Photoshop Lightroom 2 released as Adobe's first 64-bit Mac app

Posted:
in Mac Software edited January 2014
Following an earlier open beta, Adobe on Tuesday released version 2.0 of its Photoshop Lightroom post production photography software, which stands as the company's first application to run 64-bit-native on Apple's Mac OS X Leopard operating system.



The San Jose-based software developer is particularly proud of the accomplishment given that Lightroom's main competitor, Apple's Aperture, has yet to see native 64-bit support.



Adobe has committed to delivering 64-bit versions of Photoshop and its other Creative Suite applications, but said earlier this year that those updates will take considerably longer due to Apple's decision to scrap plans for a 64-bit version of its Carbon developer tool set.



For Lightroom 2.0, 64-bit support will allow the application to address large amounts of memory in excess of 4 gigabytes, which will speed up overall performance for photographers dealing with large scale images that must be swapped into and out of memory during processing-intensive operations.



The software also aims to streamline and accelerate photographers? workflows through an enhanced Library module featuring the ability to visually organize images across multiple hard drives. A Library Filter Bar and Suggested Keywords feature work towards simplifying the search and retrieval process.



Two other highly touted features of Lightroom 2.0 are dual-monitor support for maximizing workspace and more efficient printing tools. For instance, the software now arranges photos of multiple sizes on one or many pages with customizable templates to maximize paper and ink. Intelligent algorithms then automatically determine optimal sharpening for screen or print, producing crisper images faster.



Adobe is also rolling out new RAW technology that gives photographers access to flexible camera profiles that will help reduce unexpected changes in the quality of their photographs.



"Camera profiles are the visual starting point for the raw processing workflow, but image preferences vary for every photographer," the company siad. "To minimize surprises, Adobe is supplying default camera profiles that closely emulate the visual looks that photographers are used to seeing from their favorite camera, while also providing the ability to create highly customized profiles to suit different tastes."



Camera profiles are available for immediate download on Adobe Labs for use with Lightroom 2 and Camera RAW 4.5, along with a DNG Profile Editor for the community to test and create their own profiles. The tools currently support over 190 camera models including the Olympus E 420 and E 520 models.



Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 2 is available for immediate download (or shipping) through the Adobe Store in English, French and German with the Japanese language version planned to be released at a future date. New licenses cost $299 and upgrades fetch $99.
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 34
    godriflegodrifle Posts: 267member
    Cool. I can't wait to gauge the performance impact of 64-bit. Problem is that current 32-bit apps from Adobe are pretty slow to begin with. I *really* look forward to the next iteration of Creative Suite, not from a feature standpoint, but from a performance standpoint. Adobe can (should) do better.
  • Reply 2 of 34
    noirdesirnoirdesir Posts: 1,027member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by godrifle View Post


    I *really* look forward to the next iteration of Creative Suite, not from a feature standpoint, but from a performance standpoint.



    You are aware that the next iteration of the Creative Suite, CS4, will still be 32 bit on the Mac? Only the version after that, CS5, will be 64 bit. CS4 will be available as a 64 bit version for Windows (XP and Vista, I guess), but it requires the installation of the 64 bit version of Windows. Few people currently run the 64 bit version of Windows (XP or Vista) as by far not all software (all vendors combined) runs on it smoothly.

    Mac OS X 10.5 (Leopard) can run 32 and 64 bit applications side-by-side without any problems whatsoever.
  • Reply 3 of 34
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,718member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by noirdesir View Post


    You are aware that the next iteration of the Creative Suite, CS4, will still be 32 bit on the Mac? Only the version after that, CS5, will be 64 bit. CS4 will be available as a 64 bit version for Windows (XP and Vista, I guess), but it requires the installation of the 64 bit version of Windows. Few people currently run the 64 bit version of Windows (XP or Vista) as by far not all software (all vendors combined) runs on it smoothly.

    Mac OS X 10.5 (Leopard) can run 32 and 64 bit applications side-by-side without any problems whatsoever.



    Yep one wonders what Adobe have against Apple lol, one would have thought 64 bit development would have made more sense on Mac first. Personally I'm more excited about utilizing all 8 cores on my Mac Pro hopefully coming in some part with Snow Leopard and thereafter from developers of pro apps. A friend of mine owns a color scanning software company and they are already hiring experts in multi core development as they see that as crucial for near future.
  • Reply 4 of 34
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post


    Yep one wonders what Adobe have against Apple lol, one would have thought 64 bit development would have made more sense on Mac first.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post


    Adobe has committed to delivering 64-bit versions of Photoshop and its other Creative Suite applications, but said earlier this year that those updates will take considerably longer due to Apple's decision to scrap plans for a 64-bit version of its Carbon developer tool set.



    Adobe doesn't have anything against Apple as far as developing 64-bit applications. It's just that Apple threw Adobe a curveball by beginning the process of eliminating Carbon-developed applications (such as the entire Creative Suite).
  • Reply 5 of 34
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,718member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jdmlight View Post


    Adobe doesn't have anything against Apple as far as developing 64-bit applications. It's just that Apple threw Adobe a curveball by beginning the process of eliminating Carbon-developed applications (such as the entire Creative Suite).



    Is there a reason (I have no clue, not my area of knowledge) why Adobe are not developing using Cocoa?
  • Reply 6 of 34
    Just curious to see if anyone knows if Lightroom's 64-bit support is just x64 or also 64-bit PPC for the G5?
  • Reply 7 of 34
    abster2coreabster2core Posts: 2,501member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post


    Is there a reason (I have no clue, not my area of knowledge) why Adobe are not developing using Cocoa?



    "It is important to note that in Tiger, the support for 64-bit programming does not extend throughout the entire set of APIs available on Mac OS X. Most notably, the Cocoa and Carbon GUI application frameworks are not ready for 64-bit programming. In practical terms, this means that the "heavy lifting" of an application that needs 64-bit support can be done by a background process which communicates with a front-end 32-bit GUI process via a variety of mechanisms including IPC and shared memory.



    On another note, if anybody can single out any major 64-bit native applications, I would love to hear about it.
  • Reply 8 of 34
    heffequeheffeque Posts: 139member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ltcommander.data View Post


    Just curious to see if anyone knows if Lightroom's 64-bit support is just x64 or also 64-bit PPC for the G5?



    Interesting question, yes. Also a comparison between speeds would be nice.
  • Reply 9 of 34
    heffequeheffeque Posts: 139member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Abster2core View Post


    "It is important to note that in Tiger, the support for 64-bit programming does not extend throughout the entire set of APIs available on Mac OS X. Most notably, the Cocoa and Carbon GUI application frameworks are not ready for 64-bit programming. In practical terms, this means that the "heavy lifting" of an application that needs 64-bit support can be done by a background process which communicates with a front-end 32-bit GUI process via a variety of mechanisms including IPC and shared memory.



    On another note, if anybody can single out any major 64-bit native applications, I would love to hear about it.



    QuickTime X will be 64bit = less CPU use on HD content.



    With a little luck coding videos will start taking advantage of 64bit processing. I saw a benchmark of a lame mp3 encoding in linux almost twice as fast with 64bit code, but as everyone can imagine, not all apps can take this performance upgrade just by going 64bit.
  • Reply 10 of 34
    abster2coreabster2core Posts: 2,501member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ltcommander.data View Post


    Just curious to see if anyone knows if Lightroom's 64-bit support is just x64 or also 64-bit PPC for the G5?



    Perhaps the answer is found here: http://blogs.adobe.com/jnack/2008/04...hop_lr_64.html
  • Reply 11 of 34
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,951member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by heffeque View Post


    QuickTime X will be 64bit = less CPU use on HD content.



    With a little luck coding videos will start taking advantage of 64bit processing. I saw a benchmark of a lame mp3 encoding in linux almost twice as fast with 64bit code, but as everyone can imagine, not all apps can take this performance upgrade just by going 64bit.



    It's not the 64 bit-ness itself, what sped up the encoding was that the CPU is less register starved than IA32. I don't think encoding benefits from longer data word lengths or access to more memory.
  • Reply 12 of 34
    minderbinderminderbinder Posts: 1,703member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post


    Yep one wonders what Adobe have against Apple lol, one would have thought 64 bit development would have made more sense on Mac first.



    I really wonder what APPLE has against Apple. It's funny to see people complaining about third parties not having 64 bit support when Apple hasn't released a single app yet. Pretty pathetic.



    Where are 64 bit versions of Logic and Final Cut?



    In general, most developers are further along with 64 bit development on the PC side. XP64 was ready much earlier than 64 bit OSX, and it looks like it's a much easier transition.
  • Reply 13 of 34
    abster2coreabster2core Posts: 2,501member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by heffeque View Post


    QuickTime X will be 64bit = less CPU use on HD content.



    "?will be?? Looking for native available now.
  • Reply 14 of 34
    abster2coreabster2core Posts: 2,501member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by minderbinder View Post


    I really wonder what APPLE has against Apple. It's funny to see people complaining about third parties not having 64 bit support when Apple hasn't released a single app yet. Pretty pathetic.



    Where are 64 bit versions of Logic and Final Cut?



    In general, most developers are further along with 64 bit development on the PC side. XP64 was ready much earlier than 64 bit OSX, and it looks like it's a much easier transition.



    Microsoft Windows XP Professional x64 Edition is not 64-bit native! Neither is Microsoft Windows Vista x64.
  • Reply 15 of 34
    abster2coreabster2core Posts: 2,501member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by minderbinder View Post


    I really wonder what APPLE has against Apple. It's funny to see people complaining about third parties not having 64 bit support when Apple hasn't released a single app yet. Pretty pathetic.



    Where are 64 bit versions of Logic and Final Cut?



    In general, most developers are further along with 64 bit development on the PC side. XP64 was ready much earlier than 64 bit OSX, and it looks like it's a much easier transition.



    Just a perception, not a reality.
  • Reply 16 of 34
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,951member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by minderbinder View Post


    I really wonder what APPLE has against Apple. It's funny to see people complaining about third parties not having 64 bit support when Apple hasn't released a single app yet. Pretty pathetic.



    Where are 64 bit versions of Logic and Final Cut?



    Nowhere yet, because Apple is just as laggard as Adobe in porting their pro apps to Cocoa, all the released versions of Pro Apps (except maybe Aperture) are Carbon. Apple had the same ten year head start that Adobe had, but they didn't seem I think it's reasonably likely that they will be starting next year in replacing them, I think Logic's dev cycle is up for an update at NAMM, and FCS's typical dev cycle puts a major update in April 2009. If they miss those, then it's another two years.
  • Reply 17 of 34
    abster2coreabster2core Posts: 2,501member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post


    Yep one wonders what Adobe have against Apple lol, one would have thought 64 bit development would have made more sense on Mac first.



    And what wrong with Adobe introducing Lightroom 64-bit for the Mac and PC at the same time?
  • Reply 18 of 34
    minderbinderminderbinder Posts: 1,703member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post


    Is there a reason (I have no clue, not my area of knowledge) why Adobe are not developing using Cocoa?



    Yes, because using Cocoa makes cross platform coding more difficult. Under Carbon, programmers can use C++ code and keep much of it the same over both platforms. With Cocoa, they have to use objective C (yeah, I know, they can still do some things in C++) which means the mac version necessarily is more different than the windows version.



    Beyond that, they use carbon because the program is years old and that's the way it was originally written. Changing a program that is years old and millions of lines of code is a huge job.



    For these reasons, hardly any devs are ready for 64 bit code on OSX (even companies that are already 64 bit on windows), and hardly any are on Cocoa.



    And that includes apple, I doubt there are more than one or two pro apps (if that) on cocoa.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ltcommander.data View Post


    Just curious to see if anyone knows if Lightroom's 64-bit support is just x64 or also 64-bit PPC for the G5?



    Intel only.
  • Reply 19 of 34
    minderbinderminderbinder Posts: 1,703member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Abster2core View Post


    Microsoft Windows XP Professional x64 Edition is not 64-bit native! Neither is Microsoft Windows Vista x64.



    Are you sure about that? There are 64 bit versions of both XP and vista.



    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows...al_x64_Edition



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Abster2core View Post


    Just a perception, not a reality.



    OK, let me rephrase to be perfectly clear.



    A number of companies have released 64 bit windows versions of their software while the mac version remains 32 bit (I'd still say that's the same as being further along with 64 bit on the windows side, but whatever).



    That is reality, not perception. If you disagree, feel free to post all the cross platform apps that are 64 bit on both. I guarantee there are many more that are 64 bit on the windows side only.
  • Reply 20 of 34
    I downloaded the trial version of Lightroom 2 and Activity Monitor, doesn't show it as Intel (64-bit), only as Intel.

    This is a Core2Duo iMac.



    AJ
Sign In or Register to comment.