No more standalone version of Lightroom (1 Viewer)

[Scott Merryfield]

I wonder if I already have LR 5.7, if it'd be worth it to snag LR 6 at this point in time.

LR6 didn't have any significant new features over LR5.7 that interested me. I think it comes down to whether there is equipment supported in LR6 but not in LR5.7 which you may be considering purchasing.

In my case, I have been thinking about upgrading my Canon EOS M mirrorless body to the EOS M5, as the price on refurbished units has been dropping lately. I do not think that body is supported in LR5.7, so I am considering picking up the upgrade to LR6 while Adobe still offers it for $80. I am satisfied with my two dSLR bodies -- Canon 5D Mark 3 full frame and Canon 7D Mark 2 crop -- and have no plans to upgrade either for the foreseeable future. So a LR6 upgrade would probably get me by for at least a couple of years and give the competition more time to develop their Lightroom alternatives.

Another part of me doesn't want to give Adobe any more money and just move on. However, I need time to figure out what I would move on to, and I'm concerned that Adobe will pull the plug on the LR6 upgrade option soon as another strong arm tactic to get people to move to their subscription model.

 

[Patrick Sun]

Adobe still offers the $80 upgrade price for LR 5 => LR 6 standalone?

 

[Scott Merryfield]

Yes. It's buried on their website, but it's there. When you go to purchase the full license, there is a pull down menu where you can select the License Upgrade option for $79 plus sales tax. You actually inspired me to go ahead and buy an upgrade license while it's still available.

 

[Patrick Sun]

Adobe still offers the $80 upgrade price for LR 5 => LR 6 standalone?

To answer my own question, yes, once you are on Adobe's site, you get to the complete list of products, and LR 6 is on the 11th page of products, and you select the upgrade version, which is $79. (For some reason I just saw Scott's post, otherwise I would not have posted my post).

 

[Mike Frezon]

(For some reason I just saw Scott's post, otherwise I would not have posted my post).

You extra post poster you!

 

[Scott Merryfield]

I have started playing with the free version of DxO Optics Pro 11 that I downloaded about a month ago. While the interface is a little cumbersome to get used to if you are a Lightroom user, I like the results so far and there is a lot of automated processing within the application for straightforward conversions. It appears the only feature that is missing which I use in Lightroom is local adjustments, such as a grad ND filter. However, the newer DxO PhotoLab adds that feature. So, if I end up liking the version I am currently trying, I may spring for the PhotoLab license -- cost is $149 for the complete toolkit, or $99 for a version without a couple of tools.

The DxO products do not have a full blown digital asset management (DAM) feature, but I really do not need that. You can easily manage a complete folder of images in one session, and that is how I use Lightroom anyway, so the lack of a complete DAM is irrelevant in my case.

 

[Scott Merryfield]

I ended up buying DxO Photo Lab Elite yesterday to take advantage of the sale price, which is supposed to end on 12/25. I had played with DxO Optics Pro (the previous version) for awhile, and then downloaded the trial version of Photo Lab. I saw enough to be satisfied that the DxO application could completely replace everything I do in Lightroom. The results I am getting are at least as good, and in some cases better, than what I got using Lightroom.

 

[Scott Merryfield]

I used DxO PhotoLab to edit and process the RAW files from our recent trip to the Keys and Everglades. Overall, I am very happy with the software. The local edit tools work well, and some of the automated settings save time versus doing things manually -- but can be turned off with the click of a button.

The only feature the software appears to be lacking that I use in Lightroom is being able to delete a batch of photos that have been tagged as "rejected". PhotoLab allows me to tag the photos as rejected, but I cannot find an option for actually deleting the tagged photos. Hopefully this gets added in the future.

The ClearView function is a really quick way to fix skies and add pop to a landscape photo. Here is a before / after example where I simply clicked the ClearView button:

Before:

After:

 

[Patrick Sun]

I've been sniffing around DxO lately. Paid $11 for the "free" Optics Pro 11 (missed out on the offer a few months ago), but didn't think the $11 was wasted.

Wouldn't mind having better noise reduction Prime of the Elite version, but the cost to get to Photolab has me balking a bit. Maybe if I shot a lot of photos at high ISO, I would find it a better value proposition, but I'm not totally against it, just need to make the work flow work for me.

But I'm intrigued by the DxO Filmpack 5 collection, as I find myself veering in that direction with some genres I shoot in (mainly artistic figure work, i..e artistic nudes) to grit up the final images and add a different aesthetic to the overall feel of the photos.

 

[Patrick Sun]

And I have Nik, with the various film-like filters/nuggets, and b/w silver efx nuggets, so not sure if DxO filmpack is worth the investment. I guess I should just download the 30-day trial and give it a go, eh?

 

[Scott Merryfield]

Patrick,

The ClearView feature is only available in the Elite version, as well, so I am glad I went with that version, as it works well with landscapes, which is one of my primary subjects of interest. I have not had much need for the Prime denoising yet, so I cannot offer any feedback on that feature. The Elite version was on sale for $149 late last year when I purchased the product, but I see it's back up to $199.

The local adjustment tools were a major requirement for me, which is one of the big differences between PhotoLab and the older Optics Pro version. I used the grad filter quite a bit in Lightroom, and the PL version works just as well, if not better. I did give the spot healer a workout with the photos from our Florida trip, as I had some sensor dust on my Canon 5D3 which created spots on a lot of my shots. Time to clean that sensor again!

The filmpack doesn't really interest me, but sounds like it could be useful for you -- at least worth a trial.

 

[Sam Posten]

You guys are doing an awful lot of somersaults to avoid (very reasonable) subscription fees for the clear winner in this product space...

 

[Scott Merryfield]

You guys are doing an awful lot of somersaults to avoid (very reasonable) subscription fees for the clear winner in this product space...

Sam,

The subscription fee is only reasonable if you are both a Lightroom and Photoshop user. For those of us who used Lightroom only, the subscription quadruples the cost from what I used to pay for a perpetual license upgrade. I do not feel that Lightroom by itself is worth that increase, especially since there has been very little improvement made to the program over the past several years.

In any case, DxO PhotoLab replaces everything I used Lightroom for, and does an overall better job on processing my RAW files than Lightroom. I have not used Lightroom since buying PhotoLab, and do not see any need to do so in the future. All done without a single somersault, too.

 

[Sam Posten]

Lightroom/PS is $89 a year if you buy it at the right time. Just sayin' =)

 

[Scott Merryfield]

Lightroom/PS is $89 a year if you buy it at the right time. Just sayin' =)

Even at that price, it's still triple the cost of upgrading the perpetual license every 2.5 to 3 years, as had been my pattern. And this is just not about the money. I don't like the way Adobe is attempting to force customers into a model that not all of us feel comfortable with, especially after they had said that perpetual licensing for Lightroom wouldn't be going away after they first announced their subscription program. I do not trust where the company is going with their products and services, and would rather move on now before they suck me into a service that becomes difficult to move away from later.

Fortunately, I was able to find a replacement which satisfies my needs and produces excellent results. There are other options out there for people willing to make a change.

BTW, Quicken is doing something similar. I have been using their software to manage our finances for about 25 years, but a couple of years ago Intuit sold the application to a private equity firm who has now moved to a yearly subscription model -- for an application that now has performance problems, hasn't had any useful new features added in years, and locks you into their product once you move to the subscription model. Sound familiar? I am now looking for a Quicken replacement, but have a couple of years before my copy of Quicken 2017 will no longer provide online updating of personal accounts and security prices.

 

[Sam Posten]

Related:
https://www.reddit.com/r/AdviceAnimals/comments/80va98/it_used_to_feel_like_you_owned_it/

 

[Ted Todorov]

Affinity Photo looks like a possibility. It's a $50 one-time fee, and gets some decent reviews.

Looks very appealing, but AFAIK it is a Photoshop, not Lightroom/Apeterture/Photos replacement. Made for individual photo editing, not dealing with albums/collections.

 

[Scott Merryfield]

Looks very appealing, but AFAIK it is a Photoshop, not Lightroom/Apeterture/Photos replacement. Made for individual photo editing, not dealing with albums/collections.

I never did give Affinity Photo a try. It's been over a year since I bought DxO PhotoLab, and for the most part I am very happy with the application. The main downside is that the program does not yet support the Canon M50 mirrorless camera I purchased last year as an upgrade to my original Canon M. I opened a support ticket with DxO inquiring about when the camera would be added, and was assured it was being worked on, but no time frame was given. For now, I have been using Adobe's free RAW to DNG conversion application and then processing the DNG files in Lightroom 6, since LR6 doesn't support the M50 RAW files, either. It's cumbersome using two different applications -- DxO PhotoLab for my Canon 5D3 and 7D2 bodies and LR6 for the M50 -- but it works for now. Hopefully DxO will add support for the M50 soon, though.

 

[Ted Todorov]

I’ve been an Aperture user for a long time now, but Apple stopped maintenance years ago and it is starting to fall apart. I keep trying to switch to Lightroom and always wind up spending far longer to achieve the same thing. (I subscribe to Lightroom/Photoshop). The Lightroom Classic UI always seems incomprehensible to me vs Aperture. I am playing now with the new Mac/iPad version of Lightroom which is indeed simplified, but some basic things can’t be achieved.

For instance, global metadata changes - it is simple to add or change Title/Caption/Copyright for a single photo, but I have not figured out how to do it for every photo in a given album,or on the fly to every photo being currently imported. Thus: huge waste of time, doing hundreds of photos one a time,

 

[Mike Frezon]

For now, I have been using Adobe's free RAW to DNG conversion application and then processing the DNG files in Lightroom 6, since LR6 doesn't support the M50 RAW files, either.

Scott: I do this since my version of Photoshop (5.5--one of the last before CC) doesn't accommodate my Canon 80D's CR2 files.

Do you see any difference in your images after you process them with the DNG converter? Mine look just a little "different" and I can't put my finger on exactly why.