What new features in Lightroom 6 ?

* Fattened & robustened SDK.

* Bugs fixed.

* Performance improved.

FWIW, the feature set for Lr6 was probably set in stone a *long* time ago, so any suggestions will impact Lr7 or 8..., at the earliest.

PS - nothing wrong with having high hopes I guess, but I recommend maintaining low expectations - Adobe not sinking many resources into Lr these days, or so it seems from my point of view.

Cheers,

Rob

Performance actually seems to have improved dramatically since v4, but gradually and very silently. There's still some room for improvement, though. Most people would look to OpenGL as the logical next step for this, as it could take a huge load off the CPU (which certainly seems to be busy enough as it is). And Capture 1 does it.

But the engineers say it wouldn't speed anything up, so...

Personally I'd like some sort of CMYK support. And I'm sure so would all the Blurb users. But that's probably a major rewrite, so I suppose it's not going to happen.

It is a great tool!

Great ideas, bitm07.

Perhaps even a color range type of selection option?

My no. 1 request would be for brush/filter sharpening that is independent of the global (Detail) sharpening, so I could have, for instance, global high radius - usm - edge masked sharpening and locally applied low radius Smart Sharpening for detailed areas. LR's claimed implementation of Fraser Three Stage sharpening is kind of weak in the Creative stage at present.

The option to purchase any additional modules the LR team may be planning would be (for me) a great feature.

I personally have no need of the map, book or web modules, so the option to purchase, or not purchase modules, would help prevent LR from becoming bloatware.

I can dream, can't I?

The Lightroom executable program is really quite small, a little over 4 MB. All of those different features are already modularized and Lightroom swaps out when using them. If you don't want to use certain modules you can uncheck them and they will be hidden from your view. And their existence Isn't really slowing Lightroom performance.

Some way to attach shooting notes to a photograph. Not to be viewed by a client, just personal notes as to how the photo was shot jusr for my reference.  Such as "sun low over left shoulder". As great a database as LR 5 is, it should be possible to included a section/field for shooting notes or additional info on the photo for reference instead of relying on memory or trying to coordinate another database or notes.

Allow adjustment brush to be active for HSL adjustments in addition to the standard adjustments.

Thanks

widetrack12 wrote:

 

personal notes

This part is fairly easy to do now, by one of two ways:

* Borrow an existing (unused) IPTC field for your notes. (If you want to change the label in Lr, you can - via TranslatedStrings.txt).

* Use a plugin like jb's "Big Note", or my 'Custom Metadata'.

Consider jf's Metadata Viewer Preset Editor to have your notes in a tidy metadata set for viewing.

PS - Warning: a plug for plugins: so much of what people want out of Lr is already available via (cheap or free) plugins, but much of it is klunkily implemented due to SDK limitations - this being the reason I think Adobe might get more bang for their buck by simply robustening the SDK - there's a whole (small) world of plugin authors that will add the missing features, SDK-willing...

Granted many Lr users will do without desired features before stooping to a plugin - but that would change some, if plugins were slicker/better..

Rob

bshamilton wrote:

 

Perhaps even a color range type of selection option?

The ability to auto-select/mask adjustments based on HSL (and whatever else) would be a welcome addition to the develop tools.

Current auto-masking mode of brush leaves much to be desired.

Rob

Completely agree. I want to be able to have 2 different sharpness settings!

1) Layer Support -> But just on a very small scale. Brushes somewhat accomplish this, but I would love to be able to apply a setting (say Sharpening with Radius XX) and then apply another sharpening (Radius YY).

2) Built-in HDR support

3) Photomerge

4) Combining images into a single image. 4 back to back photos merged into 1 photo like a photobooth style strip. Vertical and horizontal support.

This is not a statement of what I would like to see, but what I think Adobe might be working on

I first purchased Lightroom when the current version was Lightroom 2. In each major version, we have seen dramatic improvements in some of the tools in Lightroom regarding image quality. So, from LR2 to LR3, we saw dramatic improvements in Noise Removal. From LR3 to LR4, we got a whole new process version, which produced huge improvements in image quality leading one person (Rob Cole) to say it was like "seeing with new eyes". From LR4 to LR5 we got a lot of new tools, each one not particularly dramatic but useful in its own way: enhanced spot healing, radial filter, upright.

So, my reading between the lines tells me that image quality is one of the primary concerns of Adobe when deciding how to improve Lightroom. Furthermore, if you looks at competitor's web sites (DxO, Capture One, and so on), they all claim to produce outstanding image quality, and I can understand how Adobe does not want to fall behind in this area. In one example, DxO claims it can improve "lens softness" via "automatically improving and homogenizing image sharpness from the center to the edges, even when you push the settings", whatever that means. I haven't actually used DxO, so I can't evaluate this claim but I don't think Lightroom can do that right now. Perhaps this is something Lightroom will have in LR6.

Anyway, that's my speculation of where LR is heading ... additional image quality improvement tools. Some of the image quality issues mentioned above by others in this thread may indeed be on the list of LR6 enhancements, although the specific form of the tool may be different in LR than it is in CS6.

The LR design team or rather the Adobe policy setters who direct their work, meaning Thomas Knoll who, apparently, still maintains strict control, has something of a problem. LR was originally conceived as a tool for the large volume professional - wedding, events, sports, etc. - but has become increasingly popular with lower volume professionals - landscape, portrait, product and fashion, fine art - and advanced amateurs. So which segment do they play to now? I think they may well see the greatest chance for market expansion in the amateur direction, even at the risk of undercutting sales of PSE. A feature like HDR appeals primarily to the amateur market (the professional fine art landscapers are probably relatively few in number) and this group is less likely to have the budget for PSCC, but more likely to be using the Photomatix plugin or similar. It should be very possible for LR to incorporate PS's Blend to HDR into the Export module, generating a 32 bit tiff for tonemapping.

As to layering, it is already possible to apply multiple filters and brush applications one on top of another, but it is not very easy to return to them later to alter them (possible but not easy). Making them more like Smart Filters would help. And of course any expansion of their functionality would be welcome; HSL, Vibrance, curves, etc.

A few other things; it would be nice to see more use of the Content Aware technology in the Healing tool and Refine Edges in the brush selections.

Regarding speculation:

I agree that Adobe is particularly keen to have changes to develop aimed at image quality and usability in ACR (Photoshop/Bridge) too. DxOh's lens softness adjustment is not as keen as you might hope for - they've profiled the lenses well-enough to have a good map of how sharpness falls off based on lens/aperture..., but the correction is pretty weak: I get get better results in Lightroom by correcting sharpness falloff with a brush (larger radius sharpening is better toward the edges..) - granted it takes more work - having that automated (with proper directional correction more akin to "focus magic" (deconvolution) than simple sharpening) would be a boon to "image quality", to be sure..

And I assume Lr6 will have face recognition - they've obviously done a lot of work on it (e.g. one can see the signs in catalog tables..), but didn't finish for Lr5, which was almost certainly a primary reason Lr5 was such a lean release.

That's all for now..

~R.

dj_paige wrote:

 

So, my reading between the lines tells me that image quality is one of the primary concerns of Adobe when deciding how to improve Lightroom.

I hope you're right and believe you are. The reason being, Thomas Knoll who's baby is ACR and the raw rendering engine that LR is part of. It will help aid in Photoshop CC subscriptions for those who want raw processing but don't like LR (there are quite a few out there for whatever reason). IF ACR improves, so does LR by virtue of the fellows working on that engine. Now the rest of LR? Who knows. I don't know there's anywhere as strong a captain or leader for the rest of the product as we have with Thomas (along with Eric Chan), two people who are always pushing the quality and feature's inside the ACR engine. PV2012 was huge! If the Develop module improves quickly with other modules not getting as much love, you can probably blame this on other's than Thomas and Eric.

We DO need much better performance, especially in Library mode. When iPhoto can scroll thumbnails significantly faster and smoother than LR, one has to wonder what kind of underlying architecture in LR is the cause. I've got a newer MacBook Pro fully maxed out and scrolling even a 30K library is ridiculously slow.

If past release timing is anything to go by, we should be seeing what is in LR6 as a beta in April, and then the full release in June! So only a few weeks to go.

Bob Frost

I think that's a typo for LR5 (it should say June 13)

I thought LR was on a 18month release schedule, but had now switched to a 12 month release schedule. But I may be wrong.

Bob Frost

I doubt that Adobe would ever commit publicly to a firm schedule and risk being forced to release a buggy version before it is ready.

1. Gotta have Network intelligence and be able to store images on a Network or External Drive.  Proxy thumnail images should be used for editting with final changes on 'real' image.  This of course should be a User choice.
2. Use 64 bit operating systems and GPU acceleration.
3. Font size in panels should be resizable - thought everyone in the world had done this to enable Users?
4. Should integrate smoothly and correctly (very buggy at the moment) with Photoshop (all versions) not just CC
5. Should be independant of Creative Cloud (I KNOW this will NEVER happen!!!) if the User chooses.
6. Should background synchronize and optimise catalogs (databases) in the BACKGROUND!
7. Should support 16 bit images and processing
8. Look as sweet as Elements 12 - certainly NOT essential
9. include sophiosticated batch conversion and resizing particularly for Digital Projection - Currently 1400 x 1050 sRGB in UK Club community
10. Better plugin integration - its clumsy in Lightroom - see Photoshop for HOW TO DO IT.
11. Most important - support new cameras for up to 5 years post relaese instead of abandoning the CUSTOMER and hard marketing Creative Cloud which is great for Companies
12. I could continue but I will not as LR6 BETA is imminent (or should be) I doubt any of my suggested changes that are not already implemented will be?

Long live Lightroom and Photoshop Wither and Die Creative Cloud!

Hi

     I agree with your comments but the worse part of an ADOBE one year release schedule is they ABANDON the old version and ONLY the new version supports new cameras.  This is especially true for Photographers in the know that almost exclusively use RAW files as you cannot use the newer Adobe Camera Raw (ACR) and are obliged to convert to DNG format.

     The issue is that ADOBE are rather 'Up themselves' as a company and arrogant to boot.  Historically pride comes before a fall and this is true of software companies if they longterm abuse cutomers and force them down paths they do NOT want to go (Creative Cloud).  I strongly suspect many companies are ploughing extra investment into image manipulation development areas to prepare to rival and perhaps better ADOBE's offering?  Meanwhile ADOBE do rule the roost but I was very impressed with the free GIMP software that used to be nerdy but is now more accessible.  Still not easy to use but powerful.

regards

Ian

Dumb Marine,

It seems at least some of your requests are already implemented, thus I was confused by having them requested for Lr6.

DumbMarine wrote:

 

1. Gotta have Network intelligence and be able to store images on a Network or External Drive.  Proxy thumnail images should be used for editting with final changes on 'real' image.  This of course should be a User choice.

This is already implemented, no? I mean, images can be stored anywhere (that's always been true), and @Lr5 one can edit via smart previews when 'real' image is offline.

DumbMarine wrote:

 

2. Use 64 bit operating systems and GPU acceleration.

Lr already takes advantage of 64-bit operating systems (but not GPU acceleration). In other words, the 64-bit version is a recompilation of the source code, not a 32-bit version that runs on 64-bit computers too.

DumbMarine wrote:

 

3. Font size in panels should be resizable - thought everyone in the world had done this to enable Users?

Not sure what you meant by the 2nd part of this, but part1 can be done using Jeffrey Friedl's Online Lightroom Configurator.

DumbMarine wrote:

 

5. Should be independant of Creative Cloud (I KNOW this will NEVER happen!!!) if the User chooses.

User can choose to buy/maintain Lightroom independent of Creative Cloud now. Granted, if you buy Photoshop + Lightroom, Lightroom will be available via the cloud, but even then you can download and install independently if you prefer - stand-alone download will find creative cloud licensing, I *think* (somebody correct me if that's wrong).

DumbMarine wrote:

 

7. Should support 16 bit images and processing

It already does - always has.

Perhaps I've misunderstood what you were asking/hoping for in some cases - if so, please forgive and enlighten...

Rob

DumbMarine wrote:

 

     I agree with your comments but the worse part of an ADOBE one year release schedule is they ABANDON the old version and ONLY the new version supports new cameras.

Every single Raw converter, and every single software company that provides such software, does exactly - and I do mean exactly - the same thing.

Historically pride comes before a fall and this is true of software companies if they longterm abuse cutomers and force them down paths they do NOT want to go (Creative Cloud).

Nobody is "forced" down paths that don't want to go down - not with CC or anything else.

Most important - support new cameras for up to 5 years post relaese instead of abandoning the CUSTOMER and hard marketing Creative Cloud which is great for Companies

I am not aware of a single camera that Adobe has abandoned

Should background synchronize and optimise catalogs (databases) in the BACKGROUND!

This has been discussed many times in this forum, and there are technical reasons why optimizing catalogs in the BACKGROUND simply isn't going to happen. As far as synchronize catalogs in the BACKGROUND, I have no idea what that means, as there is no synchronize catalogs capability right now.

Use 64 bit operating systems and GPU acceleration.

LR does use 64 bit operating systems. With regards to the GPU, one of the lead programmers of Lightroom has explained that the goal of the team is to provide maximum performance, rather than to use a specific piece of hardware. The team felt that they could provide maximum performance via the CPU rather than the GPU so that is why LR 5 was designed that way. If I could put in *my* wish for LR 6 and beyond, it is that the designers of LR continue to follow this sensible policy of trying to obtain maximum performance using whatever hardware is available, and to not follow the less sensible policy of being forced to use a specific piece of hardware called the GPU if it does NOT deliver maximum performance.

Quote "I am not aware of a single camera that Adobe has abandoned"

Very odd as you are a supposed expert with 10.000+ posts?  Have you tried importing Nikon D610 .NEFs into Lightroom 4?  I am sure many others suffer similar fates?  I suspect as an official mouthpiece for ADOBE you must toe the official line.  It is very odd how so many issues are denied in official ADOBE forums?  Perhaps this is related to another post where I tell of ADOBE arrogance with Customers?

Quote "LR does use 64 bit operating systems. With regards to the GPU, one of the lead programmers of Lightroom has explained that the goal of the team is to provide maximum performance, rather than to use a specific piece of hardware. The team felt that they could provide maximum performance via the CPU rather than the GPU so that is why LR 5 was designed that way. If I could put in *my* wish for LR 6 and beyond, it is that the designers of LR continue to follow this sensible policy of trying to obtain maximum performance using whatever hardware is available, and to not follow the less sensible policy of being forced to use a specific piece of hardware called the GPU if it does NOT deliver maximum performance."

I am so sorry to be blunt but this is absolute GARBAGE!  Using GPU acceleration (where that is available) is proven technology used by Photoshop for gods sake!  A GPU is not a specific piece of hardware at all and modern machines can mostly exploit this.  Sounds like lazy developers?

Similarly, as so many are complaining about Lightrooms performance it practical looks like I am right and the developers have made a bad job of "The team felt that they could provide maximum performance via the CPU rather than the GPU"?

Quote "As far as synchronize catalogs in the BACKGROUND, I have no idea what that means, as there is no synchronize catalogs capability right now."

This is probably my fault for not being clearer but does not right clicking on any folder allow synchronisation?

Harsh I know but when people are put forward as experts and are blatantly wrong it is usually better to deal with it right away?  I hope your response goes some way to vindicating my other post about the attitude of ADOBE as a company?  Though as top dog they can do want they want ... for a while......

DumbMarine wrote:

Have you tried importing Nikon D610 .NEFs into Lightroom 4?

What's the issue that converting to DNG wouldn’t provide? Is this NEF not supported in the latest DNG converter or LR4 directly?

If every RAW converter does exactly the same thing then why are new releases made by ADOBE and these ven beta -tested.  Lol this just is not accurate.  Different Raw import and conversion programs treat raw data the same but how they do it is quite different.  Go do some research on COREL Aftershot, RAWTherapee, etc etc.

If you have Lightroom 4 but Photoshop CS6 (as I do) they do not even comfortably talk to each other and this forum has many posts on the issues?

Why am I getting a feeling that this 'official forum' is a denial machine for ADOBE?

Thanks for the reply though

DumbMarine wrote:

 

If every RAW converter does exactly the same thing then why are new releases made by ADOBE and these ven beta -tested.

Every raw converter doesn't do exactly the same thing.

If you have Lightroom 4 but Photoshop CS6 (as I do) they do not even comfortably talk to each other and this forum has many posts on the issues?

Can you explain? Talk to each other? Do you understand the differences between Export and Edit In within LR4 and what's happening with CS6 and ACR? The issue's are usually when someone has an older version of LR vs. Photoshop and attempt to use Edit In instead of Export. The older version of Photoshop and thus it's older version of ACR are not on feature parity with LR which makes a call to ACR to render the raw when using Edit In. Just Export, let LR render the TIFF using it's newer engine. No talking issues if that's what you're referring to (mismatch in version parity).

Rob,

         Thanks for a more measured response than a couple of others I have had.

By Network intelligence I mean for the catalog?  I dont have LR6 But my understanding is the catalog cannot be on another machine on a network (server)?  Great news if it is.

By font size I thought most development companies (of software) had enabled their products for the disabled?  But thanks for the pointer to Jeffrey Friedl's Online Lightroom Configurator, something I was unaware of.

Quote "Should be independant of Creative Cloud" - we will see how long this persists.  If you use standalone CS6 (Creative Suite Production Premium) as I do you will see many part implemented CC applications that just dont work but are deployed to me needlessly.  Indeed I can make a decision (and I have) not to be TRAPPED ON THE MERRY-GO-ROUND that is Creative Cloud.  While CC makes sense for large commercial users and those that always pass costs off to customers it makes no sense for the enthusiast.  Even the dramatic price cutting ADOBE has been forced into to encourage uptake is risky as the adopter cannot control inevitable future price-rises but by then stand-alone Photoshop (for example) will be unavailable?

Quote "Should support 16 bit images and processing"  - my misunderstanding.  I know LR4 can import 16 bit images but is the Print module outputting in 16 bit?  It might well be but something I read recently said not?  LR5 might well already do this but I am waiting for LR6 to upgrade.

thanks

Ian

DumbMarine wrote:

I know LR4 can import 16 bit images but is the Print module outputting in 16 bit? 

Depends. On Windows no. On Mac, with the right print driver, yes. Can you see any difference? Sometimes, with a very strong and powerful loupe. The Epson Pro line drivers support 16-bit through the driver.

Quote "I am not aware of a single camera that Adobe has abandoned"

 

Very odd as you are a supposed expert with 10.000+ posts?  Have you tried importing Nikon D610 .NEFs into Lightroom 4?

Adobe hasn't abandoned D610 in LR4 ... using D610 RAW photos was never was a feature or capability of LR4, you couldn't do it the day LR4 was released, and you can't do it now ... so the word "abandoned" clearly doesn't apply ... and anyway Adobe provides a mechanism (at no charge) for converting those D610 RAW photos to DNG so they can be used in LR4