The latest Adobe update fixes the Nikon D810 Adobe standard profile bug

Adobe-logo
Adobe released Camera Raw 9.1.1 and Lightroom CC 2015.1.1 updates. One of the fixed bugs in this release is the missing Nikon D810 Adobe standard profile. Download links:

Also note that this Adobe Camera Raw release (v 9.1.1) will be the last version available for CS6 users:

"In order to pursue further innovations in image processing and workflow technology, the next release of Adobe Camera Raw (v 9.1.1) will be the final version available for use with CS6. Customers can utilize the free Adobe DNG Converter utility to receive the very latest camera support for CS6 and older versions of our software going all the way back to Photoshop CS2 and Lightroom 1.0."

New Nikon F mount lens profiles added in the latest Camera Raw and Lightroom versions:

Mount Name
Nikon Lensbaby Velvet 56mm f/1.6
Nikon Sigma 24mm f/1.4 DG HSM A015
Nikon Sigma 150-600mm f/5-6.3 DG OS HSM C015
This entry was posted in Nikon D810 and tagged . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • Spy Black

    “In order to more effectively rip you off, the next release of Adobe Camera Raw (v 9.1.1) will be the final version available for use with CS6. “

    • Patrick O’Connor

      I don’t like the subscription model, even though I have the entire CC suite, and it sucks they’re not going to continue updating the CS6 version of CR.
      However, and this is important, they’re most definitely NOT ripping anyone off. You pay for a product and you get what you paid for. It takes effort and revenue to develop for legacy products; resources for which they’re not getting reimbursed, much less making a profit from. Their employees and stock holders have to make a living too. Think about it.

      • Proto

        CS6 came out in 2012. Not that old to retire or render it unfit for new cameras. They can easily add new camera models to CR… not a huge technical legacy maintenance work. This is just an excuse to force people to new products.

        • dclivejazz

          When do you think is a reasonable time frame to discontinue support of legacy software? If they didn’t have the CC, Adobe would probably be on CS8 by now. I don’t know what is customary or widely practiced but at some point a software company needs to not be restrained by backwards compatibility issues.

        • Patrick O’Connor

          It’s not unfit. You can convert your RAW files to DNG and process them. I realize it’s a really long article so I’ll point you to it: it’s about half way down…

          • Proto

            : ) trust me… read the whole thing before because I do not want to abandon CS6 and buy subscription. Yes, sustaining in CS6 will involve converting, say, Nikon D900 RAW –> DNG –> then open in Camera Raw. i hear DNG zaps Dlighting info from file. But, overall it will be a pain, but still usable.

            • Patrick O’Connor

              Can’t speak to that. I don’t use Dlighting or any of that sort of thing. When I’m working, I always bracket my shots to get the best possible starting point or merge exposures if necessary.

              Please don’t misunderstand…I REALLY don’t like the subscription model.

        • nwcs

          Whether we like it or not the software industry is moving to this model. Some slowly, some fast.

      • ZoetMB

        I disagree because both the old and subscription versions of Adobe’s products need that ACR file. They would have a point only if they were changing the entire structure of the code. And as Proto points out below, CS6 is not that old. And it’s not like this was some inexpensive $50 application. CS6 was quite expensive and I don’t think it’s unreasonable to expect Adobe to support it until at least 5 years from purchase date (not from release date).

        • Patrick O’Connor

          I’m not sure I understand what you mean. You can use the free converter to create a DNG file which will retain all the information that ACR or Lightroom could access anyway. Furthermore, ACR is an add-on to Photoshop, not the other way around. There are other, some cheap or free, raw converters out there. One could easily make the case for using Nikon’s free software to convert RAW files to TIFF, or whatever, and then finish up in Photoshop if needs be. Theoretically, it would do a better job of the basic conversion anyway. I don’t really know having never used it.

          • ZoetMB

            My point is that the conversion parameters, including the support for newer cameras and lenses, are kept in a data file that should be able to work with any version of the ACR application. So there’s no reason why Adobe can’t continue to support CS6 users into the future in this regard. This is all about their strategy to convert all users to subscribers, a policy I resent even if the overall costs are about the same. I understand why it makes sense for them, but it doesn’t make sense for all their users. I do not want to be dependent upon online access or verification in order to use their software.

            I want my workflow to be more efficient, not less efficient, so I really don’t want to convert Raw to DNG or TIFF before working on a file.

            There are other apps out there. Maybe they don’t have every last feature Photoshop has, but I don’t often use those more obscure features anyway. If Adobe doesn’t support my next camera or lens in CS6, I’ll have no choice but to switch. If Adobe is happy with that, so be it – it’s their strategy.

            • Patrick O’Connor

              I won’t pretend to understand the effort required to integrate that data into existing software. Perhaps you’re right.
              I understand and agree with all your points. My only point, and reason for weighing in, is to say that Adobe isn’t ripping anyone off; it’s their company and they have every right to run it the way they see fit. We, conversely, have every right to use whatever software meets our needs.

            • ZoetMB

              Adobe having the right to run their company the way they see fit and whether or not they’re ripping anybody off are two completely different things. When I go to a hotel and the mini-bar charges $5 for a can of soda or a stadium charges $9 for a hot dog, they have the right to do that, but they’re still ripping people off. When a drug company charges $5000 a month for a drug or a hospital charges $25 for an aspirin, they have the right to do that, but they’re still ripping people off.

            • Patrick O’Connor

              I guess we have different definitions for “rip off.” A connotative definition (yours) is just as legitimate as a denotation (mine) but Merriam-Webster defines it as “Cheat, Defraud; Steal”

              So I guess we’re both right! 🙂

    • Proto

      I agree with you 100%. Purposefully pushing out CS6 owners, and forcing the mortgage-with-no-house-in-end model.

    • ZoetMB

      Dear Adobe: Effective with the next time I need a new version of ACR, due to the purchase of a new lens or camera body, that will be the last time I use or purchase any Adobe products.

    • true

      I’m under impression that this will be bite for the Photoshop users, but the Lightroom standalone users are safe? Maybe find different program to use in conjunction with Lightroom?

      • Spy Black

        I’m just being cynical. DNG converter if it needs be.

    • EthicalSusan

      C’mon – CS6 was release in 2012 – it’s 3 1/2 years old. should they support every new camera that comes out forever? It’s just not practical. There are changes to the RAW definitions that use more current code, and making it backwards compatible for every piece of software out there just isn’t good business sense.

      The CC licensing is very inexpensive, and works wonderfully.

      • Spy Black

        Actually, I was being cynical, but technically there’s nothing stopping them from integrating the database in CS6, or 5 or 4,3, and 2.

        • EthicalSusan

          Nothing stopping them, but Adobe isn’t the only company that they have to accommodate – there are many RAW engines out there, and creating backwards compatibility for all of them would create slow, bloated software. It just doesn’t make any sense to do so.

          • Spy Black

            I don’t know what you’re talking about. Adobe only cares about it’s own products, and apparently not even all of them. 😉

  • T.I.M

    I do a lot of micro photography, so bugs don’t bother me.

    • Patrick O’Connor

      🙂

  • AlphaTed

    I will perpetually use my CS5 license. Adobe can never convince me to subscribe to the CC model.
    I’m sure other software will be happy to fill the void that Adobe will leave behind.

  • mok

    I ma actually not sure what that means for me and further releases of I.e. new cameras. Have today the stand alone LR.

  • mok

    I was actually not missing the Adobe standard. I think it is not really making pictures from nikon any good.
    Using Neutral now. What you use?

  • EthicalSusan

    Thank goodness.

  • Nobody Cares

    I suspect that they dropped support, because people figured out they could use new CC CR features in PS by creating macros. At that point, Adobe realized they either had to make more changes to the legacy CR releases or drop legacy support.

    That’s a no brainer, IMO.

  • Back to top