LR Import Process Screwed
- Thread starter MaxElmar
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 44
- Views 4K
Godfrey
somewhat colored
Looks like it. I'm happy to see they've responded and hope the reversion update is out quickly. There are certainly ways to improve Import that are not at the expense of all existing users' work.
G
Fraser
Well-known
When i moved from work pc to mac I thought I would give lightroom a go , but the import time and the speed that you can do your selects was just too slow. I love the concept and still use it for my archive but have since moved back to photomechanic and photoshop CC.
I've heard a few people use photomeechanic with lightroom and that seems to work, if you've never tried photomechanic you really should there is still nothing like it for selects and captioning.
I've heard a few people use photomeechanic with lightroom and that seems to work, if you've never tried photomechanic you really should there is still nothing like it for selects and captioning.
squirrel$$$bandit
Veteran
Other stuff is broken for me, like using the mouse to move a crop around. What on earth?
Godfrey
somewhat colored
PhotoMechanic is great at what it does, for sure!
Lr's import is slow, but I'm usually not in much of a hurry. It will be great when they fix that without breaking the rest of it... 🙂
Mabelsound,
I haven't seen other issues on my test system, now that it's not crashing anymore. are you on OS X or Windows?
G
johannielscom
Snorting silver salts
Get extra hard drives and install the OSX + Aperture you need on those. Keep the left Option key down when booting and you will be able to boot from the external hard drive with the software you need.
No need to get extra machines at all.
And in general with regards to software that a workflow depends on: if it ain't broke, don't fix it.
I make a habit of buying a new hard drive and installing major new software versions on that. If it works for me, I install the new hard drive in the machine and keep the older one in the external casing. If it doesn't work out, I simply wipe the hard drive and keep it until the next incarnation of OSX of software shows up. Then, press repeat.
No way I'm gonna let Apple or Adobe screw my workflow up with a dim-witted 'update'!
krötenblender
Well-known
I rolled back to 6.1.1, it was easy and in 6.2 there is nothing really new, that one needs, imho.
Nevertheless, the recent history of changes in LR and in Adobes policy with the subscription model, that I don't like and do not use, the ignorance towards customers, the really bad quality of the software development process... made me think, what went so horribly wrong at Adobes development team.
Sometimes it is enough when a very central person moves out of a team, or some guy moves up in hierarchy for the wrong reasons and starts to make bad decisions.
I don't know, what it is, but something changed to the worse.
Since then (starting with subscription model), I tried some alternatives and especially C1 seems to me a good one, but I didn't pull the trigger, yet, because of a steep learning curve and the usual idleness. Instead, being an experienced SW developer, I asked myself, why it seems so hard, to "just develop" a new program with the same focus and core aspects of LR. There are some alternatives in the open source area, but they are not too useful, yet. Also they suffer from the same problem, that Adobe/LR does. That is, they don't listen to the potential users. For an open source project, this might be okay, because the maintainers do it for oneself and are nice enough, to give it away for free. But is very much the take it or leave it way - just like Adobe with the exception, that Adobe takes your money and still does not listen.
So why isn't there some kind of Kickstarter-project, with the goal to create a LR-competitor that seriously reduces Adobes income from bad managed and tested SW...?
In the discussion at Petapixel a SW developer mentioned one of the currently favored development processes called agile development, that when badly implemented misses one of the most important parts: real SW testing for the sake of many new releases. The latter obviously brings more money, because with every new release you can publish a new press statement with a long feature list and take even more money from the user base (that is stupid enough to take every single update - sometimes including me...). A company that has such a big user base with many of them really depending on functional SW and then throws out obviously untested (or not sufficient tested) releases is not trustworthy anymore. That is, why we need an alternative specially targeted at - or for a change FOR the LR users.
Nevertheless, the recent history of changes in LR and in Adobes policy with the subscription model, that I don't like and do not use, the ignorance towards customers, the really bad quality of the software development process... made me think, what went so horribly wrong at Adobes development team.
Sometimes it is enough when a very central person moves out of a team, or some guy moves up in hierarchy for the wrong reasons and starts to make bad decisions.
I don't know, what it is, but something changed to the worse.
Since then (starting with subscription model), I tried some alternatives and especially C1 seems to me a good one, but I didn't pull the trigger, yet, because of a steep learning curve and the usual idleness. Instead, being an experienced SW developer, I asked myself, why it seems so hard, to "just develop" a new program with the same focus and core aspects of LR. There are some alternatives in the open source area, but they are not too useful, yet. Also they suffer from the same problem, that Adobe/LR does. That is, they don't listen to the potential users. For an open source project, this might be okay, because the maintainers do it for oneself and are nice enough, to give it away for free. But is very much the take it or leave it way - just like Adobe with the exception, that Adobe takes your money and still does not listen.
So why isn't there some kind of Kickstarter-project, with the goal to create a LR-competitor that seriously reduces Adobes income from bad managed and tested SW...?
In the discussion at Petapixel a SW developer mentioned one of the currently favored development processes called agile development, that when badly implemented misses one of the most important parts: real SW testing for the sake of many new releases. The latter obviously brings more money, because with every new release you can publish a new press statement with a long feature list and take even more money from the user base (that is stupid enough to take every single update - sometimes including me...). A company that has such a big user base with many of them really depending on functional SW and then throws out obviously untested (or not sufficient tested) releases is not trustworthy anymore. That is, why we need an alternative specially targeted at - or for a change FOR the LR users.
Shac
Well-known
OK - help a LR ignoramous - how can I roll back? I ask b/c the so-called fix to LR 6.2 doesn't seem to accessible to me and I also find the import changes really suck
Thanks in advance
Thanks in advance
plummerl
Well-known
From Adobe: https://helpx.adobe.com/lightroom/kb/roll-back-to-prior-update.html
If you're using Windows, the above link says Windows 10, but it will work for any version of Windows.
or the Lightroom Queen: http://www.lightroomqueen.com/how-do-i-roll-back-to-lightroom-2015-1-1-or-lightroom-6-1-1/
Shac
Well-known
Many thanks Larry
Godfrey
somewhat colored
LR is, simply stated, complex software that will take a serious and dedicated effort to reproduce. Despite Adobe's recent hiccups on quality and design missteps, LR is still very well engineered and remarkable in its feature set, robustness, and lack of bugs. It will take a good long while with a strong team of developers to recreate what it does or go beyond it with the same degree of polish and sophistication.
There is at least one such effort underway by another member of this forum already. A product is already shipping and looks pretty good. I can't recall the name offhand but you might participate in that product's development by buying, using, and collaborating with suggestions and bug reports.
C1 is another good, professional product that works well in the same vein. And, at least on OS X, Photos has a good bit going for it too albeit targeted at a slightly different audience' needs.
So there are options. Starting from scratch with something new is a laudable goal, if you want to take it on, but know that doing so is going to take a lot of work. More power to you if you do it and succeed. 🙂
G
There is at least one such effort underway by another member of this forum already. A product is already shipping and looks pretty good. I can't recall the name offhand but you might participate in that product's development by buying, using, and collaborating with suggestions and bug reports.
C1 is another good, professional product that works well in the same vein. And, at least on OS X, Photos has a good bit going for it too albeit targeted at a slightly different audience' needs.
So there are options. Starting from scratch with something new is a laudable goal, if you want to take it on, but know that doing so is going to take a lot of work. More power to you if you do it and succeed. 🙂
G
krötenblender
Well-known
Software development and SW quality assurance is my profession for over 20 years now, having seen big projects with many million lines of code and in recent years many small projects but with high requirements in safety and absence of bugs in certain parts of the product (never the whole thing, because that is not feasible in most situations).
So I think, I have a pretty good idea of the complexity of LRs code base. What I think I can say about it is that I agree, that it has a good set of features. But I don't think, that it is well engineered and it is certainly neither free or even very good regarding bugs. Also performance is pretty bad. LR seems to be more a historically grown SW. It has an architecture behind it, but not a very consistent one, I think.
Rebuilding in the SW world is often easier than maintaining something, but my suggestion or question wasn't to reproduce LR and to create a clone. I think more about taking many already existing partial solutions from the open source world and create something consistent and integrated out of it, fill only the gaps, that are missing.
For professionals this wouldn't be an option for years, because of lack of professional support. OTOH what Adobe currently shows is also pretty far away from good support.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
We have commonalities in our technical careers: Five years doing flight-critical software at NASA, five years doing mission critical database implementations for chemical research, twenty-four-plus years doing software work (engineering, development, support, documentation) at Apple.
My opinion: Taking partial existing solutions from the Open Source community and patching it together into a viable LR replacement would take as much if not more work than to write a new app from scratch. You'd spend a vast amount of time removing all the cruft that's in all those Open Source bits, modernizing them to current languages and implementation methodologies, making them work together seamlessly, etc.
I don't want to say it can't be done. But if you think you have a shot at doing it, all I can say is, "Go for it, and let us know what you build."
G
My opinion: Taking partial existing solutions from the Open Source community and patching it together into a viable LR replacement would take as much if not more work than to write a new app from scratch. You'd spend a vast amount of time removing all the cruft that's in all those Open Source bits, modernizing them to current languages and implementation methodologies, making them work together seamlessly, etc.
I don't want to say it can't be done. But if you think you have a shot at doing it, all I can say is, "Go for it, and let us know what you build."
G
krötenblender
Well-known
You are right, that it would be a major project, especially for one person. I couldn't do it (and I did not say I could). Not because of lack of skills, but because of lack of time, and certainly not alone...
I'm just wondering, with all the outcry from users, why LR isn't an interesting target for skilled open source hackers. I admit, there are projects like Darktable, which try to create something like it. But they are still not usable on a Mac, for example.
brbo
Well-known
I believe Godfrey is talking about Halide (Win)/Emulsion (Mac). Developed by two guys.
I'm sure they will listen to your input, krötenblender. Or not. I'm not saying that listening to ALL of your users is bad (it does become unproductive very fast, though), but implementing everything anyone wants in your software is pure maddness.
Anyway, LR will revert to its old input dialogue in the next version. I guess they are not totally detached from their user base.
krötenblender
Well-known
I heard about Emulsion, but I did not follow the project so far. Let's hope, they make it.
And often not even possible because of contradicting requirements by different people.
Well... I hope so, but I'm not very confident. They've lost my trust, they have to re-earn it.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
Darktable is available for OS X ... See the OS X section on http://www.darktable.org/install/
The unfortunate thing is that it's not really a very good replacement for Lightroom in that it doesn't have Lightroom's non-destructive image editing and adjustment model, at least not that I've found from the brief look at it I put some time into.
I think the lack of alternatives just points out that a product like Lightroom is a multi-year, multi-person development effort with substantial development money backing it and pushing it forward. A small, fast team is simply not going to be successful creating a replacement by shoehorning existing code into a combined package.
G
Godfrey
somewhat colored
Yes, that's the one!
I just could not remember the name... I have a copy on my system, probably quite old by now. See http://www.emulsionapp.com for more info on the OS X version.
G
krötenblender
Well-known
Well, I wrote unusable, not unavailable. I tried it a few times in the hope, that it gets better and might become an alternative to LR in the future. But the last version I installed a few months ago on Yosemite crashed each time and simply did nothing - like LR 6.2. So in that regard, they were even ahead of LR... 😀
On Linux, though, it seems to be a pretty good programm.
squirrel$$$bandit
Veteran
FWIW, except for the dimmed previews, I actually prefer this import method by a long shot. It's much easier to point directly at a folder to import from...no more clicking through half a dozen nested ones in the sidebar. I'll be kinda sad to see it go.