Adobe Releases Photoshop Lightroom 3 Beta

[MacRumors]

Adobe today announced that it has released a beta version of Photoshop Lightroom 3 for Mac and Windows, the company's software for digital photo management and post-production that competes against Apple's Aperture.

Available as a free download on Adobe Labs, Lightroom 3 beta delivers a preview of new tools that will be in Lightroom 3, including more intuitive importing, unparalleled noise reduction and sharpening tools, enhanced slideshow capabilities and direct publishing to online photo sharing sites like Flickr®. Adobe encourages photographers to test this early selection of new features and provide the product team with their feedback.

Lightroom project manager Tom Hogarty provides further detail on the new beta in a blog entry announcing the release.

For this latest release we went back to the drawing board and revisited what we believe are the fundamental priorities of our customers: Performance and Image Quality. Lightroom has been stripped down to the "engine block" in order to rebuild a performance architecture that meets the needs of photographers with growing image collections and increasing megapixels. The raw processing engine has also received an overhaul right down to the fundamental demosaic algorithms that now allows unprecedented sharpening and noise reduction results.

Hogarty notes that Adobe is not finished adding and refining features for Lightroom 3, but is engaging users at an early stage in order to ensure that the finished product reflects the needs of its customers.

Article Link: Adobe Releases Photoshop Lightroom 3 Beta

[Michael73]

c'mon apple...we haven't seen any major version changes in Aperture since v2 was released in Feb 2008!

[Forced Perfect]

Get with the program, Apple. Where the heck is the next version of Aperture?

Although, I know in the back of my head it is almost guaranteed to be Intel only and optimized for Snow Leopard (most likely justifying a version 3.0 designation). Which my G5 will of course not run.

Sigh. I'd at least like to see the damn thing come out so we know Apple hasn't forgotten about such a great program.

[klittle32]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_1_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile/7D11 Safari/528.16)

Lightroom 2 is a great piece of software. For the Photoshop user, it seems to be a more logical choice than Aperture. I think lightroom 2 can already run in 64 bit mode (not 100% sure about this), so what else needs to be done to optimize for snow leopard? What exactly needs to be done to get it to tap into grand central? I hope LR3 accomplishes this.

[FrankieTDouglas]

Maybe v.3 will seem less like a toy in comparison to image editing in Photoshop.

[Marion]

Since I'm on Snow Leopard, my Aperture is rreeaallllyyy ssllooowww. So slow that I'm seriously thinking of switching to Lightroom (which I had before).

I know I'm not the only one with this issue and Apple should address it ASAP. Also, release of Raw compatibility is pretty slow with Apple... which is another killer for me. Canon 7D was announced more than a month and a half ago and still not Raw supported. Maybe Adobe will seduce me again...

[bikertwin]

Originally Posted by FrankieTDouglas

Maybe v.3 will seem less like a toy in comparison to image editing in Photoshop.

That's like saying that InDesign is a toy because it doesn't have all the features of Illustrator.

They're different tools aimed at different people.

[FrankieTDouglas]

Originally Posted by bikertwin

That's like saying that InDesign is a toy because it doesn't have all the features of Illustrator.

They're different tools aimed at different people.

Actually, no, Lightroom is being promoted to the same people who use Photoshop. I work in the photography industry. I deal with these people and this software everyday.

The problem is, people think Lightroom is a good substitution for correcting and maintaining their photos until they hit the brick walls that this software holds. Lightroom is being pushed as a new way to edit photos and Photoshop is being considered only for "illustration and advanced stuff." Except, Lightroom can't even be used to adjust output levels. And so on and so on.

It's a toy with lots of sliders, but nothing more.

[Kaptajn Haddock]

Hopefully this will get the Aperture team out of their holes and give us an awesome new Aperture 3 app.

[spazzcat]

Come on Apple. I am this close to dumping Aperture...

[numbersyx]

Originally Posted by spazzcat

Come on Apple. I am this close to dumping Aperture...

+1

And the poster above is right - Lightroom 2 can be used in 64 bit mode...

[John.B]

Still waiting for a Lr 2.6 update (even a beta update) that will offer full 7D raw file support...

[stagi]

can't wait to try this out this afternoon!

[Hellhammer]

Originally Posted by FrankieTDouglas

Maybe v.3 will seem less like a toy in comparison to image editing in Photoshop.

I doubt it. Aperture costs 199$ while Photoshop CS4 Extended costs 999$. Aperture isn't meant to be Photoshop copy.

Lightroom 3 looked awesome. With 64-bit support etc, it beats Aperture 100-0

[Snowcat001]

Get us Aperture 3 and make it a proper update!

if there isn't any coming soon i'm switching to Lr3 when it's out.
I've been saving some money for Ps CS4 and Lr/aperture for a while now...

I'm thinking Apple will introduce that tablet device and promote it read books and blablabla but also to get creative with photo's and film. Many people who work with photoshop or other adobe CS stuff use a Wacom Tablet or something, it'd be ideal!

Come on think outside the box and think faster :-)

[scratchh]

I am looking to upgrade from iphoto (i know, i know) for my photo management, and trying to decide between aperture and lightroom. note that i work on a G5 and so snow leopard/intel native issues are not relevant to me. also note that this is just for management, any serious editing is done in photoshop.

This seems like the best place to ask for feedback. i tried out the demo versions long ago when they were both pretty new. i had a tough time deciding which i liked better then, though i leaned towards aperture. one thing i do really want is easy exporting to flickr, so i was happy to see that mentioned in the lightroom 3 beta. i know you can get plugins for that for aperture though.

let the suggestions pour in. =)

Cheers,
scratch

[Winni]

Originally Posted by FrankieTDouglas

Actually, no, Lightroom is being promoted to the same people who use Photoshop. I work in the photography industry. I deal with these people and this software everyday.

The problem is, people think Lightroom is a good substitution for correcting and maintaining their photos until they hit the brick walls that this software holds. Lightroom is being pushed as a new way to edit photos and Photoshop is being considered only for "illustration and advanced stuff." Except, Lightroom can't even be used to adjust output levels. And so on and so on.

It's a toy with lots of sliders, but nothing more.

I really wonder why people always think digital: Yes/No - Either/Or - Black/White.

Lightroom and Aperture are first and foremost databases for photos, and they also have a very focused set of tools on board to make the most common tasks EASY when you DEVELOP your digital photos. Neither was meant as a Photoshop replacement. They supplement Photoshop, but they clearly don't aim to replace it. But both provide functionality that Photoshop just does not have.

You could also wish that Photoshop CS5's photo database and light table capabilities won't look like a toy when compared to Lightroom and Aperture.

Anyway. I would go so far to say that Adobe should give away Lightroom for free to PhotoShop (Extended) customers - and not sell it at an additional price. They could replace Adobe Bridge with Lightroom - I wouldn't miss it.

I will definitely have a look at Lightroom 3 and see if I like it better than Aperture. For me, Aperture still is Apple's killer application.

[Winni]

Originally Posted by scratchh

I am looking to upgrade from iphoto (i know, i know) for my photo management, and trying to decide between aperture and lightroom. note that i work on a G5 and so snow leopard/intel native issues are not relevant to me. also note that this is just for management, any serious editing is done in photoshop.

This seems like the best place to ask for feedback. i tried out the demo versions long ago when they were both pretty new. i had a tough time deciding which i liked better then, though i leaned towards aperture. one thing i do really want is easy exporting to flickr, so i was happy to see that mentioned in the lightroom 3 beta. i know you can get plugins for that for aperture though.

let the suggestions pour in. =)

Cheers,
scratch

The only suggestion that I have is the one that you already tried: Download and install trials or betas of both apps and decide for yourself which one is - or FEELS - better for you.

I very much prefer Aperture because it is more compatible with the way that I think and work. It feels more natural to me to work with Aperture.

I just don't like the way Lightroom 2 was organized, but I will definitely give Lightroom 3 a chance.

There's also Lightzone from Lightcrafts, in case you want to evaluate a third alternative. It doesn't have Lightroom's and Aperture's strong database features, but instead has other strengths - and it costs less.

[NomadicTy]

I've got all my photos in Aperture 1. How hard would it be to switch between that and Lightroom? Or if I end up not liking LR after a while, the switch from LR to Aperture? Those who had actual experience switching between the two, and who have thousands of photos, please do tell.

Thanks!

[John.B]

Originally Posted by NomadicTy

I've got all my photos in Aperture 1. How hard would it be to switch between that and Lightroom? Or if I end up not liking LR after a while, the switch from LR to Aperture? Those who had actual experience switching between the two, and who have thousands of photos, please do tell.

I kept my older photos in Aperture and imported the new one's into Lr. No need to import thousands of CR2 files that would have to be redone in the other software.

FWIW, I export my keepers as JPEGs and import those into iPhoto. YMMV.

[jettredmont]

Originally Posted by scratchh

I am looking to upgrade from iphoto (i know, i know) for my photo management, and trying to decide between aperture and lightroom. note that i work on a G5 and so snow leopard/intel native issues are not relevant to me. also note that this is just for management, any serious editing is done in photoshop.

This seems like the best place to ask for feedback. i tried out the demo versions long ago when they were both pretty new. i had a tough time deciding which i liked better then, though i leaned towards aperture. one thing i do really want is easy exporting to flickr, so i was happy to see that mentioned in the lightroom 3 beta. i know you can get plugins for that for aperture though.

let the suggestions pour in. =)

Cheers,
scratch

Honestly, right now, I'd wait and see. If you need to make a decision today, as much as it pains me to say it, I'd definitely go with LightRoom.

Both lines will be coming out with new versions soon (if Aperture 3 doesn't peek its head out within the next 6-9 months I think we can assume Aperture is a dead project at Apple). Aperture 3 is VERY likely to be Intel-only; LR3 might not be. That might be enough for your decision right there (once Aperture 3 comes out all updates to Aperture 2.x will cease, which is not a good thing for software housing your life's pictures).

I'm in somewhat the same boat. I have Aperture 2 running on my G5. I'm expecting to replace the G5 next year, but Apple's made me very nervous with regards to their commitment to Aperture development. I might end up moving over to LightRoom, as Adobe has made it clear they are heavily invested in moving the product forward. I initially chose Aperture because I feel it suits my style better, although LightRoom has since evolved so that it could do the same (for one: I really don't want to have to manage my photo library both in the application AND as a collection of image files on disk, as LR 1.0 insisted upon; LR 2.x follows Aperture's lead in allowing you to use a managed repository instead).

The switchover will be painful, though, because the "change list" of edits (cropping, all filters, etc) is proprietary to Aperture and LR. I'll need to leave the main photos intact in Aperture, and export just the "keepers" as JPEGs to LightRoom. I don't think Adobe makes this process easy (Apple certainly doesn't). Hopefully LR will read in all the keywording and rating information which is stored in the EXIF of the files, at least. And, after that, the "negatives" will largely just remain in Aperture, until such time as I want to re-tweak one of them. Then it will be a toss-up between firing up an old and unsupported version of Aperture or just throwing the RAW file into LR and redoing the basic edits to match before doing any more tweaking.

Not looking forward to it.

If I were choosing between the two today, I'd wait to see if Apple makes a major reinvestment in Aperture, but barring something significant, would invest in LR.

[John.B]

Originally Posted by jettredmont

Honestly, right now, I'd wait and see. If you need to make a decision today, as much as it pains me to say it, I'd definitely go with LightRoom.

If he goes with Lr 2.x it'll cost him $300 today plus another $100 to upgrade to Lr 3.

[PortraitProAlex]

Originally Posted by John.B

If he goes with Lr 2.x it'll cost him $300 today plus another $100 to upgrade to Lr 3.

True, though Aperture is $200 itself. The question is: is the difference worth it?

[scratchh]

Thanks for all the input. I am definitely not in a hurry to make this decision, so I think I'll just download the lightroom 3 beta and play around with it to see if it will work for me. If so, I'll get the full version when it comes out.

From what people have said, it sounds like the current version of aperture is a little iffy, and i'll likely be kept from any future updates (intel only), as Im not planning on upgrading from the G5 any time soon.

Thanks again for the input.
Cheers,
scratch

[John.B]

Originally Posted by PortraitProAlex

True, though Aperture is $200 itself. The question is: is the difference worth it?

Hard to say. Both products have free 30-day trial downloads. If he is ready to evaluate one or both products (and has the not inconsiderable amount of time to invest) that would probably be his best bet.

FWIW, Aperture X (Aperture 3) is apparently coming in 2010. Which would be $200 now + $100 to upgrade later.