I think with Luminar AI I'm done with Skylum

Answered

Comments

17 comments

  • Avatar
    Albert Freeman

    I totally agree with you. No more from me as a new version comes out every year. Just don't have the money...

    8
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Helga Rowles

    Hi Len and Albert,

    Thanks for sharing your feedback with us. I will be sure to forward it to our product team.

    Indeed, historically, we release a new product/upgrade once a year or two. However, your license key remains valid, so you can keep using the purchased software on the condition that your device meets our system requirements.

    -6
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Len Mizutowicz

    So I'm either locked into a single version with no upgrades, or I buy new software every year, having to learn a new workflow and losing features I already paid for.

    Not a winning strategy.

    11
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    John Tweddell

    I totally agree and I have also given up on the annual purchase of a new product that is never properly developed or even have the bugs removed before it’s replaced with another new one. It’s interesting how the roadmaps disappear half way through the annual process so we cannot see the promised functions that never arrived eg versions of a file with different sets of looks applied - you cannot even round trip to Aurora HDR - I just wish App,e would bring back Aperture 

    10
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Dennis Uyesugi

    I also agree with all the comments and won't recommend this software to anyone

    Supported this company since Macphun not any more just bad business practices

    10
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Kerry Emery

    Yeah...I'm noticing that the products are version specific.....and yes - relearning the interface every version is not a sustainable business model.  I too am leaving this silliness.  There's two things consumers really hate - 1. subscription models.  2. Changes to the product that slow down the workflow.  That's why I left Adobe - and it will be why I leave this product as well.  It's confusing and when one spends more time trying to figure out how to use the product (when you've already invested enough time to learn it once) Then it's no longer a productive tool. 

    Now I'm being told that a totally new version is coming out that's unlike the prior (confusing) versions.  And next?  Likely yet another version that helps me do the laundry and keep in touch with my inner self......Every time I go to use a tool...you can't actually just 'use' it any more!  You must upgrade, update, or talk with tech support on something that's broken(which has actually gone away as well - no talking with anyone any more! - That's a liability.)....So I think that's enough for me. Your customer acquisition costs just went up.....As I too used to recommend it - but alas - not any more. Quite the opposite now. I will only recommend it to people I don't want to enjoy themselves... - Ciao!

    6
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Len Mizutowicz

    Kerry;

     

    I think you described our frustration very well. If I'm going to invest my money, and more importantly my time in a tool I am perfectly happy paying to grow that tool and myself along with it as it improves over time.

    I don't have the time to re-learn a tool every year, throwing away the functionality I've invested in over the previous year. A lot of people made the time investment in learning the UI and features of Luminar, and building out their libraries (boy, was that ever promoted) as well as money purchasing additional presets and such...

    ...and every year, poof. I finally learned my lesson.

    6
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Kerry Emery

    Yes - building on a tool is good and expected.  Throwing away the prior tools and changing the workflow in a radical way is not.  Especially when i 'breaks' your prior customization libraries ...... It makes adobe look not as bad - although now it's subscription model keeps me away.  If they had a desktop version - I'd be right in there.  Keep looking.  Gimp is looking better and better. I'm using On1 Photo 10 a lot now too.....it's not bad.

    5
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Mathias Calabotta

    I use darktable for most of the time. It is free, but just a bit complicated for the beginner, however. And there are unfortunately not many other tools which offer a great sky replacement at the moment (Photoshop does). For me this is the only reason why to consider Skylum at the moment. All other edits you can easily do in any other software, even with the free open source darktable.

    With the new philosophy of AI you need another RAW converter which supports a good catalog and if you want edit just one single image with the AI enhancement, use Luminar AI. No idea why Skylum does not want to combine both worlds and offer a real Lightroom killer for professional photographers.

    5
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Michael Warfield

    I must agree with all of the above. I started with Luminar 3, forced to go to Luminar 4 after 3 was thrown away, and now they're asking for another dead end product. Catalog functions are abysmal, and there is no path from 4 to AI. Enough is enough. I will continue to use ver 4 as a quick brainless edit tool, but I have gone back to Lightroom for it's superior catalog functions, and Photoshop, a real editing tool. How soon before they abandon ver 4 and put out more crap? I don't like renting my photography tools, but limited, short lived applications are not the answer. Good Bye Skylum!

    4
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Tim Horne

    So, I just filled out a survey about how I feel about a new feature called "Lumichat" and my thoughts about the importance of this. Of course, I gave it a thumbs down as I'm not interested. There are plenty of other places for a community with Skylum. What about that one.... what is it.....  oh yeah, Luminar X membership. Hmmm, the things this company does just still keeps me wondering about their direction. I don't think they are developing for professionals anymore but more or less for those who don't want to learn photography and are just looking for something easy to use to make up for the fact they can't get a sky or fog in their photo.

    If you have time to develop something like "Lumichat" why don't you dedicate some resources to updating your camera support for products you still sell to the photography community such as Aurora. That would be a MUCH BETTER use of your time over "Lumichat"! Come on, Skylum, get your act together and support your users and the software they already purchased.

    4
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Len Mizutowicz

    I did the math a few months ago, and with what I've spent on Skylum abandonware and features it's cheaper to have a Photoshop subscription. And I really, really hate Photoshop.

    5
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Marco Marrocco

    [X] stable and reliable support for the recent RAW formats.

    [X] proper management of GPU resources.

    [X] a smaller memory footprint.

    [X] finally looking into some outstanding bugs that date back to two or three generations past.

    [X] giving a sign, ANY sign, that Aurora is not dead and buried.

    [✓] Lumichat.

    lol. 

    --

    Marco

    4
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Helena Carter

    Hello Everyone,

    Thanks for sharing your feedback!
    I've passed this to our Product Team. As to Aurora HDR updates, while we continue selling it, we support it, still, right now, there's no ETA.

    -4
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Marco Marrocco

    Hi Helena, let me reiterate what I have posted in another thread:

    Aurora, in its current conditions, should not be up for sale.

    HDR processing, especially in a professional context like real estate photography, heavily relies on a) working with RAW files b) GPU support for faster compositing, c) the possibility to batch process multiple, possibly dozens of brackets, without hassle.

    Now, people have been complaining about the lack of support for newer RAW formats, the overall slowness/crashes, and discrepancies in the batch process module for longer than I care to remember. If by "we support it" you mean you' ll keep on answering support tickets - usually by telling people to install the DNG converter or to process brackets one by one, Then truly Aurora is dead.

    Just my 2 cents,

    --

    Marco

    4
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Tim Horne

    Helena,

    While I understand that you still want to sell Aurora, you really need to put a disclaimer on the Aurora page that is easy to see that you do not support certain cameras that were released since at least the last half of 2018. I'm not sure how far back this goes, but I do know that you do not support the Fuji X-T3 which was released in September 2018. Now, I'm sure you don't want to stop selling to customers but you should be open and honest upfront instead of telling someone to use your competitor's free product download when they complain. I did not purchase your software to only have to download another program and add more steps to my process. 

    If I were Skylum I would be ashamed that you had not updated camera support for software that you still claim you support which was released almost 3 years ago. This is a truly mind-boggling business practice. The other day, I canceled my Luminar X subscription. No more money to Skylum! No more recommendations to Skylum! I'll be giving my recommendations to companies that will actually keep their software updated!

    Tim

    5
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Len Mizutowicz

    And now Limunar Neo... The abandonware continues...

    2
    Comment actions Permalink

Please sign in to leave a comment.