Will Lightroom 1.1 be.....

a free update to those who own the program? Or are we going to have to pay for the update somehow online or to have a hard copy?!

Dave

Adobe have said in various places that it will be a free update - though I'm not sure how official that is. After all, Lightroom 1.1 itself is sort of unofficial official at the moment - an open secret if you like. I believe the update will be free for the downloading; Lightroom isn't huge (the full installer for Windows is about 64MBytes).

Adobe haven't charged for a point release that I can recall. If I remember rightly,back in the dim and distant past there was an x.5 Photoshop that I think was chargeable, but that wasn't a true point release.

David

Agreed. Everything I have read suggests this will be a free update.

DavidW wrote in post #3332770
Adobe have said in various places that it will be a free update - though I'm not sure how official that is. After all, Lightroom 1.1 itself is sort of unofficial official at the moment - an open secret if you like. I believe the update will be free for the downloading; Lightroom isn't huge (the full installer for Windows is about 64MBytes).

Adobe haven't charged for a point release that I can recall. If I remember rightly,back in the dim and distant past there was an x.5 Photoshop that I think was chargeable, but that wasn't a true point release.


David

According to Tom Hogarty's (can't get much MORE official) and Scott Kelby's blogs, 1.1 will be a free update, delivered in downloadable form (full program download, not a patch)

davidcrebelxt wrote in post #3334247
According to Tom Hogarty's (can't get much MORE official) and Scott Kelby's blogs, 1.1 will be a free update, delivered in downloadable form (full program download, not a patch)

Wow, they must have re-wrote a lot of the engine then...or is that wishful thinking.

Ephemeral wrote in post #3335731
Wow, they must have re-wrote a lot of the engine then...or is that wishful thinking.

He doesn't really say WHY it will be this way, just that they want it to be painless. The only real information I can glean about this is one of the last comments he made on his own post at:

http://blogs.adobe.com …ra_raw_41_1.htm​l#comments

I'd be pretty pissed off if I bought Lightroom then a few months later had to pay to get the first patch to it. :P

Kurt

Maybe they rewrote the engine with elements of RawShooter to make it faster? Now we're REALLY venturing into wishful thinking.

Yeah, comments I've read from the Lightroom group have said that 1.1 contains features that should've been in the initial release (like the sharpening options), so it'll be a free upgrade.

The enhanced RAW engine is already out there as Adobe Camera Raw 4.1 - we're just waiting for it to be incorporated into Lightroom. The improvements are really good - I am very impressed, and I can't wait to have them in Lightroom.

Sadly, the Pixmantec RAW engine is likely never to surface again; Adobe bought out Pixmantec pretty late on in the Lightroom development cycle, and Lightroom always was going to be based around Adobe Camera Raw. Some Pixmantec ideas have surfaced in Lightroom, but that's about it. I'm pessimistic that it will be possible to migrate 'Develop' settings to Lightroom, though other data should be able to be migrated if and when Adobe come out with the promised migration tool.

David

I'm like a kid waiting for Santa Claus.

I've really liked LR 1.0 as it is, but with the rumoured improvements - well, hope I can sleep until Santa gets here.

it should be out
i don't know why adobe doesn't release the update

mantra wrote in post #3341283
it should be out
i don't know why adobe doesn't release the update

Adobe hasn't released the update because it's not finished yet, simple as that.

It will be out once as much testing as is reasonable has been done, and once as many of the bugs as possible have been fixed.

Tom's already explained that it's not just the new cameras which have been updated, but also lots of new features have been added, and lots of bugs have been fixed. It all takes time.

I'm curious to see if it'll get a new life on my old [and primary] desktop machine. (2.16GHz AMD Athlon, 2GB RAM). If so, I'll be able to put off upgrading to dual cure a tad longer.

cdifoto wrote in post #3341491
I'm curious to see if it'll get a new life on my old [and primary] desktop machine. (2.16GHz AMD Athlon, 2GB RAM). If so, I'll be able to put off upgrading to dual cure a tad longer.

Don't hold your breath It chugs on my X2 4600+ dual-core with 2GB RAM (I've probably wasted whole days worth of my life staring at that "Loading" graphic when viewing at 100%), and I doubt they'd tune the engine enough to start flying on either of our setups. I'm impatiently awaiting the Intel price cuts this summer on their dual- and quad-core machines to improve Lightroom performance.

Yohan Pamudji wrote in post #3343128
Don't hold your breath It chugs on my X2 4600+ dual-core with 2GB RAM (I've probably wasted whole days worth of my life staring at that "Loading" graphic when viewing at 100%), and I doubt they'd tune the engine enough to start flying on either of our setups. I'm impatiently awaiting the Intel price cuts this summer on their dual- and quad-core machines to improve Lightroom performance.

Oddly enough it zips along fine on my Dell Latitude with Core 2 Duo 2.16GHz and 2GB RAM. The hard drive is faster and so is the bus speed though too. Unfortuntely the screen sucks.