1 Correct answer
No one can say (except for some Adobe employees, who are not allowed to say). You should check the list here each time Adobe updates the Lighroom Classic software.
838
Replies
Great points @Jao vdL
Unfortunately the camera manufacurers have largely ignored the DNG file format which means Adobe (and other software vendors) are always forced to play catchup to provide support for new cameras.
By @John Waller
The majority of their customers don't make a big stink about this unfortunately.
Many would prefer to rant at Adobe.
Too bad they don't ask why a JPEG works everywhere the day the new camera ships but not the raws and connect the dots on the real source of this issue: unnecessary proprietary (raw) file formats.
The majority of their customers don't make a big stink about this unfortunately.
Many would prefer to rant at Adobe.
Agreed @TheDigitalDog.
So often we hear in these forums from people complaining about why new camera Raw support is taking so long when the entire updating process is completely unnecessary. As you said, we have JPG in-camera. Why not DNG?
I'm just glad that Adobe still provides new camera support as a free service to users. The reasons are obvious of course but I'm glad Adobe and others have elected not to (or not found a way to) try and monetise the process.
Any news on when Sony A7R V will be supported in Lightroom?
By @Henrik23418415azzc
Until the actual support is released, anyone who actually knows can't say.
What other options we have for now?
Thanks
By @iurban
Read the correct answer #2 from Rob. Use camera manufacturer-supplied raw converters and complain that they forced this on you.
get Iridient S-Transformer and you can convert Sony A7R5 raw files to linear DNG that can be opened in ACR/LR - certainly you still do not have full set of camera profiles from Adobe, but you can use their profiles from A7R4 as well
By @deejjjaaaa
This 'solution' (if I can be so kind), assumes the user is want to spend $39 if the demo times out, and more importantly will accept a partially raw, linear conversion (as they state: S-Transformer provides some of the high quality, early stage RAW processing).
I've been a big fan of Iridient products for decades (http://digitaldog.net/files/IridientDeveloper.pdf). But in this case, again, the big elephant in the room you don't want to address is, there is no reason for ANY of this nonsense and in this case, again, the problem lies solely with Sony.
Indeed, Adobe's DNG converter (or it's other products like LR) are not the only DNG converter because converting to DNG is openly documented by Adobe! Which IS the fix for this elephant; why can't Sony or Canon or Nikon do this themselves? Rethorical question; I don't expect you can answer for them.
> This 'solution' (if I can be so kind)
By @deejjjaaaa
this is the solution for somebody who can't wait for Adobe to release the version supporting A7R5
No, not really. It doesn't provide a true and full raw processing workflow as outlined (and again ignored).
The right answer was provided, is simple**, and again ignored by at least one person here.... The right answer is to use the proprietary raw converter provided by the camera maker the day the camera ships. It will fully support raw processing, albeit not to every user's satisfaction, which is WHY they use Adobe raw converters.
after all years of using Adobe converters you still did not learn that ACR/LR will produce the same exact output from both linear ( demosaicked ) and regular ( non linear, non demosaicked ) DNG file from Adobe DNG converter or original raw file -
By @deejjjaaaa
Your 'solution' doesn't provide a nonlinear non demosaicked DNG does it sir? So once again, an apples-to-apples comparison and solution from you does not (yet) exist.
**“There seems to be some perverse human characteristic that likes to make easy things difficult.” -Warren Buffett
I can add that as you want camera manufactureres to fully document raw files, I want Adobe to fully document their proprietaty parametric ACR/LR edits, so that I can as well take my work ( no - not the rendered output - but what I invested in parametric edits - so that I can continue modify them from that point ) to a different raw converter if I decide to stop Adobe using software...
By @deejjjaaaa
You can add such an assumption like many others you've made.
The camera manufacturers could make this all go away in a number of ways, including documenting the raws:
1. A switch on the camera that would save off a fully raw DNG is one.
2. Agreeing to work with Adobe and others by providing a sample raw long before release is another.
3. Treating a raw like a JPEG (openly).
By @deejjjaaaa
The absurd is the last refuge of a pundit without an argument. And a pundit who likes to assume and hasn't as yet provided any support for those in bed with Adobe by virtue of just being their customer, hoping to solve the current problem. The long-term problem will never be solved when those who maybe are or maybe are not in bed with the camera manufacturers or other raw software companies can't post actual solutions to the source of the issue (impossible to tell when you post without any transparency here and behind an alias).
The temporary fix has been posted. No reason to convert to Linear DNG (extra step), and lose data and processing control. The camera manufacturers have forced their early adopters to use their raw converters, go ahead and thank them very much deejjjaaaa. 😱
IF and when you have an actual solution for Adobe customers in the fourms that provides them the same processing qualities they would get if the Adobe product(s) had native support (proprietary raw or nonlinear DNG), please do post it here.
The cameras involved are OM System OM-1 and OM-5. There may be other older Olympus cameras as well but I don't know which specifically. Adobe claims to support the OM-1 and the OM-5 so I consider this an oversight omission, therefore a bug, not a feature.
By @Bob Trlin
Where in the URL of supported cameras does Adobe show support for the OM-1 and the OM-5; I don't see it.
What I do see is OM-D E-M1, OM-D E-M5 as two examples, yes. Is that the camera body, and are you saying you cannot import that raw into the versions of LR/ACR Adobe states it can?
As for supplying the one line of code, you must be joking!
By @Bob Trlin
I think you might be the jokester consider what you wrote in your first post:
One line of code could fix this.
By @Bob Trlin
Hence my question and I await your answer again.
Might I request that you pass this matter on to someone else?
By @Bob Trlin
No need. Your post was merged to where it now belongs by someone else because it isn't a bug.
AdChoices