Anyone try LR6 facial recognition yet?

[lnh]

OK - this is semi on-topic / semi off-topic...

Not at all advocating switching from IMatch to LR, but I'm curious about any initial experiences folks have had with LR6 facial recognition and whether it can output MWG face region XMP data in the industry standard format which IMatch can import. Saw some words when it was announced about how you can keep the metadata out of your files, but it didn't talk about the opposite situation where you want it in the file. Personally my last version of LR is back in v4 so haven't had much experience with recent versions of the software. If it does a credible job and can integrate it's metadata with IMatch it might be a useful pre-processing tool prior to doing the real work in IMatch.

[Mario]

Didn't try it yet. From what I can tell, LR6 forces you into the Adobe cloud, with monthly payments etc. Adobe is pulling the rope tighter again...

There is still a LR6 version you can buy, but they made it incidentally totally unattractive by leaving out all mobile features and also state "no function updates for this version" - whatever that means. It's clear that Adobe wants everyone to get into their cloud. Software runs only as long as you pay for it - every month.

Adobe has really become a greedy bunch. Naturally, they have to compensate the decreasing income from PDF and Flash technology by pressing more and more money out of the (photo)graphic community. And once you are in their cloud, it is very hard to get out again. Prepare to pay forever - which is of course the reason behind all this. I like Adobe products, and I use PS and LR for a long time. But all that "get into our cloud" movement I despise.

And before I let any Adobe software analyze my images for faces, I would read the fine print in the license agreement very, very carefully. Who knows how this is implemented, if it uses some kind of on-line functionality or maybe even shares the face prints with other parties and companies. After recent NSA scandals everybody should have got the message about what the consequences of features like face tagging are...

There are still many IMatch users working with IMatch 3.5 or 3.6, bought between 2006 and today. They can still work with the software, without giving me money every month. Eh, wait a moment...

[Ferdinand]

LR 6 doesn't force you into the cloud, from what I read, but it does require you to have an Adobe ID to install the perpetual license version.  So this is Adobe's version of product activation, which LR hasn't had previously.  In fact, in the past if you did subscribe to the cloud, then you could use the CC serial for LR 5 to install it on your laptop without all the CC rubbish.   Handy.   I guess that means you could install it as many times as you liked, in contravention of the license agreement (I have NOT tried this).  So the need to have an Adobe ID in order to install LR prevents this for LR 6 / CC and later.  You can install twice and that's it, unless you deactivate one of them.

As for the "no function updates for this version", there is a lot of uncertainly as to what this means.  You may know more than I, but I have read that some of the changes to LR6 had already been rolled out to ACR, but couldn't be rolled out to LR 5 for "legal reasons".  There is an assumption that this clause is to give them the right to differentiate LR 6 and LR CC should they choose to do so.  It's not clear that it says that there will never be any update to the perpetual license version, even though that's what it seems to say.  There will have to be bug fixes and some camera updates, but I bet that some LR CC features may not make it into LR 6.

As for facial recognition .... not interested.

[Carlo Didier]

As for facial recognition .... not interested.

Hehe, same here.

As for the LR6 future, I think they may handle it like Photoshop CS6, but they might continue updating the raw engine. Nobody knows.

I got the CC deal for photographers which, when they set a reduced price, wasn't actually more expensive as my bi-annual upgrades before.
Does it bother me that it will stop working (some time after) when I stop paying? Sure, but I decided that at the given price, I could live with that, even if I don't like it. Life is full of compromises and this is just one of the least important ones for me.

As for Lightroom, it came with the package but I don't use it. Bridge and ACR can do the same stuff for my raw conversions and my DAM isn't Lightroom but iMatch 

[JohnZeman]

Here in the USA the link to pay for the standalone version of LR6 is disabled so at the moment my only LR6 purchase option is the cloud and I won't be going that route.

[lnh]

Didn't try it yet. From what I can tell, LR6 forces you into the Adobe cloud, with monthly payments etc. Adobe is pulling the rope tighter again...

There is still a LR6 version you can buy, but they made it incidentally totally unattractive by leaving out all mobile features and also state "no function updates for this version" - whatever that means. It's clear that Adobe wants everyone to get into their cloud. Software runs only as long as you pay for it - every month.

Adobe has really become a greedy bunch. Naturally, they have to compensate the decreasing income from PDF and Flash technology by pressing more and more money out of the (photo)graphic community. And once you are in their cloud, it is very hard to get out again. Prepare to pay forever - which is of course the reason behind all this. I like Adobe products, and I use PS and LR for a long time. But all that "get into our cloud" movement I despise.

And before I let any Adobe software analyze my images for faces, I would read the fine print in the license agreement very, very carefully. Who knows how this is implemented, if it uses some kind of on-line functionality or maybe even shares the face prints with other parties and companies. After recent NSA scandals everybody should have got the message about what the consequences of features like face tagging are...

There are still many IMatch users working with IMatch 3.5 or 3.6, bought between 2006 and today. They can still work with the software, without giving me money every month. Eh, wait a moment...

I'll probably download the 30 day trial onto a secondary PC in the house and play around with the facial recognition just for fun. Looking at the YouTube video describing the capability it seems similar to Picasa, but updated a bit (Picasa has been basically dead for a long time now). Really wonder how well it works given that the expertise and patents were with PittPatt (now Google) and face.com (now Facebook). Will definitely check out the license for bad stuff.

Sounds like they are doing to LR exactly what they did to Photoshop the version before they stopped offering traditional licenses. ACR was updated for both, but some new features only made it into the CC version. Personally, I despised this product strategy as reason was arbitrary and it was transparent why it was happening. Ever since CC-only Photoshop I've been hoping some good alternatives would become available, but haven't seen anything yet. ACR not being updated for prior versions is probably 80% of the reason anyone updates at this point anyways.

I'm guessing one of the sticking points may be that facial recognition will work better as you build up more recognized people. This would mean keeping the photos in the LR database and exporting the files for import into IMatch. Essentially keeping two databases. I'm guessing you don't want the two programs pointing at the same files. Is this correct? I'll report back after playing around with it over the coming weeks.

[Mario]

given that the expertise and patents were with PittPatt (now Google) and face.com (now Facebook). Will definitely check out the license for bad stuff.

That's one of the problems. The big players have basically created a patent minefield around the entire face recognition research. This makes it very hard to develop an open source facial recognition technology - at least not without violating at least several patents of the thousands of patents held by Google and FB. And they get thousands of patents granted each year. Patents are ow used as legal battle axles to keep the competition at bay.

Very unfortunate for a free market and free software. Or for small ISPs like myself who cannot even afford patents (starting at 25,000 € for just a few major European countries). I'm sure many of the things I have developed for IMatch could be patented.

I'm guessing you don't want the two programs pointing at the same files.

Why not? Did you read the knowledge base article about How to use IMatch and LR together, or the LR-related topics in the IMatch help?

http://www.photools.com/3172/adobe-lightroom-imatch-5/

If face recognition is really such an important feature for you, go LR 6. IMatch will pick up the face data, at least when Adobe sticks to their very own standards (they are a key player in the Metadata Working Group, after all). But, wait: Microsoft is also in the MWG but came up with their own way to store face data in XMP - not using the XMP regions they helped to design in the MWG.

This is all business of course. The company who first gets control over your data, or makes it to hard to use it on other platforms or with software from other vendors has you for good. 140 US$+ per year for an image editing product, forever. Great value. Worth to fight for, to break some rules, to "bend" some standards etc.

I'm programming my buttocks off to keep IMatch open and flexible, but apparently many users just go the lazy way, and then complain later...

[lnh]

I'm guessing you don't want the two programs pointing at the same files.

Why not? Did you read the knowledge base article about How to use IMatch and LR together, or the LR-related topics in the IMatch help?

http://www.photools.com/3172/adobe-lightroom-imatch-5/

Thank you for the reference to this article. I've never tried to make the two work together because I've never liked the DAM part of LR and usually find it easier to edit in Photoshop (version 5) anyways. Also, when I've played around with LR and PhotoSupreme before switching to IMatch, it never seemed to interoperate that great so just figured it was cleaner to keep the two away from each other.

If face recognition is really such an important feature for you, go LR 6. IMatch will pick up the face data, at least when Adobe sticks to their very own standards (they are a key player in the Metadata Working Group, after all). But, wait: Microsoft is also in the MWG but came up with their own way to store face data in XMP - not using the XMP regions they helped to design in the MWG.

This is all business of course. The company who first gets control over your data, or makes it to hard to use it on other platforms or with software from other vendors has you for good. 140 US$+ per year for an image editing product, forever. Great value. Worth to fight for, to break some rules, to "bend" some standards etc.

I'm programming my buttocks off to keep IMatch open and flexible, but apparently many users just go the lazy way, and then complain later...

Exactly why I was curious about formats, and you are right to be suspicious whether they would eventually lock you in down the road. I think people who are attracted to IMatch greatly value the openness you've baked into the product.

There was a time where "proprietary" was a dirty word in the computing industry. Very large companies fell by sticking with their closed solutions even if they were better. But today it's different, particularly with consumers. Just look at the nearly entirely closed interoperation of Apple devices, and people seem to eat it up while reviewers never/rarely point out the lock-in nature of this model. Although Facebook does have APIs, they are closing in too. In 5 days their XMPP support for chat disappears so a Jabber client will no longer work. Will have to use the Fb Messenger app after that, and I refuse to load that on my phone. Some of my friends only seem to communicate via Fb so hopefully will be able to retrain them. Surveys have asked people about the use of the Internet and various thing like Facebook. People have responded that they use Facebook, but not the Internet. Now with the upcoming inclusion of news sources right within Fb, you'll never have to leave Fb (or so is their desire). The mid/longform blogging platform "Medium" is a complete data silo and the list goes on. For those interested, read some of what the developer Dave Winer writes on his blog about the open web. I hope the open side stays alive.

[Mario]

Now with the upcoming inclusion of news sources right within Fb, you'll never have to leave Fb (or so is their desire).

Well, that's the plan. I often recommend the book "The Circle" by Dave Eggers as an eye opener.

[Carlo Didier]

Ever since CC-only Photoshop I've been hoping some good alternatives would become available, but haven't seen anything yet.

You might have a look at the On One Suite. Not a complete Photoshop replacement, but potentially sufficient for many users. Not much cheaper though if you regularly upgrade to the latest versions ...

[Ferdinand]

Here in the USA the link to pay for the standalone version of LR6 is disabled so at the moment my only LR6 purchase option is the cloud and I won't be going that route.

Since I drank the cool-aid and signed up to CC I haven't tried to buy a copy of the perpetual license version, but comments on Lula indicate that it is available but rather well hidden.   If you go to the LR page and scroll all the way to the bottom there's a link.  Good luck installing it.

https://www.adobe.com/products/photoshop-lightroom.html

There's nothing much in it for me, so I'm not racing to upgrade.

[jeknepley]

Yes, Adobe did a good job hiding access to the non-CC version - but it is there. Further, if you already own a pre-LR6 version it is also possible to get an also well-hidden upgrade (vs full) at a price of $79 vs $149 (I could be off on the exact $ but it's close to that).

I do my best to avoid "mixing" my image processing software (LR, onOne, PSE & the Nik Collection) with IM. All I want & expect from them is a version (usually jpeg or tiff) of the "negative" (usually NEF) that I send to them via IM5's favorite's panel. Works well for my amateur hobby needs.

Back on-topic - facial-rec isn't important here since 99+% my work http://www.pbase.com/ed_k/root is sans people.

[JohnZeman]

Here in the USA the link to pay for the standalone version of LR6 is disabled so at the moment my only LR6 purchase option is the cloud and I won't be going that route.

Since I drank the cool-aid and signed up to CC I haven't tried to buy a copy of the perpetual license version, but comments on Lula indicate that it is available but rather well hidden.   If you go to the LR page and scroll all the way to the bottom there's a link.  Good luck installing it.

https://www.adobe.com/products/photoshop-lightroom.html

There's nothing much in it for me, so I'm not racing to upgrade.

I certainly agree Adobe did quite a job in hiding their LR6 standalone, and the link Ferdinand posted is the link I was using in my attempt to purchase it.  I could add it to the shopping cart all right but the link to checkout and pay is a dead link, it does nothing.

However after MUCH googling I did manage to find a way to download LR6 standalone, and I have, but I haven't installed it yet and I don't intend to for at least another 30 days until I see how this whole standalone/cloud mess shakes out when it comes to actually purchasing the standalone version.  In case anyone else is looking for a way to download the standalone trial version the following link provided the answer for me.

http://prodesigntools.com/adobe-lightroom-6-cc-direct-download-links.html

[lnh]

I'm going to make a bold prognostication... LR6 will be the last perpetual license version of this software we'll see. If I remember, this is the same playbook Adobe used starting with Photoshop CS5.5 in 2011. A version and ½ later, only CC remained. Haven't looked at new versions of Photoshop in detail for years, but it seems they are just taking some existing Photoshop features and moving them into LR and calling it a new version. Is facial recognition the only new capability which wasn't already in another Adobe product? Sounds like a good gig for Adobe; minimal engineering - extract more money from customers.

[Aubrey]

Here in the USA the link to pay for the standalone version of LR6 is disabled so at the moment my only LR6 purchase option is the cloud and I won't be going that route.

I noticed that one can buy the download version from BH photo. Not sure about the upgrade version I don't see a link for this.

Aubrey

[JohnZeman]

Well I finally was able to buy the standalone version of LR6.  The link Ferdinand mentioned above was finally enabled so I could complete the purchase.  Like lnh I expect this will likely be the last version of Lightroom I'll ever buy.  If so, at least I have the final standalone copies of Photoshop (CS6) and Lightroom.

What a major hassle it was this time to update!! 

[lnh]

Anyone use PaintShop Pro X7 instead of Adobe products. Never been a fan of Corel products as they seem to have a history of buying out SW companies and either killing it or letting it languish. Decided to download the trial just to see as they do seem to update this one on a regular basis and it seems to support 16bit/channel processing, non-destructive adjustment layers etc. Probably not as full featured as Photoshop, but might be good enough. Kinda wonder if the built-in RAW converter is derived from Bibble/AfterShot Pro.

For Adobe and many others it seems like updated RAW converters is the most compelling leverage point to force you to upgrade. Would be nice to see something like ACR as a separate product which would work across multiple release generations. Of course this only makes sense if we weren't forced into a subscription model. You can work around needing updated converters by using their DNG converter, but that is a painful approach.

[Carlo Didier]

You can work around needing updated converters by using their DNG converter, but that is a painful approach.

That depends on your workflow. Mine is 100% DNG ...

About Paintshop Pro. It can be a real alternative to Photoshop, up to a certain point. For many users, even Paintshop Pro would be overkill. Don't know much about the current version though. I had it back when it was still from Jasc (I think), before Corel took over. I loved the fully configurable menus and button bar.

[Ferdinand]

Never been a fan of Corel products as they seem to have a history of buying out SW companies and either killing it or letting it languish. ...... Kinda wonder if the built-in RAW converter is derived from Bibble/AfterShot Pro.

You got that right.  Corel bought Bibble5 turned it then into Aftershot, then 6 months later sacked the Bibble team and let it languish for years.  They are now belatedly trying to play catch up, but with only partial success.

The PSP converter is NOT based on ASP.  There are often questions about why certain cameras are supported in one and not the other.

The only real need to upgrade a converter is a new camera, unless there's a new feature that you absolutely must have.

[lnh]

You can work around needing updated converters by using their DNG converter, but that is a painful approach.

About Paintshop Pro. It can be a real alternative to Photoshop, up to a certain point. For many users, even Paintshop Pro would be overkill. Don't know much about the current version though. I had it back when it was still from Jasc (I think), before Corel took over. I loved the fully configurable menus and button bar.

Have been taking a look at PSP for a couple days. First impression... Generally very capable, but to borrow from a famous US VP campaign debate, "Paintshop Pro... I knew Photoshop. Photoshop was a friend of mine. Paintshop Pro, you're no Photoshop." Even on a recent high end PC with a mid-range Nvidia graphics card, it's just not smooth as silk like Photoshop. As you pan when zoomed in, garbage pixels initially appear and then get written correctly. After a bit of time you get use the different way it works vs. Photoshop, but some common things are incomplete and have been for a long time. One of the virtues of Photoshop is you can do most everything in a non-destructive way. For example, fixing image imperfections (e.g. sensor dust, maybe red eye, scratches from film scans, etc.) can be done on a new layer leaving the original alone without having to duplicate the original layer. In PSP, you can do the same with the cloning tool, but can't with the nearest equivalents to spot healing brush and things like it. A search of this deficiency brought be to a confirmation of this "negative" which was written in 2008 regarding a release 5 versions back. On the plus side, it does have a full set of adjustment layers similar to Photoshop. Early impression is that Corel may churn the product to get upgrades but hasn't addressed some basic deficiencies, but at the price it's decent. Can't really expect champagne on a beer budget.

[Carlo Didier]

You're right Inh. If you want better non-destructive editing and even Photoshop compatibility (of the files, to the extent that you can write PSD files), the On One Suite is the way to go, but again, it's not much cheaper than Photoshop. Owning both (Photoshop CC and On One Suite , I effectively rarely use the suite, but always Photoshop (with the Google/Nik plugins). And I won't upgrade the On One Suite.

[jeknepley]

You're right Inh. If you want better non-destructive editing and even Photoshop compatibility (of the files, to the extent that you can write PSD files), the On One Suite is the way to go, but again, it's not much cheaper than Photoshop. Owning both (Photoshop CC and On One Suite , I effectively rarely use the suite, but always Photoshop (with the Google/Nik plugins). And I won't upgrade the On One Suite.

Be aware that OnOne Suite states the following - "For photographers who shoot RAW, we recommend processing those images in applications designed to process those files, specifically Lightroom, Adobe Camera Raw or Aperture. However if you do not use a workflow application like Lightroom or Aperture you can open RAW files into Perfect Layers with the settings used in the camera."

This RAW handling may or may not meet your needs.

[Aubrey]

I'm not having much success in downloading the standalone 6 to trial it for 30 days. I keep getting sent to the CC. I tried the URL:

http://prodesigntools.com/adobe-lightroom-6-cc-direct-download-links.html

This also sends me to the cloud.

Adobe clearly are not keen on potential standalone buyers!

Any ideas how to get an official standalone LR6  trial.

(I have seen some sites advertising the Lightroom_6_LS11.exe, but I am reluctant to download this!)
thanks,

Aubrey.

[Ferdinand]

This also sends me to the cloud.

First, let me say that I haven't tried to do this myself, so take this with a grain of salt.  But in what sense does it send you to the cloud?  Unlike earlier versions of LR you need an Adobe ID to install it, and from an attempt I made a moment ago, using the link I posted above, you may even need an Adobe ID to download it from Adobe.  But having an Adobe ID is not the same as flying in the cloud.  It's just Adobe's version of product activation, ensuring that you only install it once or twice.

[Aubrey]

Ferdinand,
In the end I decided to buy! Bought through B&H. They sent me the link and downloaded the exe. 142.99$, slightly cheaper than Adobe and 149$, also no taxes, (Amazon wanted taxes for a Texas address of a friend).

In fact tried to buy it through Adobe, they said my ID was for wrong region. I've lived in Trinidad UK, Cyprus! So couldn't figure out what they wanted.  Sigh... Adobe is something else!

Well I'll find out if the HDR is better than Google's HDR Efex Pro. There is also Panorama, I wonder if better than Autopano?

Interesting discussion about LR6 on the podcast TWIP (this week in photography http://thisweekinphoto.com/twip-410-lightroom-cc/ ). I do wonder the best approach for Frederick and team to discuss IMatch5. Especially with the recent post with a user with over 340,000 images.

Aubrey.

PS. I've kept money aside for IMatch 5.5, I wonder when Mario will have this available?

[Mario]

PS. I've kept money aside for IMatch 5.5, I wonder when Mario will have this available?

Anticipatory. Excellent.
Without any kind of guarantee, the 5.5. is planned around Summer (this year!).

[Aubrey]

(this year!).

I'm delighted you added the clarification; I won't hold you to summer, this year is fine!   

Aubrey

[lnh]

FWIW - following the link listed previously and following the directions in the post let me download the non-CC trial without issue. Unlike previous trials, you do need to login with your Adobe ID. In my case, it initially brought me to a download for PSE, but replacing the URL with the link listed in the post did the trick.

My previous download was the installer for the CC version which I hadn't installed yet, and I'm waiting for a block of free time before starting the 30 day clock. Some initial comments I've seen in some forums seem to indicate the facial recognition works. Guess it's similar to Picasa in only working with straight-on views of faces.