Older versions of Lightroom and modern RAW files

[CavGez]

I think I know what the answer is for this, but need to ask anyway.

Is there any way to add recognition for modern RAW files (CR3) for older versions of Lightroom? (4 and 6). Camera profiles can be installed...

The current workaround is to convert to DNG which is fine, except the file size balloons from 10MB to 25MB and this stack up pretty quickly. Also...there is no way to convert back to CR3 (and compress) in the future, as I see it? So therefore I will be stuck with the larger files for ever more, unless I use a CR3 compatible editing package...

 

[RichardC27]

Basically no, you're stuck with the DNG converter unless you're willing to upgrade to the subscription based Creative Cloud plan. I know some people are very against that but I am a huge fan and think it is absolutely worth it. You can find annual subscriptions paid in advance on Amazon, usually for less than the cost of paying monthly for 12 months.

 

[CavGez]

Thanks. Whats the deal price on Amazon when it happens?
If I work out how many years of photography I want to do by the annual fee, I'll be wanting an early afternoon beer!

 

[droj]

In the wholly film era you could at a pinch have a camera for life, and the ongoing costs were film, chemicals & paper. In the current digital era, technology has expanded & those who want to participate have to pay for it. I imagine that there are many more transactions happening, so on one hand it's good for business. How good it is for the planet is another matter.

So the system is a leapfrog one as components get updated & become incompatible - photo hardware / processing software / operating system / computer platform, and that's to ignore the printing end of things, if any.

It's an old story in a way - balancing what we think we want with financial resources / income. But for most of us photography is a luxury, not necessary for life - and we make our choices. Financially, the odds are stacked against us, and favour the companies that make what we use, and the economies of the countries they operate in.

Lightroom 6 was mentioned - and it seems likely that Adobe will at some point remove the activation facility for this, at which time LR5 will be the last legacy version to stay widely usable.

I think that when digital first came along, we didn't know what we were buying into - we were innocents. And now it's got us shackled by the balls, and we're slaves ..

The current workaround is to convert to DNG which is fine, except the file size balloons from 10MB to 25MB and this stack up pretty quickly. Also...there is no way to convert back to CR3 (and compress) in the future, as I see it? So therefore I will be stuck with the larger files for ever more, unless I use a CR3 compatible editing package...

25Mb isn't that huge, is it? Storage space doesn't have to break the bank.
.

 

[Faldrax]

Thanks. Whats the deal price on Amazon when it happens?
If I work out how many years of photography I want to do by the annual fee, I'll be wanting an early afternoon beer!

Amazon sell 12 month subscription packs for the various versions of Lightroom Photography Plans - and at various times, discount these quite significantly.
So the LR Classic + Photoshop + 20Gb Cloud pack (~£10/month via Adobe) is ~£120 as a 12 month pack, but when discounted might be £70 - £80.
You log on to your Adobe account, add the special code the pack gives you, and get 365 days of credit - when it expires, you automatically start paying the £10/month again.
You can 'stack' these deals, so I typically start to look for a new one when I have 3-4 months left before credit runs out - adding a new plan extends your credit (so if you had 60 days remaining, and added a plan, you would then have 425 days credit).
Just take care you pick the right plan from Amazon, and check the 'delivery method' - sometimes the 'by email' method is cheaper, and occasionally the 'by post' is cheaper!

I have a private wishlist with the relevant plan on it, which makes finding and spotting any discount offers very easy.

On a related note, if you use Amazon to any extent, and don't already use a cashback site to access it, Amazon have 'Amazon Smile', which is the same prices to you, but they donate a small amount per purchase to your nominated charity (from the list they have registered). I'd strongly recommend it, as these small donations add up over a year, and can really help a smaller charity (I have the Hawk Conservancy Trust as mine, for example, and they have received over £4,500 from Amazon so far from all those that have chosen them.

 

[tijuana taxi]

In the wholly film era you could at a pinch have a camera for life, and the ongoing costs were film, chemicals & paper. In the current digital era, technology has expanded & those who want to participate have to pay for it. I imagine that there are many more transactions happening, so on one hand it's good for business. How good it is for the planet is another matter.

So the system is a leapfrog one as components get updated & become incompatible - photo hardware / processing software / operating system / computer platform, and that's to ignore the printing end of things, if any.

It's an old story in a way - balancing what we think we want with financial resources / income. But for most of us photography is a luxury, not necessary for life - and we make our choices. Financially, the odds are stacked against us, and favour the companies that make what we use, and the economies of the countries they operate in.

Lightroom 6 was mentioned - and it seems likely that Adobe will at some point remove the activation facility for this, at which time LR5 will be the last legacy version to stay widely usable.

I think that when digital first came along, we didn't know what we were buying into - we were innocents. And now it's got us shackled by the balls, and we're slaves ..

25Mb isn't that huge, is it? Storage space doesn't have to break the bank.
.

I still use LR6, fortunately 2 out of 3 of the cameras I own are compatible with LR 6.14.
The one that isn't gets the raw converted to dng and then processed further in LR
This is very convenient because DxO PureRaw which I use a lot converts everything it processes to that format.
In fact nearly all of my raw files get processed with PureRaw so LR version is irrelevant

No. you're right 25mb isn't at all big these days with storage being calculated by the TB.

 

[CavGez]

...
.

Thanks for taking the time with that post, a nice summary of the state of things then, and now.

There were more running costs in the past, and more physical consumables....yes you could even argue that it's never been cheaper to be involved in photography, (not that I am going to start that argument right here).

It's an absolute bonanza for software companies who use subscription products successfully - they scale incredibly well in terms of profit with virtually the same running and development cost whether there are 1000 or 500 000 subscribers. Just briefly looking at Adobe's last quarterly statement if looks like they are on 25% growth on subscription revenue, of which about 10% is running costs (which probably doesn't scale up as much with subscribers' revenue).

Adobe Reports Outstanding Second Quarter Results

Revenue Growth of 23% Year Over Year Drives Record $1.99 Billion Cash Flows from Operations Adobe (Nasdaq:ADBE) today reported financial results for its second quarter fiscal year 2021 ended June 4, 2021. Second Quarter Fiscal Year 2021 Financial Highlights Adobe achieved quarterly revenue of...

news.adobe.com

and looking at this investor puff piece, the creative suite has only just got started. Adobe have expansion plans:

pdf-page

www.adobe.com

There is an obvious flip side to subscription costs with digitalisation - there are great software packages which are totally free (I'm looking at you DaVinci Resolve), and so many other online resources...I don't want this to dissolve into another slightly bitter subscription-is-frustrating thread, although I do like to keep a lookout for other options where they exist.

 

[CavGez]

Oh and the reason all this started is...yes 25MB isn't that much.... unless you're getting involved in time lapses. I managed to generate 28GB of stills in the last 24hours...about 2500 shots. And those are still in CR3...

There's definitely a cost incurred with time lapses (time, storage space, wear and tear on equipment) that I am learning quite fast.

Fun though. I'll put one up soon.

 

[Faldrax]

...

It's an absolute bonanza for software companies who use subscription products successfully - they scale incredibly well in terms of profit with virtually the same running and development cost whether there are 1000 or 500 000 subscribers. Just briefly looking at Adobe's last quarterly statement if looks like they are on 25% growth on subscription revenue, of which about 10% is running costs (which probably doesn't scale up as much with subscribers' revenue).

...

Actually as users increase (via subscription or one-time purchase) costs do increase, as you need to devote more resources to customer services to handle issues that arise.

What the subscription model does do is help in two key areas;
1) Steady Income - you have a steady stream of income, which aligns with costs (staff are paid monthly, etc), which helps with cash flow.
2) Reduced need to support old versions - on the subscription model, the majority of your customers will be on the latest version, or perhaps one or two sub-versions behind.
With one-time buy, you have lots of customers on older versions - which is much harder to support - if someone finds a bug in something 3 versions old, you potentially need to fix it in all 3 versions, rather than just the latest version for subscription.

The subscription model may also have a lower rate of pirated versions, as license codes can be regularly checked - less piracy potentially means more sales (some who would use pirate software will pay if the pirate option is removed).

 

[droj]

So where's it all headed? All in the developed world wearing headsets incorporating 3d goggles, constantly online? Unless your sub runs out, at which point the screen goes blank & you have to revert to reality? Imagine the amount of electricity being consumed by the network of server nodes, not to mention all the electric cars trucks and trains, domestic equipment, heat pumps, hydrogen generation stations ...

It's hardly begun, just as the industrial revolution had hardly begun not so long ago.

And there are environmental, political and personal implications ...

 

[CavGez]

Now I definitely need a beer..

 

[droj]

It's your round, isn't it ...?

 

[wornish]

I think I know what the answer is for this, but need to ask anyway.

Is there any way to add recognition for modern RAW files (CR3) for older versions of Lightroom? (4 and 6). Camera profiles can be installed...

The current workaround is to convert to DNG which is fine, except the file size balloons from 10MB to 25MB and this stack up pretty quickly. Also...there is no way to convert back to CR3 (and compress) in the future, as I see it? So therefore I will be stuck with the larger files for ever more, unless I use a CR3 compatible editing package...

There are alternatives to Lightroom that are available on a one time purchase. Affinity Photo is easily on a par with Photoshop and you get regular free updates to provide new camera raw file support.

 

[droj]

There are alternatives to Lightroom that are available on a one time purchase.

'One time purchase' is a myth ... and you've fallen for it.

 

[wornish]

'One time purchase' is a myth ... and you've fallen for it.

Not really, I was just making the point there are alternatives some are even FREE.

I use Lightroom and PS because I think the photography package is good value for what you get.

 

[tijuana taxi]

Not really, I was just making the point there are alternatives some are even FREE.

I use Lightroom and PS because I think the photography package is good value for what you get.

If you use all that it offers then it certainly seems good value for what you get.
Constantly updated and not hit up to buy the new version every few years.

For now I get by with LR 6.14, when I inevitably have to get a new PC it won't reload and then pay up time for me.

 

[LeeRatters]

If you use all that it offers then it certainly seems good value for what you get.
Constantly updated and not hit up to buy the new version every few years.

For now I get by with LR 6.14, when I inevitably have to get a new PC it won't reload and then pay up time for me.

Same here. I get by just fine on LR5 so far. A new PC or an A7iii might change that though..... I guess really I should because I use LR5 or CS6 most days of the week so it's not like I wouldn't get my monies worth!

 

[Kris]

Download latest canon DPP and batch convert to tif. DLO in DPP is very useful too. File sizes will be big however.

Import into any LR.

 

[CavGez]

Haven't tried DLO yet. Current workflow involved converting to DNGs, TIFF file is obviously out. I'd go from 28GB (CR3) to 62GB (DNG) to....450GB (TIFF) for that last batch of time-lapse files. I quite like a bit of detail but those pixels aren't worth that much.

 

[wornish]

Haven't tried DLO yet. Current workflow involved converting to DNGs, TIFF file is obviously out. I'd go from 28GB (CR3) to 62GB (DNG) to....450GB (TIFF) for that last batch of time-lapse files. I quite like a bit of detail but those pixels aren't worth that much.

Think your file sizes should be MB (Megabytes) and not GB (Gigabytes)

 

[CavGez]

Unfortunately not... see post 8.

 

[Topsy]

If you use all that it offers then it certainly seems good value for what you get.
Constantly updated and not hit up to buy the new version every few years.

For now I get by with LR 6.14, when I inevitably have to get a new PC it won't reload and then pay up time for me.

Same here. I get by just fine on LR5 so far. A new PC or an A7iii might change that though..... I guess really I should because I use LR5 or CS6 most days of the week so it's not like I wouldn't get my monies worth!

Same here and I'm not looking forward to needing to replace my computer.

 

[wornish]

Unfortunately not... see post 8.

Ha!, I missed that bit. I thought you were referring to one image. 2500 stills(frames) is a lot and it is total overkill to use Tiffs. When converting your time lapse to video format could you reduce the resolution a touch?

I do some planetary astro-imaging and typically take between 5000 and 15000 frames for one planet using high-speed video. The file created is in .ser format which can be up to 20GB in size but that's for 15,000 frames, which are then assigned a quality rating and the best stacked to create a single image.

 

[CavGez]

When converting your time lapse to video format could you reduce the resolution a touch?

Yes, definitely. The final video is only a hundred or so Megabytes, its all of the intermediary files during the creation process that take the space. These can be deleted after, so ideally just left with the final video and the original files ... and even those could be deleted too, except for a few choice ones that would make a good stills image.

I'd like to get into astro stacking using video one day, I was really impressed how much detail a simple shot with a super-long tele lens could achieve (I had an 800mm with a 2x tele). That was just a loaner so I didn't have the time to develop the skills for video translation. Your astro images are a good motivator too. Next time........

 

[CavGez]

A brief update to this thread, and what I discovered when trying the current Lightroom and Photoshop offering from Abobe.

The current version of Lightroom in terms of use and capability is very similar to older versions. There are some extra features for masking but really that's it.
-In order to use Lightroom (Classic) you have to install Adobe Creative Cloud. There's no getting around this.
-Creative Cloud runs lots of applications in the background, whether you are using Lightroom or not. These start up when you start you computer even if you disable 'start up at login'. These processes start up if you use a different account on your computer.

I did some digging to see if this can be uninstalled and found this is a pain - it's basically Adobe gathering telemetry data for you using your PC, not sure what they do with it. Apparently it pings to Adobe servers every second, along with other adobe servers at less frequent intervals (according to this

https://justin-ross.SPAM/how-to-disable-adobes-creative-cloud-background-processes-fb4e572a628c

Add to this the annual-only subscription dressed up as a 'pay-monthly', a penalty fee for early cancellation and it's fairly obvious what their business practices are. If they want to subsidise the costs for my computer which they exploit then sure.....

I'm happy sticking with the legacy versions while I can. Nothing wrong with them.

 

[sk66]

... except the file size balloons from 10MB to 25MB and this stack up pretty quickly. Also...there is no way to convert back to CR3...

If the DNG files are ballooning in size it's most likely because you have the "Embed Original Raw File" option selected (and probably full size jpegs as well); in that case you can use the "Extract" function of the DNG converter to recover the original CR3 file.
Personally, if I were converting to DNG's I would turn off all of those options to get the smallest file size possible (should be same/smaller than the original).

 

[CavGez]

If the DNG files are ballooning in size it's most likely because you have the "Embed Original Raw File" option selected (and probably full size jpegs as well); in that case you can use the "Extract" function of the DNG converter to recover the original CR3 file.
Personally, if I were converting to DNG's I would turn off all of those options to get the smallest file size possible (should be same/smaller than the original).

Interest piqued....
I've run a bit of a test with various settings:
Baseline
-RAW files are CR3's from a 30.2MP camera (EOS R)
-DNG Converter 14.2.something
-a selection of RAW files with different file sizes

1) Default Preferences
JPEG Preview:Medium, Embed Fast Load Data, don't use lossy compression, Preserve pixel count, Don't embed original.

Results RAW size/ ===> DNG size
29MB ===> 38.1MB
26.6MB ===> 35.8MB
18MB ===> 30.1MB
16.6MB ===> 29.4MB

2) Minimum size Preferences, without lossy compression
JPEG Preview:None, DO NOT Embed Fast Load Data, don't use lossy compression, Preserve pixel count, Don't embed original.

Results RAW size/ ===> DNG size
29MB ===> 37.3MB
26.6MB ===> 35.1MB
18MB ===> 29.7MB
16.6MB ===> 29MB

3) Maximum size Preferences, without lossy compression
JPEG Preview:Full size, Embed Fast Load Data, don't use lossy compression, Preserve pixel count, embed original.

Results RAW size/ ===> DNG size
29MB ===> 71.4MB
26.6MB ===> 67.4MB
18MB ===> 50.3MB
16.6MB ===> 47.8MB

Looks like step 1 to step 2, which is the jpeg previews, do not save much in file size. And embedding the original file literally adds the two file sizes (DNG and RAW) together.
I know the CR3 files have lossless compression to keep the file size down, which it seems the DNG doesn't exploit. DNG might not be universal after all, when they introduce a DNG mark 2 with some compression capability.

 

[sk66]

And embedding the original file literally adds the two file sizes (DNG and RAW) together.

Which is why I suspected it for the 10 to 25MB increase you noted.
I haven't messed with the DNG converter, but I've always heard the files would be smaller than the raw file, not larger... I guess that's just an uncompressed raw file though (and IDK anyone who uses those).