Bug fixed in Lightroom 13 with 13.0.1 release: From Nate at Negative Lab Pro: "Hi Friends, Great news! The bug in Lightroom Classic v13.0 has been fixed with the release of version...

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

From Nate at Negative Lab Pro:

"Hi Friends,

Great news!

The bug in Lightroom Classic v13.0 has been fixed with the release of version 13.0.1, and I've confirmed that Negative Lab Pro is working as expected.

It is now safe [for Negative Lab Pro plug-in users] to update to Lightroom Classic v13.0.1.

Thanks to everyone for your patience, and a big thank you to Adobe for fixing this so quickly!

Cheers,
-Nate
Negative Lab Pro"

For those who don't know, Negative Lab Pro is an excellent plug-in for Lightroom Classic that inverts black-and-white and color negative images from scanners or digital cameras. It is pro-level software, yet relatively easy to use. It makes mincemeat of the task of making positive digital images from macro photographs of film negatives, and it works with scanner files, too.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

Nice.

(What was the bug...)

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Longshadow wrote:

Nice.

(What was the bug...)

It had to do with the curves tool. Version 13's curves conversion system wasn't working when invoked by the software development kit used by third parties to drive LrC's imaging tools "under the hood."

I'm in there now... It is working again.

The bug affected many different plug-ins, so Adobe had it near the top of their list to fix.

The 13.0.1 release also adds other bug fixes and camera profiles for several of the latest cameras.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

burkphoto wrote:

It had to do with the curves tool. Version 13's curves conversion system wasn't working when invoked by the software development kit used by third parties to drive LrC's imaging tools "under the hood."

I'm in there now... It is working again.

The bug affected many different plug-ins, so Adobe had it near the top of their list to fix.

The 13.0.1 release also adds other bug fixes and camera profiles for several of the latest cameras.

bsprague Loc: Lacey, WA, USA

Confidence (mostly) restored!

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

bsprague wrote:

Confidence (mostly) restored!

All perfected software is abandoned. No one gets everything right in a point zero release. I tend to delay upgrading operating systems until x.2 or x.3, but applications are usually usable after one or two minor fixes.

SueScott Loc: Hammondsville, Ohio

burkphoto wrote:

All perfected software is abandoned. No one gets everything right in a point zero release. I tend to delay upgrading operating systems until x.2 or x.3, but applications are usually usable after one or two minor fixes.

Are you implying that it is possible to not upgrade at this time? I've had many problems with LRC over the past few years and am paranoid about upgrading to this new version.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

SueScott wrote:

Are you implying that it is possible to not upgrade at this time? I've had many problems with LRC over the past few years and am paranoid about upgrading to this new version.

You can turn off auto upgrade using Adobe Cloud. You can remain at 12.x until you are comfortable upgrading.

I'm on the current version, and have had no issues since it was tweaked to 13.0.1. But that doesn't mean someone won't find something!

My statement really meant that developers who "finish" or "perfect" their software will abandon it. Inevitably, they have to expand it or re-model it to create a newer, better version for which they can charge an upgrade fee (or with which they can justify their ongoing subscription fee).

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

We're forced, yet again, to ask: what does Adobe actually test before releasing an update? They're an industry-leading software company in October 2023. This isn't the 90's, nor even the Aughts ...

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

CHG_CANON wrote:

We're forced, yet again, to ask: what does Adobe actually test before releasing an update? They're an industry-leading software company in October 2023. This isn't the 90's, nor even the Aughts ...

One of the things I learned from directing several software development projects and using the results of others, is that it is often difficult for developers to anticipate that an update, upgrade, or even a bug fix, can "break" existing features or create other bugs.

Software is enormously complex. That the house of cards stands at all, is amazing. Moving one piece can innocently cause another to fall, and the cause isn't always obvious or immediately apparent.

They probably didn't test the SDK for current plug-in compatibility with the new version's curves control features...

SueScott Loc: Hammondsville, Ohio

burkphoto wrote:

You can turn off auto upgrade using Adobe Cloud. Y... (show quote)

Thanks for your answer! I save my work to a hard drive rather than using the Cloud, so does that mean I don't have the option of refusing this upgrade?

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

SueScott wrote:

Thanks for your answer! I save my work to a hard drive rather than using the Cloud, so does that mean I don't have the option of refusing this upgrade?

No. All upgrades to subscription plans are via the Adobe Cloud application.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

burkphoto wrote:

One of the things I learned from directing several... (show quote)

I have 27 years experience in this area, global 500 company, all on large-scale IT projects, each covering 3+ years, typically 100+ head count. And, we struggled with rollout issues of updates when people tested only the new / fixed functions, not a retest of the entire system. Now retired for 8 ish years, what happened to automated regression testing, or just offshoring the retesting process to humans? Or, was that just another IT nirvana that never actually arrived? The subscription model was suppose to address this issue, wasn't it?

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

CHG_CANON wrote:

I have 27 years experience in this area, global 50... (show quote)

There’s always a point of diminishing marginal returns on testing, where the cost of finding more bugs is deemed prohibitive by management, and it becomes a customer responsibility. Naturally, this cost is allowed to be much higher for some applications than for others. Adobe is not making life-sustaining medical, or potentially life-threatening military software!

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

burkphoto wrote:

There’s always a point of diminishing marginal returns on testing, where the cost of finding more bugs is deemed prohibitive by management, and it becomes a customer responsibility. Naturally, this cost is allowed to be much higher for some applications than for others. Adobe is not making life-sustaining medical, or potentially life-threatening military software!

Agreed. When doing taxes, we were reminded these weren't rockets going to the moon. We can always pick it up tomorrow. I've watched KEH operate similar, the customer can test whether the camera / lens actually functions, and return those that don't. As a business operator though, I'd still be concerned about the reputation hit to releasing bad / problematic software. That just creates a willingness for customers to look elsewhere, if they can.

If I was a working professional and had my primary digital tool knocked out by an update for a day or so, I'd be pretty pissed. Even a hobbyist working on vacation pics would feel much the same pain. I guess, if I was a subscriber, I'd definitely disable the auto-update function, to avoid being on the bleeding edge.