Great. Support for the Nikon D800. No support for the Canon 5DIII yet though. Odd as both are released later this month. No Fuji X-Pro 1 support either. I wonder how long that one will take.
If they jack it up too much, just leave the process version at 2010. One interesting thing I found out when importing my 2011 and earlier catalogs this morning (all my 2012 shots were already in the LR4 beta), was that the old catalog is still at 2010 process until you change it....and it even keeps the original LR3 sliders in place for those images. That is, in 2010, you still have "Recovery" "Fill Light" and "Blacks." Switch the image to 2012 process and those automatically change to the current (and better) "Highlights" "Shadows" "Whites" and "Blacks" sliders.
So, for images you're already happy with, just don't update the process version....but for any new edits, you'll certainly want to use the new process. Shadows yields much more pleasing results than the old fill light slider. Really nice tonality control in this version, and the ability to paint noise reduction, moire removal (which works beautifully) and white balance is really a great feature as well.
Tariq Gibran wrote:
Great. Support for the Nikon D800. No support for the Canon 5DIII yet though. Odd as both are released later this month. No Fuji X-Pro 1 support either. I wonder how long that one will take.
As Jordan says if you are happy with an image that has been processed with PV 2010, you should leave it alone. Otherwise, you'll likely have to start from scratch (in terms of the tonal controls).
You don't have to apply the 2012 controls, it's not mandatory, it'll respect your previous settings. Only if you want to edit them again does it make a difference it seems.
It's cheap! $80 to update from any
version. It bothers me to get the same new
processing features in PS, I'll have to pay
for the CS6. Camera Raw should be
sold for $49 or something like that,
independent from PS.
thedigitalbean wrote:
It all comes down to how quickly a manufacturer can get (even a pre-production) body to the Camera Raw guys.
By the way the 5D3 is supported in the ACR 6.7 RC announced this morning...
That's great news about the Canon 5D3 support in ACR 6.7. Still no Fuji X-Pro 1 support though. Given that it uses a new color filter array scheme, I wonder if that will also contribute to much slower, third party support. This was a notorious issue early on with Fuji Super CCD cameras.
I posted in the PP forum, be careful LR4 will nuke all your tone curve edits when you import a LR3 catalog (even when left at PV 2010).
If you've ever changed a tone curve in the past you probably don't want to import your LR3 catalog until this gets fixed. I have no idea what might happen with XMP sidecars or DNGs...
Mike V wrote:
I'm starting to think I should have used Lightroom instead of aperture.
You can always switch. Download the trial, and use it by itself for 30 days and see if you like it. Give it a little time, though as it has a learning curve, but after you are familiar with the program, it is a great workflow...really easy to get the results you want. Some people prefer Lightroom, some prefer aperture. I love LR, but I use Windows, so Aperture isn't an option for me.
I also use Aperture, and prefer the colours from it to Lightroom, but Apple is moving away from their pro suite of programs, and it has been a long time since I have seen an update. I am toying with the idea of moving back again... (I used to use Lightroom in the 1 and 2 days, but they botched my upgrade process completely, which is one reason I switched).
Every time I try Aperture it just runs too slowly compared to Lightroom. This would probably not be an issue with a brand new machine, but it was the case when I tried Aperture back in 2009 as well, when my MBP was brand new.
Lightroom is also catching up in the areas where Aperture is better. The maps module is one example of this. I still hate having to switch between the Library and Develop module though.
Another important point is that Adobe's commitment to the creative community is a lot more reassuring than Apple's. This is Adobe's bread and butter, while Aperture/FPX/etc are peripheral to Apple's main revenue streams. Just look at how Apple is typically dragging their feet to provide RAW support for newly released cameras.
I wonder how long that one will take.