There has been mentioned a method will be offered to create custom page sizes in the future ... but you will have to create entire templates on your own using other software options outside of LR for each size book you wish to use. Or wait until other printers/publishers "come on board" ... as far as I have been able to research there will be no method to create a fluid page size like many users would prefer ... and then ... you will only be able to export the books as a PDF ... so another hoop to jump through if your preferred vendor doen't accept PDF, you will have to once again, use other software option to convert the PDF pages/spreads to jpeg or tiff so you can upload your pages to your preferred vendor ...

All-in-all quite a unique concept that has flexibility for the end user in mind ... well, maybe not so much ...

But maybe someone else (Self edition!). It make no sense  to count only on what someone  offers or not.

pjakobs,

Quite a bit more has to change in Lr before we can send our pdf to other print service providers.

At the moment the exported pdf is in Lr's own color space: proPhoto RGB *). How many printers are out there who can handle / will honor proPhoto RGB?

At the moment we cannot even softproof for CMYK the color space that printers are using. Blurb also uses CMYK printing and we cannot softproof for Blurbs CMYK profile. I can only surmise that Blurb somehow is able to render the files sent from Lr.

For Blurb-independant printing we would need the posibillity of embedding CMYK profiles, or at least Adobe RGB into the PDFs.

I think it's a long way to third-party printing from Lr.

In the meantime if you are serious about self-publishing and/or printing with different providers, have a look at In Design. I know it's expensive. I'm not making advertisement. I'm not on the Adobe payroll.

Just a hard look at the facts.

*) To be precise the Lr color space is a derivative of proPhoto RGB.

Message was edited by: web-weaver (Note added)

web-weaver wrote:

 

I think it's a long way to third-party printing from Lr.

Poppycock ... Aperture 3 has been capable of custom page sizes, export to PDF, jpeg or tiff ... or print to your own printer for books since 2010 ... not one CMYK profile or softproofing involved ... no requirement for other vendors to "get onboard" ... no need for the user to jump through hoops to build custom templates ... Simply choose the custom theme, type in your page size and margins ... and lay out the book ...

While I agree that users would need to define a color profile for exported PDF's, not all books are printed via CMYK offset printing. I create on average 200 books/albums per year. Not one of those books need to be softproofed for CMYK. Many wedding/portrait photographers create high-end wedding ablums that are made from standard color prints bonded to substrates for flush-mount albums ... Also there are many pro color labs that do press printed books and do so very well with Adobe RGB, and sRGB profiles ...

InDesign? Sure I own it (I've had it since version 1) ... I love InDesign, though frankly, for wedding albums and portrait keepsake books it is overkill ... not to mention, ID doesn't allow you to work with directly RAW files like Aperture 3 will. So each time I want to create a book, I have to export hundreds of images in a format that ID can recognize. Then I have to re-export any images I decide I want to process differently during the book design phase then updating those images upon the return to ID. Thus creating a mountain of unnecessary derivative files and much more work than is necessary.

I work with Lr to save on my workflow efforts. Up until the current version, each new iteration was a no-brainer investment that saved me much more work than the cost of entry. I had high hopes for the book module, I expected it to further simplify my daily tasks ... not add yet more hoops to jump through ...

My question is, If Apple and their "closed" eco-system can offer such freedom of user customization for books ... two years ago ... why did Adobe have to make the book module so difficult for users to work with? They did so by choice, not because there are technical limitaions that haven't yet been addressed.

pjakobs wrote:

 

Instead it's basically a blurb storefront. Very disappointing.

Indeed ... Adobe spares no expense in marketing Lightroom to professionals ... and also spares no effort in celebrating the fact that more professional phtographers use Lr than any other similar option. So why do they only offer a Book module that can be ordered by any consumer on the planet? A great many of those pros are wedding and portrait photographers. They are not out to create the next great coffee table book of their most recent trip to Yosemite. They are creating wedding/portrait albums for their clients and work hard at finding vendors that offer sizes and options not readily available to the average consumer. If my only option is to offer my clients books that they can easily order on their own, how does that add value to my offerings? How does that separate me from my competition? How does that make Lr4 a valuable asset to my business goals?

For the record, I will say it again so there is no doubt ... I have no ill will for Blurb or their products ... I'm sure they are fine ... but they don't offer what my clients are accustomed to.

Butch,

In all fairness would you think then, it would be better if Lr had no Book Module at all?

I understand you predicament - but is it fair to complain that Lr does not allow for your workflow?

And which other program does?

Nobody said that it would be easy.

I value Lr above all for its image management capabilities and the very good Develop Module. And the Print Module is good, too.

For me everything else (Book, Map, Web) is just icing on the cake.

web-weaver wrote:

 

Butch,

In all fairness would you think then, it would be better if Lr had no Book Module at all?

I understand you predicament - but is it fair to complain that Lr does not allow for your workflow?

Uhhh ... yeah it's fair to complain ... I can't be in the extreme minority here ... nearly every photographer (pro or serious amateur) I have come in contact with over the past several years uses Lr. I can't be the only one that feels this way ... and I do think it would have been better if Adobe would have gotten the Book module right before they released it. I can't imangine if Adobe offered a true book creation option that allowed the same freedom of customization that is available in the other modules, that ALL Lr users would prefer it over what we have now.