Photographing the Milky Way

Your content will be up shortly. Please allow up to 5 seconds
Gear Rumors

Lightroom 6 Coming In Early March with a Price Increase?

By Anthony Thurston on February 19th 2015

We have all been eagerly awaiting the launch of the next version of Adobe Lightroom, which is expected to have vast performance increases over the current Lightroom 5. If a new report is correct, it could be coming within the next couple weeks.

Adobe-Lightroom-61

According to a report over on Photo Rumors, the next version of Adobe’s Lightroom Software, Lightroom 6, leaked online in several countries. The leak indicates that the release of LR6 will happen on March 9th.

The cost would be about 130 euro or about $150 in the US. This would be a bit of a price increase, maybe justified by the improved performance built into the new version. But still, I know many will not like to see it, if the leaked pricing is accurate.

Just as with the Nikon rumor from earlier today, we will know more within the next couple weeks, so stay tuned and we will keep you updated.

What are your thoughts on this Adobe Lightroom 6 leak? Do you think the price increase will be too much? Leave a comment below. 

[via Photo Rumors]

Anthony Thurston is a photographer based in the Salem, Oregon area specializing in Boudoir. He recently started a new project, Fiercely Boudoir to help support the growing boudoir community. Find him over on Instagram. You may also connect with him via Email.

Q&A Discussions

Please or register to post a comment.

  1. Lester Terry

    enjoying it!

    | |
  2. Vince Arredondo

    Does anyone know when the new version is coming out?

    | |
  3. Carl Davies

    CC sounds great apart from when you get to retirement and can’t afford the £102 a year, yet you’ve paid hundreds over the years and end up with nothing.

    | |
  4. Gareth Roughley

    all i would really like to see is the ability to view Raw files as fast and easily as photo mechanic!

    | |
  5. Bill Veik

    I have never had the need for anything but Lightroom, other than using free Canon Pro software for image merging. If LR handles that well then I can stick to it exclusively. My workflow shoots and saves RAW originals, then exporting a set to a JPEG folder after processing. That set gets used for my general purposes.

    If HDR is used for creating Velvet Elvis items, yuck. If you use it to balance exposure, the way you bracket photos to create sharpness at each level of depth of field, I don’t think that goes overboard.

    | |
  6. Gurmit Saini

    Well in UK I paid £89 for Lightroom and if the price for the upgrade will be more or near to £100, I will rather go with CC as CC (Photoshop + Lightroom) here is £102 per year.

    | |
  7. David Hall

    I can’t wait for the upgrade. Really hoping the new performance specs meet expectations. So, the other burning question…. who’s image is on the box?

    | |
  8. Dave Lyons

    are they going to get nikon color conversion right this time?
    Is capture one still going to wax it in producing better images?

    Don’t get me wrong I use it mostly for the tagging, cataloging & presets but it’s hard to ignore how much better the initial import is with nikons app or capture one. They promised this was going to be fixed awhile ago but haven’t seen it yet

    | |
  9. Daniel Thullen

    Wow gents, all this discussion based on a rumor. Do you tend to upgrade whenever one comes out? My Lightroom upgrades tend to coincide with hardware upgrades more than anything else. (I’m currently using ver. 5.6) To this point I’ve avoided the CC version, although that may change in the near future. Any thoughts?

    | |
    • Bill Bentley

      Ha ha, this discussion pales in comparison to the discussion when Adobe revealed their subscription model. Depending on the forum you can still get heated debates on this topic.

      I started with LR3, upgraded to LR4 and passed on LR5. I’m on the fence now about going with the subscription model. Being located in Canada means it’s really $15/mo for me. I’m fine for 85% of what I do with PS6 and LR, but I’m wanting to mess around with PS compositing, light effects, etc. more these days and one really needs the CC version for that. Gonna be a tough call.

      | |
    • robert garfinkle

      when the actual truth comes out – WE’RE GONNA RUN FOR THE HILLS!!!!!!!

      | |
  10. Scott Walter

    I was hoping for layer support. I guess I will still need Perfect Layers.

    | |
    • Hannes Nitzsche

      I use elements for all my layer work… it’s much easier to get into than PS and does 90% of the work outside LR that would normally require the help of PS or the likes…

      | |
  11. Bill Bentley

    Upgrade price used to be $79, so I’m guessing it will now be $89-99 then.

    A bit off topic but I have a question regarding B&W conversion in LR and or Silver Efex vs. PS. Do LR and SEfex remove all the color information when doing the conversion? Someone in my photo club says only converting an image to grayscale in PS properly discards the color information. Can anyone here confirm this?

    | |
    • Stephen Jennings

      Hmm.. if this is what you mean, then this is my understanding: RAW files retain color information. If you shoot in monochrome for example, the RAW file still contains all the color information, you can convert it either way.

      Greyscaling in PS is a destructive process, whereas LR is a non destructive process. If however you did it in a non-destructive way the color would still be retained. I would imagine it depends on how you edit and what you export your save as.

      | |
    • Bill Bentley

      I always shoot RAW. My normal B&W workflow is basic edits in LR, export to SFex for conversion and further edits, then save back to LR for final touches and then export as JPEG. But if there is still color information in that file then it will make a difference when you go to print. Correct? If I opened the JPEG file in PS where would I go to verify if the color information was still present or not?

      | |
    • Stephen Jennings

      Ok, I had to open CS6 to see what you were referring to. When selecting the greyscale mode a box comes up that asks if I want to discard the color channels which is what you’re referring to.

      I’ve never heard that discarding the color channels entirely makes for a better print, I’ll have to look into that.

      | |
    • Ebenezer Baxendale

      I don’t think the price is actually going up — I think the writer is out over his skis on that. $150 would not be a price increase, and anyway you cannot just convert currencies to find retail prices. Exchange rates fluctuate daily and even if they didn’t, companies don’t always price things in different regions based solely on a straight currency swap.

      | |
  12. morgan glassco

    Will our catalogs have to be upgraded to be used on LR6? I never had 3 so I don’t know if that is the case for every upgrade, but going from LR4 to LR5 required it. I am hoping not as I just worked out a mobile workflow with my NAS and laptop and only have CC on my Desktop. Don’t want to pay to upgrade my stand alone copy of LR5.

    | |
  13. Denis O’Donovan

    Ah noooooo! Not the dreaded HDR…………

    | |
    • Colin Conn

      What’s wrong with HDR. Does it kill grandma’s or something?

      | |
    • Denis O’Donovan

      Can’t reply to you directly Colin, so I’ll try it here. No HDR doesn’t actually kill anybody, the only thing it does is kill good photography – especially when it’s overcooked as it inevitably is. Garish, over-saturated, cartoon-like landscapes are awful. Full stop.

      | |
    • Steven Mole

      It’s also really nice when done right (which admittedly is less common than done wrong) – using manual blending work and luminosity masks rather than Merge To HDR. However I doubt it’s possible to create a script within LR to allow this technique.

      | |
    • Hannes Nitzsche

      But I think that’s all up to the individual photographer and his/her skill level… I love a good HDR and in fact believe often it is the only way to bypass our camera’s inability to record all the information of a scene and/or produce natural looking landscapes, architectural shots, etc… I’m really looking forward to that feature!
      But I understand your hate for over-processed HDR’s… there’s many dreadful examples out there lol.

      | |
  14. Richard Bremer

    Any chance of LR6 becomming multi-threaded en therefore using modern cpu’s to their fullest?

    | |
  15. Greg Silver

    Found a link with some of the new features for Lightroom 6: http://www.canonrumors.com/2015/02/adobe-lightroom-6-coming-very-soon/

    Just a summary is:
    – Environment nondestructive
    – Advanced conversion feature black and white
    – Development predefined settings
    – Face Recognition
    – Sophisticated Healing Brush
    – Upright (Vertically)
    – Merge to HDR
    – Fusion panoramas
    – Performance gains
    – Sophisticated video slideshows
    – Optimized web galleries
    – Integration of online sharing
    – Creating photo books

    | |
    • Stephen Jennings

      So LR will finally have HDR? And panorama stitching???

      | |
    • Greg Silver

      Apparently so – but remember this is coming from a rumor site. I could see all this being true but just know where it’s coming from – I don’t know if this is official.

      | |
    • morgan glassco

      What you think Environment nondestructive means? Editing is already nondestructive so I am wondering what this applies to.

      | |
    • Stephen Jennings

      I think that might just be information to a LR newbie.. because like you say, LR is already nondestructive. It also already has B&W conversion so.. yeah. Another “key feature” of LR 6 is .. presets. Well, that’s been around forever. I don’t think everything listed is actually new so much as a feature of the total package.

      Which makes me skeptical LR6 will actually have HDR because, technically, “merge to HDR” is already a feature as well .. it just merges it to PS’s HDR. It’d be awesome if we could just right click stacked images and merge them without having to export to PS or something like Photomatix.

      | |
    • Hannes Nitzsche

      I have been hanging for a HDR and pano option in lightroom… in the end, it’s supposed to be a professional one stop editing software for photography only (as opposed to PS which basically includes photo editing possibilities among many others)… and panos and HDR (and the advanced B/W conversion features for that matter) are all common photography techniques these days…
      this would be a game changer, if they can pull it off with the said performance improvements! Can’t wait to try it out!
      Adobe, shut up and take my money already!!

      | |
    • Ebenezer Baxendale

      @ Stephen Jennings

      You’re right that the feature list is not “new features”, it’s “major features”, for new buyers of Lightroom, not upgraders, and it includes mostly features that already exist.

      But Merge to HDR is new. As is “fusion panoramas” and face recognition, plus a handful of other things. And GPU support, of course.

      | |
  16. robert garfinkle

    I thought $150.00 was the full price (as always), and discounted for “upgrades” – either 50 or 75 bucks to upgrade… I can check receipts.

    Unless there is a great reason to upgrade, not sure I’d move so fast on it. I am not sure 64bit, if that is the difference, is worth it… I’m sure there are other enhancements too, but 64bit is not a reason in my book…

    to be clear – if they are charging more, because of 64bit, they are fooling the public. there is not 1 software manufacturer on the planet who charges more for 64bit vs. 32bit, none, none, none. It’d be a tragedy if they did charge more based on that, meaning they are saying that the buyers (you and me are stupid)… it’s like the cable companies charging you more for HD content – in which they do (thanks a lot AT&T!! they started that BS…) – it does not cost them more to send that signal, they always have, and always will gouge the customer on those basis… AT&T has ALWAYS notoriously charged you for a capability YOU have already (like tethering) as tethering is not a service, just as HD is not, just as 64bit is not… notably, 64bit or 32bit windows, same price, any other software that has the same duality, allow you to download both (no additional charge) It’d be my hope that Adobe does not start that precedent cause others follow –

    Compiling a 32bit or 64bit program is a button click difference, no greater / lessor code is produced… period…

    just saying…. now that I got that out (sorry guys…. venting)

    Anthony – what are the differences?

    | |
    • Pablo Rogat

      are you feeling better now? xD

      | |
    • Matthew Saville

      LOL, Robert, if you’re “not sure you’d move so fast”, then you’re probably not the target market for what LR6 is seemingly going to offer. ;-)

      It sounds like Adobe is simply requiring users to have 64-bit machines so that they can take full advantage of new speed improvements. There will probably be a new CPU GHZ / core # requirement, too.

      In my opinion, the reason they’re going to charge $150 for it is simply, that’s the price tag they’re putting on the avoidance of CC. They can get ~$120 per year out of you if you join CC, for probably much more than 1 year, so they’ve gotta charge more if you’d prefer to just buy it once and be done. (Considering that a LR CC subscription comes with the latest version of PS, I still consider it a steal at $10 / month, of course…)

      | |
    • robert garfinkle

      Oops – I retract my statement about 64bit (I read somewhere that 64bit was coming to a particular version of an Adobe product…)

      Sorry, for going off on that tangent – again, my goof…. woke up on the wrong side of the keyboard :)

      But, I do not retract the statements about service providers charging you money for services that are not really services. It would be like you a photographer charging your customers more if you took photos in FX as opposed to DX – it does not cost you more to throw a switch nor produce…

      | |
    • robert garfinkle

      Gotcha Matt –

      If the Rumors are true there are a few features I’d be interested in…

      and, as I stated in an above post – oops, sorry, they already have 64bit in 4, 5.nn, etc…

      | |
  17. Amanda Jehle

    Will CC subscribers get the latest version or would we have to buy it in addition to the monthly subscription fee?

    | |
    • Stephen Jennings

      If LR is in your current subscription you get it like any other update. If it’s not included in your current subscription it’s extra.

      | |
    • Pablo Rogat

      Excellent question…

      | |
    • Colin Conn

      This was the whole point of me signing onto Adobe CC in the first place. I should hope they stick to their service plan.

      | |
    • robert garfinkle

      Agree – though I am not a cloud fan, as most of you know – this 9.99 / month thing sounds like a deal, right, however, let’s do the math…

      I paid for an upgrade to version 5, @ 79.00 (before tax), that probably means I will be paying close to the same, right, for the upgrade to 6, yes?

      would I rather pay somewhere in the neighborhood of 79.00 up front, or 120.00 commitment – remember, once you agree, you are obligated to pay at least 50%, from what I’ve read – month to month is a means of breaking out your payments over an agreement that you will spend 120.00 / year, right…

      what I’m saying is, if I am effectively paying less for an upgrade vs. 120 / year – the upgrade is still cheaper.. yet the benefit is, i am not under any obligation…

      | |
    • Colin Conn

      It is a deal because your getting Photoshop CC with Lighroom, your math isn’t accounting for that.

      | |
    • robert garfinkle

      you are correct… like I said, off today..

      | |
    • Matthew Saville

      Indeed, Robert, anyone who needs only Lightroom, and only upgrades when they must due to new camera RAW formats, …will definitely come out ahead by AVOIDING the Creative Cloud subscription.

      However, the minute you need Photoshop, the equation changes.

      Then again, it is true that unless you incessantly upgrade your camera and are picky about Photoshop’s own RAW support, you could make do with any old version of PS, maybe just CS4 or CS5, which wouldn’t cost you much, and you’d “never” need to upgrade as long as your workflow never changes too dramatically. As long as you pay to upgrade Lightroom whenever you get a new camera, you’ll STILL come out ahead in the long run, compared to paying $120 every single year, forever.

      Personally, unfortunately, my work does require me to have the latest of both applications, in which the subscription becomes most beneficial.

      So, in short, most casual photographers need not worry about joining CC, as long as they figure out their workflow and stick with it over the years…

      =Matt=

      | |
    • Jason Teale

      I was just thinking the same thing.

      | |
    • Jason Teale

      I am just hoping that my old 2008 macbook pro can keep up.

      | |
[i]
[i]