Lightroom and Camera Raw 4.1

Last night we released the Camera Raw 4.1 update that includes support for new sharpening and noise reduction functionality as well as support for 13 additional cameras. I’d like to discuss the timing of Camera Raw and Lightroom updates. One of my goals as product manager of both Camera Raw and Lightroom is to have the camera support update of these two applications coincide as closely as possible. However, many have noticed that the official statement from the Camera Raw 4.1 update is that Lightroom will be updated in the “near future.” Why can’t we be more specific? To be honest, it’s driven by the nature of software development. The camera raw plug-in is a discrete portion of code that has quietly matured and delivered numerous incremental updates over the last three years. So when a Camera Raw and DNG Converter update is ready to be released, customers expect Adobe to deliver the solution in the same timely manner that we’ve always provided. Lightroom on the other hand is a brand new product and the team has taken the opportunity to address a number of critiques on Lightroom 1.0 similar to the way the beta program was managed. Testing and qualifying all those improvements is taking more time than it takes us to get the Camera Raw update tested and out the door. I believe that you’ll find it worth the wait. Not only are all the additional raw processing controls found in Camera Raw 4.1 included in the next Lightroom update but we’ve added a few other features that should further streamline your workflow.
For those just looking for the updated camera support, you can use the free DNG Converter to convert your proprietary raw files to a standard that can be read by Lightroom 1.0 as well as prior versions of Adobe’s Camera Raw plug-in. I realize that for many photographers this extra step may not be a viable solution for their high volume workflow. It’s clearly a workaround until the Lightroom 1.1 update is available, something we’re working hard to provide as soon as possible.
Lets keep the dialog going and I look forward to hearing your feedback.

Tom Hogarty

56 Responses to Lightroom and Camera Raw 4.1

  1. ifonline says:

    I love reading comments like this… that’s not sarcasm, I really mean it. It has been a roller coaster of a ride for me with Lightroom, but I have grown to love its concept and plan on continuing its use for as long as I can.Updates are a great thing, especially with the suggested improvements that we will see. I appreciate the feedback that you have posted, understanding that your position between a rock and a hard place likely isn’t very comfortable: Do you post details and fall short with unexpected delays, or do you not post details and accept the backlash from end users? Thank you for what you have shared.

  2. Daveed V. says:

    Would it make engineering sense for the RAW engine within Lightroom to be a plug-in also (i.e., as it is with Photoshop)? Is this perhaps just waiting for the plug-in APIs of Lightroom to stabilize?[Good point. To some extent, the raw engine shared between Camera Raw and Lightroom is ‘plugged’ into Lightroom. It just isn’t abstracted to the point of requiring a separate file. – TH]

  3. pete says:

    Thanks for the update.Any chance you can give a status report on the LR SDK?[Not quite yet. – TH]

  4. Thanks for taking time out of that busy schedule to comment, Tom![Thanks Sean. If folks appreciate the effort I’d actually like to start posting more blog entries going forward. – TH]

  5. Andrew Wenn says:

    Well I do appreciate it. I have used LR almost exclusively from Beta 3 and will continue to do so for sometime to come.DNGs are not really important to me, I am happy with raw format and haven’t seen a good case made for changing.Keep up the good work.[Thanks Andrew, I guess I’ll have to whip up another post on Why DNG, but we’ll save that for another time. – TH]

  6. Nick Kirkland says:

    I for one certainly value the blog… just like with John Nack’s blog on Photoshop, and some great side items, the sense of understanding a little more of where things are headed is very valuable and gives a sense of connectedness to Adobe… please do post more.[I’ll probably never reach John’s prolific blogger status but I’ll see what I can do. – TH]

  7. David Harrison says:

    The effort is very much appreciated, Tom. While I certainly appreciate that circumstances limit what you can say, it’s still great to get an update.ACR 4.1 has certainly got me anticipating LR 1.1.

  8. James says:

    Is the latest ACR for LR going to be 300 dpi or still the defaults on ACR of 240 dpi since I know my DSLR is shooting at 300 dpi would like to see LR be able to read this info and display it. In ACR in PSH we can tell it to use 300 dpi but not in LR any chance for a way to adjust this setting[James, the ppi value is immaterial until you specify a height or width constraint in inches. You can set that in the Export dialog in Lightroom or the workflow options in Camera Raw. – TH]

  9. Friedrich says:

    Thanks for the info! I’ve played a bit with ACR 4.1 and really like it. Especially the sharpening and the claritiy controls. The only complaint I have is, that it’s unusable on my PC. I can’t drag sliders as they’d hang calculating after I moved them by the amount of 1, so I can only guess and click somewhere on the slider, or enter values numerically. I was really glad you fixed the ‘highlight bug’ on non SSE2 machines, but it’s still pretty incompatible with SSE only machines it seems. I have an AthlonXP Barton 3200 and 1GB RAM and all the other RAW converters are much faster, but I want to use ACR or LR. Are you going to further optimize it for older CPUs?[Friedrich, I’ll pass this along to our QE and Engineering team. I will say that the development focus is to adapt to new hardware going forward and to fix bugs associated with existing hardware like the SSE2 highlight problem. Optimizations generally happen as the hardware comes out so I can’t say how much more can be done for SSE machines. – TH]

  10. Friedrich says:

    Thanks for the info! I’ve played a bit with ACR 4.1 and really like it. Especially the sharpening and the claritiy controls. The only complaint I have is, that it’s unusable on my PC. I can’t drag sliders as they’d hang calculating after I moved them by the amount of 1, so I can only guess and click somewhere on the slider, or enter values numerically. I was really glad you fixed the ‘highlight bug’ on non SSE2 machines, but it’s still pretty incompatible with SSE only machines it seems. I have an AthlonXP Barton 3200 and 1GB RAM and all the other RAW converters are much faster, but I want to use ACR or LR. Are you going to further optimize it for older CPUs?

  11. Friedrich says:

    Thanks for the info! I’ve played a bit with ACR 4.1 and really like it. Especially the sharpening and the clarity controls. The only complaint I have is, that it’s unusable on my PC. I can’t drag sliders as they’d hang calculating after I moved them by the amount of 1, so I can only guess and click somewhere on the slider, or enter values numerically. I was really glad you fixed the ‘highlight bug’ on non SSE2 machines, but it’s still pretty incompatible with SSE only machines it seems. I have an AthlonXP Barton 3200 and 1GB RAM and all the other RAW converters are much faster, but I want to use ACR or LR. Are you going to further optimize it for older CPUs?

  12. Jim Goshorn says:

    Thanks for the posting Tom and I would certainly appreciate any thoughts and tips you could pass along in the blog.

  13. Glyn Dewis says:

    Hi Tom,Thanks for the update, which I discovered through Scott Kelby’s blog.HUGE thanks for all the work being put into Lightroom and Photoshop … a totally awesome combination which I get embarrasingly excited about thinking how they’ll develop in the future.All the best to you and yours,Glyn

  14. Mike Early says:

    Tom, thanks for the post. It at least provides a sense of what is going on. While it will be nice to have the capabilities of 4.1 in LR … there are few more features that I am anxiously waiting for, like the ability to incorporate my work from the field when I have been using my laptop to store a bunch of images being an absolute key item. The ability to select a large number of raw images from my 1D MKII and send them to CS3 for editing and not have problems like I do now in LR (not export, but edit it PS3).So Tom please take the time to make it right — but also please make it as soon as you can ;->And, please keep up the postings as to what is going on …. I really don’t like the mushroom approach to life……..

  15. Eric says:

    >>If folks appreciate the effort I’d actually like to start posting more blog entries going forward.

  16. Steven Sinski says:

    while i appreciate the effort of getting out ACR 4.1 in a rather timely manner it seems to have neglected the new sRAW option now added to the 1D3 entirely. hopefully there will be a little more thought in the support for it in Lightroom and then maybe ACR 4.1a or 4.2[Steven, the Camera Raw 4.1 readme indicates that we were unfortunately unable to include SRAW support in this release. Lightroom’s next camera support update will be identical. We will address SRAW support in a future release.]

  17. Tom, is there any chance that in the nearest future LR will include external plugins support for, for example, noise reduction, sharpening, blurring… anything?[I can’t comment specifically on future feature timing but one of the key updates already provided in the Camera Raw 4.1 release and the next update of Lightroom is improved noise reduction and sharpening technology. A plug-in API for third party software is very important for Lightroom but will not be included in Lightroom 1.1. – TH]

  18. Roland Young says:

    Tom-I am looking forward to the Lightroom 1.1 update. I hope to see an option to embed the original RAW file within DNG, that would be awesome! Thanks for the update.[Roland, I’m also the DNG product manager so I agree that it would be very, very nice to have all of the DNG conversion preferences available in Lightroom 1.1. (As well as the ability to update the embedded preview whenever the mood strikes you) – TH]

  19. Juergen says:

    Thanks for your post.But a little hint about the approximately meaning of “soon” or “near future” (these terms I heard so far) would be welcome.Does it mean days, weeks or maybe months?I hope you can understand that it is very hard to wait for the cool new features which are public so far and not to know if it would maybe take months to get them in Lightroom.Without an approximately time frame it is better to know nothing about the new features.Ok, simple question: is “soon” more likely a few weeks or a few months?From reading in several forums I know there are people with serious problems on their (mostly) PC’s and for this people the 1.1 update is important to use Lighroom at all. But there are many others out there who don’t have serious problems and for this people a separate minor camera raw update with the new features would make sense, also in the future.Thanks.Juergen[ Juergen, I understand your desire to know more about the release timing but I’m going to hold off on providing any dates or estimates. – TH]

  20. Dave says:

    I am totally hooked on lightroom and look forward to the 1.1 update. Please provide documentation of the new features and changes with the release. The lack of timely documentation has been my biggest frustration with LR.[Dave, the help documentation with Lightroom is fairly comprehensive. We also provide a detailed Read Me file that includes quite a bit of information. Unfortunately, the very title of a Read Me file seems to repel readership as John Nack noted on his blog the other day. -TH]

  21. Tom, While I may get access to certain private postings, I think it’s vital for the Lightroom audience to have interaction in the form here. With all the work being put in behind the scenes, sometimes users can feel left out and ‘in the cold’. There’s a certain fear that Adobe is not listening and I think public statements here can alleviate that perception.On the note about Camera Raw as a plugin to Lightroom, I’ve said something similar before. Rather than having to constantly leapfrog updates, a similar plugin form, for both LR and PS, might halve the engineering effort required to ensure compatibility. I appreciate that Lightroom does have other features besides this, but I think it would help (and of course Lightroom would get point curves!).The key advantage is that you don’t have to keep updating Lightroom simply for camera updates. The Camera RAW plugin will do that for you.[Sean, I think that one of my future blog posts should address how the Lightroom team interacts with the photographic community and how we do listen to the feedback provided by photographers. To your point on the camera support, I agree that there is a certain level of simplicity and elegance in allowing the single camera raw plug-in file to drive camera support updates. But I would argue that a more integrated camera support update experience is required for Lightroom. As I mentioned in my post, the goal is to release camera support updates simultaneously but a number of factors prevented that from happening for this release. – TH]

  22. Daniel says:

    HiI installed Lightroom 1.0 on Vista Ultimate. It sometimes crashes and the Adobe Photo Downloader just doesn’t show up anywhere on my computer!? I hope this will be fixed in LR 1.1 too. Thanks for the great software!

  23. Paul Johnson says:

    Whilst I appreciate that Adobe needs time get this right. As a CS2 user I find it quite frustrating that I would have to pay to update PS CS2 to CS3 so I can use Lightroom on my 1Dmkiii files by converting to DNG files first. Soon is a relative term and this could mean anything.You guys must have some idea of when it will be ready by and this would help in the decision of wether to wait for the Lighroom 1.1 update or to splash out and get CS3 to do the work around with DNG.Please can you be a little more specific when ‘soon’ is as it so ambiguous.ThanksPaul[Paul, the DNG Converter is a free standalone application and does not require Photoshop CS3. I could go on and on about other reasons why you would want to upgrade to CS3 but that’s another post entirely. -TH]

  24. David says:

    Thanks for the update post, very intriguing!Will the update be an update per-say (a la PSCS’s updates), or will it be a whole new installation package (akin to the annoying iTunes updates)?I’m glad the LR team are taking the time to listen to the users, this really is the best way to get great feedback and to get the issues out of the door to an adoring crowd :)Aside to the (awful looking) Adobe LR forum, is there a specific feedback site/blog/group for LR and its development, as it seems pretty fragmented at the moment, what with the LR adobe forums, blogs, official site etc.Thanks again for the update update, can’t wait for it! (But will do patiently 🙂 )[David, the update will be in the form of a full application download and installation. It’s a fairly painless process but we’re always trying to improve the experience so it’s good to know what kind of update methods you prefer. I’m going to work on another post to discuss how the team collects feedback. Stay tuned. -TH]

  25. David says:

    Thanks for the update post, very intriguing!Will the update be an update per-say (a la PSCS’s updates), or will it be a whole new installation package (akin to the annoying iTunes updates)?I’m glad the LR team are taking the time to listen to the users, this really is the best way to get great feedback and to get the issues out of the door to an adoring crowd :)Aside to the (awful looking) Adobe LR forum, is there a specific feedback site/blog/group for LR and its development, as it seems pretty fragmented at the moment, what with the LR adobe forums, blogs, official site etc.Thanks again for the update update, can’t wait for it! (But will do patiently 🙂 )

  26. Torleif says:

    I’m now running, or rather trying to run LR, under Vista. Not a particular good experience. Will the upcoming 1.1 be Vista compatible? If not, I probably have to revert to XP.[Torleif, One of the primary reasons we need to provide this update is to address Vista compatibility. – TH]

  27. John Shortess says:

    Thanks for the update, Tom. Is there anything you can say at this point about Vista support in LR 1.1? Overall, I’ve had a VERY good experience with LR 1.0 on my Vista machine, but the inability to burn to optical media does put a bit of a cramp in my workflow![John, optical media burning on Vista is definitely something we needed to fix for this release. Glad to hear that you’ve had a very good experience! – TH]

  28. Aaron Nelson says:

    Tom, Thanks for communicating what you are allowed to communicate. And thanks for your patience with those who aren’t able to accept that you can’t say anything else. I travelled from Seattle to the Boston Lightroom Seminar and really enjoyed everything I learned and I now use LR to completely process my weddings.Can you imagine being the project manager for Vista OS? Just a little perspective. I appreciate what you do!-Aaron[Thanks Aaron. Glad you enjoyed the Boston event. – TH]

  29. carl says:

    From my side, I think it’s a good thing to get the update in a whole installation file. Should be less problematic.I’m planning to do a clean install on a new computer. In that case: Is it recommended to install the CS3 Suite before or after Lightroom? (if it makes any difference at all..)[Carl, I’m not aware of any reason why installing the suite prior to or after Lightroom would make any difference. – TH]

  30. Joanne says:

    Lightroom is great and I’ve every confidence that the forthcoming update will bring worthwhile benefits.A ‘ready for export’ tag or some other means of earmarking a file for export would be very nice.[Thanks Joanne. Good suggestion. We’ve already included a number of tagging methods such as stars, flags and color labels. Have you tried repurposing one of those labels to indicate ‘ready for export’? A green color label seems like a strong candidate. – TH]

  31. Matt says:

    Great to hear about the forthcoming update.Is there any discussion about including HDR tools into Lightroom at some point. Presently I have to go to CS2 to do HDR…but it would be great to have lightroom be my one-stop shop for all my workflow.Thanks again!Matt[That’s a good question Matt. There’s nothing specifically in this next update to address HDR tools but I know that a number of photographers would like to see this addressed in the future. – TH]

  32. Tom Walker says:

    Lightroom is great but as a user of the Imageprint RIP, I’d like to request that Adobe and Colorbyte coordinate on how to integrate the IP Print-Through-Application (PTAPP) with LR. While I’m certain I don’t fully understand all the ins and outs of this, to date the only effective technique seems to be designating the print profile as sRGB in the IP driver. While this works, sRGB doesn’t seem to be the best print space. According to Colorbyte until LR allows designation of another printer profile (like ProPhoto), the IP PTAPP can only be used to process sRGB output. Can this be addressed in LR?Thanks[Tom, the RIP workflow is something we haven’t had a chance to address yet but I understand that it’s an important subject. I’ll try to write a follow-up blog post on the topic. – TH]

  33. Tony Harman says:

    Updates for cameras should have been sorted out as a separate update. I don’t care about the other fixes that will occur over time if my new camera is not supported. This combined with Adobe’s decision to not update CS2 with the RAW 4.1 update has screwed me.[Tony, in the future we will be providing camera support updates outside of significant application updates. Adobe has a strong history of providing new camera support quickly and we’re planning on continuing that tradition. The decision not to update Camera Raw 3.x with new camera support for CS2 customers is a long standing policy for the Camera Raw plug-in based on a number of different factors. I realize that this information doesn’t help your current situation but using the free DNG converter as a way to convert your files to a compatible format for Lightroom 1.0 is a valid solution in the interim. – TH]

  34. Thanks for the update on the progress.I am a previous RSP user and at first I was hesitant about LR but now it is the only RAW converter i use.One thing I do miss greatly from RSP is the ability to find all the files i recently converted for export to Photoshop (as an example).Really looking forward to the 1.1 update./Andreas[Thanks Andreas. Have you tried to add a ‘converted’ keyword or color label to the files after the export/conversion process while you still have the selection active? It’s still one more step than the workflow you’re proposing so I’ll add the feature request to the already ample list. – TH]

  35. Dennis O'Leary says:

    I just happened on this site. Might as well take the opportunity to ask. Maybe I am missing something. When I rotate an image in Lightroom, the rotation is not recognized by Bridge. Just rotating, Lightroom recognizes it but Bridge doesn’t.Thanks[Dennis, the rotation value is initially only stored within Lightroom. To share settings with Bridge, choose the library module and select the group of target images. Choose the “Export XMP Metadata to File” option in the Metadata:XMP file menu. Note: This menu option is only available in the Lightroom Library. There is also a preference to write the XMP metadata to your files automatically. – TH]

  36. richiec says:

    Tom, it makes me happy beyond belief to hear that vista issues will be handled with 1.1.I believe lightroom will become the industry standard once we get the SDK to play with but i can be patient till then.

  37. carl says:

    Thanks for providing very useful answers in this blog. And sorry for bothering you with this boring question (I know it’s not a popular one)I guess most pro photographers won’t risk using Vista yet, but as a semi pro I’m willing to take that risk in order to use the other advantages of Vista compared to XP.In my photography Lightroom is an important part of my workflow, and not beeing able to plan upgrading and investing in Vista and other hardware because of the vague timeframes for the 1.1 update is very difficult.(I’m know that 1.0 works on Vista, but the known issues are to prominent for me to concider it).I’m aware of the adobe “telling when to release” policy is a strict thing. But what respectfully I ask for is a hint / rough time frame; if it’s a matter of weeks or months. I hope it’s possible to do so, also because many customers (inlucing me) bought Lightroom an assumed that Vista would be fully supported. I’m not blaming anyone for this, I simply bade a bummer not investigating about Vista issues. But because we now are mid june, I think Lightroom / Vista users deserves to know a little more specific timeframe.Again, thanks a lot[Carl, thanks for your patience. If you’ll read my post you’ll notice that my goal is to have the camera support updates for Lightroom and Camera Raw coincide as closely as possible. I realize this isn’t the level of detail you’re asking for but clearly stating simultaneous release as my goal and then letting everyone wait for 6 months wouldn’t be helpful to you or me. – TH]

  38. sherwin says:

    Lightroom really help me organized my photos and made my workflow really convinient.I’m concern with some issue i notice with Lightroom. I search everywhere but I didnt find any answer.First is when I import RAW file from directly from Canon Rebel or from a card reader sometimes it sometimes prompt me that some of my photos cannot be imported. But when i copies all of my photos in the HD then import i didnt encounter any error. Some of my fellow photographer also encounter this. But only Canon user.Second is when I backup a folder or set of photos how do i also backup the database of a particular folder? Because sometimes I need to send a backup copy to other photographers. But I dont want to send the whole library backup.More power and really looking forward to the update![Sherwin, there’s a note on Canon’s tech support pages about problems downloading directly from a camera on Windows. I always recommend using a dedicated card reader. We’ll need more details via a bug report form to get to the bottom of your issues using a card reader. ( hear you loud and clear on backing up or migrating just a portion of your library to a different location. We’ll see if we can’t get you that solution sooner rather than later. -TH]

  39. Steve Krivian says:

    Lighroom’s successful goal has long been targeted at processing and managing digital images in the RGB format. This makes sense for a great many photographers and a significant portion of the graphic output market. We get that part. However, the inability for CMYK files to simply exist in the database for cataloging and tracking purposes means that Lightrooom is excluded as a tool in a far wider variety of operations, corporations and agencies that must manage both CMYK and RGB files in a database. I realize that someday a future release may possibly effectively address this issue.A way to unrestrict Lightroom use and more quickly gain a significantly larger market with a small FIRST step would be to allow CMYK files to be tracked in the database and with whatever limits needed to make it possible quickly rather than perfectly. I know it is not as simple as it might seem, but any way Adobe could allow such files to be simply be indexed would be a great way to get your foot in the door to expand the market beyond which Lightroom is presently restricted.Great product! 1.1 when the time is right![Thanks Steve. There was quite a bit of debate on this topic during Lightroom’s public beta. Ultimately, we chose the more conservative route given that Lightroom’s develop tools are not designed to handle CMYK data and there isn’t an appropriate way to visually/logically distinguish non-RGB and RGB image files in Lightroom. Rest assured, we haven’t forgotten the topics we discussed during the beta cycle. -TH]

  40. David says:

    Looking forward to 1.1; I think Adobe’s on the right track with LR. I know I won’t get details, but I’ve been concerned with the tagging/organizing in Lightroom. Especially searching for images based on multiple tags. Coming from Elements, it is considerably harder to do in Lightroom.Speaking of Elements, is the “Import from Elements” improved? All my keywording and heirarchy went out the window when I imported my catalog from Elements.Thanks again for taking the time.[David, specifics always help us improve the program. What did you like and dislike about the change in tagging behavior moving from Elements to Lightroom? If you submit a bug report regarding your problem with hierarchies when importing from Elements we can be sure to improve the quality of that experience.

  41. Massimo Novi says:

    Do You think the next LR upgrade will have more localized languages (spanish, italian, etc) or is not an important issue for now? Other Adobe softwares are quite readly localized but LR seems to be limited in this area.Are You and Your team addressing (in a subsequent release) the possibility to show true RGB value instead a MelissaRGB percent? No calibration o precise correction can be done in percent. Of course this will probably impact inner color engine working but You think LR will eventually evolve to this feature?Thank You!Max[Thanks Max. We’re always evaluating additional languages and appreciate your input. To the comment on color space, I’d appreciate hearing more information on how you plan to use that information and if you have any specific color space in mind for that purpose. For those not familiar with his comment regarding “MelissaRGB” take a look at Andrew Rodney’s paper on color management in Lightroom. -TH]

  42. Brad says:

    I am really enjoying Lightroom, it has its quirks but it is incredibly stable and full-featured for a 1.0 release. Can’t wait for 1.1 myself, but that has been fully covered here already :-)I wanted to throw in a quick feature suggestion, which sounds (on the surface) not that hard to do: add a Develop option to emulate a graduated neutral density filter. The tool would allow you to draw a line on your photo, and you would then have the ability to set different exposure settings above and below the line. Even neater would be to allow all of the Basic settings to be different.What does the LR world think of this idea? Or is it so obvious it is in the pipeline already? 🙂[Brad, sorry for the delay in posting your comment. Hopefully you’re enjoying 1.1 by now! Great suggestions. You’ve got at least one engineer and a product manager who personally agree with your suggestions. – TH]

  43. Tom,I can’t express in words with how much anticipation I awaited Lightroom 1.0 and how much frustration and disappointment it has caused me. I have long since abandoned my Lightroom migration. I understand, working in the software industry myself, that no piece of software is perfect, dot-oh releases in particular. But where I feel the Lightroom team completely dropped the ball is on stability and lack of followup (I am specifically referring to the Windows release, I have no experience with the Mac release). The constant crashes and out-of-memory errors related to importing images and generating previews were widely reported and for me a showstopper. But what made me abandon my migration is not the product but the complete lack of acknowledgement and support from Adobe. I logged all of the issues I found never heard back. I was expecting a quick response in the form of 1.0.1 and 1.0.2 releases addressing the key stability issues. But when it became apparent that the these aren’t forthcoming I gave up. What I’m most disappointed about is that I already paid for the software so I can no longer express my vote of no confidence with my wallet. And while the damage is done I hope that the team never lets this happen again. I’m eagerly awaiting 1.1 and I hope that should this time the release also have stability issues the team will take responsibility for them and address them PROMPTLY.

  44. Harry says:

    Hi, I can’t say enough good things about LR. I’ve been using it since Beta 3. Just two problems I have, but don’t know where I could post them where they might be answered, so please excuse me if this is the wrong place.Slideshow, is there any plans to export other than as a pdf? I’d like to burn dvd’s for clients, or export to a website. Personally I don’t see much use for it other than playing it on your own computer.Crop, is there any way to put in measurements instead of aspect ratios? I’ve called adobe support on this one and nobody can seem to answer that one.Thanks for the blog![Harry, these are all solid suggestions and fall under of the category of feature requests. I’ve got them noted but other folks that are looking for new functionality can submit their request here: -TH]

  45. Dave Landry says:

    I wish future iterations of Lighroom allowed for smoother interoperability with other applications, including nonAdobe applications (without having to resort to SDK fixes). It would be ideal if digital archival management vendors could come to at least an informal agreement on how to store hierarchical keywords.For example here is a posting from a LR user trying to move his IMatch data into Lightroom. with LR “release 1 keyword hierarchies do not have an inclusive/exclusive option for parent/child keywords, they are inclusive only. This may cause you problems if you organize people photos (or any others) by relationships using the exclusive keyword option in iMatch. Further details of what I am referring to can be found here ( you import photos with your keyword hierarchy from iMatch intact, see below, you will end up with parent keywords being added as “Implied Keywords” instead of actual searchable keywords. From the example below, If Mike and Jill are both keyworded to a photo then imported into LR, only Jill will be keyworded, Mike is implied and not searchable.Mike—Jack——Jill——BillThis caused me a few headaches trying to figure out why some keywords were missing. The work around for now (until LR supports an inclusive/exclusive option) is to change your keyword hierarchy before importing photos to something like the following.Mikes Family—Mike—Jack—Jill—Bill”[Dave, we’ve greatly improved the keyword hierarchy interoperability in Lightroom 1.1 and it really deserves it’s own blog post. I’ll see if we can’t get something up and posted in the next couple weeks. – TH]

  46. HELP!!I’m a Lightroom owner and have been using it since early betas and have become addicted to it’s fantastic workflow features.While the 1.1 performance and UI enhancements are great what’s going on with the built in mosaic mush filter destroying my images?I shoot a lot at iso 800 with a 5D and 20D and have come to love the film grain/noise sharpness at this level.I don’t use any of lightroom’s sharpening, clarity, noise reduction and yet the images processed through the 1.1 update left me horrified when compared to an older version of the camera raw plugin.This “upgrade” is absolutely unusable and I would alert others to proceed cautiously.If it is Adobe’s intent on Lightroom being a product that appeals to the masses by giving them built in “pleasing” tones, I must move on.This is similar to my old days printing with a point light source enlarger and looking at comparisons printed through a diffusion head. The diffusion prints were soft and sweet, but at least I could change the head back and get all the sharpness and grain I truly adore!As of now I have reverted back to Lightroom 1.0 until I hear this problem has been fixed.Thank you for any insight into this situation.

  47. Damon Knight says:

    Guys,Before I start this rant… I LOVE LIGHTROOM… but no more ADOBE, I cannot stand it anymore… sort out the OOM errors now, before I put my Lightroom CD into the shredder and then post this SHAM on every ADOBE forum I can find.I have experienced the out of memory error 11 times today. I am working with 30,000+ images in Lightroom 1.1 on XP, but only looking through 58 files while doing an import of 100 files I get the “OUT OF MEMORY A2” error. This looks suspiciously like another of the, now famous, debug errors used by the developers to track the ‘pain’ issues. I would challenge Adobe that they know EXACTLY why this happens, a limitation in the programming techniques for their chosen development platform is highlighting issues in the Windows Memory sub-system and they cannot do diddly squat about it… they are just ‘attempting’ to clean up memory leaks where they can, by putting markers (A2) into the code. It would seem that they are down a creek without the proverbial paddle.Tom Hogarty & ADOBE listen up… stabilize the memory issues stop listening to your marketing bods who are probably leaning over your shoulder as I write these words. You are going to suffer at the hands of Aperture and Capture One if you dont get your act together. I have used both of the above with little or NO errors at all.Tell us ADOBE why do none of your engineers or developers talk openly about OOM errors, stop silencing them… lets get a discussion going there are some very capable developers out there willing to help for FREE! Are you mad… admit the problems and get people to help… Open Standards could teach you guys a thing or two!Remember for everyone of of us that actually has the balls to complain, there are a 1000 who just sit and suffer not knowing what to do!Fix the OOM issues before you do anything else this week!! Provide an interim 1.1.x update and make people happy they bought ADOBE and above all else remember at the end of the day these people PAY your wages….Now where is my Capture One license key…Damon KnightPhotographerLondon[Damon, the most effective way for Adobe to solve your problem is through a bug report or calling technical support. ( ) The out of memory error is caused by memory fragmentation on the Windows platform. The Lightroom 1.1 update provides a number of enhancements to minimize the fragmentation and subsequent error. Obviously that is not the case on your computer so providing relevant details about your system through bug reports or technical support calls are critical to helping the Lightroom team solve the problem for you in a future release. – TH]

  48. chlise says:

    I know you guys are going to hate me disrupting your love fest with Tom H. but I am having some serious problems with LR 1.1 and it is not user error.It crashes everytime I go into Develop mode. What the heck is going on. I have read some other posts where people are seeing the exact same thing.I have uninstalled and reinstalled, rebooted etc…This is consistent and should be very easily reproducable.I am working with XP and Service Pack 2…What is the solution to this or I want my money back…[Did you file a bug report for this problem? That’s the quickest way for us to get to the root of the problem, particularly if it’s easily reproducible. – TH]]

  49. Mike Rodway says:

    Damon, I had the same issue, couldn’t believe it was really happening considering the cost so i reloaded onto a different pc and it worked fine. I’m not hugely technical on the ins and outs so I just gave up on the old install. The newer pc that worked did have significantly more RAM which i guess helped but I found the whol thing a bit disconcerting. Maybe I am one of the 1000s who didn’t complain but it worked eventually and is proving to be very useful!

  50. Thanks I had forgotten about the DNG converter until I stumbled upon this post.Tim

  51. Good post many thanks – Always good to get a reminder

  52. Thanks for the good post-A reminder is always helpful. Thanks again p

  53. Grant says:

    Thanks for the post. I am new to lightroom so all this informations helps my undestanding

  54. Really looking forward to LR 4, so many great features already in LR3, and LR4 appears to plug any that were missing.

  55. This site is my inhalation, really wonderful pattern and Perfect articles.

  56. Fabulous!

    I can’t wait to upgrade to LR4!

    I used to do it the hard way and used PS as my main editing software, including work flow. LR has saved my life!