by Daniel T


July 18, 2006

Lightroom beta 3 is now available for the Windows platform on Adobe Labs. The efficient new way for professional photographers to import, manage, and showcase large volumes of digital images now supports Mac and Windows systems.
Learn more ›
Download now ›


  • By tatsu aiko - 11:37 PM on July 18, 2006  


  • By James Cauble - 5:15 AM on July 20, 2006  

    I have downloaded Lightroom beta 3, Windows version to a Windows XP SP2 operating system and it will not load. Upon attempting to load a window comes up saying “This installation package could not be opened. Contact the application vendor to verify that this is a valid Windows installer package.”
    How do I work around this problem?

  • By Daniel Taborga - 9:32 AM on July 20, 2006  

    Hi James,
    You may have a corrupted download. Please try to download the file again to see if this resolves the issue. If problems persist, please post a topic in the Lightroom Beta Windows Discussion forum.

  • By Jo Meder - 3:12 PM on July 20, 2006  

    Ok, so it has a new kind of interface which is quite nice and handy. But: This application is way too slow. I mean, not “we’ll optimize a bit and it’ll be alright”-slow, but “abysmally, completely unusable and useless”-slow. Just import something like 2000 photographs with 6 mpixels (not that many in my book) and see what kind of performance you get on a standard office machine. Forget it, nobody pays me the kind of money I’d need to wait for Lightroom to finishing even the most basic tasks.

  • By John Meek - 6:58 PM on July 20, 2006  

    “2000 photographs with 6 mpixels”
    Are you for real? Do you own a Cray or something? I am running Lightroom on a laptop and a desktop, both with 1gb RAM and the speed certainly seems OK to me. I just loaded 22 images from a Canon EOS 5D (12+mp each) in about 10 seconds. I then opened one up and waited about 3 seconds to process the image. Still, that seems pretty reasonable to me.
    In the first few uses, I am impressed with the capabilities and ease of use. I will keep playing and get back to you soon.

  • By avioli - 1:06 AM on July 21, 2006  

    Hi there, I’m with a DELL INSPIRON 8200 with 1GB RAM and 1.8Pentium M… This proggie is not as fast as all other products of Adobe, but it has a perfect workflow. A bit slow, can’t say it is fast as Photoshop, but don’t forget it is a Beta yet. Everything refreshes pretty slow, but it works… I had a major problem when I switched to another program – it hung… well never occured again the same problem… I terminated the program and opened it up again… switched, switched, switched.. no problem at all.
    Great work Adobe Labs… keep the good, NO – the perfect work going.
    Hope you will place a White, Grey, Black point samplers in the final release (probably this is not the place for this feature request).

  • By Mary Ann Melton - 10:50 AM on July 21, 2006  

    I have uploaded the newest version of Lightroom for Mac.
    I shoot RAW images with a Canon 5D.
    When using the slideshow, I am disappointed because it does not show the photos sharp. It seems that it shows an image and right before going to the next image, it becomes sharp. But on the initial run through all the images appear soft and pixelated as though the image has not fully loaded into the browser. But I use the slide show to screen which of my images are worth working on. If the slideshow images are not high quality images from the file, I can’t tell what I’m doing.

  • By steven - 8:26 AM on July 26, 2006  

    “2000 photographs with 6 mpixels”
    That I would agree is slow. This adobe’s workflow software for pro’s much like captureOne etc.. code should be optimised to the hilt to ensure that that proper professional style imports work. Not the average consumer/light-pro photographer who will use this product.
    I know of quite a few places that use amazingly high volume processes such as this and photoshop and imageready perform better.
    However it is at Beta.

  • By Thiago Silva - 4:35 PM on August 16, 2006  

    I run the Mac version on a 14″ iBook G4 1.6GHz. Or well, I try to. It’s painfully slow. Ok, I know the computer is not top notch, but if Photoshop/Camera Raw run well, with almost no lag for display updates when applying effects, why wouldn’t Lightroom?

  • By Daniel Taborga - 9:08 PM on August 16, 2006  

    Hi Thiago,
    How much RAM do you have on your system? Please report your performance issue within the Lightroom Labs forums so the product team (and other users) can follow up with you.

  • By Paul - 11:17 AM on August 29, 2006  

    Lightroom is a ram hog – I use a 2 ghz dual mac with 4gb ram, and lightroom always uses at least 150% of ram. When I switch to another program, lightroom won’t give up the ram. If anything at all is running in lightroom, like printing contact sheets, nothing else will run. This makes it very unappealing for my work flow.

  • By Daniel Taborga - 12:43 PM on August 29, 2006  

    Hi Paul,
    Lightroom is still in development and one area that they are focusing on is performance. The next beta release should yield better resource management on your system; if not, please be sure to raise this issue in the Lightroom discussion forums.

  • By Tim - 1:19 PM on September 4, 2006  

    Is it same to assume resource management fixes apply to both Windows and Mac versions? I’m running Beta3 on XP SP2 on a Pentium 4 2.8GHz/800 system with 2GB RAM.
    While I was just sitting *idle* in the Develop module I opened up Task Manager, went to the Process tab and watched lightroom.exe allocate memory. It started off around 100MB, then quickly went to 200, and kept going up and up finally stabilizing at about 800MB! Wow.

  • By Daniel Taborga - 2:03 PM on September 4, 2006  

    Hi Tim,
    That sounds like a bad memory leak. If you can find reproducible steps, please log a bug in the Lightroom discussion forum. You are using the first Windows beta build so issues like this are conceivable, but bad nonetheless.

  • By Keith Blundy - 12:10 AM on September 25, 2006  

    Have been testing Beta 3 for 2 months – first impressions very nice. I hope the final version is going to be much quicker as it runs slow!! I would like to see healing brush and stamper tools in the final as well as selective are manipulation like is possible in NIK.

  • By Daniel Taborga - 12:14 AM on September 25, 2006  

    Hi Keith,
    We just released beta 4 so I suggest that you check it out!

  • By photographic - 2:30 AM on September 30, 2006  

    try lightroom beta 4 on PC and I see that it to solw I usealy use ACDsee for this jobs and everything more fast in ASDsee. In print I dont see print to file .jpg… most photographers I belive there dont have a printer in there office put thay need contact there jobs.
    The Auto aujust is to bad!
    and I dont see unsharpan filter olny sharpen!
    I belive that you have a great software but not yet the goodone to Release!

  • By Franzus - 4:11 AM on March 3, 2007  

    Tried Lightroom 1.0
    It looks really nice. Best feature: the “L” key – Aaaah. That’s about it.
    ACDSee Pro looks amateurish in comparison, BUT is an excellent Browser/Editor/Sorter.
    Does most things Lightroom does, AND more…
    In terms of speed it’s like sitting in your car during downtown rush hour (Lightroom), versus having a private jet. Not kidding.

  • By Mindrinos - 6:55 AM on April 13, 2007  

    I don’t see yet in lightroom print module a setting for print to file – jpg – tff or something. I have to use a third part software to print to files put again I have problem with profiles which I have to put a printer profile and not sRGB or RGB …

  • By Daniel Taborga - 3:37 PM on April 13, 2007  

    Please see the support site on for a list of known issues and discussion groups for the shipping Adobe Photoshop Lightroom software.

  • By photographic - 6:08 AM on September 21, 2007  

    In lightroom the Raw photos is too different from original photos i shut!
    Color – contrast – brightness