Lightroom Journal

"the scope of Scott’s list and the subsequent comments could easily require 5 years or 5 more versions of Lightroom to accommodate"

This sounds like some small scale after hours shareware developer talking, not someone from Adobe. :)

One thing I noticed when I was evaluating Lightroom was absence of aligning printed image exactly to the center of page. Most print settings worked relative to non-printable margins, not relative to actual page. So if a printer has different margins on each side then image is not centered on page center.

Tom, you guys have really produced a great v1.0 product!

I would like to echo many things the esteemed Mr. Kelby suggested in his post. The scary thing that he wrote was consolidating the keyword panels... the left side I totally get as a "selector/filter" of sorts, while the right side is where I change things. In fact, I typically Auto Hide the left panel and leave the right panel open when working with keywords... So, just one small vote for keeping keywording the way you made it!

Thank you for listening!

That's awesome! Go Adobe! Go Tom! Thanks Scott! Lightroom is the most important app I've used in a long time. I have a feeling it's that way for a lot of photogs. That tends to make people passionate. Thanks for listening.

Hi!
The feature/bug request form does not work, Is sent to a non existing page after submitting a feature request.
So, I'm a panorama photographer, my full rendered panos is as large as 15000x500 0 pixels. Lightroom does not support that large images. It's easyli fixed?

I'd settle for it as it is now, if it actually worked as it's supposed to. We need the bugs fixed first.

Most of the features Scott mentioned seem like feature bloat to me, the kind of stuff that should either require a dedicated tool, or be better suited to Photoshop, not Lightroom. Keep Lightroom lite!

In fact I wish I could remove the Web and Slideshow modules, since they are so limited to be useless.

The only exception is Dual monitor support, which is a no-brainer and Adobe should be smacked on the head for leaving that out.

I was too late to ask for this on Scott's blog. As a color-blind user, I would find the ability to show color values in LAB and CMYK in addition to RGB helpful.

I think you guys have done a great job releasing a world class product for digital photographers, especially considering how far the product has come since the Beta was released.

I would like to see Adobe continue on their goal of making LR the preeminent application for digital photographers and incorporate the ideas on Digital Asset Management put forth by one of the members of your Lightroom Iceland Adventure, Peter Krogh.

Digital imaging is still in its infacy and it is already a challenge to manage the amount of data we have now. The idea that I wouldn't need to use Microsoft Expression Media to manage my collection and could rely on LR to meet most all of my DAM needs would be really appealing.

I would also really like to see Adobe help photographers bring standardization to metadata in a way that would be fairly simple to implement. I would really love to see pick-lists (and/or drop-downs) for IPTC fields with Standard and ISO codes already built into Lightroom. I think that in this way Adobe would help photographers follow best practices around cataloging their images. It would save us photographers having to find the information on esoteric websites, and for those that aren't that metadata savvy, would get them to practice better metadata updating.

Thanks again for all the work that you have done and are planning to do in the future with LR. It is really hopeful that you are so interested in the user communities participation and suggestions. It suggests that we will get a product that we actually want to use.

well, the list of Scott is not quite complete...posts that criticize the unacceptable color rendering are not published - luckywise many useres have complained on the net in all the sw-forums on the net. even on adobe's own forums (see links below). What are all the improvements worth, if image quality is insufficient, even with a calibrated camera. open for example an image from a canon-camera in breeze-browser and look at the colors and details. after that, you won't use lightroom anymore - although it is a nice product besides that.
I don't know, why adobe is so stubbern in this matter.

links that discuss the color issue:
http://www.adobeforums.com/webx?14@@.3bc4c365/0

http://www.adobeforums.com/webx?14@@.3c05a209/5

Well from what Scott says here we will be happy when this update happens. http://www.scottkelby.com/blog/2008/archives/941

I look forward to this great update to a great product. Lightroom does realy rock!

Good list.

Personally, I have 2 requests.

1) Make Lightroom faster. More speed is always better.

2) Allow an option to export to a relative directory instead of an absolute. i.e. ../POST for output would be fabulous.

Thanks!

I think it is important to discriminate between adding new features and optimizing existing features.
LR is basically a very good product, thought out as a photographers tool from the very beginning.
It so much more disappointing, that some of its existing features are seriously under-developed. I'm thinking of two issues:
1. we need a way to visually control the effect of compression etc. when exporting to JPG. Something like "save to web" in PS, but preferably integrated with the ability to preset size etc.
2. we need softproofing before printing - just as in PS
Please fix these to issues before anything else, to make LR fullfill its initial promises.
After that, feel free to ad new features....

Scott put together a great list. If I was to pick one thing I would like to see it would be Soft Proofing in Lightroom.

Looking forward to Lightroom 2.0.