Digital Home Thoughts - News & Reviews for the Digital Home

What happened to Lightroom 3.1? I have no idea. But Lightroom has jumped from 3.0 to 3.2, and this new update adds support for new cameras, corrections for "issues", Facebook publishing, and over 120 new lens profiles. I wonder if one of the "issues" is performance? Lightroom 3.0 often feels sluggish to me, even on strong hardware. I'm downloading it now...

"While registering for a free Photoshop.com account is a requirement for storing photos online, creating and sharing galleries and albums, the Photoshop Express Editor no longer requires registration, which means the online editor is available to anyone who visits Photoshop.com. The Editor also now supports the ability to upload directly from a hard drive, apply edits, filters and effects and save the results back to the hard drive, without ever replacing the original."

The bread and butter of Adobe is not sitting still in this technological landscape. Web applications is what everyone is into, and while Photoshop.com has been around for a while, it has been updated, and without registration, it is open to everyone! Of course, the features supported by Photoshop Express Editor is not in the same league with its old grand-daddy, but still quite handy for those who want an easy way to do touch-ups and have Flash on their computer. While I personally prefer to tools and responsiveness of an installed program, after trying out Express for a while, I can see this fitting the needs of a casual user. Anyone sold on Photoshop.com?

"Adobe Photoshop Lightroom first saw the light of day in January 2006, as a publicly available beta. Its intended audience, then as now, was professional and enthusiast photographers who want to organize and edit images - primarily RAW files - quickly and simply. For this reason, it doesn't offer layers, or any of Photoshop CS5's various graphic design-oriented features, and originally it offered very little in the way of pixel-level adjustments either."

dpreview.com has their writeup on Lightroom 3, and liked it a lot. Since I'm still not going to use Adobe Camera RAW for my photos, I will give this a pass. For others though, Lightroom 3 offers plenty of power for organising and doing workflow edits to your photos. I tried the beta and quite liked its organisation-to-editing capabilities. I'm looking forward to what Phase One comes up with when it updates its acquisition of Expression Media (formerly iView Media Pro), and see how the two compare. I know they're different, but it's interesting to see how they'll shape up.

"Last month I called Adobe's Flash "the new Vista," and wondered out loud about Adobe's commitment to fixing its reliability and security problems. Now that Flash Player 10.1 has been officially released, I have some initial, very preliminary data to help answer the reliability question, as well as some simple tests to see whether performance is any better with this new version. On reliability, the 10.1 upgrade gets a big thumbs up. I have yet to see a crash or slowdown related to it...."

Ed Bott, at ZDNet.com, has not been happy with Adobe's Flash Player, citing performance, reliability, and security issues with the common browser add-on. However, he finds that the latest release, version 10.1, appears to have addressed the performance and reliability issues - at least on Windows based systems. Read his article for details on the data upon which he bases his ("preliminary") conclusion. You can also visit Adobe's site for information on the new features version 10.1 introduces, or to simply download this release. I have not had significant problems with Flash of late (running Ver 10.0.45.2, mainly under Firefox), but increased performance and reliability make an update to 10.1 seem attractive. What has your past experience been using Flash? Have you tried the new release? And, if so, does it indeed work better?

"Close on the heels of Adobe's release of Photoshop CS5, Lightroom 3.0 is now available. Lightroom, unlike Photoshop, is built from the ground up for photography and the unique workflow that we have as digital photographers. Rather than dealing with 3D, vector graphics, and other general graphics tasks that aren't of interest to most of us, Lightroom distills the features down to what is important - image management and optimization. While Lightroom 2 is a popular option for many, the latest release adds some new features that improve the overall workflow and quality of output."

PhotographyBLOG takes a spin at the latest incarnation of Lightroom, and gives it the thumbs up. The main attraction of Lightroom for me is its DAM (Digital Asset Management) capabilities, though currently it's still weak at handling video files, if you're a hybrid user.

For me, I'm still waiting for Nikon to make a Capture Plugin for Photoshop/Lightroom. That's combining the best of both worlds: Capture's better image quality with Adobe's better and more universal workflow.

I hack on Adobe now and then for their unstable software, but I've got to hand it to them: this is some damn impressive software coding! This feature looks extremely impressive - I wonder how long it will take to filter down to their Elements version of Photoshop?

"New features in this release include tethered shooting support for select Nikon and Canon cameras, the ability to import and manage video files from DSLR cameras for a streamlined workflow and additional behind-the-scenes architecture enhancements for faster importing and loading of images. The addition of luminance noise reduction to the color noise reduction options already available in the beta helps photographers achieve overall exceptional image quality from high ISO images. The import experience and watermarking functionality have also been modified to reflect feedback received from the Lightroom community during the first beta period."

Anyone using the Lightroom 3 beta? I'm toying around with it on one of my laptops, but it's a sadly underpowered 1.6 Ghz AMD Neo processor that is pretty awful at keeping up with Lightroom - I'm still using Lightroom 2.0 on my main media editing computer. Lightroom 3.0 brings some pretty cool things to the table - I like that it's able to import and manage video files now. It's a hassle to insert a memory card, import the photos using Lightroom, then have to manually dig to get the video files. I don't expect Lightroom to help me edit the video files, but I do expect it to at least import them for me. Looks like Lightroom 3.0 is shaping up to be a winner!

"Since the comparative efficiency of Flash vs. HTML5 seemed easy enough to quantify, I endeavored to do so, using YouTube's new HTML5-based player as the test bed. Specifically, I played a YouTube video in the same browser twice, once via HTML5, once via Flash, and measured CPU utilization during playback."

The results of Streaming Learning Center's tests shuld not be considered exhaustive but it does indicate that HTML5 is an viable all around solution for streaming video to web browsers that support it. The results also show the huge difference between implementations for the Mac version of Flash compared to Windows. I imagine that Linux tests would more closely emulate the results seen on the Mac compared to Windows as well. It should signal to Adobe that it has a lot of work to do in terms of optimizing Flash for OS X and Linux if it wants to remain relevant in today's web. Unfortunately, while Flash also offers a lot of flexibility to allow designers to create more interactive websites more easily, or to develop games, probably the biggest strike against it is that advertisers currently really favor the format as well. Of course, as HTML5 matures and becomes more universally supported, advertisers will begin to design HTML5 based ads, which may end up becoming a horror story in itself.

"We are ready to enable Flash in the browser on these devices if and when Apple chooses to allow that for its users, but to date we have not had the required cooperation from Apple to make this happen. Longer term, some point to HTML as eventually supplanting the need for Flash, particularly with the more recent developments coming in HTML with version 5. I don't see this as one replacing the other, certainly not today nor even in the foreseeable future."

I will gladly argue, and have argued that Flash is a ciritcal component to getting the whole "web" experience at present. With its pervasiveness at hundreds of major sites, I consider Flash as much a part of the everday web as I consider PDFs a sad reality of government website forms. That being said, Flash definitely needs to be concerned, and it hopefully will be replaced in the future, despite the confidence that Kevin Lynch exudes. Developers will be pushed by management to develop on what will get the most penetration and presumably, costs the least. Right now, Flash is a great, cheap way to get neato dynamic content online. However, there is a growing population, largely driven by smartphones with the iPhone as the leader, that are accessing online that do not have decent Flash support. With the shrinking userbase, companies are going to look to alternative solutions like HTML5, which can serve the whole market. Well, that is unless they buy into this whole "app" thing, and hire developers to make an iPhone app, other developers for an Android app, even more developers for a Maemo app and even some developers for a WinMo app, if it still exists in a few months. Apple is betting that their base of iPhone users, soon to be bolstered with iPad users, is enough to push companies to go an alternate route than deal with Flash. Had the iPad come before the iPhone, it probably would be a different story, but Flash's days may very well be numbered!

"Adobe Photoshop Elements 8 & Adobe Premiere Elements 8 software gives you power and ease of use so you can do some amazing storytelling with photos and videos. Create extraordinary photos and incredible movies, and use them together in cinematic slide shows and more."

Another year, another version of Photoshop Elements and Premiere Elements. It still feels like v7 of both products are "new" to me, but Adobe has locked into a yearly release cycle for both these products so I shouldn't be surprised. I'm a big fan of Photoshop Elements and use it daily. I happen to believe that a large number of people using Photoshop really don't need it, and encourage people to give Photoshop Elements a try whenever I can - it's a very capable program that can do everything most people need to do. There's certainly a place for the full-fledged version of Photoshop in the marketplace, but I think people buy into the "I need to have Photoshop, nothing else will do" a little too often.

Premiere Elements? I have mixed feelings about this program. On the one hand, it's delightfully easy to use - everything is fairly intuitive about it, and after having used it for a few years I can work really quickly with it. The down-side is that, in general, it's not a very stable program. Prior to v7, I'd describe it as "crash happy". Things got much better with v7, but I still had trouble with it on a fairly frequent basis. What boggles the mind is that Adobe seems to be the only company in the world that never releases software patches or updates for their Elements line - they don't fix bugs, or address new codecs, they just release a new version and presumably fix the problem in the new version. As an example, Premiere Elements 7 chokes on the AVCHD Lite files from my Panasonic DMC-ZS3 camera. Is there going to be an update to fix this problem? Nope. Will it work properly in v8? Yes, it's likely that it will. So I'll very likely give v8 a try and hope that things get better with it again...

"Our biggest problem with Premiere Elements is that it suffers a host of problems (both minor and major). The first glitch occurred when we were trying to capture HDV footage via FireWire from a Canon HV10. The app's preview screen would simply stop showing the preview footage. The content would capture, but we could not watch it as it was captured. OK, not a show stopper. More serious was our inability to burn more than one hour of HD footage to a Blu-ray disc. The app would either hang or reboot Windows Vista 64-bit. And it's not like we didn't bring enough firepower. We tested using this month's Gateway FX6800 (page 76), which was equipped with a 2.93GHz Core i7-940, Radeon HD 4870 X2, and 6GB of RAM."

Reading this review, I could only nod along with their findings - Premiere Elements 7 has a lot going for it, but it's ultimately plagued by bugs, strage behaviours, and limitations around codecs and file formats. I recieved a copy for review months ago, but my review notes read like a product-bashing session because I found more wrong with it than right. Believe it or not though, I'm still using it to produce the videos you see here - that's largely because I've set up templates in it and having to re-create those templates in another program would be a pain. Ultimately, Premiere Elements 7 as a program has a lot of potential, but it doesn't live up to it.

"Welcome to the Adobe® Photoshop® Camera Raw 5.4 plug-in release candidate on Adobe Labs. The Camera Raw plug-in provides easy access within Photoshop to the raw image formats produced by many leading professional and midrange digital cameras. The ‘release candidate' label indicates that the plug-in is well tested but would benefit from additional community testing before it is distributed automatically to all of our customers. The Camera Raw team would like the community to help verify the quality of the plug-in through normal usage as this will ensure that the plug-in is tested on a diversity of hardware and software configurations not available internally at Adobe."

Newly supported cameras in this release are: Canon EOS 500D (EOS Rebel T1i), Epson R-D1x, Hasselblad CF-22, CF-22MS, CF-39, CF-39MS, CFH-22, CFH-39, CFV, 503CWD, H2D-22, H2D-39, H3D-22, H3D-31, H3D-39, H3DII-22, H3DII-31, H3DII-39, H3DII-39MS, H3DII-50, Kodak EasyShare Z980, Nikon D5000, Olympus E-450, Olympus E-620, Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH1, and the Sigma DP2. If you've got one of those cameras, and you've been itching to use ACR with the raw files, here's your chance.

Photoshop Elements is a surprisingly powerful and capable package - I've been using it for years, going back several versions, and for the kind of work I tend to do with photos, it's more than enough. I think a lot of people have bought into the hype that Photoshop CS is the "only" software you should use if you're at all serious about photography, and I think that's incorrect. At any rate, getting Photoshop Elements 7 for $59.99 USD (40% off the normal price) is a great deal - it easily out-does every other product I've tested in the sub-$100 price range. The new version, which I'm working on a review of, has a lot to offer.

Product Category: Photo editing software

Manufacturer: Adobe

Where to Buy: Amazon.com [Affiliate]

Price: $265.99 USD ($99 upgrade from Lightroom 1.0 direct from Adobe)

System Requirements: Windows XP SP2, Windows Vista (32-bit or 64-bit) or OS X 10.4/10.5. 1 GB RAM, 1 GB hard drive space...but if you have a computer with those specs, you probably shouldn't be shooting in raw. Figure on 2+ GB of RAM and a 2+ Ghz dual-core CPU for decent performance.

Pros:

• Great quality raw photo conversions using Adobe Camera Raw;
• Fast software that scales to multi-core systems beautifully;
• Clearly designed for photography professionals in a hurry;
• Impressive depth of tools for correction, adjusting, printing, and sharing online.

Cons:

• Lack of HDR functionality; no duplicate filtering
• Needs a fast CPU and plenty of RAM to really sing;
• No automatic lens barrel distortion correction like DxO Optics Pro offers.

Summary: Lightroom is a photo processing software package aimed at professional and prosumer users. More specifically, it's raw photo processing software. If you don't have a camera that can shoot in raw format, or you're only shooting in JPEG, this isn't the software for you. If you're a photographer who shoots in raw format and are looking for software that will help you develop, edit, process, sort, rank, and export your images, this is among the best software on the market for those tasks and well-worth the asking price. Read more...

"Adobe® Photoshop.com Mobile is the easiest way to upload, view, and share your photos online from your phone. All you need is a supported Windows Mobile phone and your Photoshop.com account ID. Photoshop.com Mobile beta will be available as a free download in September."

Adobe claims that Photoshop.com Mobile will only support the MOTO Q, Blackjack, and Treo 700/750 series, although we're willing to bet most other Windows Mobile devices will handle it just fine as long as Flash is installed. At any rate, we'll let you know the moment it's available.

"Adobe Systems Incorporated (Nasdaq:ADBE) today announced the Open Screen Project, supported by a group of industry leaders, including ARM, Chunghwa Telecom, Cisco, Intel, LG Electronics Inc., Marvell, Motorola, Nokia, NTT DoCoMo, Qualcomm, Samsung Electronics Co., Sony Ericsson, Toshiba and Verizon Wireless. The project is dedicated to driving rich Internet experiences across televisions, personal computers, mobile devices, and consumer electronics. Also supporting the Open Screen Project are leading content providers, including BBC, MTV Networks, and NBC Universal, who want to reliably deliver rich Web and video experiences live and on-demand across a variety of devices. The Open Screen Project is working to enable a consistent runtime environment -- taking advantage of Adobe® Flash® Player and, in the future, Adobe AIR™ -- that will remove barriers for developers and designers as they publish content and applications across desktops and devices, including phones, mobile Internet devices (MIDs), and set top boxes. The Open Screen Project will address potential technology fragmentation by enabling the runtime technology to be updated seamlessly over the air on mobile devices. The consistent runtime environment is intended to provide optimal performance across a variety of operating systems and devices, and ultimately provide the best experience to consumers."



Adobe, in a typical long-winded manner, recently announced the opening up of Flash in an attempt to enable consistency in content delivery across a wide range of devices, including set top boxes and mobile phones. In what is most likely a response to Silverlight and HTML 5, the industry initiative sees the removal of restrictions on the use of SWF and FLV/F4V, the removal of licensing fees, and the publishing of multiple APIs and protocols. Definitely a step forward. Any developers and designers care to weigh in with their thoughts?