P: Ability to create custom book templates/sizes from scratch

Getting the document data to the printer is no different for a commercial printer than it is for someone printing to their own LAN connected printer ... Actually, a commercial printer will in all likelihood have tighter integration than most casual Lr users ...

The ability to export PDF and/or Jpeg files from the Book module is a cruel joke ... of as long as the user can not stipulate page dimensions ... it is an exercise in futility to prepare files for a non Blurb process.

I'm just surprised that ... 1) Adobe won't publicly admit they struck a deal with Blurb. 2) They actually think we are so stupid not to realize it is indeed the situation.

Either way. Blurb isn't receiving a direct profit from me ... and I'm growing more reluctant to trust Adobe to offer tools I can actually depend upon.

In fact, the only modules I have turned on in Lr are Library, Develop and Print ... not because I wouldn't be inclined to use the others ... but in their current sate, they are utterly useless for my needs.

I see we agree that there is probably a monetary "Arrangement" between Adobe and Blurb involved in the issue. I extend that thought to include some sort of exclusivity agreement for a period of time.

LR does allow PDF output of books which, as you correctly point out opens the door to other companies.

I don't particularly concur with your opening paragraphs though. A print lab is a somewhat different animal than a home printer. Not that the printing is inherently different but the interface between the author and publisher is. With a home printer, they've pretty much standardized the data stream format (post script?) across all platforms and vendors and this works pretty well for printers connected directly or through LAN's to the computer.

However, I'm not sure the situation is as uniform in the commercial publishing business - I'm not saying it isn't, I just don't know.

But however you slice it, there must be a fundamental underlying reason that Adobe has not chosen to improve their first version of the book module by allowing additional output formats, dynamic book sizing, custom layouts, or even multiple print lab vendors. In my experience, whenever a corporation makes decisions to either do something or, as in this case, not do something it is either based on contractual requirements (e.g., agreement with Blurb) or they just don't see a positive return on investment - or not "as positive" as something else they want to do like implementing the CC.

Sorry ... your analogy is pure poppycock. Did Adobe have to open a printing lab for their other apps? Seriously? You expect me to accept that as the situation?

Did they have to invent their own line of inkjet printers so they could develop the Print Module? See how ridiculous that sounds?

The only "proprietary" constraints of individual print houses are page , margin and bleed dimensions ... all other apps ever developed by Adobe in the print publication industry offer this capability. It is nothing new or extremely costly to create. If it were ... there would be considerably less available in many of their current offerings.

Adobe can create documents with text and graphics in other apps .... like say InDesign, Acrobat, etc. ... and export files from those very apps that then can be utilized by a near infinite number of print houses? It's done every day for millions of customers by thousands of print houses. Yet, you expect me to believe it far to costly and difficult to do so in Lightroom?

I don't know for a fact, but I would wager the the very document that Lightroom exports to Blurb for printing is exactly an industry standard PDF. Additionally any PDF page can be converted to a high quality jpeg ... which either file type is what is used by EVERY high end photo album and book print house in the industry that serves wedding and portrait photographers.

I'm sorry ... but the solution is definitely not super expensive, intricate and near impossible rocket science.

The Book module should have NEVER been constrained to a single vendor. There was no legitimate reason to do so. Period.

Any difficulty Adobe is experiencing in this instance is self-imposed by choice ... not by circumstance of incredible difficulty.

I totally agree with you that the only reason I can come up with for the absurd decision is either Adobe is receiving a kickback from Blurb for every book printed .... or that Blurb underwrote the development of the module.

Either way ... as long as we can not set our own document page sizes, margins and bleeds ... the Book module is of little to no use to a great many Lightroom users that wish to offer their clients products other than Blurb. Hence, those users are being cheated for they pay the same rate for the software as other customers.

If my concept of the situation is off the mark ... Please explain how Apple was able to offer both in-app ordering and custom exporting for ordering from the vendor choice in Aperture more than 5 years ago ... Is Apple really that much better at software development than Adobe? (The last question is of course rhetorical to prove a point.)

Butch - There are really only 3 options for Adobe short of them opening their own printing lab. One is to create an output file for each "blessed" lab that is in a proprietary structure of that lab's specifications (the approach taken by Adobe for only Blurb, so far). The second option is to out put pages in an open format such as PDF, TIFF, JPG or some other universally understood file type for the industry. And, third is to create their own format (like they did for PDF and PSD), publish it and let any print lab that desires business from LR users to figure out how to make books from that format.

Now, Commercial SW development is a costly endeavor and before any company invests in major development efforts they must convince themselves they will get a positive return on that investment. In addition, if they can get another company to foot part of the cost, so much the better. So, I imagine, the Adobe folks said "do we really think that we'll sell enough Lightroom licenses that would not otherwise have been purchased to offset the cost of developing our own file type in addition to the cost of developing the Book Module itself?" No.

OK then what about recouping the cost of the Module if we output to PDF or TIFF or JPG? Well, that's a better proposition but probably still not a profitable one considering the cost of developing the Book Module itself..

So, what about getting a third party to foot a bunch of the development cost? Well that sounds good but how do we convince them to do that? Well, we'll have to cut a contract with them that we won't do the same thing with any of their competitors for a certain number of years. Maybe then their potential new business would be attractive enough to chip in a significant amount of development dollars.

So, boys and girls, that's probably what they did, and is why we're stuck with ONLY blurb + PDF in the book module. BTW PDF can be used as an input file for some other publishers.

What will it take to get custom page capability at this point? I assume we'll have to wait for the exclusion clause of the Blurb contract to expire then see if another company steps up to the plate with enough development dollars to fund the implementation of custom pages - Again, for another exclusivity period.

Does what I'm saying make sense? I'm saying this not from any direct knowledge but as an IT executive of over 40 yeas - Including 5 years at Adobe itself (Mid 90's) and a good sense of how these things play out.

I agree Matthew ... why the Book module had to be tied to ANY vendor is beyond comprehension?

Repeating the same sentiments I shared earlier in this thread ... over two years ago! ...

How successful would Lr have been if it could only process RAW images from a single camera maker? Print only to a single brand of printer? Export from the Web module to code that could only be utilized by one brand of browser? ...

Yet, Adobe, and the Lightroom Team seem to believe they did no wrong with their development of the Book module and we should all rejoice, accept and embrace a Blurb only option.

And there are those folks who consider Apple a "walled garden" ... In Aperture, I ALWAYS had the option and capability to create custom page sizes. Custom templates and export pages to jpeg, tiff or PDF ... That's freedom for the end user to choose whatever firm they wish to print their book.

It's time Adobe remove the unwise, self-imposed limitations they have placed on the Book module and Lightroom users.

I find it utterly amazing and disappointing that a company that can do so many things extremely well ... fail so miserably in other instances. Why they don't place the same level of direction, purpose and expectations on all their projects is purely perplexing and extremely disappointing.

Dear Adobe,

How good is Blurb in bed? Just curious. (I mean, I suppose they must be pretty exciting, since they're definitely not much to look at..)

Anyway, looking forward to a professional book publishing feature whenever you guys finish.

-MT

HI Matt,

Exactly!

Hey, want to get even more frustrated? Check out Zenfolio, Smugmug, Photoshelter, etal...

If you ever want to develop something, let me know. I have ideas. Seriously.

My rants...
https://vimeo.com/channels/768091

I have deep skills in application development for small medium and global enterprises. It saddens me to the core that Adobe give lip service to the principle of efficient workflow, but mostly they talk the talk, not walk the walk. I can outline so many examples. They go to the 95% in so many areas and then jump on the next fashion wave before they finish a job properly.

I will await the next release of Lightroom before commenting any further.

Frustrated and depressed.

Yeah, good thoughts.
If you're gonna do it, do it right. Otherwise don't offer it at all.

If you're worried about InDesign, then just scrap the book module.

Bigger issue is that Adobe really has no competition right now.

I wish Aperture kept it going and offered a comprehensive system for Pro photographers with the ability to design books for all the major vendors built in as well as fully functioning plug ins for all the online gallery site.

Adobe is now just trying to sell to everyone and is losing sight of the larger picture for pros. That's just my opinion and I am very frustrated.

I can only assume a proper Book Module will limit sales of InDesign. I use InDesign, but can see massive advantages to having a proper Book module inside of Lightroom. Alternatively, I would gladly pay for a new module or application which did a proper job of providing book generating features, where I do not have to generate intermediate jpgs and sharpen them correctly for the final output size.

I sense Adobe got the design wrong at the start, but there has been multiple opportunities to correct this by now, therefore I feel Adobe are happy to leave the book module crippled.

A statement from Adobe on their plans for the Book module might be helpful.

The only new feature I see myself using with CC 2014, despite the fanfare, is the rating option in Lightroom mobile and then only occasionally. Adobe's implementation of the Book Module has been a lost opportunity. With 90% of the effort invested! why Adobe do you not finish it properly.