Adobe releases Photoshop Lightroom 4, cuts price in half to $149

Posted:
in Mac Software edited January 2014


Adobe on Tuesday released Photoshop Lightroom 4, the latest version of its professional photography software for OS X and PC, with a $149 starting price that's half that of its predecessor.



Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 4 introduces refined technology for superior shadow and highlight processing, the ability to create photo books, additional local adjustment controls, and has enhanced video support. It's $149 for new customers, or $79 for those upgrading from a previous version.



"Feedback from our customers is invaluable in developing Lightroom and the real trick to a great release is to combine these insights with Adobe’s unrivaled image processing innovation," said Winston Hendrickson, vice president products of Creative Media Solutions at Adobe. "Lightroom 4 is a stunning new release that will enhance photography workflows and help photographs stand out from the crowd."



Adobe said on Tuesday that Photoshop Lightroom 4 features significant new capabilities and innovations, including new adjustment controls that maximize dynamic range from cameras for recovering shadow details and highlights. New auto adjustments dynamically set values for exposure and contrast, and additional local adjustments are now available, including "Noise Reduction," "Moire" and "White Balance."



The latest version of Lightroom also provides photographers with tools to create photo books with text controls and a number of templates. There's also a direct link for photo book creation within the software's new "Book" module.







Users can also access a new "Map" module that displays images already assigned a location, and also provides location tagging and reverse geo-tagging controls. Saved locations also allow for assignment of a photographer's common location.



Lightroom 4 also features native video support, giving photographers the ability to play, trim and extract frames from video clips shot on DSLR cameras, as well as point-and-shoot cameras and smartphones. Video-specific presets and many standard Lightroom image adjustments can be applied to video clips, and adjusted videos can be exported as an H.264 file or published directly to Facebook or Flickr.







The "Develop" module also offers presets that utilize new processing technology. The addition of soft proofing will also assist photographers in tuning images in a destination color space. Customers can also e-mail images directly from Lightroom using an e-mail account of their choice.



Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 4 is available for both Mac and Windows direct from Adobe. Free shipping is available through March 31, 2012, and users can also download a free trial of the software.



[ View article on AppleInsider ]

«1

Comments

  • hexxhexx Posts: 40member
    excellent update, been using beta for some time and it's really great improvement and the price is big surprise, was expecting much more not half price
  • fairthropefairthrope Posts: 249member
    Half-price? These are hard times isn't it?
  • plovellplovell Posts: 654member
    Apple cut the price of Aperture from ~$199 to ~$80, so Lightroom is still $70 more expensive.



    Is it worth the extra $70 ?? [Honest question - I haven't used Lightroom and can't compare]
  • hexxhexx Posts: 40member
    With LR you're getting both win and mac copies. also LR in my opinion is much better than Aperture
  • hexxhexx Posts: 40member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by plovell View Post


    Apple cut the price of Aperture from ~$199 to ~$80, so Lightroom is still $70 more expensive.



    Is it worth the extra $70 ?? [Honest question - I haven't used Lightroom and can't compare]



    it's worth the extra. speed speed speed, and better organizing, custom presets and so on. think about LR as a huge db management, all you do is stored in a db and therefore you can create from whatever you do a new preset and apply it to number of photographs, you can limit those presets to be applied only to certain ISO, camera serial nr and so on. it also means that you have full history of all edits you've done to a photo and you can go back and forth, create new virtual copies at whatever step you desire (it will create just new set of settings).



    now they've added soft proofing to print module so there's no need for PS any more. the basic panel in develop module is re-done from scratch and now fulfils 98% of my post-processing needs. also B&W conversion is better than in Aperture. I've been using both for really long time.
  • gustavgustav Posts: 802member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by hexx View Post


    With LR you're getting both win and mac copies. also LR in my opinion is much better than Aperture



    That's not really a selling point. Most photographers have one chosen platform, not two. When I evaluated the two, I chose Aperture because of its free form nature. LR made me feel like I was locked into their process. I don't know if that's still the case.
  • hexxhexx Posts: 40member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Gustav View Post


    That's not really a selling point. Most photographers have one chosen platform, not two. When I evaluated the two, I chose Aperture because of its free form nature. LR made me feel like I was locked into their process. I don't know if that's still the case.



    i guess it's matter of preference. i like the fact that my RAW files remain untouched (you can write settings to your RAW files if you choose to), it allows me to work with different SW on the same files and also allows me to haw RAW files on external HDD and LR library on my internal SSD which makes it really really quick.



    I've been switching back and forth, started with the first Beta of LR and used it until version 2, then switched to Aperture and then again when version 3 was released I switched to LR.



    I don't feel locked-in the LR, the opposite, gives me freedom





    "That's not really a selling point" - for some it is, I know few people who use MacBooks as portable machine and have a Win based computer at home. It's not a selling point for me because I don't have a Win box.
  • cy_starkmancy_starkman Posts: 488member
    Oh my god, adobe is abandoning its pro users, targeting the prosumer market with this price point and cheap iPhoto features like book making, Facebook uploading and location mapping.



    There is nothing left, the professional market is doomed!



    /irony or something



    --



    Lightroom gives you simple file system control, I find that a major win over aperture (which can but gets all convoluted about it)
  • docno42docno42 Posts: 3,147member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by hexx View Post


    i guess it's matter of preference. i like the fact that my RAW files remain untouched (you can write settings to your RAW files if you choose to), it allows me to work with different SW on the same files and also allows me to haw RAW files on external HDD and LR library on my internal SSD which makes it really really quick.



    Aperture can work exactly the same way. Indeed, I've found any speed advantage Lightroom had completely evaporated once I put my Aperture library on my SSD. Aperture is extremely sensitive to file fragmentation of its databases - so much so I think the Aperture team should address it by at least warning people when their databases are fragmenting.



    Quote:

    I've been switching back and forth, started with the first Beta of LR and used it until version 2, then switched to Aperture and then again when version 3 was released I switched to LR. I don't feel locked-in the LR, the opposite, gives me freedom



    They are both great programs. I'm glad Adobe is keeping pace and even pushing forward a little with Apple. If I grew up as a traditional photographer and/or was a constant user of Adobe software and had the "Adobe Way" ingrained in me I might lean more towards Lightroom - but for me personally Aperture just felt better.



    As I said the are both great and one doesn't have a knockout over the other. Much like the endless Nikon/Canon debates . Since the both have trials, download 'em both and make your choice that way.
  • tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 39,903member
    Wake me when the Illustrator CS6 demo comes out.
  • hexxhexx Posts: 40member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DocNo42 View Post


    Aperture can work exactly the same way. Indeed, I've found any speed advantage Lightroom had completely evaporated once I put my Aperture library on my SSD. Aperture is extremely sensitive to file fragmentation of its databases - so much so I think the Aperture team should address it by at least warning people when their databases are fragmenting.







    They are both great programs. I'm glad Adobe is keeping pace and even pushing forward a little with Apple. If I grew up as a traditional photographer and/or was a constant user of Adobe software and had the "Adobe Way" ingrained in me I might lean more towards Lightroom - but for me personally Aperture just felt better.



    As I said the are both great and one doesn't have a knockout over the other. Much like the endless Nikon/Canon debates . Since the both have trials, download 'em both and make your choice that way.



    oh yes those canon/nikon debates i feel a bit left out now, replaced my dSLR kit (Nikon) with Fuji X100.



    What you're suggesting is the best thing to do - download trial versions and try them both
  • jlanddjlandd Posts: 810member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by plovell View Post


    Apple cut the price of Aperture from ~$199 to ~$80, so Lightroom is still $70 more expensive.



    Is it worth the extra $70 ?? [Honest question - I haven't used Lightroom and can't compare]



    Absolutely, and it was worth it before this update and at $300. Now it's a no brainer.
  • jlanddjlandd Posts: 810member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by plovell View Post


    Apple cut the price of Aperture from ~$199 to ~$80, so Lightroom is still $70 more expensive.



    Is it worth the extra $70 ?? [Honest question - I haven't used Lightroom and can't compare]



    Biggest factor is that they are two very different ways of working. You'd base your preference on the working paradigm rather than if either is a "better" program.



    There are surely differences is speed and some features existing or not, but truthfully 75% of Aperture users don't even know what softproofing is much less use it : ) so much feature comparison isn't going to be a deciding factor. Most Aperture users just were happy they had an $80 image program (and were never going to spend more), and now they're used to it.
  • irelandireland Posts: 15,290member
    Get your ass in the Mac App Store.
  • tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 39,903member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Ireland View Post


    Get your ass in the Mac App Store.



    They'd actually have to put work into their Mac versions for once, and they're never going to do that.



    And if they rewrote the stuff in Xcode and submitted it to the Mac App Store, they'd be rejected instantaneously because Adobe wants to tie everything into AIR and Bridge and all their other third party crap. "Adobe Application Manager" my foot.



    PLUS, Apple gets a cut of their money, so even if they swallowed their nonexistent pride and actually wrote proper Mac applications, they'd still put them on their own website.
  • minnesota_steveminnesota_steve Posts: 109member
    Photography is my main hobby and Photoshop with various plug-ins is my main software. Eventually with a large photo collection, database management becomes a real need and easy management of multiple versions of photos. The built in file browser for Photoshop, Bridge, is quite nice. But it is not a database.



    For a Photoshop user, Lightroom uses the same RAW file processing engine and tools. Furthermore, because of the high learning curve for Photoshop, many folks also purchase learning resources. Books, membership in NAPP, etc. Those same authors and organizations also support Lightroom. But until this release, Lightroom had many gaps compared to Aperture. Basically anything related to export of your work (web, printing, books, etc.) was superior in Aperture. So I use both. This becomes the battle. Adobe wins easily win Photoshop users. Aperture created the category of giving high end capabilities to the rest of the world.



    Now when my friends getting into photography, who own a Mac, ask me for a recommendation, I ask them about their true use. But I emphasize more, "what do the friends and family you collaborate the most with use?" . Like cameras, if you have hobby time with friends and family which mostly own one brand, the you will likely have more fun using that same brand. Sharing lenses, learning features, etc. Photo apps is roughly similiar. All of my friends come back to me about how to improve their post processing. For those who chose Aperture, I have less to offer them.



    For those who will mostly work on their own. Aperture supports iCloud, is simpler to learn, is more free form. It works very well, especially for just a few thousand photos. Lightroom requires more diligence in learning, offers more advanced features and has a an extremely large support community (Scott Kelby, etc.). Youtube training videos are many. Currently, it is better set up for managing large photo collections and now has caught up to Aperture in the output features.



    But they basically are both huge improvements over iPhoto for postprocessing and file management.
  • jlanddjlandd Posts: 810member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


    They'd actually have to put work into their Mac versions for once, and they're never going to do that.



    Although it's Aperture and not LR that has the well deserved reputation as behaving like an alpha release for years, but whatever.



    (and I've been on Aperture since shelling out for v1)
  • hexxhexx Posts: 40member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jlandd View Post


    although it's aperture and not lr that has the well deserved reputation as behaving like an alpha release for years, but whatever.



    (and i've been on aperture since shelling out for v1)



    +1000
  • ash471ash471 Posts: 705member
    Apple has flipped the computer industry on its head. Apple is creating a "race to the bottom" in software. The OS is $29.99 for up to 10 users in a household. iWork apps cost $19.99. Aperture costs $79.99. Most games and simple apps are $0-$5. This is the opposite of the microsoft era where hardware was a race to the bottom and MS was charging $300 for its OS and productivity suites. I think it is a brilliant strategy for Apple since they sell both hardware and software. If you think about it, cheap software is the only way to break down the PC barrier. If the software is cheap, people will buy the hardware to run the software. Once people buy the software, they will keep buying the hardware.
  • tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 39,903member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ash471 View Post


    I think it is a brilliant strategy for Apple since they sell both hardware and software. If you think about it, cheap software is the only way to break down the PC barrier. If the software is cheap, people will buy the hardware to run the software. Once people buy the software, they will keep buying the hardware.



    The best part is that it fundamentally undermines Microsoft's entire platform. They don't sell the hardware, so their software has to be stupidly expensive. But when iWork is $45 and Office is $150, people will stop buying the latter entirely. When OS X updates are $30 and Windows updates are $400…
Sign In or Register to comment.