Adobe Camera Raw 8.3 - just out

[steve_bingham]

<p>Adobe Camera Raw (converter) version 8.3 has added the <strong>Nikon D610 (and others)</strong> and is now available for download.<br /><a href="http://go.redirectingat.com/?id=27015X856183&site=photo.net&xs=1&isjs=1&url=http%3A%2F%2Flabs.adobe.com%2Fdownloads%2Fcameraraw8-3.html&xguid=4826b17d4d741fb671402f50359244aa&xcreo=0&sref=http%3A%2F%2Fphoto.net%2Fnikon-camera-forum%2F00c9AJ&pref=http%3A%2F%2Fphoto.net%2Fnikon-camera-forum%2F&xtz=420" rel="nofollow" target="_blank" data-skimlinks-orig-link="http://labs.adobe.com/downloads/cameraraw8-3.html">http://labs.adobe.com/downloads/cameraraw8-3.html</a> Works great! You will need PS CS6 or Lightroom 5 (upgrade available).</p>

[keith reeder]

<p>Lr 5.3 RC is available too. I've been using it for a couple of days, and so far it hasn't blown up my PC or deleted all my images.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>You will need PS CS6 or Lightroom 5</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Just for clarity, you don't "need" Lr 5 in order to use ACR 8.3. You do need CS6, but Lr need not even be on the machine.</p>

[keith reeder]

<p>Oh, and you don't need an up to date ACR for an up to date Lr either - Lr doesn't use the ACR plug-in.</p>

[digitaldog]

<blockquote>

<p>Lr doesn't use the ACR plug-in.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>If you use the <em>Edit In Photoshop</em> option instead of <em>Export</em> it does use ACR if the two versions on are parity (otherwise it will pop a warning). <br>

Also, 8.3 is not the same under CS6 and CC! There are new features for CC users. </p>

[keith reeder]

<p>Lr still doesn't use - as in "need" - ACR to convert and export a Raw file, Andrew. A lot of folk get confused about this, believing that they need to update ACR in order to have an up to date Lr, and it ain't so.</p>

[digitaldog]

<blockquote>

<p>Lr still doesn't use - as in "need" - ACR to convert and export a Raw file, Andrew.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>It never need did<strong>! </strong>LR from day one, version 1 has been able to render raw data <strong>without</strong> ACR or Photoshop, it's a stand alone product. IF you use the <em>Edit In Photoshop</em> command, LR accesses ACR as ACR does the rendering. That's not the same behavior in 1.X when LR rendered, built/saved the rendered image before opening Photoshop. Around 2.0, calls were made to ACR and then both products in this use were joined at the hip to some degree.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>A lot of folk get confused about this, believing that they need to update ACR in order to have an up to date Lr, and it ain't so.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>They might. Your simple statement, <em>you don't need an up to date ACR for an up to date Lr either - Lr doesn't use the ACR plug-in </em><strong>is</strong> adding to the confusion as stated. True, you do not need the latest version of any version of ACR for that matter to render raws in LR. However, things get confusing quickly if you expect to move directly from LR to Photoshop for rendering using the <em>Edit In</em> command (rather than <em>Export</em>) if the two are <strong>not</strong> on version parity (LR has features that the current ACR doesn't). In such a case, LR should pop a warning dialog suggesting you export the raw rather than use ACR. You could have asked LR for a feature (Upright as an example) that is available in that version that isn't in ACR. Worse yet, with CC, we know have the possibility to run ACR in CS6 and CC where the CC version of ACR has newer functions that are not accessible in CS6! Same plug-in version. Adobe has figured out how to support CS6 with ACR with new cameras and bug fixes while allowing new functionality from the same plug-in within CC. And the schedules for updates and features between CC and LR is now very messy with one being subscription based while the other isn't. <br /> But the bottom line is, if you own ACR and LR, LR can and has always been able to render the raw without ACR, Edit In however changes some of the rules.</p>

[keith reeder]

<blockquote>

<p>It never did! LR from day one, version 1 has been able to render raw data without ACR or Photoshop, it's a stand alone product.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>That's <em>my</em> point. Did you not read the comment Steve made that I was addressing? He said:<br /><br /></p>

<blockquote>

<p>You will need PS CS6 <em><strong>or Lightroom 5</strong></em></p>

</blockquote>

<p>And I said - perfectly clearly and unambiguously - that <em>in order to get the benefit of ACR 8.3 (<strong>as an update to Photoshop</strong>)</em> - Lr was unnecessary. There is <em>no sense </em>in which it is true that Lr 5 is "needed" in order to get the benefit of ACR <em>the</em> <em>Photoshop plugin.</em><br>

<br />So what's your point? Steve's statement implied a need for Lr, I said no. You've really got to want to misinterpret what I'm saying there - it could not be clearer.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>They might. Your simple statement, you don't need an up to date ACR for an up to date Lr either - Lr doesn't use the ACR plug-in is adding to the confusion as stated</p>

</blockquote>

<p><em>No, it is not</em>. But <em>you've</em> unilaterally and arbitrarily decided to play in the "<em>Edit In...</em>" command, which is irrelevant to what was being discussed.</p>

<p>You're adding confusion where there was none by introducing a "technicality" of no direct relevance to my point - which is (and you've spent enough time on the Adobe Lr and similar forums to know <em>exactly </em>what I'm talking about) the misconception <em>that you update Lr by updating ACR. </em><br>

<em> </em><br>

People are going to be sorely disappointed if they take Steve's comment at the top of this post at face value, and download ACR in the expectation that - having Lr 5 <em>but not CS6</em> on their machine - ACR 8.3 is still somehow going to provide them with an advantage. It's not. It <em>can't. </em>That's what I'm trying to help people avoid.<br>

<em><br /></em>Aligning ACR and Lr versions to ensure "<em>Edit In...</em>" compatibility is a whole other discussion.</p>

[digitaldog]

<blockquote>

<p>But <em>you've</em> unilaterally and arbitrarily decided to play in the "<em>Edit In...</em>" command, which is irrelevant to what was being discussed.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>You wrote: <em>Lr doesn't use the ACR plug-in</em>. My point is, with <em>Edit In</em>, it does use ACR. It is relevant.</p>

<p>Adobe has added enough hooks between LR and Photoshop to make having the two on parity more compelling for those using both. Within the <em>Edit In</em> preferences is the ability to build as many presets for how the data renders into Photoshop somewhat akin to Export presets. PS will honor a setting in LR for how images should be saved and their resolution, and even add's the new iteration to the library with or without a stack. The options show up in the contextual menu in Grid along with other options such as <em>Open as Smart Object, Merge to HDR </em>and<em> Pano</em> and <em>Open as Layers</em>. Not having processing parity between the two and having to use Export doesn't allow us to use these options to the fullest.</p>