Luminar 4

Comments

169 comments

  • Avatar
    Angela Andrieux

    Hi Roger - I'm very sorry for any confusion our marketing materials caused and appreciate your understanding.

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Andy H

    Just so everyone's clear as well. Skylum also sneakily reduced their refund period from 60 days to 30 days.  To quote Kate Williams on a different thread:

    "Indeed, our money-back guarantee was changed to a 30-day one on September 3rd. Those who purchased the app before this date will be able to request a refund within 60 days, as it was specified during the purchase." 

    I suppose they've brought it back in line with the competition, but they didn't exactly make that very clear either.  Hopefully you won't need to exercise that option, but if you do just bear this in mind.

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Andy H

    Thanks for your initial impressions Martim. I’m looking forward to hearing more unbiased, affiliate-free reviews and comments over the coming days.

    I’m trying to keep an open mind, but already I’m concerned. Reported install issues, slow performance and load times, adjustment slider lag, slow rendering of files, no use of GPU power - seems like Luminar 3 all over again. I’ll reserve final judgement until I’ve tried it myself. I hope my experience will be better.

    What about the Library module? Have they done anything to improve that? Keyword support perhaps?

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Colin Grant

    Keywording and search is due for L3 and L4 in 2020 I believe.

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    fishmi

    I would really like to write something positive about the update to L4 now. Because I'm still convinced that Luminar has a lot of potential.
    The results of some tools are really convincing or even outstanding (compared to Lightroom, DxO, On1 and especially C1).

    But unfortunately important basic functions are still missing or they are not mature or even go backwards with the update (see below).
    And the current update crashes regularly (Win 10, 1709, 16 Mb RAM, Geforce M3000M, i7-6280HQ), especially when changing pictures.

    And L4 is definitely too slow. A picture change between unprocessed JPG (up to the sharp picture) must not take several seconds even with an older laptop, if many other programs manage this without delay.

    The update of the user interface may be better suited for beginners, but if you sell yourself as a professional program, this is a clear step backwards for me:
    In L3 I could see with much less clicks which filters there are and which filters are currently applied to the image. Playing" with the filters was much easier. The ability to create filter sets was great (similar to C1). Now you have to click back and forth all the time, way too many clicks, very cumbersome. I don't understand why they changed that or at least only offered it as an alternative. I never read any complaints about the L3 operating concept.

    And what about the basic functions?
    - the picture bar on the left side still can't be enlarged, on my 4K screen I have to guess how photos differ from single rows.
    - No keywords
    - the noise removal is still poor, the Skin Enhancer doesn't make it better (please have a look at Topaz Renoise, this is the reference)
    - the caching seems to work only very limited, at each zoom level the recalculation of the image starts
    - the export takes far too long (30 seconds for a JPG !) and has far too few options (no settings for the export)
    - and still: processor load too high, I don't care about the high memory load

    Finally something positive: the Sky Replacement Tool is really fun and the Portrait Enhancer is very effective.

    I do not give up hope that one day Luminar will become a stable, fast and complete program.
    If the current update was there to save Skylum financially, then that's OK.

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Roger Bolt

    Suggest using as plugin to your main software. I use Lr Classic

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Andy H

    I’ve long given up on Luminar becoming my main editing software and L4 isn’t going to change that if the Libraries module remains as poor as it is. I still use Flex (as L3 was so bad) and it works great as a plugin not only to Lr, but also an “other application” to ON1 or an “external editor” to Exposure X5.

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    fishmi

    In addition to my own post (which is still pending :-) ):

    For a full photo editing software the exchange with other programs is still missing:
    - Data of other programs (XMP files) are not read yet
    - And no data is passed on to other programs.
    - And it is not possible to call external editors from Luminar.
    - And it completely lacks publishing to external services.

    Maybe it was a mistake to sell yourself as a great DAM. The focus on Flex might have been better. Unfortunately, Flex doesn't work for me because a higher Windows version is required (which I can't install, nor such a software GAU).

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Sam C

    Everything that mattered and was wrong with Luminar 3 has been completely ignored, it was (and still is) riddled with issues, I spent months trying to get them resolved.

    Luminar 4 the new shiny software is no more than some UI fixes - underneath it's the same old story - buggy, unstable and just as slow.

    Trust me, don't waste your money upgrading to the "new version".

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Andy H

    @Sam C. Wow, this is exactly the worry I had i.e. Luminar 4 would be built on the same shaky foundations as Luminar 3 with a new UI to try and paper over the cracks. I’ll still give it a try next week, but I’m not expecting a good experience. Maybe I’ll be surprised (fingers crossed)!

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Roger Bolt

    In my darker moments I wondered if the first 20,000 weren't guinea pigs at some level to work out the bugs. But I've been wrong before

    1
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Andy H

    @Roger. Not a dark thought at all. After all, with Luminar 3 we probably all feel we’ve been part of the longest beta testing period ever......and some would argue it still hasn’t even passed release candidate status yet!

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    James Moore

    Reading these comments about Luminar 4 leaves me very, very concerned.

    Along with many others my copy of Luminar 3 is largely unusable despite my buying a new iMac just to run this app which I used to enjoy using before L3 came along. Now I use DXO Photolab and this excellent application works flawlessly, is fast and 100% reliable. It runs on my old MacBook too without ever an issue.

    I was looking forward to L4 as being essentially a working version of L3 but alas that does not appear to be the case. Whilst the sky replacement would have been useful for my real estate work, I most probably will stick with Luminar 2018 if layer editing is needed.

    I use Aurora HDR 2019 which is an excellent application yet comes from the same developer as Luminar! How can this be? I implored Skylum not to release L4 without proper testing but yet again we have been let down at best or ignored at worst. I was hoping for a free copy of L4 given my problems with L3 but I don't think I would even risk using it. Time for me to learn Photoshop?

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Wim van der Meer

    Back to the macphun days. The sky replacement tool is truly fun. Lots of it. Portrait enhancer is less funny. It should have tools to replace hair, eyes, nose, mouth... A quick look at Luminar 4 gives me the impression it's not a successor of Luminar 3, but rather a different program with a similar interface. In Luminar 3 I would work with filters and looks. In 4 looks are still around, but the filter structure has been replaced by broad categories of editing. I think Luminar 4 offers some interesting new approaches to photo editing, and I may keep it around for that. But VERY VERY unfortunately some of the major shortcomings of 3 have remained unchanged. It still is pretty useless as a DAM: no keywords, no searching, no gps. Some file types are still not read correctly (although I was promised several times this was on the list of problems to be solved), and I don't trust the reliability of the database. I had a library with some 80000 images, did a lot of edits, the library crashed and all my work was gone. Skylum tried to help out but they couldn't solve the problem. If I keep Luminar 4 it will only be for some specific editing tasks. But in some cases I may prefer 3. 

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Peter Hellstrand

    Got L4 today and after a quick try I could see that it's not as slow as I could imagine, after reading all the posts in this thread. That might be since I have a 2018 Macbook 15'' though. The new interface is interesting and fun. Replacing the sky and other AI tools are great, but it's not what I consider as main functions for photo processing. I'll keep L4 for fun and for specific projects where I might feel for being artistic, but LR (or DxO PhotoLab in the future) will be my main apps. I will also use Luminar Flex, which is great and Creative Kit as plugins.

    It's a pity that Skylum have chosen this path, but again, L4 is usable, but not as a professional photo processing app.  

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Andy H

    I gave the trial version a go yesterday and I'm pretty disappointed with it. L4 is displaying exactly the same slow performance as L3 did, making it frustrating to use for me. Skylum need to boost performance, especially if they are not leveraging the power of the GPU at the moment, which is an amazing oversight as most similar products do this these days.

    I think the new UI is a big step backwards, but that's a personal thing. It's clear Skylum are taking Luminar in a different direction, it's a shame that direction is more towards a Photolemur type product rather than a professional grade photo editor. I won't be buying it at the end of the trial.

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    James Moore

    Surprised to read that L4 is now available, having not had an email from Skylum. Despite my misgivings and problems with L3 I decided to "upgrade" and give L4 a try. Here's a quick heads up and initials impression.

    I did 2 downloads - first onto a 2010 MacBookPro. No issues with download and no problem activating the application. So far so good so let's go.......loaded quite quickly and I was prompted to update my library (not huge), I did this and the process completed in a few seconds. Library displayed after just a few seconds so all good again (why am I surprised). Had a quick play with a few images and yes the user interface is a bit different but fairly intuitive.

    The sky replacement is important for me (real estate) so that was my first port of call once I had found where it was! And guess what? It works like magic and instantly, very, very clever indeed. You can also load in your own sky images and that works well too.

    So far so good so over to my brand new iMac. Again the download process was OK and loading the app, updating my (small library) to V4 was done smoothly in only a few seconds. Editing worked ok but I was disappointed in the export time BUT I had made dozens of fairly random edits. A later test exported quickly so phew! The eraser tool is really very good too and easy to use after an extend "preparation" time but it worked very well indeed. I tried clone and stamp and (like my version of L3) either does not work or takes too long to figure out what it's doing.

    All in all a pleasant surprise - worth a try given the money back guarantee or the free trial

    James

     

     

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Ralf Sohnsmeier

    Auch ich werde Luminar4 zurückgeben, da es die GPU meiner NVIDIA immer noch nicht verwendet. Beim Laden eines Bildes habe ich eine Prozessorauslastung von 90%, während die GPU nichtmal 1% ausgelastet ist. Das Laden eines Bildes dauert 20-30 Sekunden, bis es scharf dargestellt wird.

    Am Rechner (Windows 10) liegts nicht, denn ich schneide meine 4k-Videos mit Resolve 16 Studio in Echtzeit. Zum Laden eines Fotos mit Luminar 4 reicht es nicht. Auch bei Luminar 3 ist nach geraumer Zeit immer noch keine GPU-Unterstützung implementiert. Wird dann bei Luminar 4 wohl nicht werden.

    Anfragen beim Support sind ergebnislos.

    Ich verwende nun den "Luminar Replacement Filter" , sprich ich werde mir eine funktionierende Software zulegen.

     

    Ralf

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Helga Rowles

    Hi Ralf, thanks a lot for submitting a support request.

    Our support team is extremely busy because of a great number of incoming emails these days. We ask for your patience. Someone from our team will respond as soon as possible.

    0
    Comment actions Permalink

Please sign in to leave a comment.