# Lightroom 6 is out.



## photoguy67 (Apr 21, 2015)

Just thought I would pass along that Lightroom 6 is available and has raw support for Nikon D7200.
Excuse me while I go play.


----------



## astroNikon (Apr 21, 2015)

Kewl.  I decided to skip v5 and wait for v6.  Now I can upgrade from my v4.4x.
It's paid for itself so far, and much cheaper than the $10/mth plan.


----------



## KmH (Apr 21, 2015)

See - Lightroom CC Huh Photography Forum

The Lightroom 6 standalone program does not have the mobile and web components the subscription LR CC version has.
And with the standalone LR 6, you don't get Photoshop CC 2014 included with the $10 a month subscription.


----------



## astroNikon (Apr 22, 2015)

KmH said:


> See - Lightroom CC Huh Photography Forum
> 
> The Lightroom 6 standalone program does not have the mobile and web components the subscription LR CC version has.
> And with the standalone LR 6, you don't get Photoshop CC 2014 included with the $10 a month subscription.


Yes that is true.  But if you ever get in a situation with no internet access to access CC online ....

here is their comparison of the products
Compare Lightroom versions Adobe Photoshop Lightroom CC


----------



## ronlane (Apr 22, 2015)

astroNikon said:


> KmH said:
> 
> 
> > See - Lightroom CC Huh Photography Forum
> ...



You don't have to be connected to the internet all the time to run it. Yes, you may not have access to some photos if you keep them on the cloud, but you can access any hard drive or external drives.

You only have to connect every so often for it to verify your subscription.


----------



## agp (Apr 25, 2015)

I absolutely love the LR 6 HDR and Panorama functions. Much better than editing those in Photoshop CC on a pixel-basis and then reimporting back in LR.


----------



## astroNikon (Apr 25, 2015)

ronlane said:


> astroNikon said:
> 
> 
> > KmH said:
> ...


And it would probably want to connect for subscription confirmation while I'm out hiking.

LR is $80 (I work at a university) so I'd rather pay once instead of each month.  My break even is 8 months vs CC, yes I know you get more but I don't want full PhotoShop right now.  I have PSE and it's more than enough.


----------



## Buckster (Apr 25, 2015)

astroNikon said:


> And it would probably want to connect for subscription confirmation while I'm out hiking.


Actually, it would want to confirm when you're connected to the internet, does it in the background, and you never even know it happened, other than the fact that it just keeps working month after month after month.

It's really not an issue, no matter how much you want to use it as an excuse to not use it.


----------



## astroNikon (Apr 25, 2015)

Buckster said:


> astroNikon said:
> 
> 
> > And it would probably want to connect for subscription confirmation while I'm out hiking.
> ...


Fine,
If you are up to paying the cost after the 8th month then I'm 100% onboard.


----------



## Buckster (Apr 25, 2015)

If the issue for you is money, then it's money.  

But don't use excuses that aren't valid, like the "connection to the internet" one.  And when corrected on it, don't keep trying to use it anyway with some BS about hiking.


----------



## astroNikon (Apr 25, 2015)

Buckster said:


> If the issue for you is money, then it's money.
> 
> But don't use excuses that aren't valid, like the "connection to the internet" one.  And when corrected on it, don't keep trying to use it anyway with some BS about hiking.


I do take my camera camping and my laptop is with me (and there's no internet) ... I don't ever see you there so don't say it's BS.  
I was unaware of how the CC thing operated. Thanks.


----------



## Derrel (Apr 25, 2015)

Adobe s Not So Smooth Rollout byThom Thom Hogan

The "rollout" is a comedy of errors and eff-ups...check this article to get some insight about how badly botched this update is.

It's pathetic.


----------



## Buckster (Apr 25, 2015)

astroNikon said:


> Buckster said:
> 
> 
> > If the issue for you is money, then it's money.
> ...


You're on here (on the internet) enough to know that's not going to be an issue.


astroNikon said:


> I was unaware of how the CC thing operated. Thanks.


That's why you were corrected on it, and why you can stop using it as an excuse.  You're welcome.


----------



## astroNikon (Apr 25, 2015)

Thanks, much appreciated.

I still see no need to buy CC .. just read the last paragraph of the Tom Hogan article that Derrel just posted. Except my costs are less due to the Educational version.  Why spend money when you don't have to ?  You're welcome too.


----------



## Buckster (Apr 25, 2015)

Every new thing, program, rollout, method, feature, etc., from Adobe is "pathetic" according to Derrel, and he can always find someone on the vast internet to back him up on it.  I'm sure Adobe is shaking in its boots over their impending demise because of it.


----------



## astroNikon (Apr 25, 2015)

I only listen to Ken Rockwell, that's why I only have a 16-1/2 to 800mm pancake zoom lens.  It's as sharp as anything out there 

I was only referencing the last paragraph about CC vs buying .. which is the (money limiting) camp I'm in.


----------



## Derrel (Apr 25, 2015)

DGMPhotography throwing a little 4-post disagree button tantrum this AM...Maybe have the courtesy to post a few words, maybe make some kind of "point"???

I thought Thom Hogan's suggestion/hint was interesting. He closed with this thought:

"_Finally, an interesting side note to all of Adobe’s Cloud-only aspirations. More than one site reader pointed out to me that with the inclusion of HDR and pano support as well as the improved brush capabilities, the need to actually use Photoshop has dropped considerably for quite a few people. At US$150, the standalone Lightroom 6 pretty much does everything a photographer wants and represents basically 15 months of the Photoshop/Lightroom CC photography bundle cost (less if you’re upgrading). More and more folk are going to be tempted to drop Photoshop and just use Lightroom. That’s especially true on the Mac side where you can pick up a very accomplished pixel-level editor with layer capability on the cheap (e.g. Pixelmator)._"

from  Adobe s Not So Smooth Rollout byThom Thom Hogan


----------



## bribrius (Apr 25, 2015)

astroNikon said:


> I only listen to Ken Rockwell, that's why I only have a 16-1/2 to 800mm pancake zoom lens.  It's as sharp as anything out there
> 
> I was only referencing the last paragraph about CC vs buying .. which is the (money limiting) camp I'm in.


never had any of the light rooms. But if it anything like pse i think i will opt out. Pse does something odd with my nikon files. I run through nikon software, i am all set. Run through pse, it seems a little amiss in color, toning, something. i can't put my finger on it. Also using pse and nik collection. A few in nik collection are "okay". A few seem to totally fruck my nikon files. I don't know why, they just do and look different. i read a piece from a photographer a while back, which peaked my interest. while having a multitude of programs and avoided using anything but nikon software to edit nikon. If he had to bring something into lightroom or ps i guess he would. But it was on a HAVE TO basis. I didn't get the difference. But i started looking more closely on the effects on the color, toning, whatever. And realized he was on to something.. i send something to nik or pse i try to go it from one of my NON nikon cameras. And speaking of which, nik collection is "neat" but short of silver fx occasionally i can't find much use for the 150 bucks or whatever it costs me. Starting to strike me more as a toy.


----------



## bribrius (Apr 25, 2015)

astroNikon said:


> I only listen to Ken Rockwell, that's why I only have a 16-1/2 to 800mm pancake zoom lens.  It's as sharp as anything out there
> 
> I was only referencing the last paragraph about CC vs buying .. which is the (money limiting) camp I'm in.


i wish nikon would step up with a full equivalent photoshop program. Two of my cameras are nikons i would pick that up in a heartbeat.


----------



## tirediron (Apr 25, 2015)

bribrius said:


> astroNikon said:
> 
> 
> > I only listen to Ken Rockwell, that's why I only have a 16-1/2 to 800mm pancake zoom lens.  It's as sharp as anything out there
> ...


Out of curiosity, why?  Photoshop has been around for a LONG time, it's a very refined and very powerful program.  Used in combination with LR, it's pretty much unbeatable.  Nikon would have to put many years of work (and a LOT of $$$$) into producing a program that was even remotely close.  They took a stab at it with NX2 which, did do a great job of processing .nef files, but had a horrible UI, and completely unintuitive method of operation.  I would much rather have Nikon keep their efforts focused on great bodies and glass, and leave the software to those who do it best.  What's next, the Adobe CC DSLR?


----------



## bribrius (Apr 25, 2015)

tirediron said:


> bribrius said:
> 
> 
> > astroNikon said:
> ...


because i think it would be more inline with nikons digital processing engine and code (or whatever is in that soup).  I use nx2 most of the time.


----------



## tirediron (Apr 25, 2015)

bribrius said:


> .... I use nx2 most of the time.


But you also enjoy beating your head against bridge abutments too, so....


----------



## astroNikon (Apr 25, 2015)

I don't see Nikon getting full blown in to the software business.  I tried their nx2 once before I got the hang of LR.  It kinda looked the same but was totally confusing to me (but so was LR at that time).

It reminds me of when I worked at Toyota/TG.  My CAD lab had their in-house Caelum software, CATIA, Pro/E, Unigraphics etc systems.  Toyota Japan HQ came over to evaluate their in-house Caelum vs the competition.  After full comparisons and looking at how much resources was required to even attempt to catch up, they opted to use CATIA for future car development.

I see Nikon in the same boat.  Their core business is not end-user software development.  And selling it to non-Nikon folks would be even a harder chore, unless they had a spinoff business so ppl don't fully correlate the software with Nikon.

But you never know.


----------



## astroNikon (Apr 25, 2015)

Derrel said:


> DGMPhotography throwing a little 4-post disagree button tantrum this AM...Maybe have the courtesy to post a few words, maybe make some kind of "point"???


I missed that
Wowzer.  So someone disagrees that I go camping (or vacations), and take pictures, and may process them at a camp site (or other place that I may not have internet access) to see what I have ??

I guess some people's laptops are too cumbersome to travel with therefore no one can do it.

I also sometimes take my telescope with friends to empty fields in the middle of nowhere, attach the camera take pics and look at some on the laptop.  But I guess that's just a pipedream too.


----------



## bribrius (Apr 25, 2015)

astroNikon said:


> I don't see Nikon getting full blown in to the software business.  I tried their nx2 once before I got the hang of LR.  It kinda looked the same but was totally confusing to me (but so was LR at that time).
> 
> It reminds me of when I worked at Toyota/TG.  My CAD lab had their in-house Caelum software, CATIA, Pro/E, Unigraphics etc systems.  Toyota Japan HQ came over to evaluate their in-house Caelum vs the competition.  After full comparisons and looking at how much resources was required to even attempt to catch up, they opted to use CATIA for future car development.
> 
> ...


it seems like adobe is on the ball trying to fit the processing of every camera company. I do wonder if such a generalized approach leads to the best development. Curious how fuji users make out, or olympus etc. As the tech improved it seems every camera company came up with their own version of the soup but not all the software to deal with that soup.


----------



## bribrius (Apr 25, 2015)

tirediron said:


> bribrius said:
> 
> 
> > .... I use nx2 most of the time.
> ...


hey, a guy can dream right? For the amount of editing i do and my prowness (lack of) i actually have more than enough software already, most of which i barely use.  After reading that tidbit i mentioned above i did start paying more attention to how photos looked going through view nx2 and nikon capture compared to dragging nikon photos into the the other software. Perhaps it is my imagination, but something seems to be going on i think the guy that first wrote about that had something there.


----------



## astroNikon (Apr 25, 2015)

bribrius said:


> astroNikon said:
> 
> 
> > I don't see Nikon getting full blown in to the software business.  I tried their nx2 once before I got the hang of LR.  It kinda looked the same but was totally confusing to me (but so was LR at that time).
> ...


That is true.  Adobe has to figure out code for compatibility (I hope not has badly as the 3rd party lens manufacturers).  I think they have some agreement with Canon but not with Nikon.  Who knows. But i'm sure there's bugs and they have to tweak them from time to time.


----------



## tirediron (Apr 25, 2015)

bribrius said:


> astroNikon said:
> 
> 
> > I don't see Nikon getting full blown in to the software business.  I tried their nx2 once before I got the hang of LR.  It kinda looked the same but was totally confusing to me (but so was LR at that time).
> ...


I don't think it's that big a deal, there are actually only a few companies making sensors, and they all operate in a similar manner, so IMO, it's sort like making automotive diagnostic equipment.  Yes, one made by Ford for use on Ford vehicles only might be a little better, but the Snap-On one that works on everything is pretty darn good!


----------



## Dave442 (Apr 25, 2015)

OK, they (Adobe) sure don't want you to buy the standalone. From within Lightroom the 'download' button takes you to the CC page. Took more than a few clicks to find the products page (should have read Thom's article first). 

Might be time to move on to the photography CC package from my current LR 5.6 and CS4, (although those are not costing me anything right now, except the fun of the new features). 

Already using some Microsoft and AutoDesk products with the subscription service model. 
I do have Nikon View NX2 installed, but just prefer the photo management of LR.


----------



## bribrius (Apr 25, 2015)

Dave442 said:


> OK, they (Adobe) sure don't want you to buy the standalone. From within Lightroom the 'download' button takes you to the CC page. Took more than a few clicks to find the products page (should have read Thom's article first).
> 
> Might be time to move on to the photography CC package from my current LR 5.6 and CS4, (although those are not costing me anything right now, except the fun of the new features).
> 
> ...


yeah, i just don't like subscriptions. I have problems with commitment.


----------



## astroNikon (Apr 25, 2015)

bribrius said:


> yeah, i just don't like subscriptions. I have problems with commitment.


I don't like subscriptions either.
It's like car leases, renting etc ... it's never ending.  It creates a consistent month to month cash flow for Adobe which boosts the bottom line and shareholder value, which, after all, is what it's all about.


----------



## bribrius (Apr 25, 2015)

astroNikon said:


> bribrius said:
> 
> 
> > yeah, i just don't like subscriptions. I have problems with commitment.
> ...


you could still buy cs6. In fact you might want to before they do away with all the stand alones and everything is a monthly fee. I am still pissed no one wants to send me a disc anymore....  Thankfully, i can't buy it. Because i don't even remember my adobe login in. Speaking of which, i forgot my apple log in too so somehow am locked out of my ipad. And yeah, my microsoft id, wtf was that again?  This chit is enough to bang your head off a bridge abutment.


----------



## bribrius (Apr 25, 2015)

the gizmo and software makers have control "issues"


----------



## astroNikon (Apr 25, 2015)

bribrius said:


> the gizmo and software makers have control "issues"


cash flow... they want to make money from you.
But then I own stock ... so I want that share holder value, just not from me.


----------



## Derrel (Apr 25, 2015)

bribrius said:
			
		

> i wish nikon would step up with a full equivalent photoshop program. Two of my cameras are nikons i would pick that up in a heartbeat.



Capture NX-D is FREE, for Windows and Macintosh...I have not tried it. But it can be downloaded in multiple, regional versions, in different languages here, where one selects his or her regional site: Nikon Imaging Global Site Capture NX-D

It is incredibly unlikely that Nikon will ever offer a pixel-level type editing program like Photoshop...

The conversion of RAW images is another matter entirely. There are a number of workers who want to be able to convert their RAW data in very specific ways, and then work on the images using other software. Adobe does a pretty good job, mostly, but there are people who feel like "other" RAW conversion software is better at getting the very most out of the capture data.


----------



## Buckster (Apr 25, 2015)

astroNikon said:


> bribrius said:
> 
> 
> > yeah, i just don't like subscriptions. I have problems with commitment.
> ...


I actually like the new subscription model from Adobe for my LR and PS needs, and now From Microsoft for the latest always up to date version of Office as well.

It's a lot easier and gives me a lot more comfort for me to include the $10 bucks as part of my known monthly budget and never have to deal with it again beyond that, than it is to suddenly pull the upgrade price out of nowhere whenever they decided to upgrade again out of the blue, which I did for many years.

I'm really big on my monthly budget.  I budget every known item I anticipate needing to pay for in a very detailed budget spreadsheet and keep close tabs on it all.  If I spend $3.95 at the dollar store, as soon as I get home I open up my budget to plug it in and review where I'm at for the month.  If I forget to do it right away, there's a handy email reminder waiting for me with the amount and place.

The fewer monthly financial surprises there are, the more I like it; The more it keeps me in my comfort zone.  That's a big plus for me on the subscription models of things.

These are all known monthly "subscriptions" in my budget:

Rent
Verizon
Doctor Visit
Internet Service
Medical Bills
Netflix
Backblaze
Blue Cross
Gasoline
Car Insurance
MS Office
Food
Save For Emergencies
Adobe

They're reliable.  I KNOW the cost of each and I KNOW what that leaves me for the month to work with.  To me, that's a good thing.


----------



## bribrius (Apr 25, 2015)

Buckster said:


> astroNikon said:
> 
> 
> > bribrius said:
> ...


my list is a lot longer than yours. i am very jealous.  You live a very simple life.


----------



## bribrius (Apr 25, 2015)

Derrel said:


> bribrius said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


yeah i just downloaded it (again). I don't recall it being that much different from view nx though.


----------



## Derrel (Apr 25, 2015)

Adobe figured that millions of OWNERS of Photoshop, and Lightroom, and other products, would willingly, on a couple months notice, just bend over and take it, to the tune of $50 a month, $600 a year, for life...that all their customers would, you know, just say,"WTF...I have no options...I'll tack on another bill to a credit card number Adobe holds on file and bills me on for the rest of my life."

Oooops! Apparently, people realize that they don't have to submit to extortion. Customers complained, by the millions, world-wide. Instead of needing to come out with regular updates to get new buyers...Adobe decided they could milk customers to the tune of $600 a year, for "whatever it is they offer".

And then, when Adobe was hacked (possibly in retribution for the $50 a month plan's imposition???), and millions and millions of user names AND passwords were compromised, all of a sudden, the price dropped from $50 a month, to $9.5 a month on a short-term contact basis. Huh...imagine that.

See...it works like this...a company opens negotiations with property OWNERS, tells them they will now become nothing more than temporary, month-to-month renters, telling these owners that their "rent" will be five times higher than what they [the company, the new landlord] are ACTUALLY willing to accept...



Not working out so well for the mud-house company now, is it?


----------



## bribrius (Apr 25, 2015)

Derrel said:


> Adobe figured that millions of OWNERS of Photoshop, and Lightroom, and other products, would willingly, on a couple months notice, just bend over and take it, to the tune of $50 a month, $600 a year, for life...that all their customers would, you know, just say,"WTF...I have no options...I'll tack on another bill to a credit card number Adobe holds on file and bills me on for the rest of my life."
> 
> Oooops! Apparently, people realize that they don't have to submit to extortion. Customers complained, by the millions, world-wide. Instead of needing to come out with regular updates to get new buyers...Adobe decided they could milk customers to the tune of $600 a year, for "whatever it is they offer".
> 
> ...


so what you are telling me is someone else hacked my adobe account and knows my password and i don't even know it anymore?


----------



## Buckster (Apr 25, 2015)

Derrel said:


> Not working out so well for the mud-house company now, is it?


Ah, classic PS rant, man!  Right up till this last part, where you lost me.  Who is "the mud-house company"?  I don't get the reference...?


----------



## bribrius (Apr 25, 2015)

Derrel said:


> Adobe figured that millions of OWNERS of Photoshop, and Lightroom, and other products, would willingly, on a couple months notice, just bend over and take it, to the tune of $50 a month, $600 a year, for life...that all their customers would, you know, just say,"WTF...I have no options...I'll tack on another bill to a credit card number Adobe holds on file and bills me on for the rest of my life."
> 
> Oooops! Apparently, people realize that they don't have to submit to extortion. Customers complained, by the millions, world-wide. Instead of needing to come out with regular updates to get new buyers...Adobe decided they could milk customers to the tune of $600 a year, for "whatever it is they offer".
> 
> ...


they are still missing out on money here. If they really wanted to fruck with people they could issue new versions for each generation of camera released by manufacturer. so you have to buy the newer versions when you buy a new camera, or if you own more than one make you have to pay "extra" for each additional support. see, they are hurting their stock value and passing up on revenue.


----------



## astroNikon (Apr 25, 2015)

I track all my expenses too.  I've been doing that since about 1984.
I can actually cancel my Verizon, cable, netflix, etc  at any time with no penalty.

Since I 100% own my car, I'm not limited to contract restrictions on what minimal amount of insurance is required for a lease or loan.  It saves money.

Since I don't do subscriptions, it increases my cash flow. As long as I look at what improvements I would use I can opt or not opt for an upgrade.  Such as LR v5 - there really wasn't anything there for me.  So I opted not to do it, saving money.

with Office, I own 2003, and a later version.  I used to do development and owned the Select platform where you own everything Microsoft.  In office there's few actual features one actually uses.  So upgrade makes no sense to me. The main reason for upgrades is OS compatibility, security, etc. and I control that too.

There's alot of things I do to maximize cash flow for investments, hobbies, etc.  Subscriptions would just drain that cash flow, though it would make everything "easier" it would strain finances a bit more to things I think are more important.

I don't have any financial surprises either.  One doesn't have to buy something immediately just because someone releases it. Thus you can budget it.

So I totally understand your perspective.
Mine is just different.

I also have no idea what a mud-house is.


----------



## bribrius (Apr 25, 2015)

astroNikon said:


> I track all my expenses too.  I've been doing that since about 1984.
> I can actually cancel my Verizon, cable, netflix, etc  at any time with no penalty.
> 
> Since I 100% own my car, I'm not limited to contract restrictions on what minimal amount of insurance is required for a lease or loan.  It saves money.
> ...


my budget.

1. bills come in. wtf!
2. "hunny i need three hundred for...." wtf. wtf
3. daughter "hey dad......." wtf, wtf wtf
4. "sweetie we need....." wtf wtf wtf wtf wtf wtf wtf
5. another kid "Dad....." wtf. i freakn give up
6.  bills come in again. wtf!


then i say the hell with it and go take photos...


----------



## photoguy67 (Apr 25, 2015)

Is it really necessary to have 3 pages of arguing over this? Can't we all just say, I don't agree with you, but that's okay.


----------



## snerd (Apr 25, 2015)

photoguy67 said:


> Is it really necessary to have 3 pages of arguing over this?.........


Well, of course it is! It's the Interwebs!!


----------



## BillM (Apr 25, 2015)

It's more fun than a barrel full of trolls !!! Like our newest member, the king of england. He is an amazing photographer who only takes photos of himself and he even has his own youtube channel. This is soo cool, we can tell all our friends that we know royalty now, ain't we lucky !!!


----------



## snerd (Apr 25, 2015)

BillM said:


> It's more fun than a barrel full of trolls !!! Like our newest member, the king of england. He is an amazing photographer who only takes photos of himself and he even has his own youtube channel. This is soo cool, we can tell all our friends that we know royalty now, ain't we lucky !!!


I don't know.................... after watching him pull clay out of his crotch, I'll probably pass on any more of his videos.


----------



## astroNikon (Apr 26, 2015)

snerd said:


> BillM said:
> 
> 
> > It's more fun than a barrel full of trolls !!! Like our newest member, the king of england. He is an amazing photographer who only takes photos of himself and he even has his own youtube channel. This is soo cool, we can tell all our friends that we know royalty now, ain't we lucky !!!
> ...


I'm glad I missed that


----------



## bhop (Apr 28, 2015)

Mud house.
Adobe Definition of adobe by Merriam-Webster

Personally, I'm happy with my subscription based Adobe products. I use more than just Lightroom and Photoshop, so it is a decent deal for me.  If I were only using Lightroom, then yeah, i'd probably just get the standalone.


----------



## Buckster (Apr 28, 2015)

bhop said:


> Mud house.
> Adobe Definition of adobe by Merriam-Webster


OOOOHHH!!!!  Of course!!!







LOL!


----------

