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

[petey2133]

Many of you that question the need for LR on an iPad simply don't value or understand the use cases for the software. And that's OK. There are thousands of software packages that are absolutely mandatory for people to get their jobs done that others would never have any reason to use. I have several points/clarifications:

1) LR is not just for editing. So for those of you questioning "Why/how/who would edit on an iPad without a mouse, the colors aren't the same, etc.", forget that line of thinking. LR is a database program as much as a photo program. Many people will value the ability to simply use the iPad version of LR to make initial reviews of their photos, eliminating poor shots, tagging others to consider, etc. Before the iPad version, you'd have to do so tied to your main computer/laptop. This is hugely efficient.

2) LR is generally speaking for pros and fairly serious amateurs/hobbyists. LR is not a direct competitor to iPhoto (although they both do some of the same things, LR is the Ferrari to iPhoto's Honda Accord). Again, if you don't have use for LR, you may not be able to appreciate the benefits of the mobile solution.

3) The subscription cost model is not a ripoff (yes, I will admit that this statement is subjective). LR, and the other components of the suite, are absolutely mandatory for a professional. In no way differently than gasoline is necessary to a truck driver. If you don't see the need/value/use, you very likely do not need this software at any cost, be it $0.99 or $10/mo. Don't sweat it, we all don't need every piece of software out there.

4) The target audience for LR/Creative Suite vs. Office 365 is absolutely not the same. Of course there is overlap. However, the Office audience is magnitudes larger than the photo suite audience. Further, the Office user base is much more variable, ranging from students to home users to secretaries to managers to executives and everyone in between. LC/Creative Suite is used by pros and serious amateurs/hobbyists. To compare the subscription costs baseless.

I hope that this helps, particularly those that immediately dismiss LR as being useless on an iPad and/or too costly. Step back and understand the market 1st.

Thanks.

Okay I understand why you like it but its still not efficient. My cameras have dual SD slots on them so I shoot raw L on sd1 and jpeg fine on sd2. After sliding my sd card with the jpegs in my mbpro I then just open them all in the basic photo viewer. (Never used in my life Iphoto) After going through a couple thousand photos from a wedding its quicker to pick and choose in jpegs because of size. After selecting the ones I want I then plug back in my sd card with raw files and just start editing. You have to have LR on your computer already so why play with one device then walk away to play with a smaller less capable device. If its not used as an editing software (as you said then why have it?) I got slammed for be sarcastic earlier but im not being sarcastic. This is no more useful than an app to have presets on it like instagram or any other editing software. I use a lot of adobe software, but this is like having the direct tv app and can only watch tv stuff while both your direct tv box and ipad are both connected to the same network. So I can watch tv on the crapper? Great now I can look at photos on the crapper. Adobe is loaing money on mobile apps that edit photos so if you cant beat them join them... even if its a mediocre attempt

 

[mw360]

FYI, Apple has completely abandoned Aperture. I can never buy in to Apple productivity software b/c they let things languish for many years. Then when they bring it back (Final Cut X), it's a big mess with no direction or backward compatibility.

Not customer friendly.

These days Apple software is looking more and more like bundled crapware that has no ambitions of competing on the open market. Except with the added feature that they use it to tangle you up in the ecosystem then regularly spring surprise updates on you that oblige you to upgrade a perfectly good piece of hardware.

I ran Aperture on a 2008 MBP then updated to Mavericks, and saw one of Apple's most hilarious stunts yet. Mavericks forces you to update Aperture to v3.5 - it won't run anything older. Why? So that when you've installed it, it can say, sorry, your machine is too old for version 3.5 of Aperture. Want Aperture back? Wipe your hard drive or buy a new Mac.

 

[mdelvecchio]

consumption only?

but, but...didnt anybody tell photographers that iPad is for consumption only?

 

[jdag]

Okay I understand why you like it but its still not efficient. My cameras have dual SD slots on them so I shoot raw L on sd1 and jpeg fine on sd2. After sliding my sd card with the jpegs in my mbpro I then just open them all in the basic photo viewer. (Never used in my life Iphoto) After going through a couple thousand photos from a wedding its quicker to pick and choose in jpegs because of size. After selecting the ones I want I then plug back in my sd card with raw files and just start editing. You have to have LR on your computer already so why play with one device then walk away to play with a smaller less capable device. If its not used as an editing software (as you said then why have it?) I got slammed for be sarcastic earlier but im not being sarcastic. This is no more useful than an app to have presets on it like instagram or any other editing software. I use a lot of adobe software, but this is like having the direct tv app and can only watch tv stuff while both your direct tv box and ipad are both connected to the same network. So I can watch tv on the crapper? Great now I can look at photos on the crapper. Adobe is loaing money on mobile apps that edit photos so if you cant beat them join them... even if its a mediocre attempt

What I said was that LR is not just an editing program. It is a database program for cataloging, organizing, tagging, etc. Image editing is just 1 of its many features. And the database functionality is what I am confident will be very useful for photographers via the iPad.

And the workflow you described, using 2 cards for separating JPG and RAW is certainly valid and works for you. I too have a DSLR with 2 card slots, and also shoot JPG to 1 and RAW to 2. And I too would use a full computer to get the content into the LR database. It is the following work (naming, tagging, sorting, further deleting, etc.) that could very easily be competed using an iPad while not chained to the desk. That's all. It is an additional option, and a very useful one at that IMO.

As I am sure you know based on your workflow, the initial review of a shoot is extremely time consuming. Having that ability from an iPad can only help.

By the way, I use Aperture, not LR. And I have been hoping for ages that Apple comes out with an app that will allow me to, if nothing else, manage my database via an iPad. Again, I don't care about the image editing from an iPad and likely would rarely use that functionality.

 

[thedeske]

Nice set of attacks guys

I have a few clients that will be thrilled with this.
They constantly move photos back and forth (the hard way) and this will blend right in for them. The single catalog limit needs to be fixed. Most of my people have 3-4.

 

[mdelvecchio]

These days Apple software is looking more and more like bundled crapware that has no ambitions of competing on the open market.

funny, and here i am using the latest version of Pages for work documents instead of other commercial options on the open market. and you'd better tell all the Final Cut Pro X users to pack it up and use something else.

 

[mw360]

funny, and here i am using the latest version of Pages for work documents instead of other commercial options on the open market. and you'd better tell all the Final Cut Pro X users to pack it up and use something else.

Okay, you know I do like these products, but be really, really honest now, out of the Pre-Update Pages, and the All New Free Pages, which is closer to bundled crapware with an ulterior motive?

 

[robgendreau]

Tried the app. What a disappointment. You can't tag, can't title, and can't caption. Doesn't do geo location. And you need internet; it won't suffice to have a LAN only. So you can't do any organization except collections. It's really a very mediocre photo editing app like so many others that just happens to sync over the internet with LR, at a hefty fee (for those that already own LR; the iPad app is just a throw on bonus, the real value is LR and PS themselves).

Sheesh, Dropbox is still a better alternative. And Photosmith really smokes it.

 

[enamic5]

Custom Presets

I think I found a slight way around using custom presets, which seems to work well so far. You can create single images in Lightroom, named after and using your custom Presets. Sync them to the iPad. Select any chosen image, with the preset you want to apply. Then select an untreated image on the iPad and select Previous… from the edit menu in Lightroom on the iPad. click ‘Everything from previous photo’. and it applies all settings from the previously selected photo. Like a copy settings. This goes even down to lens correction and full colour treatment.

Using this you could set up a sync folder with a handful of images using your presets and use them as preset on the iPad.

Syncing back to Desktop Lightroom, the histogram and look on screen was indistinguishable.

 

[Zaqfalcon]

Apple should've done this with Aperture years ago. I bought an iPad 2 when it first came out in anticipation of this ridiculously obvious solution. I used the excellent, but limited, Pixelsync app for ages until it was rendered inoperative by an Aperture update. Apple's utter disregard, for what has otherwise been a highly functional piece of software, is dispicable.

 

[Jessica Lares]

I have been using Lightroom Mobile for the last two hours this evening. Sadly, I have decided not to continue on with my Creative Cloud subscription after May because I am finishing up college this semester and have found that the pro-sumer applications I can get on OS X is much more cost efficient for my uses. Plus I have a few older Adobe licenses I can fall back on if I do need Photoshop and the like.

But I just wanted to say anyway, as someone who has not been happy with either Lightroom OR Aperture on the desktop, I really like the connivence of the iPad app. I also like how nice it is to work with too. Of course it's not robust as the full blown one, but it has tools that are much, much better, efficient, and useful than the ones in other current photography apps for iOS.

 

[markswit]

Wow. You completely missed...everything.

The iPad has been able to accept DSLR files since iPad first launched.

You can use the Camera connection get to get the photos from your DSLR to your iPad. You can also use the Mac/iOS app called Photo Transfer to do it wirelessly, which is what I do. The best thing is you can transfer CHOICE photos from your DSLR. You DON'T have to transfer all of them.

Know what you're talking about first before resorting to saracsm. Adobe's bread and butter is image processing software, hence why they do everything they can do be the first thing you think about when processing images on your desktop or iOS device.

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.

Hello, how do you transfer your photos using the photo transfer app, does this require a computer, or can it work directly with the DSLR when out on the road?

Many thanks in advance.

 

[amsquires83]

Lightroom vs Aperture

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.

While Lightroom Mobile does look to be a fantastic tool and exactly what I'm looking for regarding workflow improvement, I'm not ready to abandon Aperture yet. The grass isn't always greener. I live in hope that Apple at least try and match Adobe's commitment to re-evaluating how the iPad can be used by photography enthusiasts (not just professionals).

I found this article very enlightening:
http://www.lifeafterphotoshop.com/aperture-vs-lightroom/

 

[Razeus]

Hello, how do you transfer your photos using the photo transfer app, does this require a computer, or can it work directly with the DSLR when out on the road?

Many thanks in advance.

Depends on the camera. On my Fuji X-E2 it has it's own wi-fi so I can transfer photos via the camera to the Fujifilm app.

But on most DSLR's, you'll need to use a computer. Your computer will also need to have the Photo Transfer app via the Mac App Store. It cost a few bucks but it works damn good. It's what I used when I using an iPad+Android phone, and a PC. Everything move and sync wirelessly.

The most cost effective way is to simply use the $30 (US) camera connection kit if you don't have access to a computer.

 

[dazey]

I downloaded and gave it a whirl but certainly won't be subscribing at that cost and I also found features limited. I don't seem to be getting lens EXIF and although you can set rating flags you don't seem to be able to rate photos with the 1-5 scheme, which makes it next to useless for me. I don't expect to upgrade LR5 for a few years so paying £160 for limited ipad control for an app I already paid for is a complete non-starter.

 

[danakm]

Subscription? Pass.