or so new features of the software were highlighted. I know I'll never used tethered shooting, but someone working in a studio environment somewhere is jumping for joy with that addition.
Now that I've had a bit more time with it, I will say -- without hesitation -- that the upgrade is worth the price of admission from my perspective -- I'm really never going to have to go into Photoshop now that the lens & perspective corrections are available.
Your mileage may vary, of course -- and Lightroom 2 isn't going to stop working for you just because a new version has been released. I'm still running Photoshop CS4 at home with no intention of spending hundreds upon hundreds to upgrade to CS5... but that's not to say that CS5 doesn't offer enhanced functionality. Regardless, Adobe gives you a 30-day period to try the software before you buy it, so if you're on the fence, there's no reason not to at least see if the new stuff is worth the money to you.
06/15/2010 - 16:16.
Where in the hell is HDR???????????????
I should have taken up golf
06/15/2010 - 16:21.
The video feature sounds like an improvement for me. If I have videos and stills mixed from a shoot, I would like to import and view them at one time with one program. Then they can be edited to keep the keepers and ditch the junk. It's still an amazing program for the money.
06/15/2010 - 16:21.
The reason they had a "long beta" is to incorporate the improvements in raw processing into Bridge in CS5. They did so, and guess what? We have two upgrades to buy! Heck of a deal for bonus time for the developers at Adobe!
And they made their bonuses by using the ideas from you "beta testers!"
06/15/2010 - 16:26.
Where in the hell is HDR???????????????
In Photoshop CS5 -- you can select multiple images in Lightroom and roundtrip them to Photoshop for an HDR merge, but there is nothing built-in.
06/15/2010 - 16:34.
My staff is absolutely going nuts on how great this program is...Adobe never seems to amaze me.... they simply keep getting better and better
Never "ceases" to amaze me is what you mean, right?
06/15/2010 - 16:40.
I will gladly torrent this program. Seems to be worth every penny.
What does "torrent this program" mean? Throw it in a fast-moving river? Cry real hard over it? Argh!
06/15/2010 - 16:42.
Yeah Adobe never seems to amaze me either. I'll stick with Aperture 3.0.
06/15/2010 - 16:44.
... the video support is a real joke. It simply allows one to link or view a video. The absence of editing features is a big minus.
Seriously? You expect Lightroom, which is a photo editing program, to also edit videos? That is completely unrealistic. Video editing is a big deal - go buy a dedicated editor.
06/15/2010 - 16:45.
Does anyone know how does the noise reduction compares to Imagenomic's Noiseware.
If I don't have to take every noisy photo over to photoshop, this is easily work $99 to me.
The noise reduction in Photoshop CS5 camera raw was worth the price of the upgrade to me. LR3 has the same engine so it will be the same. Unlike CS3 and LR2 when you move the noise reduction slider it actually works. It does soften the image a little but for me it is fantastic. I actually really like the look it gives my high ISO images. I shoot with a D300/D90. hope this helps
06/15/2010 - 16:46.
The reason they had a "long beta" is to incorporate the improvements in raw processing into Bridge in CS5. They did so, and guess what? We have two upgrades to buy!
No. Adobe always has a long beta cycle to incorporate feedback from its users into the application.
If you buy Lightroom, there is no need to purchase Photoshop CS5 - they do work independently.
06/15/2010 - 16:49.
This forum is about photo editing software, namely LR3 If you want to blast someones spelling or grammar you should start a spelling and grammar forum
06/15/2010 - 16:48.
What am I suposed to be seeing in example 2.?
06/15/2010 - 16:54.
What am I suposed to be seeing in example 2.?
If you will look at the images side-by-side, you'll see that the perspective is changed -- it's slight, but there. Sorry I didn't have time to find a more dramatic example, but the deadline for this post didn't allow me to go out and shoot any images -- it's something that would have taken me 20 minutes or so to do in LR2/Photoshop CS4, but can now be done in about five minutes in LR3.
Apply this same technique to architectural shos and you can remove keystone distortions from a camera that is not level. Perspective corrections also allow you to correct for rectilinear distortion caused by wide-angle lenses and fisheye distortion caused by, well, fisheye lenses.
06/15/2010 - 16:53.
Not impressed!
06/15/2010 - 16:53.
This forum is about photo editing software, namely LR3 If you want to blast someones spelling or grammar you should start a spelling and grammar forum
We're going to take that under advisement. Every1 luvs korrectin' grammer and spellin'. :)
06/15/2010 - 16:57.
Or... if you'd like to make a valid point in an argument/debate/review, you should probably spell correctly.
06/15/2010 - 17:07.
Oh, by the way, if you're a Mac user and haven't "upgraded" to a machine with an Intel processor and 10.5 or 10.6 then you're out of luck.
Considering Apple and Adobe have been having a slap fight about Flash content and Apple's formerly solid operating system is locking up and crashing all over the place, I'm not too excited about "upgrading" my machine and O.S.
Apple OS10.x and Adobe products, the "new" Microsoft! Whoo hoo, here's my money.
06/15/2010 - 17:07.
RAW conversion is better than LR2 but still not up to the standards set by Capture One or DxO.
And to run LR3 you need to have a fairly new computer as what was sufficient for LR2 needs a big upgrade.
06/15/2010 - 17:15.
Has there been any improvement on the programs functionality in a network storage setup. I have been very frustrated trying to work with Lightroom and my NAS. All my images are stored there but Lightroom keeps losing its way. Adobe support offers no support and tells me that this program is not designed for "network use" Crappy.
06/15/2010 - 17:13.
yeah...really useless examples - i barely see any difference in the first pair of images and i see none at all in the second pair. i can understand having to rush to make deadline, but if you can't find sample images that illustrate your point, you probably shouldn't include sample images.
and to whomever asked, "torrenting" something basically refers to downloading (or uploading) it for free. which is irrelevant to Lightroom since it's free to download anyway. what you need to pirate to get Lightroom working is not the software, but a serial number.
but i didn't say that. that was somebody else.
06/15/2010 - 17:22.
I waited to download LR3... after about an hour of fiddling with it I placed my order for Aperture 3. Aperture 3 works perfectly for what I do.
06/15/2010 - 17:23.
I don't find a reason to upgrade to this software. It doesn't seem very useful for any of my 27 film cameras.
06/15/2010 - 17:25.
Really! enough with the "torrent this program"
I will gladly torrent this program. Seems to be worth every penny.
What does "torrent this program" mean? Throw it in a fast-moving river? Cry real hard over it? Argh!
06/15/2010 - 17:32.
Does anyone know how does the noise reduction compares to Imagenomic's Noiseware.
If I don't have to take every noisy photo over to photoshop, this is easily work $99 to me.
The noise reduction in Photoshop CS5 camera raw was worth the price of the upgrade to me. LR3 has the same engine so it will be the same. Unlike CS3 and LR2 when you move the noise reduction slider it actually works. It does soften the image a little but for me it is fantastic. I actually really like the look it gives my high ISO images. I shoot with a D300/D90. hope this helps
Thanks, Doug. It does help. I have a D200 and shoot a lot of sports, so high ISO in dark gyms and football fields is a must. Thanks again!
06/15/2010 - 17:35.
I don't see much improvement with the lens distorison and perspective tool thus for me the upgrade is not all that great. I do not use the latest and greatest of cameras, so the video has no interest for me. Did not much better noise reduction than what I get using NoiseNinja. Upgrade would be an not must get for me.
06/15/2010 - 17:40.
If you guys could tolerate a newbie for a moment...I recently downloaded LR3 specifically for the noise reduction. I tried it on several shoots involving ISO 1600 and 3200 shots. Interesting results...way better than elements 7 - I dont currently use any CS version.
I'm disappointed in the tagging/catalog...seems like I will still need something like elements for the front-end organizing and tagging solution. Is that common or am I missing something in LS?
06/15/2010 - 17:47.
+1 on the kudos for the noise reduction. For me it works beautifully. I haven't used Noise Ninja since I got the LR3 Beta 2. Well worth 99 bucks for that alone.
06/15/2010 - 17:52.
GARBAGE IN GARBAGE OUT GET A LIFE
06/15/2010 - 18:16.
For what it's worth, I really like Lightroom 3. My first version was LR2, and I bought that at the release date. The Adobe Camera RAW plugin is free and that is the basis of Lightroom, both 2 and 3. I like non-destructive. I like the new Effects Panel--everything about it, and I like the new noise reduction in the Detail Panel. I have not yet tried the Web Panel, but I WILL !
Most of the real changes are under-the-hood, but the visible stuff is great!
--Stu--
Some days just come out 18% gray!
06/15/2010 - 18:15.
The lens correction is very good, but the database of included lenses is not extensive enough for me. I have a couple of Tokina lenses and they are not supported. My only option is to create my own profile for the lenses. In Adobe Photoshop CS5 there is the ability to download other profiles as they are created but this feature was not included in LR3. So I need to spend a lot of time creating profiles or buy Photoshop CS5 and hope the Tokina profiles are released.
06/15/2010 - 18:23.
Is that all the difference between 2 and 3? It seems that I have to wait till v 10 - may be then it will worth upgrading :(
06/15/2010 - 18:33.
yeah...really useless examples - i barely see any difference in the first pair of images and i see none at all in the second pair. i can understand having to rush to make deadline, but if you can't find sample images that illustrate your point, you probably shouldn't include sample images.
The first pair of images are meant to show the differences between noise reduction in LR2 and LR3 -- it's subtle. Adobe has a more dramatic noise reduction example on their site, but they show an image with no reduction at all versus an image with LR3 reduction. I felt it was better to actually show the difference in noise reduction between the old and new versions of the software, using the same settings. The original image -- ISO 1250 from a Leica M8 (which is oft-criticised for its lack of clean, high ISO), is pretty noisy. My opinion, this is a more realistic example of the differences you'll see in noise reduction when upgrading -- but I recommend using the trial, because you never know how the software will handle files from different bodies.
As for the perspective -- mea culpa on not finding a better example originally. Just to show you that we're a full service shop here at B&H, here's one that removes keystone distortion from a building, before and after:
Hope this helps!
06/15/2010 - 18:35.
I don't find a reason to upgrade to this software. It doesn't seem very useful for any of my 27 film cameras.
That depends on whether or not you scan your negatives/slides. I shoot a lot of 35mm, digitize the images, and use Lightroom for post-processing and cataloging.
You and I are in the minority, though, of folks still fooling around with "analog" photography.
06/15/2010 - 18:41.
Will LR3 recognize GIF and PNG files?
06/15/2010 - 18:55.
Will LR3 recognize GIF and PNG files?
Not my copy -- just tried and was unable to recognize either PNG or GIF for import.
06/15/2010 - 18:53.
I totally depend on LR for my post photoshoot workflow. There's nothing out there like it. I started with LR1, upgraded to 2 , used the beta3 and bought LR3 the day it was released. The improvements have been gradual but well worth the $99.00 upgrade each time, in my opinion. I'm surprised at some of the complaints I'm reading here...tell me one program that's as good or does what LR does... Thank you so much Adobe...I'm always excited to see what your going to do next!
Glenda
Artistic Photography, Inc.
www.artisticphotographyinc.com
Post new comment