Why should I buy Luminar 4 if Luminar 3 isn't working decently?

Comments

8 comments

  • Avatar
    Donald Wyllie

    Hi Christophe: 8Gb is a bit marginal. You could try increasing the memory to 16Gb. Even if you don't stick with Luminar it will help any other image processing software run better.

    I assume that you've made sure that Luminar is set to use the graphics processor. Set in the Nvidia Control Panel under "Manage 3D settings". My computer, a home made thing, hasn't crashed L3 for a very long time. Clearly they don't understand how to make L3 play nicely with all flavours of computer. All the videos showing how great Luminar is must have only a few images in the catalogue. They must also be high end computers for the adjustments are almost instantaneous

    It is catch 22. Skylum is putting all of its efforts into L4 so I don't expect to see much improvement in L3. It will be abandoned especially as it is supposed to be so different from L4 - L4 is "wonderful" by comparison, don't you know. Anyway, by introducing L4 Skylum can make money. Free upgrades to L3 don't do a lot for the bottom line. They are here to make money although their method is rather crass, but no worse than Adobe.

    But what to do? There are few software choices out there that work well and I have tried quite a few. I've found that Luminar, despite being almost uselessly slow, is the one I like best as an alternative to Lightroom 6. Fortunately I'm an Olympus user and their latest free Olympus Workspace is showing great promise. My current workflow is Workspace then Flex if detail changes are needed. Flex was free in the days before Skylum realized it needed money.

    Having been so dismissive of L3 over the past many months, to my horror I find that I've plonked down my money on L4. I can't understand where my brain was. My hand must have developed a mind of its own. I don't expect L4 to work any better than L3 but the outlay isn't all that much. Cheaper than Lightroom and maybe this time around Skylum will get it right. But I doubt it!

    1
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Christophe-Sigmund de Terwangne

    Hi Donald,

     

    Great answer, you resumed it quite nicely. 

    I'm sure 16Gb would run the software faster, but I don't think it is the issue. Lightroom worked perfectly with these 8Gb. Lightroom worked even perfectly on my 5 years old computer... 
    I tried to manage the INVIDIA settings like you said, hope I will see some better results. I'm no geek but I think these kind of software should run by default at maximum performance... 

    When I'm working (for fun) with free photoshop and lightroom apps on my ipad, I'm sometimes really really impressed and surpised by the results and the reactivity of these apps... 

    Instead of adding all these AI features to the software (that I actually do not use), why do they not think a much more about having the software working nicely?? Again, probably, like you said, a marketing and money strategy, but I do not think this strategy will last very long. If they are trying to lure pros and semi pro photographers to work on Luminar, they are not doing it right. 

    I bought Luminar one year ago (60eu). If I do pay L4 again, I would have pay 60 +90= 150eu in one year. Probably L5 will go out in 1 year with some new AI filter, and some hope that it, this time, wouln't be "uselessly slow"... See where this is going? 

    Lightroom, with mobile apps, with cloud and sync, you pay 144eu... 

    Nice to see some Olympus users on forums ;) Just bought the 14-40mm f2.8 and I am amazed. 
    I tried the olympus software one year ago and abandonned it very fast, maybe I should give it a new try ;)

    All the best

     

     

     

     

    1
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Donald Wyllie

    Certainly 16Gb is not the whole answer in the case of Luminar but it does help with any image manipulation software. Less talking to the SSD. Do try the latest version of Olympus Workspace it is a big improvement. It is a bit slow but what else is new around here!

    Another Olympus user. Wow! The Pro lenses are remarkable. I have the 40-150 and the 300. I use the 40-150 with the 2x converter and I'm amazed at how good the combination is. I mostly shoot birds but for other photography I use the old 12-60 4/3 lens. It works surprisingly well on the micro 4/3 body.

    Anyway, I shall now return now to my dream that L4 will work better than Lightroom.

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Helge Erik Storheim

    16GB won't help. I run a laptop with 20GB and Luminar is still unusable.....

    1
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Minh-Dang Bui-Nguyen

    Lol 32 gb here and it still won't work quite right. Workspace is now completely composed of ssds and that didn't help either. Back to old Luminar and lightroom for me.

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Elena Blum

    Hi - We are constantly updating our software to improve the stability of it and to make the user experience better.

    Please contact our support team and we will do our best to assist you https://skylum.com/support

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Christophe-Sigmund de Terwangne

    Hi again Donald,

    I am thinking a lot getting the olympus 40-150pro with the teleconverter to shoot wildlife. Do you have some sample images where I can see some of your work? Or a Flickr account?

    Here is mine:
    https://flickr.com/photos/155827684@N03/sets/72157711726273961

    Best regards,

    Christophe

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Donald Wyllie

    Hello Christophe: I bought the 40-150 and will use it with the MC-20. The combination was bought for a specific purpose. Birds, mostly in Florida. Here in Nova Scotia my usual combination is the 300 + MC-14. It is all about where the birds are in relation to me. In Florida the zoom has an advantage. I'm only in Florida in the winter so haven't got any representative samples. Also, I don't have an online presence apart from closed Facebook pages. I do prints mostly.

    Now, the bit of testing I've done shows that the 40-150 + MC-20 is exceptional and focus speed is very little affected. I'm happy with the 300 + x1.4 quality and the x2.0 is better! I bought the 40-150 mostly for night time bird shooting and I've tried the combination and I'm well pleased. The 4-150 on its own is by far the best lens I have ever owned. My birding buddy with his big Nikon lenses does not produce technically better images. But he has a lot to teach me about bird photography for I'm a rank amateur in comparison. So, sorry, not much help.

    Incidentally, I just decided to forget Luminar and I'm paying my money to Adobe for the Lightroom Classic + Photoshop combo and now wish I'd not bothered with Luminar, or ON1. They are not ever going to do what I need or want. Now that I've got it all installed, a bit of a nightmare, my learning time is very short. Also, given the pricing + frequency of 'pay for' updates, Adobe is very little more expensive and the software does work.

    Finally, I like your work and it reminds me that I should get back to subjects other than birds which can be a bit soul destroying. But birds are addictive for good flight shots require a lot of effort and a different skill set, more than landscapes where you can come back the next day if the light isn't right. If you know what I mean!

    All the best

    Donald

    0
    Comment actions Permalink

Please sign in to leave a comment.