Adobe Lightroom 6 rumors

Adobe-Lightroom-logo
Some additional Adobe Lightroom 6 rumors after a new LR6 book appeared on Amazon Germany few months ago:

  • Adobe Lightroom 6 is rumored to be released in March 2015 (the beta version will be launched earlier)
  • Lightroom 6 may have the same content aware technology introduced in CS6 and CC
  • There is a possibility that Adobe may switch Lightroom also to a monthly subscription plane and include the tablet version in the pricing, similar to CC.
  • Adobe Lightroom 6 is rumored to run 70% faster than the previous version
  • Improved user interface

Adobe Aperture Importer plugin for Lightroom
FYI: today Adobe released a new Aperture Importer plugin for Lightroom.

This entry was posted in Adobe and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.
  • Zos Xavius

    I would love to see them axe the modular design. Switching between develop and library back and forth is a real PITA as well as a major time sink.

  • matprat

    “Switching between develop and library back and forth is a real PITA as well as a major time sink” Really? Press D for develop. G for Library. I takes me exactly ONE HALF SECOND to switch between them

    • Hanudiyan

      I found this G-thing accidentally. And I must say, I was so happy I have found it! 😀

      • Sebastien

        So you should look for all other shortcuts. They can speed up your process a lot.

    • Yep. Gotta learn the shortcuts. My favourites:
      SHIFT-F (lightroom at full screen)
      F (view image full screen)
      TAB (hide sidebars)
      T (hide toolbar)
      B (set to target collection)
      R (crop)
      1-5 (stars)
      X (flag for deletion)

      More here:
      http://www.lightroomqueen.com/downloads/shortcuts/

      • Eric Calabros

        Can we change these? I much prefer Q for crop, as its the first letter from the left

        • I don’t know of a way to change them without a keyboard remap of some sort – maybe someone else does!

    • Eric Calabros

      Yes, and similarly you can simply Reply comments, instead of quoting them

    • Zos Xavius

      That’s great unless your catalog is massive.

      • Idea

        Here is an idea: delete your catalogue. No harm will be done.

        • Zos Xavius

          Anonymous troll trolls anonymously.

          Funny how the only negative feedback I get is through discuss

          • Feedback

            Funny indeed, you should get no feedback at all.

          • Zos Xavius

            So where’s your awesome portfolio then? do you even have one?

          • Feedback

            Sure, and it pukes on yours. Not that hard, really. Do you like my feedback?

          • Zos Xavius

            You’re all talk son.

      • amaas

        Split your catalog. Net big performance improvements.

        Find a natural split that keeps your catalogs at ~10k images and if necessary import them to a master catalog for archiving.

        As someone who shoots ~10K yearly, I do a yearly split, but the right split depends on how much you shoot.

  • Tim Reeves

    How improved is the user interface?

    “Improved user interface improved”

    Ah, good.

    • Lol. I had not caught that.

    • Text brought to you by:
      **Department of Redundancy Department**

  • SteveHood

    Many people would switch if Adobe goes the subscription route with LR6.

    • Ken Elliott

      I’m one of them. As I’ve seen Adobe move to a rental model (let’s call it what it is), I’ve stopped buying new bodies and software. I’m pretty darn good with my V1/D700/D800 and 4×5 film setup. Frankly, there’s not a lot of improvement in the near future, other than 4K video.

      I guess it’s time to start considering what I’ll switch to. Phase One has some interesting products. But I stopped upgrading AutoCAD in 2000, supplementing it with Solidworks instead – and that worked out just fine. I could simply stop buying gear or software for a few years and see where it all lands.

      • SteveHood

        I am on LR4 as I am still using the RX100 and GH3. I don’t plan any purchases in the next 12 months so I have time to decide what to do.

        • MacU

          Aperture 3.5. 🙂

    • Incessant Troll

      yeah im not going to use adobe if they go rental. unless the rental is $1 per month or so. even $5 might convince me to pay more for stand alone PhaseOne or Dx Optics Pro

      • waterengineer

        No plug-ins if you go Capture One.

        • amaas

          COne is a RAW converter & global editing solution. It depends on a general raster editor like PS for next-step editing (as does LR frankly) and plugins. There are several options there although PS remains the most capable.

      • Rob S

        I felt the same way until they released the LR/Photoshop bundle for $10 a month. When I did the math, I liked what I got.

        LR was costing me about $100 per update.

        I was normally skipping one for various reasons and at times that really bit me in the butt. As an example when Yahoo (my web host) switched to SFTP, it broke webpage uploads in LR3. I had sat out LR4 and LR5 was about to go into beta so I didn’t want to upgrade that late in the cycle. So I was stuck with a work around for a few months.

        I was using PS Elements as much out of habit as anything else but cost was a BIG factor. Stand alone PS was $400+. PS Elements was $80-100.

        The chance to switch to full PS and always up to date LR for $120 a year made a ton of sense. Thats $60 a year for each. If Adobe put them in retail boxes and sold them for $60 each every January no one would complain. Even if you factor skipping an update that is $120 every two years – slightly more than what I was paying for LR and PS Elements. Instead I get full Photoshop. Again, even if they boxed them up and charged $120 every two years, its still a bargain. I get a good product at a great price with steady, stable cost factors. I dont have to pay big money for a single massive upgrade and I dont have to worry about doing price/performance decisions on upgrading or not.

        Again, I was right there with you about not wanting to get on a subscription. But once I really laid it out, I came out ahead. Think about it.

        • Clint

          I agree with you 100%. If you want to always have the latest version of PS and LR it only takes about 2 mins of grade 1 math to figure out that it’s a no brainer. People will always complain though…

        • I agree. I am also gainfully using several other programs in the suite that would have been not quite affordable for infrequent use, and I find that ability to be a great improvement over the old model. I doubt if Adobe would ever be dumb enough for an outrageous price increase, because there will always be competent competitors ready to attack from below.

        • TheMeckMan

          Don’t know about you, but my upgrade for Lightroom only sets me back $79 not $100. To top that off that’s about every 14-16 months. That averages to about $5.29 a month.

          While the addition of Photoshop might seem compelling I find that I use it less and less. As a photographer my copy of Photoshop CS6 (an upgrade from CS4) will last me forever as I do all my RAW processing in LR now and only use Photoshop to do more serious post-processing alterations.

          In a nutshell, you’re paying $120 every 12 moths whereas I’m paying less than half of that and am happy with my 2.5 year old version of Photoshop that cost me less than 200 to upgrade and amortized over a decade is pennies.

          At the same time (AND THIS IS THE CRITICAL ISSUE FOR ME) if you stop paying Adobe that fee then you loose access to your entire catalog. For me that’s 68000 files across 10 catalogs. Basically Adobe owns you and your work. While a PSD file is a singular entity that I can also edit in Gimp (et al) my catalog file is not. While I personally save out sidecar data (XMP – to protect from catalog failure) and therefore am a bit more protected from that potential, only the true ACR engine will process that in any meaningful way.

          Basically I can support Adobe making PS, Premier, etc part of CC, but Lightroom is too tied to my end work as a photographer to marry to some rental fee.

      • jtra

        Problem with rental model is that it could be $1/mo initially. But it will shift to $1/mo for first year, for new users only, while existing users will be billed way more.

        • amaas

          The fact is that CC for Photographers (the PS/LR bundle) was initially advertised for 9.99/mo on a promo, then went up to $19.99/mo, at which point new sales halted. Adobe’s had its face rubbed in the fact that their ‘promo’ pricing was the only pricing at which people will buy it and after several promo deals it has become the regular pricing.

          No doubt at some point it will go up due to inflation, but Adobe is well aware by now that they are at the limit of pricing on that product.

          The other CC bundles are actually very poor values aside from CC for Teams.

    • Whomever

      Switch to what? I’m open to suggestions.

      Honestly, the biggest problem with LR is that it’s SQL Lite under the hood. There are a lot of built in limitations there which is why in theory it has one million addresses but if you talk to Adobe Techs, they say, 10k-20k is about the right size for a catalogue.

      That aside, ransom-ware makes no sense to me.

      • NoMeJodas

        You make it sound as if SQLite is bad per se which is not the case at all. I’ve seen applications using SQLite to manage ~50GB databases with no performance issues. But like every other relational database system, the overall performance depends on:

        1) a clean data model design. LR uses a simplistic key/value design but relies heavily on CLOBs. Performance issues are inevitable with such design.

        2) optimized sql queries and indices. I didn’t look into that but I really hope LR is not indexing those huge CLOB fields or relying on them in a WHERE clause.

        3) tuned database system. SQLite has many parameters that can affect performance and should be set carefully.

        4) on-going maintenance of the database files. Unfortunately, this is not enabled by default in LR. One must activate “check integrity” and “optimize catalog file” during backups. Optimizing catalog can also be started manually (File->Optimize Catalog) but of course it is better to have a backup before doing that. I suspect that LR runs a SQLite “vacuum” operation during catalog optimization which is a good thing (https://www.sqlite.org/lang_vacuum.html).

        The theoretical maximum file size SQLite can handle is 147TB by the way. No idea what you mean by 1 million “addresses” or built in limitations.

        • BuyLo

          Good technical information, thanks for clearing that up.

        • Rudi

          Are you sure they use CLOB fields? For what reason? I havent’t looked into the db but I can’t imagine why they should use CLOB in LR.

  • DCPHOTO

    If they make it a subscription only I will switch to a competing product like PhaseOne or Dxo Optics Pro

  • Me

    If they go to a subscription model I will be sticking with LR 5 forever, even running it inside a virtual machine if necessary, until a competitor releases something else.

    Let’s see: I can pay for it once on sale for $80, and own it for years, OR can pay $10 every month ad infinitum. Hmmm, let me think.

    • Clint

      $10/month gives you Photoshop AND Lightroom…so your math is off. Also, good luck using LR5 ‘forever’ if you actually want to buy a new camera sometime in the next 2 yrs and still have RAW support…

      You see, what people should REALLY be upset about is planned obsolescence by Adobe so that whatever version of PS/LR you have won’t decode RAW files a few years down the road when newer cameras come out.

      • Ron Hendriks

        Time to change to Pentax or Leica, they have Adobe DNG RAW files 😉

      • amaas

        Adobe DNG converter remains a free download. That solves the RAW conversion issue as long as you are using ACR 2.4 or later (or any LR version).

      • Variegator

        But if I don’t need Photoshop it is still a bad deal for me.

  • jvossphoto

    Will it do a better job of demosaicing Fuji X-Trans sensor?

  • Eno

    “Adobe Lightroom 6 is rumored to run 70% faster than the previous version”

    Now that would be something! The only major complaint about LR 4 and 5 were really the abysmal editing speed, even on very powerful computers!

    The only complaint about LR 6 could be the monthly subscription, but I think that was inevitable. 🙁

  • Whomever

    Going to subscription may make sense for consumer products but industry — small scale and large — is a bit more conservative. I need to be able to have reproducible work for years. Subscriptions are inherently unstable if LR goes subscription, i’ll continue with LR 5 but will look for another supplier.

    This may yet turn out to be a case where the loss of competition – Aperture — results in yet another worse product monopoly.

  • JohnnyB

    I reverted to LR 5.3 because LR5.6 is about 5% slower and I counted 21 bugs(!!!!). 5.7 is the least stable LR EVER! The amount of bugs there is astonishing! Funny thing, with every version, they claim to improve speed and claim magical numbers,yet none of that is true. Test LR 2.7 and then LR 5.3 or 5.7 and you’ll see that LR 2.7 is as fast as any of these,yet according to adoble, by now the 5.7 should be at least 200% faster.

  • Markthetog

    The options are limited somewhat compared to the functionality of LR. For me I am used to the LR workflow and would not be enamored of learning something entirely new.
    As one who makes a living using Adobe tools the price is very reasonable in the subscription model. If I was a hobbyist and money was tight then maybe I would give up a couple of coffees per month.

  • Improved user interface improved? What?

  • David Portass

    I hope they make it easier for customising keys and sliders allowing external devices like the Logitech G13

  • ziplock9000

    Those features you’ve listed were just pulled out of your arse.

  • TheMeckMan

    I’d posted this as a response below regarding moving LR to CC but thought my insight might be appreciated as a top level comment (I’ve only altered to make it standalone):

    My upgrade for Lightroom only sets me back $79. To top that off that’s about every 14-16 months. That averages to about $5.29 a month.

    While the addition of Photoshop might seem compelling I find that I use it less and less. As a photographer my copy of Photoshop CS6 (an upgrade from CS4) will last me forever as I do all my RAW processing in LR now and only use Photoshop to do more serious post-processing alterations.

    In a nutshell, if you go CC you’re paying $120 every 12 moths whereas I’m paying less than half of that and am happy with my 2.5 year old version of Photoshop that cost me less than 200 to upgrade and amortized over a decade is pennies.

    At the same time (AND THIS IS THE CRITICAL ISSUE FOR ME) if you stop paying Adobe that fee then you loose access to your entire catalog. For me that’s 68000 files across 10 catalogs. Basically Adobe owns you and your work. While a PSD file is a singular entity that I can also edit in Gimp (et al) my catalog file is not. While I personally save out sidecar data (XMP – to protect from catalog failure) and therefore am a bit more protected from that potential, only the true ACR engine will process that in any meaningful way.

    Basically I can support Adobe making PS, Premier, etc part of CC, but Lightroom is too tied to my end work as a photographer to marry to some rental fee.

  • Michael Steinbach

    I have beeb lobbying for an addition to the Curves Dialog or to the bottom of the histogram in the form of a levels like control to establish white and black points. I you want to add to the traction post here: http://feedback.photoshop.com/photoshop_family/topics/curves-panel-enhancement?utm_source=notification&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=new_reply&utm_content=reply_button&reply%5Bid%5D=15000651#reply_15000651

  • Dre Mosley

    Speed increase is very welcome. I have 24GB of RAM, a fast quad, and an SSD and it still seems like it should be faster than it its.

  • Back to top