WELCOME This site is for anyone interested in Olympus and OM System system cameras. First time visit? Check out our FAQ. You need to REGISTER before you can post. After registration and two posts, forum ads will disappear.
* Registered members don't see ads on the forum after two posts - sign up for free *
** We are aware that image uploading is currently not working properly and we're working on it. We're very sorry for the inconvenience and hope we can return to normal ASAP. **
I bought Luminar 3 and I am not sure that I would recommend Luminar as a replacement to Lightroom. I rated Lightroom as an all round system, Luminar isn't that. The DAM doesn't allow even basic tagging and searching (that hasn't been implemented despite many promises in the case of Luminar 3 and it isn't a priority for developers even in the version 4 product).
I liked it when I took the trial but it seems to have slowed down as the months went on. Mostly I would comment on the slowness of the building of previews. You can open a shot and wait 30 seconds to get a proper HD version. Without that you don't know whether it is in focus or not. So it is really not the best way to evaluate pictures on import.
It is relatively simple to use. Some of the instant fixes are a good start point (if you reduce the strength back from 100%). But it produces less than natural results very readily. I tried to replicate what I had achieved in Lightroom and couldn't.
I saw on the front of some photography magazines at the weekend that they are now giving away full copies of the full version 3 of the programme (that I paid £50 for) with some of the latest mags. (just google for details). So you can get it free very simply.
The main differences between 3 and 4 seem to be about sky replacement and creating "retouched' portraits, which didn't interest me. So I'd say get a free copy of 3 and see if you like it in six months time.
I bought Luminar 3 not long after it was released. I eventually returned it as the promised DAM never seemed to be closer than on the horizon. Now there is a DAM of sorts, but it's nowhere near the level of the LR one. The biggest omission of all potential LR competitors that I see is the lack of print capability. The Print module in LR is just great at allowing you to define custom templates and then print (colour-managed) through LR - I haven't found anything that comes close.
I have Luminar and I agree with Peter (Art Frames) when he said:
Mostly I would comment on the slowness of the building of previews. You can open a shot and wait 30 seconds to get a proper HD version. Without that you don't know whether it is in focus or not.
. It feels like you wait forever.
However, that being said. I did upgrade Luminar 3 to 4 because of the new and INCREDIBLE sky replacement tool. It is a-m-a-z-I-n-g. If you get the right sky with the right tones, you can improve the photo tremendously. No more boring skies. I don't really like their one-click Looks that are presets that change the photo completely. On the other hand. I do not use it in place of LR, just as a plug for the other things that it does, like portraits. There is a lot of AI built in to the software that helps to make adjustments easier and quicker for the user. I can live without the several software editing programs that I own, like Luminar, but don't take away my LR and I only have LR 5.3. I'll be bummed when it no longer works on my PC, or the plug-ins no longer work with it.
If you want a powerful DAM 'digikam' is good (and free). I'm trying to get up to speed with it now, but have so far only scratched the surface. As well as tagging, you can also 'Find Similar' to do a 'fuzzy search'. You can also tag faces, but I've not got to that so far.
I cant really see what the problem with Lightroom/photoshop is people spend around 2 to 3 grand on camera and lenses sometimes more ,then spend another grand on computer or i.mac but then quibble about spending a tenner a month on the top digital developing program that is constantly updated .. the mind boggles
For me it is about corporate behaviour and truth. There is a very deeply held belief for me that the companies I buy from need to be good corporate citizens. It is what I spent my working life delivering for companies and lecturing in and I will not easily accept companies that behave badly. I like their products but I dislike the way that Adobe (and many others) say they will do something then quite cynically do something else. So a commitment made to 'always do something' has to mean something. At the moment they will promise that they will keep lightroom classic going, that the photography plan at £10 is a commitment etc etc. I'm sorry but I don't believe that. The reason is that how they have always behaved. And Luminar sadly also seem to promise and then say they have 'moved on' - sorry but so have I.
I cant really see what the problem with Lightroom/photoshop is people spend around 2 to 3 grand on camera and lenses sometimes more ,then spend another grand on computer or i.mac but then quibble about spending a tenner a month on the top digital developing program that is constantly updated .. the mind boggles
The "problem with Lightroom/photoshop" is that they only run on Windows or Macs! They're also both 'closed source' programmes, whereas I prefer and trust open source programs more.
Jim
I cant really see what the problem with Lightroom/photoshop is people spend around 2 to 3 grand on camera and lenses sometimes more ,then spend another grand on computer or i.mac but then quibble about spending a tenner a month on the top digital developing program that is constantly updated .. the mind boggles
It is the TENNER a month that bugs people Jeff, I'd sooner pay out 'up-front'.
A tenner a month is well worth it for those who earn a living from their photographs, but for the likes of me and the few images that I produce per annum, it's a rip-off.
And then to add to it all, Apple goes and throws a spanner in the works with the 32bit/64bit Catalina nonsense.
But Dave lightroom runs perfectly on Catalina , as for payment you can always pay annually .. which basically your doing with the other systems anyway ,and most will charge you big money to upgrade ,with Adobe those upgrades are included and seem to happen every couple of months .f.o.c ...
For example you buy a car on finance it’s not yours till it’s paid for ,but YOU still have to tax and insure it service it and fuel it
The problem with the Adobe model is (as I understand it) if you stop paying the software stops working. With others, you pay if you want an upgrade, it's your choice. I'm still using Photoshop CS4 and have no plans to upgrade it - it works.
I too was thinking of getting Luminar 4 as a plug in for LR until I read this. I am always sceptical of glowing reviews anyway because cynical old me always thinks the reviewer has an ulterior motive for heaping praise on whatever he happens to be reviewing at the time in that he is either being paid handsomely by the manufacturer or he has been gifted the stuff for his efforts. With Blackfox all the way on this. Been using Adobe right from CS1 in the early 90s up to its present iteration today. Tried a few alternatives via their 30 day free trials but nothing comes even close. If you think of it in terms of the price of two or three pints a month its outstanding value. Regards, Ian W.
Last edited by IPWheatley; 26 February 2020, 06:47 AM.
We process personal data about users of our site, through the use of web browser cookies and other technologies, to deliver our services, and to analyse site activity. No banner advertising is shown to members logged in to the site. For additional details, refer to our Privacy Policy.
By clicking "I AGREE" below, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our personal data processing and cookie practices as described therein. You also acknowledge that this forum may be hosted outside your country and you consent to the collection, storage, and processing of your data in the country where this forum is hosted.
Tweet
Comment