Luminar 3.1.0: Accent AI 2.0 + More Usability & Stability

Comments

70 comments

  • Avatar
    Bob Warwick

    Actually, I'm pretty sure Luminar is different in that respect Colin.  I have seen tutorials saying that Lightroom, which I do not know or use), takes a actually imports a copy of the original image into its DAM tool.  Luminar seems to use the photo from its original folder location.  The changes made are no longer stored along with the photo in an .lmnr file. but in the catalog as metadata. 

    My confusion is what happens if I were to move the photo via a file manager to a folder which is not in the same or perhaps any Luminar catalog, what happens?  Or what happens if I merely rename the photo via a file manager while it is in the same folder.  The scenarios can go on and on and I am hoping to gain an understanding of how Luminar keeps track of photos and associated metadata without having to test all the scenarios one by one.  

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Colin Grant

    Lr is not different Bob. I have used it since version 1 and it builds a catalogue based upon the existing file structure. If you move an image across folders via the system file manager Lr cannot find it and tells you so. Yes you can import images, but they are imported to folders in the file system and added to the catalogue.

    Google "move images in Lr" if you doubt me.

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Bob Warwick

    Colin, I do not disbelieve you about Lightroom not seeing the photos in it's catalog if you move a photo via a file manager.   The difference is you can move the files to another folder in a Luminar catalog.  You can even add files to the Luminar catalog by copying them to a folder that you told Luminar to put in your Luminar catalog.   See starting at minute 2:27 in this video.  

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7NQuobSnpkM

    Luminar also supports multiple catalogs and you can switch between them.  I am merely looking for something to explain how everything is handled........before I muck everything up.  ;-)   Sure, I can muddle through and eventually figure things out, but it would be great if it were explained somewhere.

     

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Colin Grant

    Just move the images via Luminar. Why would you want to do it any other way? That said, I think the idea was that L3 would scan the images in the folders that were catalogued and therefore pick up any additions/transfers. There was a bug in that with the last release I believe but that may have been fixed. I just copied an image from one catalogued folder to another via the file manager and Luminar picked it up upon launch. That suggests Luminar is scanning the folders - if true that could equal a huge performance hit on a large catalogue. I am  not using L3 now as the Library is pretty useless to me without keywords, exif etc. I have stuck with Lr and Flex.

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Stephan Horvath

    I tried to update to 3.1 and, what do you know....it's not working.  It says "updating image gallery...0%"

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Bob Warwick

    Colin, yes, I too have used a file manager (Finder) to move photos from one folder to another in same catalog.  I've also moved photos not yet in a catalog to a folder in the catalog and L3.1 found them too.  I installed L3.0 when first released.  I added all photos in my pictures folder and took quite a while whenever I started L3.0 such that I was using my L 2018 instead.  It was faster and easier.  I upgraded to 3.02 and now 3.1.  Along the way I deleted the catalog containing all folders of all my photos.  95% of which (likely more) I have no interest in post processing with Luminar. I am adding folders to the catalog selectively now as I shoot new photos.  

    For years, I've been managing with no DAM.  I am forever renaming photos and mucking with folders....  long before L3..0.  Moving photos is but one task I will want to do,  as is rename, etc.  Am still working on how best to organize.  

    As I have said before I am hoping to find someone who will point me to something that explains in detail how the L 3.1 DAM works behind the scenes  

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Jack Larson

    Colin, I really believe in the old maxim, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it."  For a number of years, LR has worked very well for me.  I, too, will continue to use LR and Flex (until Flex gets Accent AI 2.0, I will use Luminar 3.1 as a plug-in).  Plus, at 83 yrs of age, my goal is simplify, simplify, simplify.

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Phil Hurd

    Lightroom builds a catalogue based on the file-system, you tell it to 'Import', though the only things it actually imports is the file data (metadata etc.) and where it resides on your hard drive(s). it also creates a thumbnail of the image. It doesn't physically import the image into the Lightroom Library, how could it? My Lightroom Library is only 421.3MB in soze for 887GB worth of images. Lightroom also uses its own proprietry database, as far as I can make out.

    If you move or rename an image in Finder, Lightroom will not be able to find it from that point on but it will tell you so (because it still has the file data.thumbnail etc.) and give you the option to re-reference the image file manually. If you add a brand new image to your Lightroom referenced file-system, it will not automativally pick it up and you have to go through the Import routine.

    This is wgere Luminar differs. When you import files into Luminar, it references them in an SQL database. What is interesting is that the database doesn't appear to hold very much data at all. My Luminar Libary file is only 50MB for the same 887GB worth of images and if you look into the database (using the right tools), there isn't much there, certainly no image thumbnails.

    If you add a file to a Luminar referencesd file-system/folder, it will pick it up. I have Exported images from Aurora to a Luminar referenced image folder on my MAC and Luminar finds it without me having to import it. This is counter-intuitive to importing the images but that's what happens. I'm guessing some sort of auto-referencing.

    I have not tried re-namimg a file outside of Luminar to see if that works, not sure why I would need to. I may give it a go at some point.

    Because of the way that Luminar seems to 'scan' its referenced file-system, this causes huge start-up problems because I think it builds/reads all of the thumbnails from scratch. Have you noticed that many/most thumbnails are out of focus for a small period and then suddenly correct themselves?I have around 33,000 RAW files and it now takes over two and a half minutes to startup, which is totally unuseable for me.

    If I use an empty Luminar Library file, startup is pretty well instanteneous.

    So sorry about the ramble but the borrom line is that the idea behind the Luminar library is potentially good but poorly implemented.

    ATB. Phil

     

     

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Colin Grant

    That's how I see it Phil. Spent an hour playing with the latest Luminar and the Library is far more stable and moving images around (via Luminar or Finder) now works well. It is also reasonably quick on my machine but my database is only 1400 images. I just wonder whether this "folder watching" will slow things up on large catalogues? I see you believe it does so probably would be better to work the way Lr does?

    Still I guess progress has been made but they need exif, keywords and custom sorting to really crack it. If they also add some decent masking tools to the mix they will be there or there enough that it makes no difference to a lot of users. But...wonder how the next ON1 update will look (due in may)!

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Phil Hurd

    Just started a 30 day trial of ON1 and although I still prefer Lumnar and especially Aurora, I think Skylum are out of the game as far as a DAM is concerned. Yes they could implement exif, keywords and custom sorting but I believe the underlying database model is flawed. If, like Lightroom and ON1, they kept more info in the actual library database, there would be no need to re-load all the file info during startup. And its not just about the database engine because it looks as if ON1 are using an SQL database like Skylum, unfortunateley its encrypted, so I can't have a nose inside.

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Tomasz Gomolka

    unfortunately performance issues are back. 3.0.0 release was finally stable, after upgrading to 3.1.0 I had immediately crashes due to performance problem...

    is that issue on your radar guys?

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Terry Rogers

    Hi Tomasz. Please contact us via https://skylum.com/support and we will be happy to help you

     

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Colin Grant

    ON1 has some great masking tools, Phil, and I like the option to either have files catalogued or not (or a mix). I agree the Luminar database is flawed but for some it will be ok and I believe it is possible to have more than one catalogue? Not sure at what point (number of images) the software slows though.

    I have recently switched from Nikon to Fuji and that throws me another option, the Fuji centric version of C1. Have played with it and the results are great. They were when I tried the software a year or so ago so I should not be surprised really.

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Colin Grant

    Jack, I hope they bring the Accent AI upgrade to Flex before they remove the plugin architecture from L3. Or at least don't upgrade by mistake :-)

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Phil Hurd

    I'm not totally impressed with ON1 but in fairness I haven't played with it enough yet. The catalogue is good thogh, if only the font was a bit largerI particularly don't like the ON1 HDR modulke, I think Aurora is far superior but I suppose I can still use Aurora with ON1 as an external editor.

    I couldn't guess at what point Luminar starts to slow but as I said in a previous post, I have 33,000 RAW images and the Luminar 3 startup time is in excess of two and a half minutes. I did think about just starting Luminar and leaving it running all the time but it seems to gobble memory, one time I did that my free memory went from23GB free to 4GB free overnight, so that's clearly not an option.

    My best buddy has had Nikon's for around 50 years. He bought a Fuji mirrorless last year and loves it. Trouble was that his old version of Lightroom wouldn't read the Fuji files, so he has had to take out a subscription to Lightroom to upgrade it. This is why I want to get off Lightroom because if I buy a new camera my version of Lightroom may not work and I am not going to go down the subscription road.

     

    All the best. Phil

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Colin Grant

    There is the free Fuji C1 of course. Limited functionality but still turns out pretty good results and one can always round trip to Flex or Nik if necessary. The full Fuji C1 is currently on offer for a little over £100 so that makes it a great buy.......but it is Fuji-centric. I actually think ON1 is a great piece of software but for me it is a little like DxO, it is not a comfortable fit and I have to work hard to get results. Here I have to say that Luminar is very easy to work with but I am not convinced it will ever really get "there". I might just stick with ON1 for the old stuff and go Fuji C1

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Bob Warwick

    I've been asking where I can find a detailed explanation of how Luminar 3.1 stores photo updates now that .lmnr files no longer exist.  I knew that each photo's Luminar updates is stored as metadata in files inside your Luminar catalog but had not seen much in the form of an explanation.  Just ran across this which, provides a little insight.  https://skylum.com/luminar/user-guides/chapter-19-saving-adjustments-exporting-files

    This page of the user-guide is also helpful.  https://skylum.com/luminar/user-guides/chapter-11-organizing-images 

    It ends with;   "A few notes

    • For best results move, rename, and organize referenced folders while Luminar is running
    • Avoid renaming master folders except within Luminar
    • Remember that relocating and renaming folders in Luminar has a direct effect on your hard drive."

    Also saw a page that lists new features, in process and planned.  Searching by EXIF data and keywords is planned.   

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Colin Grant

    Lots of things are supposedly planned at Skylum but they are slow to materialise. Why on earth would one release a dam without exif/iptc support, with no custom sort or search  and with no keywording! Heavens this thing does not qualify as a basic database in my books. Perhaps Skylum could give us a date when these crucial functions will be added. As for storing edits, I suspect they are stored in the database. That is not an unusual approach but others also provide the option of sidecar files. Never really took to the .lmnr approach anyway but it was probably the only option when Luminar did not have the so called Library.

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Marc Peeters

    Why still no support for Canon R CR3 files?

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Lester Vandewalle

    Far from stable. I bought and installed it yesterday I have a fairly new CPU with six cores at 3,5 ghz, I've been trying to work with it since yesterday evening, had about 12 crashes already, it's suuuper slow and everytime I move a slider my CPU spikes up to over 90%. I

    Honestly I love the program and it has definitely improved over last years version but honestly, it's not stable at all, at least not for me... it shuts down constantly.

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Tomasz Gomolka

    same here. My macbook is just cooking...

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Aydın Salur

    Dear All, I am reading many messages that complaining about sw and latest upgrade. I lived very similar problems on previous upgrade. Many many mails between me and Skylum support. Creating catalogue, installing Skylum after and after. Crash , import and export problems didn't stop. At the end I've send very angry mail to this forum. Stop doing anything, stop using Skylum and decided to wait for the new version. About a month ago as you know we upgraded to v. 3.1.0 (3588). You know what ? All my problems gone away. Very happy with the new version. All upgrade happened less than 5 minutes and no any problem left. (By the way I am a Mac user)

    So here is my point. If you all living those problems (like I lived on previous one) while at the same time I am problem free. There must be some hw problems not with your pc's or mac's but with sw compatibility to different hw configurations. Sure Skylum is following those mails, in my opinion versions must be checked with different motherboards, graphic cards, rams and so on. Otherwise we are all using the same version for Windows and Mac but living very different problems which I believe not related with only software itself. Hope we all use Skylum (that I do like it really) without problems. 

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Maryna Skylum

    @Lester Vandewalle

    I'm sorry for the inconveniences.

    Please, contact us at support@skylum.com. We'll investigate the issue.

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Maryna Skylum

    @Aydın Salur

    Thank you for your feedback.

    Great to hear everything is fine now!

     

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Lester Vandewalle

    What kind of response is that? 'I was whiny too but now MY problems have been fixed everybody should just stop complaining'? It's commercial software, it's supposed to be quite universal. I have a brand new PC since november my hardware is all new and up to date and should be working fine, as it does with all my other software. It's just not stable and it's very demanding on my system. That's an observation not a cringe.. I said I love this software and I see progress but I as many other users think it's in the company's and users best interest to stabilize and refine the product first before they expand it and start adding bell and whistles.

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Bob Warwick

    While I am still getting familiar with the new DAM, I have had no problems with the installation of the latest upgrade to 3.1.  I've an older (2010) Macbook Pro; 15" -  2.6 Ghz i7 cpu,  8 GB RAM and 512 GB SSD.  When I originally installed version 3.0, I added my complete "Pictures" folder (thousands of photos) as the catalog.  Big mistake!  Loading was slow as they were mostly photos I was never going to process with Luminar, nor was I going to go through them all to categorize and rate them.  I now add photos from my camera to folders by date outside of the Luminar catalog.  I then decide the ones I want to work on and add them to folders inside my Luminar catalog.  Seems to be working much better for me. 

    Bottom line:  3.1 has been very stabile on even an elderly Macbook Pro.  The things you can do (and quickly) with Luminar 3.0 are amazing.  Sorry to hear it's not working as well for everyone.    

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Bob Warwick

    I should have mentioned that I deleted the initial catalog containing all my photos in the Pictures folder and created a new one that I selectively add photos to.  So far so good!  

    Purchased Luminar for a friend's birthday ( a Lightroom subscriber)  who is really enjoying Luminar 3.1.  

     

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Aydın Salur

    @Lester Vandewalle

    Dear Lester, I think you didn't read my mail till end or I misexplained my point. I didn't say everyone should stop complaining, even I have no problems I tried to bring another point of view to Skylum that may help all of us to solve our present or future problems. I lived problems , not now but that doesn't mean that won't in future. This is sw running on thousands of different hw so Skylum (sure they are) must be more flexible for those different hw configurations. Hope everyone bug free sw's.

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Lester Vandewalle

    I'm sorry Aydin, I may have been a bit on edge, but I keep getting alot of crashes. I will try what Bob said, but if it's a known issue I still think they should give a warning dialog. After installing the first thing Luminar asks is.. designate the folder in which you keep your photo's :) I mean that's a strong indicator that you have to select the parent folder, not manually put them in one by one.

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Aydın Salur

    Your Wellcome Lester, happy that we are at the same point. I strongly insisted that I have no problems and all upgrade happened in less than 5 minutes so what I tried to say that to Skylum and to everybody I didn't do anything special, just downloaded the 3.1 as you do then everything is working but at the same time with the same version you are having terrible problems. So I wonder that on the next version some of us will be in similar problems while the others won't. We all like Skylum, that's why we are writing here so there must be as you said universal flexibility. My Mac is from 2017, your PC is new but it is not working. I don't think that yo will find stable solution by trying folders and catalogs because several times I tried those tings on previous version, and I could't solve the problems. I still think that ( I am not a sw technician) it doesn't matter that our hw is old or new but this is the result of incompatibility of sw with hw. In every new version sw is changing and it starts not to work on the same hw that it used to work. Hope they will find a way to fix that unstable situation.

    0
    Comment actions Permalink

Please sign in to leave a comment.