«

I am just wondering where everyone is now after more than six months of
Beta testing.

Are you convinced yet? Have you changed your mind?

Please let me know and I will include some of your views in my articles
and eBook on Lightroom.

http://dpmac.com/adobe/

Thank you,

George

I see it as a useful studio type tool: for batches of images made under
identical conditions requiring minimal processing.
I suppose it can be used as an alternative raw converter as well.
I am not sure about its value as a stand alone program, particulary at Adobe
"profesional" prices (Photoshop and Windows are the two most overpriced mass
market computer programs on earth, and Microsoft has already settled
lawsuits over the price of Windows), and I suspect Adobe has its doubts as
well, hence the prolonged public beta.
Fundamentally Lightroom is simply an alternative to Bridge, and probably
should be included in CS3 as such.

Still too much missing and it doesn't look like they will get it in before
they ship. They have beta 5 but there is every indication that it will not
be released that beta 5 will be internal to Adobe only and then to 1.0 final
release. Unless they expand and improve what they have Lightroom 1.0 will be
DOA.

R


<> wrote in message
news: oups.com...
>I am just wondering where everyone is now after more than six months of
> Beta testing.
>
> Are you convinced yet? Have you changed your mind?
>
> Please let me know and I will include some of your views in my articles
> and eBook on Lightroom.
>
> http://dpmac.com/adobe/
>
> Thank you,
>
> George
>

I don't see anjy need for it.
Old Bob (set in his ways)

Well, if they got the features in it that it needs. It would be one of the
best way to processing images especially RAW. I find it to be better for
that than any program I have used. But, it is missing too much. Versions,
Stacks, noise reduction, sharpening, flexible print layout abilities,
watermarking, lens distortion correction and more. For some of these they
have the basics, but that isn't good enough. Not for version 1.0 and if they
don't include these in version 1.0, then I for one will never buy the
product.

Funny that they did a public beta and then pretty much ignore what the
public wanted. Like dropping the database and going to drive directory tree
structure.

R


<> wrote in message
news:YV16h.20027$.. .
>I don't see anjy need for it.
> Old Bob (set in his ways)
>