Lightroom 5.0

[gary_morrolf1]

<p>I recently purchased a Nikon D750. I want to shoot Raw, but my version of Lightroom 4.4 does not support the Nikon D750. According to my research I need at least Lightroom 5.7 edition or newer . I bought and returned 6.0 when I discovered it will not work with my computer with Windows 7 with 32-bit OS. If I use the 6.0 edition I would have to buy new OS software, motherboard and processor. I do not want to because of the expense. If I buy Lightroom 5.0 can I go to the Adobe website an update to 5.7 edition without additional cost? </p>

[digitaldog]

<blockquote>

<p>I want to shoot Raw, but my version of Lightroom 4.4 does not support the Nikon D750.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Convert to DNG.<br>

https://helpx.adobe.com/photoshop/digital-negative.html#downloads</p>

[JosvanEekelen]

You have several options. Buy LR5 (upgrade) as you suggested, it will update to 5.7 for free. Or use DNG converter (free)

to convert your files to DNG and keep using LR4. Or wait a few months and upgrade your OS to Windows 10 64 bits (for

free- if possible) and use LR6. Or use the Nikon software, convert your files to TIFF and import them in LR4 ( not

recommendee because of file size).

[EricM]

<blockquote>

<p>If I use the 6.0 edition I would have to buy new OS software, motherboard and processor.</p>

</blockquote>

<p> <br>

What hardware do you have, Gary? Most has been 64-bit since 2003 (?) and you should be able to load W7 64-bit? Or, do you have W7 "Starter" that was only released in 32-bit? As Jos suggests, perhaps wait until the end of July and load Windows 10 64-bit and get a modern os and Lr6. Converting to dng needlessly complicates your workflow. It should be a last resort and only after careful research and consideration. </p>

[digitaldog]

<blockquote>

<p>Converting to dng needlessly complicates <em>your</em> workflow.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>It solves the problem TODAY at zero cost and needlessly complicates Eric's workflow. <br /> I've been using DNG since day one in LR, doesn't complicate my workflow, just the opposite (speaking personally and for myself alone of course).</p>

[JosvanEekelen]

<p>It's not difficult to integrate DNG conversion in your workflow, in fact I do this all the time for my girlfriend's pictures (she runs LR4 on a laptop, it won't recognise EOS 70D pictures). Just combine making a backup and DNG conversion.</p>

[lornesunley]

<p>You can also install the free ViewNX2 from the Nikon website and use that to adjust your NEF files and export to TIFF for additional editing in lightroom if you want.</p>

[Wouter Willemse]

<p>DNG is an option, and checking if you can use your existing Windows 7 license to install the 64-bit version (it will mean a clean reinstallation!) is possible at zero cost is an option. Waiting a bit for Windows 10 (as you will get that for free) to make the same move is yet another option. All viable options, none inherently better or worse than the other. (<em>If you'd like to know more, there are already hundreds of threads with the same contributors arguing over the merits of converting to DNG. It really comes down to personal preference, despite some people making it sound more fundamental, it is just a personal choice</em>).</p>

<p>For the moment, I would see to buy Lightroom 5, update it for free to 5.7, and next it'll do what you want and let you continue to work the way you are already used to. There is little reason to assume LR5 will not work on Win10, so in no way would you be forced to upgrade to LR6 once the free Win10 upgrade starts to roll out.</p>

[EricM]

<blockquote>

<p>It's not difficult to integrate DNG conversion in your workflow, in fact I do this all the time for my girlfriend's pictures (she runs LR4 on a laptop, it won't recognise EOS 70D pictures). Just combine making a backup and DNG conversion.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Workflow, and level of difficulty, are subjective terms and will of course vary from user to user. I'm forced to deliver dng and a jpg copy of it, at work. With blind faith, from Lr 1.3 to 4.4'ish, I did dng for everything I shot. My requirements are different than for example someone that doesn't shoot for a living, or even fun, and his "workflow" is a matter of running a few raws a month through Lr on an old mbp laptop in order to answer questions on the internet.</p>

<p>In my experience, keeping with native raws is easier on your time, easier on your brain, takes less hard drive space, and doesn't lock you out of software choices like dng will. DNG is not the holy grail of a universal digital negative that we hoped it to be in 2004. Imo, doing dng has a huge pro/con list and is something that should be done after research and heavy consideration. I feel it's easier and wiser to stay native raw and do the inevitable update to software/hardware updates than use dng as an easy-work around</p>

[digitaldog]

<blockquote>

<p>It's not difficult to integrate DNG conversion in your workflow, in fact I do this all the time for my girlfriend's pictures (she runs LR4 on a laptop, it won't recognise EOS 70D pictures).</p>

</blockquote>

<p>No it's not difficult and for some, it's part of their <strong>intended</strong> workflow. For some, it's not. Some have an anti-DNG attitude which is annoying and would rather suggest strongly that other's will find it upset's <em>their own </em>workflow without knowing anything about that person's workflow, only their own, which is pointless. </p>

<p>The real culprit here are the camera manufacturers who continue to build proprietary raw files that don't differ from camera to camera much and force their customers to upgrade their software or convert to a open raw format. Doesn't happen with the JPEG from the same camera, yet it happens with every new release of their raws.</p>

<p>You never hear the anti-DNG people accuse this workflow mess where it belongs, they would rather blame Adobe and DNG for providing a free solution to a problem they the camera manufacturers caused and could fix if they cared about their customers. This is a political problem not a technological problem of their own making and it negatively affects their customers, we photographers. The anti-DNG posters conveniently ignore those facts as it's more useful to them to blame a company trying to fix this mess. </p>

[digitaldog]

<p>http://blogs.adobe.com/lightroomjournal/2015/01/update-on-os-support-for-next-version-of-lightroom.html<br>

Some are saying they <em>can</em> run LR5 with Win 10 with some printer driver issues not withstanding. Still, it probably is prudent to wait until Win 10 is released and one Adobe engineer on the blog states Adobe will not say for sure if version 5 will run until MS releases the new OS. </p>

<blockquote>

<p>We work closely with Microsoft and Apple during OS prerelease to correct issues we find. We usually announce compatibility details the same day that the new OS is released.</p>

</blockquote>

[digitaldog]

<blockquote>

<p>Workflow, and level of difficulty, are subjective terms and will of course vary from user to user.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Agreed! So the statement you made should have been edited to state:<br>

Converting to dng needlessly complicates <strong><em>my</em></strong> workflow.</p>

[digitaldog]

<blockquote>

<p>With <strong>blind faith</strong>, from Lr 1.3 to 4.4'ish, I did dng for everything I shot.<br /> Imo, doing dng has a huge pro/con list and is something that should be done after research and heavy consideration.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Excellent advise, advise <strong>you</strong> admit <strong>you</strong> didn't follow. You can convert the images to DNG as a final step IF some client demands DNG (now why would they do that?). Hard to understand why the OP or other's would take that text very seriously.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>In my experience, keeping with native raws is easier on <em>your</em> time, easier on <em>your</em> brain, takes less hard drive space, and doesn't lock <em>you</em> out of software choices like dng will. DNG is not the holy grail of a universal digital negative that <em>we</em> hoped it to be in 2004.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Seems the text should change from <em>your</em> to <em>me </em>and<em> we </em>to<em> I. </em>Unless you're speaking for everyone and believe we all agree. I don't. <br /> I can't find anyone other than you that stated DNG is supposed to be the "<em>holy grail of a universal digital negative</em>"<em>. </em></p>

[gary_morrolf1]

<p>Eric,<br>

I have Windows 7 Home Premium 2009. With the release in July I will be able to upgrade Windows 10 with a 64-bit that will support Lightroom 6.0? Thank you.</p>

[digitaldog]

<blockquote>

<p>With the release in July I will be able to upgrade Windows 10 with a 64-bit that will support Lightroom 6.0?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Again, directly from Adobe re Windows 10: </p>

<blockquote>

<p>We work closely with Microsoft and Apple during OS prerelease to correct issues we find. We <strong>usually</strong> announce compatibility details the same day that the new OS is released.<br /></p>

</blockquote>

<p>See link above. <em>Probably</em> yes, but no official word from Adobe about LR6 <strong>until</strong> Windows 10 ships.</p>

[lex_jenkins]

<p>Gary, it sounds like the budget is a factor for you. It certainly is for me. I have 64-bit Windows 7 home version, but I'm waiting until Adobe does the inevitable tweaks and revisions to LR 6 before upgrading from LR 4.4. I tried LR 5 and it wasn't enough better to pay for the upgrade.</p>

<p>Another factor was support for Fuji RAF raw files. LR 4.4 doesn't have it. LR 5.x does, but the conversions I tried weren't impressive. I was still getting better results from Fuji's own in-camera raw converter. Even the version of Silkypix supplied with Fuji cameras wasn't very good. The only really good RAF converter I've tried is Photo Ninja, but it's a bit slow compared with Lightroom and I didn't want to add yet another tool to the workflow.</p>

<p>So meanwhile I'm using the Adobe RAF-to-DNG conversion. It's pretty good but something is lost in the translation. Highlight recovery isn't as effective as with Fuji's own in-camera raw conversion. But unless the photo involves extreme dynamic range, the DNG conversion works well enough to tweak photos a bit more than the JPEGs will allow.</p>

<p>On the other hand, the DNG converter for Nikon NEF-to-DNG seems to work pretty well. It's redundant, so I don't use it routinely. LR 4.4 already handles my NEFs for older Nikon cameras.</p>

<p>The main advantage to converting to DNG is more consistent application of meta data. For example, Lightroom keywords/tags don't translate outside of Lightroom to Windows Explorer. Nikon's own software does change some metadata in the NEFs, but I don't care for Nikon's software. But DNG allows </p>

<p>I'm also planning to try Windows 10 on my Lenovo laptop, which I don't use for serious photo editing. Lenovo includes a fall-back feature to automatically restore it to the Windows 7 64-bit factory default, so I don't lose much if Windows 10 doesn't work out well. </p>

[EricM]

"Eric,

I have Windows 7 Home Premium 2009. With the release in July I will be able to upgrade Windows 10

with a 64-bit that will support Lightroom 6.0?"

 

Yes. Lr6 and Cc are aleady working on Windows 10. Enjoy Lr6.