Adobe Announces 'Lightroom Mobile' for iPad, Enabling Editing On-the-Go

[hagar]

I'm not sure apple will come up with a workable alternative:
- they messed up iPhoto for Mac with a heavy skeuomorphism focused GUI while basic functions to group, manage and edit photos require more work. The app crashes a lot and is unresponsive. Photo streams are not synced in the background when the app is not running. And sharing libraries is gone too.
- iPhoto for iOS does not sync albums and photo edits seamlessly with iCloud or Mac. You have to deal with exports and streams.
- the whole photo stream paradigm is broken. You get copies of photos that are synced, but not all of them because there are quota, the originals remain in your camera roll, ... For instance: take a picture on iOS and you want to delete it? Hurry because once it syncs you have to delete it in two places on your device: the camera roll and the photo stream.
- aperture: is it still alive?

It's all just a big mess. Hopefully they come up with something that allows you to edit and organize your photos on your iOS device and seamlessly sync those as albums to iPhoto or aperture. It sounds so trivial, but today it's impossible unless you have way too much time on your hands.

 

[Aniseedvan]

Sooo im confused. Why is this good? The ipad takes terrible photos in comparison to a DSLR. So there is no reason to use anything other than instagram to edit photos that are taken with the ipad lol .. Then your telling me I should plug my camera into the computer and unload all of my photos (RAW and JPEGS) and separate them to upload them on to my ipad. Then edit it with possible limited features and access.. Then I am supposed to re load them back on to my computer?



Wait, where do I plug my full frame nikon into the ipad again?





Just another reason for me to see people calling themselves photographers while editing stuff on an ipad lol

I use the CCK heavily whilst out on a shoot, initially as a backup medium, but I also use PhotoSmith to bring the files in, delete the obvious duds and start adding metadata on my iPad with a decrepit but functional Belkin multi card reader (the CF slot is first so it works) . For example, I do a nursery portrait session at christmas whereby I've decided the files that need editing usually by the time I've left the location given there is a lot faffing to persuade toddlers into their nativity costumes by the staff. When I get home, I import the RAWs from my camera using a fast card reader onto the laptop, then sync across the metadata on my ipad, and with a smart collection showing me the starred photos from the last import can target the editing where needed. Given time is of the essence to get the proofs uploaded to the lab for them to print the cards, I'm grateful for that.

I've also shots photos at a duathlon, done a quick edit in snapseed and uploaded some to dropbox within half an hour of the event finishing so the organisers had some photos to drop onto the website that night. Yes, they're not calibrated, etc but it gave them the immediate photos they needed and I could edit the rest at a slightly later point, without having to shoot RAW/JPEG and worry about more files cluttering up my hard drives, etc.

Interestingly I've never seen the need for plugging my camera directly into the computer nor the iPad given that's an inefficient use of camera batteries.

LR mobile sounds interesting but possibly not for me if I cant import the photos from the iPad. I'll give it a go though given I have my soul to the CC devil also...

 

[Steve121178]

$9.99 a month for now. Once people start to get hooked on this type of usage watch the price go up and up. And when they stop selling standalone software (which they will) we will all be screwed.
And the reason they went this way in the first place? Pirated software. So basically the reason I will have to pay more is because other people steal. Great!

Piracy is just an excuse for putting up prices.

 

[notrack]

...

More than I can say for Apple, who's probably scrambling to add features back to the release of Aperture 4, which I'm sure they stripped beyond reason, before they feel the heat of user feedback. Pro software is no longer Apple's bread and butter. Accept it.

It doesn't need to be their bread and butter business as long as they come up with good stuff. Aperture is a great concept but needs more active development. I hope and think that Apple realised that the low-end consumer-only approach doesn't work well just on it's own. High-end products mostly also have a positive effect on the lower end.

The way iOS works today, I wouldn't by an iPad again but rather go for a MBA. However, I would change my mind instantly for Aperture on iPad with thethering my camera (or at least live import) + the existing "merge library" feature back on my mac.

 

[mobi79]

Before you all get excited about Lightroom, has anyone even tried Photoshop for iPad? Adobe hardly ever updates it anymore. It's slow, very buggy, and hasn't even been properly updated for iOS 7 yet. Was released just to cash in on the Photoshop brand, and now the hype around it has died down, it has been pretty much abandoned. 10$ down the drain. Or down the throats of Adobe execs. Same thing.

Anyway, my point is that this should serve as a warning to all of you getting excited about Lightroom mobile.

 

[jacobj]

Seriously. This incentivized me to buy Adobe's Photography bundle with Photoshop + Lightroom for $9.99/month. Haven't decided if I'm going to switch from Aperture entirely, but quite possible since the mobile app is really nice.

That bundle is a complete bargain. I was on a £17.99/month single app (PS) subscription before and bought LR separately. I changed to this, saved myself £9 a month and a further £100 a year for LR updates. Perfect. They had no issue switching my packages.

 

[Marc-SP]

So, when Microsoft offers Office 365, that includes 6 apps (market leaders most of them) that can be installed in 5 desktops + 5 tablets.... 100$/year is unacceptably expensive, and the suscription strategy is just evil.

But when Adobe asks 600$ a year per user, people say "Good work!", "sweet!", "bargain", "Finally!", and even thanks God.

Please, can someone explain the discrepancy?

 

[jacobj]

Sooo im confused. Why is this good? The ipad takes terrible photos in comparison to a DSLR. So there is no reason to use anything other than instagram to edit photos that are taken with the ipad lol .. Then your telling me I should plug my camera into the computer and unload all of my photos (RAW and JPEGS) and separate them to upload them on to my ipad. Then edit it with possible limited features and access.. Then I am supposed to re load them back on to my computer?

Wait, where do I plug my full frame nikon into the ipad again?

Just another reason for me to see people calling themselves photographers while editing stuff on an ipad lol

Maybe. I can't see myself using it, but I can see someone uploading from desktop to show a client and then edit with basic ideas as the client provides feedback. It becomes an edit scratchpad. Wedding photographers spring to mind.

 

[RTF]

I Love Lightroom as an amateur photograph enthousiast. It has a wide range of excellent and easy to use features. I think I would have loved the iPad version. But im not going'to spend >$100,- each year to use an application that I already bought for >$100,- in the first place (LR5). Though I can imagine professional photographers are very happy with these options and pricings (allways up to date software etc..)


Recently I changed to iPhoto/Aperture as my main Photo viewing&tuning applications. This because of better collabroration between my rMBP en my Mac Mini. New photo's are categorized and edited on my Macbook and then I transfer the event/album to my Mac Mini.

From my mac mini all my photo's/events/albums are available on my Apple TV and on my iDevices using the Photoscope app (only when connected on my home wifi).

I'm hoping that WWDC2014 will show us Aperture 4 and better integration between OSX/iOS using iCloud, like Adobe now offers!

 

[elvislives]

Creative Cloud subscription Required.

Few things why i wont be getting this -

1) Creative Cloud subscription Required in order to get Lr for iPad.

2) Editing 20MPixels + images on an iPad will be slow.....
other than few color adjustments this is not going to be much use.

3) iPad screen is not Calibrated.

I think a better portable option would be wait for new Macbook Retina Airs...
or get a current model.

 

[porky]

Hey Apple, look, syncing with desktop version, when will iPhoto do that??? What's the point of iPhoto on an iPad if you still can't sync?? Adobe revel the same, it's just amazing. I just can't understand what Apple is doing.

 

[mw360]

So, when Microsoft offers Office 365, that includes 6 apps (market leaders most of them) that can be installed in 5 desktops + 5 tablets.... 100$/year is unacceptably expensive, and the suscription strategy is just evil.

But when Adobe asks 600$ a year per user, people say "Good work!", "sweet!", "bargain", "Finally!", and even thanks God.

Please, can someone explain the discrepancy?

Yes, those are different people. It's a tricky concept I know, but give it a bit of thought.

----------

Before you all get excited about Lightroom, has anyone even tried Photoshop for iPad? Adobe hardly ever updates it anymore. It's slow, very buggy, and hasn't even been properly updated for iOS 7 yet. Was released just to cash in on the Photoshop brand, and now the hype around it has died down, it has been pretty much abandoned. 10$ down the drain. Or down the throats of Adobe execs. Same thing.

Anyway, my point is that this should serve as a warning to all of you getting excited about Lightroom mobile.

Wow, a whole $10. In a thread where people are discussing their Master Suite purchases at $2800...

Look at Adobe's product line, and their financials. They couldn't give a crap about your $10 one off purchase. They tried App Store revenue model and it failed. There's no money in it.

 

[thekev]

[

$9.99 a month for now. Once people start to get hooked on this type of usage watch the price go up and up. And when they stop selling standalone software (which they will) we will all be screwed.
And the reason they went this way in the first place? Pirated software. So basically the reason I will have to pay more is because other people steal. Great!

It kind of is what it is. It's not like CS6 is going to going to receive perpetual bugfixes and compatibility updates. Compatibility will probably last longer on the Windows side due to a slower pace of updates outside of service packs. With Apple you have the potential for significant public API changes on an annual basis when they change OSX revisions. I don't think Adobe will put a lot of extra effort into accommodating that. If it stays at $10 it's not that much, especially with lightroom included. It's still more than buying every second or third update off Amazon, which may be why they included Lightroom.

 

[throttlemeister]

Few things why i wont be getting this -

1) Creative Cloud subscription Required in order to get Lr for iPad.

2) Editing 20MPixels + images on an iPad will be slow.....
other than few color adjustments this is not going to be much use.

3) iPad screen is not Calibrated.

I think a better portable option would be wait for new Macbook Retina Airs...
or get a current model.

1) Boo. Effing. Hoo.
2) That's why you (by default) edit the smart previews, not the full size raws
3) It may not be calibrated, but unless you are going to print and hanging in galleries, it also happens to be the medium that most of your photos will be looked at, so it might as well look right on them.

 

[Marc-SP]

Yes, those are different people. It's a tricky concept I know, but give it a bit of thought.

The point is that in this thread the overall feeling about the Adobe news is positive, while the overall response to Office for iPad needing a suscription was very negative. Just have a look https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1720574/

From the first 2 pages:
"Read Only for free... Goodnight."
"you need an office 365 subscription! That hysterical, no interest and I suspect that will be the responce of many"
"This is 100% useless, with a subscription required."
" as part of a stupid Office 365 subscription? No. ****ing. Thanks. "
"Say no to software rentals. "
"I would be willing to pay $1.99 per year to have access to the full suite"
"editing requires an Office 365 sub. That means no sale for me. "
"Hilarious. Read-only for free. Thanks, guys. "
"I'm not paying a subscription just to be able to edit files on the iPad. That is absurd. "
"Money grabbing tw@s. "


Do you still think that the reception to the news is similar?

 

[69650]

and the Aperture 4 people are still waiting on their updates.

You think there will be any more Aperture updates? I think they are going to milk it for a while then quietly drop it in a year or so once they've added all the useful features into iPhoto instead.

 

[throttlemeister]

The point is that in this thread the overall feeling about the Adobe news is positive, while the overall response to Office for iPad needing a suscription was very negative. Just have a look https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1720574/

From the first 2 pages:
"Read Only for free... Goodnight."
"you need an office 365 subscription! That hysterical, no interest and I suspect that will be the responce of many"
"This is 100% useless, with a subscription required."
" as part of a stupid Office 365 subscription? No. ****ing. Thanks. "
"Say no to software rentals. "
"I would be willing to pay $1.99 per year to have access to the full suite"
"editing requires an Office 365 sub. That means no sale for me. "
"Hilarious. Read-only for free. Thanks, guys. "
"I'm not paying a subscription just to be able to edit files on the iPad. That is absurd. "
"Money grabbing tw@s. "


Do you still think that the reception to the news is similar?

You must not have followed all the crap about the Adobe CC subscription model then. You woulda thought Adobe took their first born child when it was introduced.

 

[Marc-SP]

You must not have followed all the crap about the Adobe CC subscription model then. You woulda thought Adobe took their first born child when it was introduced.

I did not follow it closely, although I am aware of it.
That makes the somehow positive reception of the iPad version more strange. Or maybe people just got tired of wasting time posting about how much they hate it (At the same time, it seems people is never tired of trashing Microsoft, hehe ).

 

[mobi79]

Wow, a whole $10. In a thread where people are discussing their Master Suite purchases at $2800...

Look at Adobe's product line, and their financials. They couldn't give a crap about your $10 one off purchase. They tried App Store revenue model and it failed. There's no money in it.

You're not quite right there, to put it mildly. If you know anything about any iOS apps out there, you'll know that many excellent photo/graphics apps are not only priced lower than 10$, but are better supported, less buggy, and highly optimised for iOS. And they keep getting new features added regularly too. Procreate and Paper are 2 notable examples.

So, looking at the iOS ecosystem, why shouldn't I hold Adobe to a higher standard if so many smaller developers are doing such great work? I really doubt these small developers are doing it at a loss either. Why should the consumer get screwed because Adobe can't get their bloated act together and turn a profit from a 10$ app purchase?

 

[jadot]

Great News

I'm an Aperture user, and in the process of evaluating the benefits of moving over to Lightroom (I already have CC so it's there waiting). Although this iPad app may be limited right now that's not the point. The fact that Adobe are relentlessly improving support and expanding their applications into multiple devices shows us that that's where the creative tools are. Get on board.

I love Aperture, but Apple haven't shown any signs that they're even on the same page as Adobe here. Aperture is being left behind. I don't like it, but you can't ignore Apple's silence on this. We've been asking for meaningful, progressive, innovative updates for 3 years! Nothing. A few tweaks, and updated RAW support. That's it.

Well done Adobe. Poor show Apple.

 

[mw360]

The point is that in this thread the overall feeling about the Adobe news is positive, while the overall response to Office for iPad needing a suscription was very negative. Just have a look https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1720574/

From the first 2 pages:
"Read Only for free... Goodnight."
"you need an office 365 subscription! That hysterical, no interest and I suspect that will be the responce of many"
"This is 100% useless, with a subscription required."
" as part of a stupid Office 365 subscription? No. ****ing. Thanks. "
"Say no to software rentals. "
"I would be willing to pay $1.99 per year to have access to the full suite"
"editing requires an Office 365 sub. That means no sale for me. "
"Hilarious. Read-only for free. Thanks, guys. "
"I'm not paying a subscription just to be able to edit files on the iPad. That is absurd. "
"Money grabbing tw@s. "


Do you still think that the reception to the news is similar?

Different demographics. If I were to be extreme, I'd say that the Lightroom people accept that their photography is either a business or an expensive hobby, and have already paid thousands for cameras, calibrated monitors, lenses, studios and models. Office users on the other hand, are people who are used to either getting Office free with their computer, or on a hand labelled CD-R from someone at work/school, and think the ability to type a document or create spreadsheet is a fundamental human right.

 

[maflynn]

I was going to complain about the need for a subscription but I'd come off as a hypocrite being that I'm on Office 365.



This looks interesting but how different is it for iPhoto? I mean editing on a tablet is not as precise as with a computer and mouse

 

[mw360]

You're not quite right there, to put it mildly. If you know anything about any iOS apps out there, you'll know that many excellent photo/graphics apps are not only priced lower than 10$, but are better supported, less buggy, and highly optimised for iOS. And they keep getting new features added regularly too. Procreate and Paper are 2 notable examples.

So, looking at the iOS ecosystem, why shouldn't I hold Adobe to a higher standard if so many smaller developers are doing such great work? I really doubt these small developers are doing it at a loss either. Why should the consumer get screwed because Adobe can't get their bloated act together and turn a profit from a 10$ app purchase?

Losing ten dollars is not getting screwed. Unless you are four.

 

[rocknblogger]

You can buy it. Couple hundred bucks. OR, $9.99/month with continuos updates and LR6 when it drops. I've been a CC member for two hears. My first was the entire suite ($2800 Master Collection) for $29.99/month, as I'd had an earlier suite. The year was up...it bumped to 'month2month' $49.99 and I've never thought TWICE about canceling. It's amazing @ $600 a year to have the $2800 package...but without the upgrade costs associated with 'updates'. You're renting their software...who cares? They're not keeping anything personal if you choose to cancel...and for aspiring amateurs, pro-sumers and the ilk, the price of a pack of smokes once a month is a bargain for LR...much less some of the PS options available. And at $50/month how in the WORLD is this a 'raw, bad, nasty deal' because we're "renting their software?" It's an absolute bargain as a long time purchaser of these suites, LEGALLY! It's also a write off, EVEN as a hobby! The IRS does allow a certain amount to spend each year in your pastimes. If photography is your thing, or your business...it doesn't get any nicer. Seriously, using Adibe for over a decade, I've NEVER received as common and frequent updates as I do with CC6. It's. Awesome!

+1 Very we'll said. I purchased Photoshop back when it was CS3 and stuck with it until CC was introduced. I jumped on the subscription as soon as it was released. Having Photoshop, Lightroom and Illustrator alone is well worth the $49/month price tag (to me), add Audition and everything else and it becomes a no-brainer. I love the fact that as soon as updates are available (and they are quite frequent) I have them too. I no longer have to worry about missing out on features that in the past would have cost ~$300 (per title) to get.

 

[AppleInLVX]

This whole subscription thing is the death of customer-focused service. All it is is creating awesome things to benefit only the people selling the stuff. Customers aren't users anymore, they're money bags to be exploited. Companies essentially become pushers and the customer addicts. I refuse to stick Adobe's needle in my arm, thank you.

Creative Cloud. Not. Even. Once.