Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Read More.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos RAW, Post Processing & Printing
Thread started 13 Apr 2016 (Wednesday) 12:32
Prev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

Upgrade LR 4 or go for LR CC?

 
Perfectly ­ Frank
Goldmember
Joined Oct 2010
Apr 13, 2016 12:32 |  #1

At a used book sale I bought Lightroom 4 in a sealed box. Cost me a buck.
I checked Adobe's site and it will cost me $79.99 to upgrade to version 6.

I had planned on subscribing to CC, where I would get PS & LR for $9.99/month.
With CC I'd get the latest & greatest version of LR, which has more features than LR 6.

But I never used LR before. Is it worth the upgrade to LR 6, or should I just put
that money towards CC?


My flickr albums (external link)
My Best Aviation Photos (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
Snydremark
Myth-informed
17,855 posts
Gallery: 39 photos
Joined Mar 2009
Issaquah, WA USA
Apr 13, 2016 12:48 |  #2

Perfectly Frank wrote in post #17970555 (external link)
At a used book sale I bought Lightroom 4 in a sealed box. Cost me a buck.
I checked Adobe's site and it will cost me $79.99 to upgrade to version 6.

I had planned on subscribing to CC, where I would get PS & LR for $9.99/month.
With CC I'd get the latest & greatest version of LR, which has more features than LR 6.

But I never used LR before. Is it worth the upgrade to LR 6, or should I just put
that money towards CC?

Either one is worthwhile; I don't remember directly what the upgrades from 4 - 5 were, but I've really enjoyed 5, 6 would be a bonus.

It'll cost you $80, once, to upgrade to LR6; it'll be $120/yr for CC. If you stop paying, you'll lose the ability to edit your photos; but, while you ARE paying, you'll have access to the full, creative suite of Adobe products.

Sort of a value question for you on whether a subscription model works for you.


- Eric S.: My Birds/Wildlife (external link) (7D MkII, Canon 10-22 f/3.5-4.5, Canon 24-105L f/4 IS, Canon 70-200L f/2.8 IS MkII, Canon 100-400L f/4.5-5.6 IS)
"The easiest way to improve your photos is to adjust the loose nut between the shutter release and the ground."

LOG IN TO REPLY
Wilt
Reader's Digest Condensed version of War and Peace [POTN Vol 1]
Wilt's Avatar
39,008 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Joined Aug 2005
Belmont, CA
Post has been last edited over 1 year ago by Wilt. 3 edits done in total.
Apr 13, 2016 12:55 |  #3

Partly a question about 'value' specific to your circumstance...


  1. does LR CC support a camera model which is not supported in earlier LR version?
  2. what feature/benefit is provided in LR CC which is not provided in earlier LR version?


And partly a question about relative cost (vs. the benefit derived)...
  • one time purchase with perpetual use vs. monthly recurring cost

    if you are a pro, you are likely to be forced to use the latest software because that is one of only two ways to have the RAW conversion software work for your recent model camera. It is rather inexpensive in the context of doing business. For us hobbyist/enthusiasts, or those student photographers living on a restricted budget, $10 a month seems cheap (Adobe wants to make it seem that way) but if you add up the low cost over 10 years, it is the cost of an additional lens! It adds up...

    If you put $10 away each month, instead of sending it to Adobe
    • in a bank account that only gives a paltry 2% annual interest computed monthly (not even the 360-period daily compounding which is the norm from banks), at the end of 30 years you have $3917.25,
    • at the more usual 4% passbook rate seen in history, compounding monthly you accumulate $6930.50,
    • if you could invest it and get 10% return, you end up with $22594.


    and if you are one of the 30% of U.S. retirees with absolutely no retirement savings, and without any employer pension, $22000 matters.

  • You need to give me OK to edit your image and repost! Keep POTN alive and well with member support http://photography-on-the.net/forum/donate.p​hp
    Canon dSLR system, Olympus OM 35mm system, Bronica ETRSi 645 system, Horseman LS 4x5 system, Metz flashes, Dynalite studio lighting, and too many accessories to mention

    LOG IN TO REPLY
    Perfectly ­ Frank
    THREAD ­ STARTER
    Goldmember
    Joined Oct 2010
    Apr 13, 2016 13:42 |  #4

    Wilt wrote in post #17970580 (external link)
    Partly a question about 'value' specific to your circumstance...


    1. does LR CC support a camera model which is not supported in earlier LR version?
    2. what feature/benefit is provided in LR CC which is not provided in earlier LR version?


    And partly a question about relative cost (vs. the benefit derived)...
  • one time purchase with perpetual use vs. monthly recurring cost
  • Good question about camera support. I'll have to check into that.
    I'm a hobbyist, and use the 1DMKIV and 6D. Always raw.

    Yeah, it does add up over time. 5 years is almost $600.
    Maybe I'll pay the $79.99 and upgrade to LR 6. I'm sure it will take several
    months to become proficient with it. Lots to learn.

    If I need more features than LR 6 can provide, I can go with CC at a later time.

    See, with the help of you folks I got it figured out ;-)a


    My flickr albums (external link)
    My Best Aviation Photos (external link)

    LOG IN TO REPLY
    BigAl007
    Cream of the Crop
    Joined Dec 2010
    Repps cum Bastwick, Gt Yarmouth, Norfolk, UK.
    Apr 13, 2016 16:25 |  #5

    CC does have a couple of new "killer" features over 6, if you use them. In order of what I think is the better usefulness/utility of those features from trying the trial, you have RAW panoramas, and also RAW HDR, which gets you in the case of panorama a 16 bit DNG file of the merged panorama. I tried it against a couple of panoramas that I had previously stitched in PSCS5 using the Pano tool. I found the RAW version was much better at it than the PS tool. Alos where there were moving objects in frames it was very good a producing a final result that removed them where possible, something that PS singularly failed to do. One of the images that I did was compiled from a multi row handheld pan, with IIRC 64 images. I have not used any of the other pano stitching programs, so cannot compare with those. The RAW HDr gets you a 32 bit DNG, I didn't try that one. CC also gets you the upright tool which is reckoned to be very good too, I didn't really try that out, It's a bit hard to "upright" a shot of an aircraft in flight with only sky as a background, and it was my aviation images that I was mostly using to test the software. The other tool is the camera shake correction. I have seen some positive comments. I had hoped it might be of help with the aircraft shots where there was a little under/over panning, but it seems that it wouldn't play like that, It may require that the motion is only in the vertical direction, as you might find in camera shake. Again I was trying to use it on aircraft against a plain sky, so was at least hopeful. Adobe dose though say that it won't correct for panning, so I was pushing my luck.

    I'm still on LR4, the basic processing engine in LR4, Process Version 2012 is still current in the latest CC version, it's just the additional tools, and extra camera profiles that you get with the later versions. Your 1D IV will be supported by LR4, but I think you need to go to 6 I think to get native support for the 6D. Of course thanks to the Adobe DNG converter, which is a free download, you can convert the CR2 files from a newer unsupported camera to .DNG's that you can use in the older version. If I were to do that though I would still keep the CR2 files, and back them up. Converted DNG files are not always 100% compatible with non Adobe RAW conversion software.

    Figured I might as well show the example of the pano stitching. First is the "original" version done using PSCS5, with several hours of mucking about to try to optimise all of the layers. Considering it was shot handheld I didn't think it was too bad. The original PSD is 13520×7638 pixels cropped to 10356×6836, then exported to JPEG, As it is an older post on Flickr, it is in the old POTN size of 1024 on the long edge.

    IMAGE: https://farm3.staticflickr.com/2835/8873571812_be138e9bb2_o.jpg
    [IMAGE'S LINK: https://flic.kr/p/ew8n​Ks] (external link)Avro 716 Shackleton MR.3, Handley Page Victor BK1A (external link) by Alan Evans (external link), on Flickr

    The DNG version was a simple run through to set the global conversion parameters for the DNG file, as I would do for any image and included cropping/straightening​. The original DNG is 13287×7630px and it was cropped to 10340×6894px, and was then exported to Flickr in the current POTN size of 1280 long edge. Total processing time about 10 min.

    IMAGE: https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1501/25809399124_541333bb34_o.jpg
    [IMAGE'S LINK: https://flic.kr/p/FjFV​b5] (external link)Avro 716 Shackleton MR.3, Handley Page Victor BK1A (external link) by Alan Evans (external link), on Flickr

    I'll leave you to judge. The other two pano's that I did this with also showed significant quality improvement thanks to doing the stitching with the RAW files.

    Alan

    My Flickr (external link)
    My new Aviation images blog site (external link)

    LOG IN TO REPLY
    Wilt
    Reader's Digest Condensed version of War and Peace [POTN Vol 1]
    Wilt's Avatar
    39,008 posts
    Gallery: 1 photo
    Joined Aug 2005
    Belmont, CA
    Post has been last edited over 1 year ago by Wilt. 4 edits done in total.
    Apr 13, 2016 16:53 |  #6

    The 6D and the 1DIV are both supported in LR 4.3 and ACR 7.3

    LR 6.x adds support for 1DXII, 5DS/R, 80D
    ACR 9.0 adds support for 1DXII, 5DS/R, ACR 9.5 adds support for 80D


    You need to give me OK to edit your image and repost! Keep POTN alive and well with member support http://photography-on-the.net/forum/donate.p​hp
    Canon dSLR system, Olympus OM 35mm system, Bronica ETRSi 645 system, Horseman LS 4x5 system, Metz flashes, Dynalite studio lighting, and too many accessories to mention

    LOG IN TO REPLY
    BigAl007
    Cream of the Crop
    Joined Dec 2010
    Repps cum Bastwick, Gt Yarmouth, Norfolk, UK.
    Apr 14, 2016 03:31 |  #7

    Wilt wrote in post #17970833 (external link)
    The 6D and the 1DIV are both supported in LR 4.3 and ACR 7.3

    LR 6.x adds support for 1DXII, 5DS/R, 80D
    ACR 9.0 adds support for 1DXII, 5DS/R, ACR 9.5 adds support for 80D

    I didn't realise that the 6D was that old! I didn't think there would be a camera that made it into LR4 (especially the penultimate point release) that would still be in production, without a replacement announced.

    Alan


    My Flickr (external link)
    My new Aviation images blog site (external link)

    LOG IN TO REPLY
    BlackBull
    Senior Member
    BlackBull's Avatar
    Joined Sep 2012
    Lancashire
    Apr 14, 2016 04:38 |  #8

    If you're purely a hobbyist and don't have a photography income to justify the expense of paying for CC then I would recommend the lesser one off cost of LR6 which probably does 99% of what CC does and more than likely 100% of what you need it to do.


    Lancashire Wedding Photographer ǀ Rob Georgeson Photography (external link)

    LOG IN TO REPLY
    chauncey
    Cream of the Crop
    chauncey's Avatar
    9,693 posts
    Gallery: 1 photo
    Joined Jun 2007
    MI/CO
    Apr 14, 2016 07:24 |  #9

    LR6 which probably does 99% of what CC does

    \
    Yeah right!


    The things you do for yourself die with you, the things you do for others live forever.
    A man's worth should be judged, not when he basks in the sun, but how he faces the storm.

    My stuff...http://1x.com/member/c​hauncey43external link

    LOG IN TO REPLY
    travisvwright
    Goldmember
    travisvwright's Avatar
    Joined Feb 2013
    NC
    Apr 14, 2016 07:42 |  #10

    LR has very little difference. But Full PS is a pretty big deal. Would you use photoshop? Remember you aren't comparing

    LR6 vs LRCC
    it is
    LR6 vs LRCC + PSCC.


    I come here for your expert opinion. Please do not hesitate to critique or edit.
    70D, T3i, Tamron 28-75 2.8, Tamron 70-200 2.8 VC, Canon 50 1.4, Canon 100 2.8 Macro, Canon 85 1.8, Canon 10-18 4.5 STM

    Franklin NC Photographer Travis Wright (external link)

    LOG IN TO REPLY
    sponsored links
    (this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

    1,992 views & 4 likes for this thread
    Upgrade LR 4 or go for LR CC?
    FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos RAW, Post Processing & Printing


    Not a member yet? Click here to register to the forums.
    Registered members get all the features: search, following threads, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, settings, view hosted photos, own reviews and more...


    AAA

    Send feedback to staff    •   Jump to forum...    •   Rules    •   Index    •   New posts    •   RTAT    •   'Best of'    •   Gallery    •   Gear    •   Reviews    •   Polls

    COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Privacy policy and cookie usage info.

    POWERED BY AMASS 1.4version 1.4
    made in Finland
    by Pekka Saarinen
    for photography-on-the.net
    Spent 0.00114 for 4 database queries.
    PAGE COMPLETED IN 0.06s
    Latest registered member is Altezza Travel
    956 guests, 451 members online
    Simultaneous users record so far is 6106, that happened on Jun 09, 2016