Kevin Bostic
Adobe on Monday announced the launch of a free public beta for Photoshop Lightroom 5, the next version of the company's digital photo management and editing software, which adds advanced features like a new Healing Brush and an Upright Tool.
The Lightroom 5 beta gives users a one-click auto perspective correction tool, more robust healing options, and the ability to create off-center vignettes. Adobe based the feature set that it added to this version of Lightroom off commentary and feedback from the Lightroom community.
The improved Healing Brush allows users to heal or clone aspects of images using brush strokes. A new "Visualize Spots" tool can also point out dust spots from a camera's sensor, allowing for easier removal.
The beta also adds a Radial Filter, allowing users to apply Lightroom's local adjustment attributes to a circular mask. A new Upright feature automatically levels horizons, straightens buildings, and corrects askew lines. The software also allows users to edit offline images by storing a smaller Smart Preview version of the image, with edits made to that image automatically applying to the original once reconnected to Lightroom.
Interested users can download the free Lightroom 5 beta from Adobe Labs. In order to take advantage of the beta offer, users must create an Adobe account or sign in with an existing account.
Andrew Orr
Christine McKee
Sponsored Content
Wesley Hilliard
AppleInsider Staff
Amber Neely
16 Comments
And here we are... still waiting for Aperture 4, or Aperture X, or the New Aperture. It was once an exciting program aimed at the pros and photography enthusiasts. Now it's just a dead piece of software with a monochrome interface and 3 year old feature sets.
And here we are... still waiting for Aperture 4, or Aperture X, or the New Aperture. It was once an exciting program aimed at the pros and photography enthusiasts. Now it's just a dead piece of software with a monochrome interface and 3 year old feature sets.
I own both but far prefer working in Aperture, though that's 99% because I was entrenched in it for years before getting a copy of LR and it's just a herculean effort to change over completely. I could never give a lesson in LR but I do in Aperture all the time. But half of Aperture's tools are like using sidewalk chalk when I want to be using a fine quill, and the more I force myself to explore LR the more I feel like switching and sacrificing the superior (for me) workflow of Aperture. Haven't explored this beta yet for how much is really useful to me, but may be a full on LR user by May.
I can't see the next version of Aperture really being a gamechanger with respect to winning over those who are frustrated by the aspects that are too lacking for their personal working style. Only by completely overhauling the brushes and adding new functions that would kill the need for so much round-tripping to TIFFs for outside apps (which isn't a big deal for some but it adds so much bloat) could I see them holding on to the serious image work.
At $80 everyone who can use it has it, including LR users, but at the moment I'm much less entranced by it as a great deal for $80 than I would be if it were a great program for $250. It's still just the former.
I share your frustration and sometimes am baffled at the direction that Apple took their software. A great program has its cost, the return is in the value. If it sold for $300, then what? Lots of software sell for more. Photoshop is $700. Creative Suite starts at $1300. It's part of the cost of doing business.
I used Aperture for years, starting with version 1.5, and kept using it, ignoring Lightroom until last year—the summer when Apple gave its pro users the birdie. No new Mac Pro, no New iMac, no Aperture 4. I switch to Lightroom 4, and despite struggling with its notoriously difficult UI, finally got a acceptable workflow for myself. I sometimes look back at Aperture, and miss it's clean UI and efficient interface. But no one at Apple seems to give a **** about pro users anymore. Final Cut Pro X was often used as the poster child for pro-neglect at Apple. But for me, it started with the Xserve, and the trivialization of pro software. They cater too much to the prosumers, adding features that have little relevance to the real pros.
I share your frustration and sometimes am baffled at the direction that Apple took their software. A great program has its cost, the return is in the value. If it sold for $300, then what? Lots of software sell for more. Photoshop is $700. Creative Suite starts at $1300. It's part of the cost of doing business.
Your point is what, Aperture is too cheap?
No new Mac Pro, no New iMac, no Aperture 4.
They're making a Mac Pro, you JUST EFFING GOT A NEW IMAC, and there's no reason to believe there won't be an Aperture 4. Come off it.
Again with the lies and FUD.
Your point is what, Aperture is too cheap?
They're making a Mac Pro, you JUST EFFING GOT A NEW IMAC, and there's no reason to believe there won't be an Aperture 4. Come off it.
Again with the lies and FUD.
His point is indeed that. By pricing the app at $60, they are essentially targeting those for whom $300 isn't worth it. Those would be pro-sumers or just those who want more than iPhoto. As a result, they don't need to do much to appeal to that crowd. The result: No love for the pros, those who would gladly pay $300 or more if it did all that they hoped.
What does a new iMac have to do with the Mac Pro? The iMac is a consumer machine, the Mac Pro is targeted towards professionals (or consumers with really deep pockets). Can you put two hard drives in an iMac and do RAID-0 striping? In fact, you used to be able to; the new update took that away. How about 4 drives for striping & mirroring? How about 12 cores? ECC RAM? The latest iMacs (and even Macbook Pros) are now performing on par with what is supposed to be the top of the line machine. The point of a Mac Pro is that it should handily outperform all others.
The complaints on the delays for Aperture 4 are completely merited. Those who make a living using these tools see them falling behind vis-a-vis the competition. Do you convert all of your work, retrain, and switch? Do you wait patiently? For how long before the lack of [insert time-saving or quality-enhancing feature here] isn't worth it? As you wait, will the next version be some half-hearted release that ultimately fails to match the competition?
There is no lies here, no FUD, just a proper understanding of the needs of a professional.