I have Lightroom 5.7; if I get a Leica SL3, would it work in my version of Lightroom?

[thebarnman]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

2 minutes ago, jaapv said:

It is not about lens profiles but about the ability to read  the DNG at all. Maybe obsolete ACR versions can still be updated. 

Maybe it's just luck or by design.  Posted earlier, it was suggested I give some of the SL3 files a try.  

Here is a gallery with SL3 raw files:

https://www.dpreview.com/sample-galleries/4112142540/leica-sl3-preview-sample-gallery/6898963578

I downloaded and tested a couple of those files.  It worked just fine as shown above with the screen shots.  I was able to open and adjust the images.  I was also able to open the same files in my older version of Photoshop and it worked just fine there too.  

 

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[frame-it]

1 hour ago, thebarnman said:

The only part that doesn't work is the lens profiles. 

on another computer install the latest camera raw, copy the camera and lens profiles  from Adobe>CameraRaw>CameraProfiles and put them in the correct folders on the computer with LR5.7, restart LR before using, use lens default not automatic

The profile needs to be placed in the below folder and LR restarted to load it.

Windows—C: \ Users \ [your username] \ AppData \ Roaming \ Adobe \ CameraRaw \ LensProfiles \

Mac—Macintosh HD / Users / [your username] / Library / Application Support / Adobe / CameraRaw / LensProfiles /

Macintosh HD / Users / [your username] / Library / Application Support / Adobe / CameraRaw / LensProfiles / 1.0 / Imported

if you do make your own profiles make sure you use a Raw file not a jpg or tiff

also If you use File > Import Develop Profiles And Presets to import the .lcp file, LR will place it in the correct folder automatically

 

[thebarnman]

11 minutes ago, frame-it said:

on another computer install the latest camera raw, copy the camera and lens profiles  from Adobe>CameraRaw>CameraProfiles and put them in the correct folders on the computer with LR5.7, restart LR before using, use lens default not automatic

The profile needs to be placed in the below folder and LR restarted to load it.

Windows—C: \ Users \ [your username] \ AppData \ Roaming \ Adobe \ CameraRaw \ LensProfiles \

Mac—Macintosh HD / Users / [your username] / Library / Application Support / Adobe / CameraRaw / LensProfiles /

Macintosh HD / Users / [your username] / Library / Application Support / Adobe / CameraRaw / LensProfiles / 1.0 / Imported

if you do make your own profiles make sure you use a Raw file not a jpg or tiff

also If you use File > Import Develop Profiles And Presets to import the .lcp file, LR will place it in the correct folder automatically

 

Wow, that sounds like that would work!  Thank you!  Putting them into the proper folder and restarting is easy enough.   

I am thinking at some point of getting a 2nd computer (such as a laptop) but if you don't mind me asking...why install the latest camera raw on a different computer?  I'm guessing somehow it would interfere or not work with my older version of Lightroom?  

Thanks

Under Camera Raw 16.3 installer

https://helpx.adobe.com/camera-raw/kb/camera-raw-plug-in-installer.html#fifteen_x

"Camera Raw for Windows x64"

Edited June 13, 2024 by thebarnman

[Jeff S]

2 hours ago, thebarnman said:

Thank you for your insight.    

No problem, whatever works for you. At least ten members here (including some former skeptics and naysayers) have reached out to express thanks after converting to the latest Adobe and/or IP software, some now even advocating same to others.
 

Personally, I find a bigger bang for the buck spending a bit on the back end of my workflow than upgrading to the latest and greatest gear, which many here do regularly at great expense. And the ongoing upgrades to the software act similarly to FW updates for camera gear, offering improved features and output from time to time. I’ve reprinted files from long ago, merely running them through later software iterations, and the improvements are noticeable. YMMV.
 

Jeff

[frame-it]

3 hours ago, thebarnman said:

I'm guessing somehow it would interfere or not work with my older version of Lightroom?  

just to be safe

[jaapv]

On 6/11/2024 at 3:33 AM, thebarnman said:

Thank you for the suggestion but I've already looked at all my options and decided to keep using Lightroom 5.7.  No real need for the mobile stuff and the basic adjustments are all that's needed to help really fine tune images.  I don’t quite agree, even the basic stuff has improved a great deal. 

[thebarnman]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 hour ago, jaapv said:

On 6/10/2024 at 6:33 PM, thebarnman said:

Thank you for the suggestion but I've already looked at all my options and decided to keep using Lightroom 5.7.  No real need for the mobile stuff and the basic adjustments are all that's needed to help really fine tune images.  I don’t quite agree, even the basic stuff has improved a great deal. 

That's fair, but I'm afraid I won't be able to easily upgrade.

[jaapv]

Clear, but still, maybe time to switch to a more modern program? I can recommend ON1 or Affinity.  

[Jeff S]

1 hour ago, thebarnman said:

That's fair, but I'm afraid I won't be able to easily upgrade.

Gotta be a lot simpler than going through all the gyrations you’re willing to go through to maintain your ancient software, plus potentially managing between 2 computers with very different operating systems.  Security might also be improved with more current and consistent hardware/software.  
 

Jeff

 

[jaapv]

5 hours ago, Jeff S said:

Gotta be a lot simpler than going through all the gyrations you’re willing to go through to maintain your ancient software, plus potentially managing between 2 computers with very different operating systems.  Security might will also be improved with more current and consistent hardware/software.  
 

Jeff

 

There - I corrected that for you 🤩

[Jeff S]

Indeed, thanks.

Jeff

[thebarnman]

On 4/25/2024 at 1:49 PM, SrMi said:

To get Lightroom 13.2, you have to subscribe to Creative Cloud ($9.99). The latest version is much better. You can try downloading an SL3 raw file, but I doubt that you import it to Lightroom 5.7.

Here is a gallery with SL3 raw files:

https://www.dpreview.com/sample-galleries/4112142540/leica-sl3-preview-sample-gallery/6898963578

I just bought a new monitor and wanted to see how a few of these images looked on it.  For some reason I'm not able to find how I downloaded the RAW file.  Is there something I'm missing? 

[SrMi]

16 minutes ago, thebarnman said:

I just bought a new monitor and wanted to see how a few of these images looked on it.  For some reason I'm not able to find how I downloaded the RAW file.  Is there something I'm missing? 

Typically a file downloaded from web is stored in the Download folder (Mac). You drag it from there to Lightroom to import it.

[thebarnman]

On 6/21/2024 at 10:31 PM, SrMi said:

Typically a file downloaded from web is stored in the Download folder (Mac). You drag it from there to Lightroom to import it.

I was able to download the original file from that link a few weeks ago, but I think the option was turned off by who ever is paying for the service.  If anyone can find a way to download the full file from there, please let us know.

 

Oh, never mind; I found it!  It says RAW 69.9 MB. 

Edited June 24, 2024 by thebarnman

[jaapv]

I keep wondering: people buy a camera from 2024 and think that it will display its full potential with software from 2017. Would they think the same if it were the other way around? 
In seven years it is not about a few features being added in an update. Over time the whole program has been reworked including basic and essential algorithms. 

[Anbaric]

It would be interesting to see a comparison between (a) A DNG file processed with LR 5.x, (b) A DNG file processed with LR Classic CC, and (c) a matching in-camera jpeg. No local adjustments or fancy new features, just the basic processing that is supposedly now so much better. Moderate global adjustments allowed (curves, brightness, contrast, etc.), as a journalist would be permitted to do. To be fair, the files should be from a camera that is fully supported by the old version with a camera profile, like the M9.

[250swb]

1 hour ago, jaapv said:

I keep wondering: people buy a camera from 2024 and think that it will display its full potential with software from 2017. Would they think the same if it were the other way around? 
In seven years it is not about a few features being added in an update. Over time the whole program has been reworked including basic and essential algorithms. 

I’ve some 2010 digital P&S photos shot at 5000 ISO that were a record of an event but essentially unusable as creative photography. Until that is the latest releases of ACR combined with Photoshop and Lightroom that can clear the digital noise completely and give old digital photos life. So it doesn’t make sense to keep buying the latest digital cameras without first first upgrading a pc and having the latest software on it because it will be the software throttling whatever the camera is capable of.

[Anbaric]

Even a 2010 dSLR would not be great at 5000 ISO, so dealing with P&S shots at this setting would be a rather extreme example, image rescue rather than conventional image processing. My camera at this time was good up to about 1600, and better (really very good indeed) at 800 and below, which is how I tended to shoot it. Starting with images that had little noise in the first place, I think the benefits of current noise reduction would (for me) be marginal at best. Go back a generation or two in technology and I can imagine a bigger difference, though. In the early years of the century you could go to an exhibition like World Press Photo and pick out at least some of the digital shots purely by the chroma noise. This ceased to be an issue at moderate ISOs by the time the third generation of dSLRs came out, and at what we used to think of as high ISOs with the next generation of cameras.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[thebarnman]

I did a search to see if I could find if there are real differences in image quality between Lightroom 5.7 and the newest version.  All I could find was talk about different tools, menu layout differences, not anything different about how an image is rendered onto the screen or the final results when it's printed. 

Besides camera/lens profiles, what really does any newer version of Lightroom do when it comes to image quality? 

My original question was if images taken with the SL3 can work in my version of Lightroom.  The answer is yes and that's all I was wondering about; but now there's a lot of talk about how horrible the image will look if I don't use the most recent releases of Lightroom. 

[thebarnman]

4 hours ago, Anbaric said:

It would be interesting to see a comparison between (a) A DNG file processed with LR 5.x, (b) A DNG file processed with LR Classic CC, and (c) a matching in-camera jpeg.

I think that would be interesting too.  Very interesting. 

Edited June 25, 2024 by thebarnman