Re: tablet PC history/back to photography with lightroom question

[Lea Murphy <lea@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I'm on LR4 can PSCS3. That ought to tell you what I think about upgrading what.

LR4's develop module is enhanced with some additional sliders…they've separated highlights and whites as well as shadows and blacks. Splitting hairs? Maybe. But I do use them all sometimes. Not only can these be done globally, they are also available with each of the enhancement tools. Nice.

The noise reduction is greatly enhanced in version 4 as is sharpening.

All your presets will work just fine in LR4.

Your old LR3 catalog images come into LR4 with the settings you used but you are given the option to 'upgrade' them to the new LR4 settings on an image by image or folder by folder basis which is nice. This can be undone via history if you don't like the changes.

For me the upgrade was worth it, most definitely.

Lea

your kids . my camera . we'll click
www.leamurphy.com

On Aug 3, 2012, at 11:06 AM, mark@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

Getting off topic is a part of a discussion, but we almost always have a root in photography.  Someone makes a joke, follows something with a joke and before you know it Andy has to guide us back.  Andy is the judge, Andy???  Others may but I won't comment on the politics without Andy's ok, and I doubt he gives it.  I hope not.

Now back to photography.

I recently lost a copy of the Lightroom The Missing FAQ by Victoria Bampton  I am still over version 3 and it was my first copy of Lightroom.  Honestly its taken a while for me to feel like it was worthwhile, but I guess I am finally won over.  Some things really are bad.  A better clone and spot removal tool would be a BIG help and so would the healing brush.  Its offset by the ease of going from Lightroom to Photoshop back to Lightroom, but the main reason I think they did it that way is so you keep buying the more expensive photoshop.

The features I love the most are the toning functions.  I know there are presets out there, and the ones that come stock almost always have to be adjusted, but I don't consider that as much of a negative as many might.  Id probably give the all at least a quick look anyway,  but the ability to sync them to a specific photo is great. 

Now my question is, with version 4 out how much different does it look and feel than version 3.  I am just beginning to know where all the sliders are now, and those famous words maybe coming back to haunt me again.  "We Don't Do It That Way Anymore."   Id like to get the fundamentals more solid before upgrading IF it looks a great deal differently.  Some versions of photoshop the interface doesn't feel that differently from one to another. 

Yet it all the sliders and buttons are more or less in the same place, if I have to replace the book anyway, I am leaning toward upgrading and getting the book for version 4.  At some point I will have to deal with it anyway, but solid fundamentals lead to a smooth transition and just not sure how solid they are yet.

Lightroom vets out there.  Big deal or no big deal at all???

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: tablet PC history
From: Hans Klemmer <hansklemmer@xxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, August 03, 2012 8:59 am
To: List for Photo/Imaging Educators - Professionals - Students
<photoforum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Mark & Greg,
Personally I do look forward to Dr. Chris' notes on whatever his subject may be. I'ts a breath of fresh air that proves to all of us that we have lives and challenges away from being behind the camera.

Hans

On 3 Aug 2012, at 14:40, mark@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

>
>
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: RE: tablet PC history
> From: Gregory Fraser <Gregory.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Fri, August 03, 2012 8:05 am
> To: List for Photo/Imaging Educators - Professionals - Students
> <photoforum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
>> From: Christopher Strevens
>> ...I have just sat up and found that I am floudering in debt and I
> might have to work FOR money much as I hate this aspect of western
> culture.
>
> Just so you know, there are about 6,973,738,000 other people in the
> world who work for money. I don't want you to feel all alone.
>
> Not only that, but if you won't take care of yourself, who will?
> Anything someone or some organization gives you, can take it away and
> sooner or later probably will. Frankly I am totally amazed that the
> group has been this patient. Andy must be a saint. Your Drs and pills
> are not about photography. I would suspect most of us have at least
> some debt, and to pay it we work for money. Some might even be in debt
> for a camera. Some might have to go to work and use a camera. After a
> while they find that what they loved so much is now a chore. They have
> to do what they are told not what they want.
>
> It is my opinion that these types of post are inhibit the flow of posts
> about photography. This is a resource I find valuable and if the post
> were about photography, the no matter how off base I might think an idea
> to be, its valuable. A free exchange of ideas isn't just for the ideas
> with which you agree. I could take each of your points part by part and
> discuss them, but no one would want to hear that. This is a photography
> group Dr, and a political discussion from me is just as bad as from you.
> Just because no one responses to argue doesn't mean you have convinced
> them of anything or that they agree with you. Its much more likely they
> have just hit the ignore button.
>