# i folded and bought CC :(



## wickidwombat (Dec 16, 2014)

after trying the LR app on my new iphone 6+ its just soo awesome i folded and bought Adobe CC for the $9.99/month deal since LR 6 is bound to be along soon too...

yep i'm a turncoat


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Dec 16, 2014)

I've had cc for over a year, and finally bought a Ipad. I put it on my Ipad, but don't really know what use I'll get out of it. I spent a couple hours watching Julieann Kost and following along as she went thru the how to operate it, and can do that. I also tried unsuccessfully to get the Canon Camera app to work. My computer finds the Ipad, but never actually completes linking.

I'm thinking that I might get more practical use from a smartphone.


----------



## wickidwombat (Dec 16, 2014)

yeah i'm using it to edit photos directly on the phone taken with the iphone and man even the white balance editing works great which is wierd since its all jpg isnt it?
its a great app on an iphone


----------



## Nitroman (Dec 16, 2014)

I must admit, I'm tempted to join ...

For £8.78 includiong vat pwer month for both CC and LR is actually good value. The upgrades cost me that each year.

Still haven't folded tho' ... yet ... lol


----------



## Marsu42 (Dec 16, 2014)

Valvebounce said:


> I think you may not read your EULA's? You almost never OWN software, however you may buy a perpetual licence for the use of it! This just means you can't easily get booted out, still basically a tenant?



Interesting enough, at least in the EU for non-rental software you do "own" the software, i.e. have the right to sell it on if you don't use it anymore. This fact has been questions by Microsoft for cheap Windows OEM licenses, and they've lost. They've tried to dongle Games to your xbox one, and they had to widthdraw because the market wouldn't accept it.

There's a big market for "used" older software versions, and that would be one of the reasons for introducing rental software: If a full upgrade is very expensive, it might be more feasible for the customer to sell the old full license and buy a new full one.


----------



## gregorywood (Dec 16, 2014)

I made the difficult decision to jump from Aperture to Lightroom/Photoshop/CC recently. The way I see it, I would fork over more money year over year (an in larger blocks) to "buy" (license for perpetual use, as another member keenly pointed out) the locally-installed versions versus adopting the CC for Photographers model. For me, it was a no-brainer as I'm simply amortizing the "ownership" (rentalship) over a small monthly amount. 

Of course, I can leave at anytime and select a different product, just as I have done by leaving Aperture for the Adobe ecosystem. As a consumer, I can exercise that right at any time.


----------



## Marsu42 (Dec 16, 2014)

gregorywood said:


> For me, it was a no-brainer as I'm simply amortizing the "ownership" (rentalship) over a small monthly amount.



We'll see about how small this amount will be in the future once the near-monopoly market leader has phased out all "owned" software and is free to adjust rental fees at any time.



gregorywood said:


> Of course, I can leave at anytime and select a different product, just as I have done by leaving Aperture for the Adobe ecosystem. As a consumer, I can exercise that right at any time.



If there's something to switch to - Adobe has bought most major competitors and stopped producing their products sooner or later or incorporated them (like with Macromedia, Aldus, ...). As Aperture is no more, it's Adobe or DxO. And if they buy DxO, where do you want to go to? ACDSee?


----------



## Zv (Dec 16, 2014)

wickidwombat said:


> after trying the LR app on my new iphone 6+ its just soo awesome i folded and bought Adobe CC for the $9.99/month deal since LR 6 is bound to be along soon too...
> 
> yep i'm a turncoat



Haha! No worries, so did I at the end of Nov. Still haven't had time to use it though, looking forward to messing around with that iPad app over Xmas break. 

I did it mainly because I wanted to improve my PP skills, get the latest lens profiles, latest process version and hopefully LR6 will be out soon. New year, new software all that jazz. Plus I want to move forward and only way to do that is to get on this Adobe gravy train. 

Let's all confess. Who else did it?


----------



## wickidwombat (Dec 16, 2014)

One thing bugging me is it doesn't seem to have or I can't find the ability to copy settings and paste to another image
:-\


----------



## Zv (Dec 16, 2014)

wickidwombat said:


> One thing bugging me is it doesn't seem to have or I can't find the ability to copy settings and paste to another image
> :-\



Not even the old shift ctrl and C / V?


----------



## AcutancePhotography (Dec 16, 2014)

Valvebounce said:


> Hi AvTvM.
> I think you may not read your EULA's? You almost never OWN software, however you may buy a perpetual licence for the use of it! This just means you can't easily get booted out, still basically a tenant? ;D
> 
> Cheers, Graham.



That is true, but traditionally one buys and owns a license. With CC you are renting a license. I am sure there are legal differences between the two that may affect the user. It certantly won't adversly affect Adobe.

In my opinion, CC is only a viable choice if I use the software pretty much every day or so. Pros for example. However I am not a pro, but a schmo (Semi Commited Hobbiest Married and otherwise Occupied). This holiday season I have not used my LR at all, but under CC I would still have to fork over the tenner. 

As a SCHMO I don't need the latest version of LR and frankly have not found any time/purpose to learn PS (PS elements is hard enough for the casual photographer).

Do I want to pay about $120 every single year to use LR? Not for me, but for other photographers, it may be a good deal. I hope that Adobe continues to offer LR as a seperate license, but I fear that they will be too attracted by the rental fees coming in every month.


----------



## lescrane (Dec 16, 2014)

good move. it;s a great deal *if* you use it regularly. I was one of those outraged bashers when Adobe went w/the subscription model. The price was simply too high for me as it is not a business expense but a serious hobby.

9.99 a month for CC, LR, etc? no brainer. THose you are complaining that you don't own it... What good is "owning it" when "it" changes every two years and you have to buy "it" again??? 

I spend over 120.00 a month for cable TV/internet access. that;'s another story, I always reconsider it, but "need" it where I live. What makes my life better? my cable or CC for 120.00/year??? duh... 

so enjoy your CC subscription. All the noise about alternatives is just noise. Nothing comes close.


----------



## AcutancePhotography (Dec 16, 2014)

lescrane said:


> 9.99 a month for CC, LR, etc? no brainer. THose you are complaining that you don't own it... What good is "owning it" when "it" changes every two years and you have to buy "it" again???



Because you don't have to buy it again unless the "old" version no longer does what you need. 

Just because a company puts out a new version, does not mean that the old version is no longer useful. It depends on the individual customer. Many people choose not to "upgrade" for every version but may wait for a few versions and then "upgrade". Many other people choose to "upgrade" for every version. All depends on what the customer needs and wants.


----------



## Random Orbits (Dec 16, 2014)

lescrane said:


> good move. it;s a great deal *if* you use it regularly. I was one of those outraged bashers when Adobe went w/the subscription model. The price was simply too high for me as it is not a business expense but a serious hobby.
> 
> 9.99 a month for CC, LR, etc? no brainer. THose you are complaining that you don't own it... What good is "owning it" when "it" changes every two years and you have to buy "it" again???
> 
> ...



I'm waiting for the next significant LR update. I had purchased PS6 (on sale) and LR before they announced CC, so it doesn't make sense because I don't need other CC features. Once I buy lenses/camera body that is no longer supported by my LR and need to upgrade, then I'll probably switch over to CC.


----------



## JonAustin (Dec 16, 2014)

I'm not interested in any software subscription service; the only way I would buy in would be if my current software no longer supported a piece of hardware (in this case, a camera body or lens) I purchased, and no viable alternatives to the subscription service were available.

But don't beat yourself up; if the subscription model works for you (as it does for many people), then more power to you. If you ever change your mind, you can always cancel your subscription.

I'm perfectly satisfied with my perpetual license of LR5; LR6 would have to offer eye-popping improvements to get me to upgrade. I also use Photoshop Elements 13; although I was also perfectly satisfied with v10, onOne Software's new Perfect Photo Suite 9 requires PSE v11 or higher. So I watched for a sale, and bought PSE 13 for a mere $35.


----------



## drmikeinpdx (Dec 16, 2014)

*CC on multiple devices?*

Is anyone using Adobe CC on multiple machines? Care to share your experience?

I'm retiring from my day job soon and will be free to do more traveling. I can see myself doing a lot of processing on a laptop in addition to my main computer at home. Maybe on the I-pad too. It would be nice if I could use the CC license to put the latest version of the software on whatever machine I happen to buy.

I saw in a video that Scott Kelby carries his Lightroom database around in some kind of Drobo hard drive unit and plugs it into whatever computing device is handy at the time. I can see the advantage in that for a photogapher who travels a lot.


----------



## Khalai (Dec 16, 2014)

AcutancePhotography said:


> lescrane said:
> 
> 
> > 9.99 a month for CC, LR, etc? no brainer. THose you are complaining that you don't own it... What good is "owning it" when "it" changes every two years and you have to buy "it" again???
> ...



I guess that might contributed to the fact Adobe so strongly propagates its CC services. For me, CS6 and LR5 boxed versions are just fine and I strongly hope that LR will continue to be standalone software in future iterations...


----------



## Freddie (Dec 16, 2014)

*There are two sides to this...*

and, as a confirmed techie, I was purchasing the PS upgrades every time they came out anyway.
I UPGRADED to the CC system almost immediately after I had talked with the Adobe sales reps. It's more like renting a nice new house and having it automatically renovated every few months to the latest code and standards. The old way of buying yearly upgrades was like buying a new house every year or so just so the toilets would work properly and the AC would continue to function. The list of improvements every year was worth it to me to upgrade and the CC rental model is worth it to me now. I didn't cave, I recognized a bargain when I saw it.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Dec 16, 2014)

Random Orbits said:


> I'm waiting for the next significant LR update. I had purchased PS6 (on sale) and LR before they announced CC, so it doesn't make sense because I don't need other CC features. Once I buy lenses/camera body that is no longer supported by my LR and need to upgrade, then I'll probably switch over to CC.


 
It has had new features added, there may never be a LR6 because Adobe has found the sweet spot price for rentals. Look for additional rental combos and options in the future.

I already owned LR5, but I signed up for cc to get photoshop, my ver 5 is getting pretty old. I also have LR5 installed on 4 computers, 2 with cc and 2 with the licensed software.


----------



## drjlo (Dec 16, 2014)

wickidwombat said:


> yeah i'm using it to edit photos directly on the phone taken with the iphone and man even the white balance editing works great which is wierd since its all jpg isnt it?
> its a great app on an iphone



Hmm. Photo editing on the phone is not exactly what I foresee enjoying, but it's not too slow on iPhone?


----------



## David Hull (Dec 16, 2014)

AcutancePhotography said:


> lescrane said:
> 
> 
> > 9.99 a month for CC, LR, etc? no brainer. THose you are complaining that you don't own it... What good is "owning it" when "it" changes every two years and you have to buy "it" again???
> ...


It also depends on how the vendor wants to sell their product. A lot of companies that do SW for a living, have adopted this model (MathWorks with MatLab, Keysight with ADS, and even Microsoft). It works well and at least Adobe has offered their package at a reasonable price (finally !).


----------



## RGF (Dec 16, 2014)

I got CC on my desktop and laptop. Original the desktop was Windows and the laptop OS (Mac). With the previous license agree I could not have done that. I have now switched my desktop to OS.

Glad I did. $10/month is about the cost of the upgrade cost with CS4/5/6 and LR was an additional $5-7 / month. 

Now instead of waiting 1 1/2 yrs for new features, they come much more rapidly.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Dec 16, 2014)

wickidwombat said:


> after trying the LR app on my new iphone 6+ its just soo awesome i folded and bought Adobe CC for the $9.99/month deal since LR 6 is bound to be along soon too...
> 
> yep i'm a turncoat



boo!  :'(


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Dec 16, 2014)

David Hull said:


> and at least Adobe has offered their package at a reasonable price (finally !).



not if you do video work too

Once upon a time you used to be able to even do something like upgrade InDesign once every three gens and Premiere Pro package (including PS) once every three gens and then add in a stand alone PS upgrade along the way if needed. Or forget the InDesign and just upgrade PP every once in a while and PS extra as needed.

And with the rental model, you can pay them for years, thousands of dollars and then if you quit you have nothing, nada, to show for all that money spent. You don't get to keep anything even if you did it for years and spent thousands.


----------



## beckstoy (Dec 16, 2014)

Has anyone heard about Adobe's plans for moving the CC functionality into the Android world? There have been whispers about it for a long time, so I wanna find out if anyone's heard anything more concrete.

Thanks In Advance!


----------



## JonAustin (Dec 16, 2014)

RGF said:


> I got CC on my desktop and laptop. Original the desktop was Windows and the laptop OS (Mac). With the previous license agree I could not have done that. I have now switched my desktop to OS.
> 
> Glad I did. $10/month is about the cost of the upgrade cost with CS4/5/6 and LR was an additional $5-7 / month.
> 
> *Now instead of waiting 1 1/2 yrs for new features, they come much more rapidly.*



Not sure I get this. I have perpetual licenses for LR5 and PSE13, and I am automatically reminded whenever there's a (minor number) update available for either application; i.e., the recent update of LR5.6 to LR5.7 (and now LR5.7.1).

Am I to understand that CC subscribers get updates sooner or more frequently, or get updates not available to us users of the perpetual license products? I'd be willing to bet not.

The only advantage of a CC license (as I understand it) is free upgrades to each new major numbered version (i.e., from LR4 to LR5). Those of us with perpetual licenses decide when and if we want to pay for the next major version of each app. If we don't want or need any of its new features, or if it's not worth the price to to upgrade for us, we can skip it altogether (or wait for a deal on the price).

(And just a nit: Windows is also an OS. What I think you meant to write is "I have now switched my desktop to *Mac* OS. As a user of long standing of both systems, I've always been amused that a company as market-savvy as Apple has never come up with a better name for their operating system than "OS.")


----------



## pwp (Dec 16, 2014)

*Re: CC on multiple devices?*



drmikeinpdx said:


> Is anyone using Adobe CC on multiple machines? Care to share your experience?


I'm platform agnostic running both PC's and Macs. I can run any CC program wherever I like on whatever platform I like provided only two are authorised at a time. It's a simple matter. Current settings and preferences are remembered via cloud. It works for me.

Like a premium phone plan or an ever growing utilities monthly bill, you soon forget about the CC monthly $$ and simply appreciate the flexibility, power & convenience of CC. My subscription is for the full CC suite. The PS & LR bundle looks like a bargain if you don't need the rest of what CC has on offer.

I also find the iPad version of LR a fairly useless irritation. It's unlikely I'll be going back to that anytime soon, though I appreciate it probably works for some users.

-pw


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Dec 16, 2014)

JonAustin said:



> (And just a nit: Windows is also an OS. What I think you meant to write is "I have now switched my desktop to *Mac* OS. As a user of long standing of both systems, I've always been amused that a company as market-savvy as Apple has never come up with a better name for their operating system than "OS.")



An even bigger nit is the whole "PC" standing for IBM PC clone and then standing for anything running MS-DOS or Windows. Atari 8bit is a PC. Amiga is a PC. IBM PC is a PC. MAC is a PC. Pretty everything that is not a giant mainframe, supercomputer or specialized workstation or gaming only box is a PC.


----------



## lescrane (Dec 16, 2014)

the poster who asked about being able to switch from computer to computer. I wouldn't count on it. I think it's still a 2 computer limit for 1 subscription and while you can swithch adobe never makes it easy, you have to deactivate one to add another. The s/w still sits on your pc and you don't have to login to use it so they cannot tell where you are and what you're not using


As far as the upgrades, I agree that many cycles are minor and when I was buying the s/w I was skipping some upgrades, but not many. My biggest gain w/CC is the shake reduction sharpening filter. It really works well not just on images with some movement blur but others where you need a sharpening result not avail w..other filters. You have to be careful of course not to over use it. also there is a lot of trial and error with settings when applying it, much more than w/trad. unsharp masking, smart sharpening etc


----------



## David Hull (Dec 16, 2014)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> David Hull said:
> 
> 
> > and at least Adobe has offered their package at a reasonable price (finally !).
> ...


What they need to do is what MathWorks does which is that once you stop paying, the SW keeps working with the features it has and the support stops. That way they get their subscription and the user still has something when they quit.


----------



## gregorywood (Dec 16, 2014)

Marsu42 said:


> gregorywood said:
> 
> 
> > For me, it was a no-brainer as I'm simply amortizing the "ownership" (rentalship) over a small monthly amount.
> ...



I understand your opinions, and you are certainly entitled to them. I was simply sharing my perspective - an opinion as well.

Good day.

Greg


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Dec 17, 2014)

Hi Greg,

it's amazing, isn't it, that we can't even just express appreciation of something _for what it is to us_ without some folk feeling the need to tell us all the ways we're wrong about it?

How _do_ we manage to make decisions in any other walk of our lives without this lot being on our shoulder to tell us what and how to think?

:


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Dec 17, 2014)

David Hull said:


> What they need to do is what MathWorks does which is that once you stop paying, the SW keeps working with the features it has and the support stops.



Well no, they don't "need" to do that. They _need_ to do whatever they think is best for Adobe's bottom line.


----------



## tron (Dec 17, 2014)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> David Hull said:
> 
> 
> > and at least Adobe has offered their package at a reasonable price (finally !).
> ...


+1 Finally! I believe you should have written that statement in bold!


----------



## AcutancePhotography (Dec 17, 2014)

Keith_Reeder said:


> Hi Greg,
> 
> it's amazing, isn't it, that we can't even just express appreciation of something _for what it is to us_ without some folk feeling the need to tell us all the ways we're wrong about it?
> 
> ...



Well if you are the type of person who allows other people's opinions to influence your decisions, that could be the problem. 

There are people who make decisions independent of what opinons they read on the Internets Tubes.


----------



## gregorywood (Dec 17, 2014)

Keith_Reeder said:


> Hi Greg,
> 
> it's amazing, isn't it, that we can't even just express appreciation of something _for what it is to us_ without some folk feeling the need to tell us all the ways we're wrong about it?
> 
> ...



I take it in stride and simply try to share my experiences, opinions and perspectives, for whatever they might be worth to someone else. I find many nuggets of useful perspective here and I'm grateful for that. I try to leave as much constructive info as I take. 

Greg


----------



## wsheldon (Dec 17, 2014)

David Hull said:


> LetTheRightLensIn said:
> 
> 
> > David Hull said:
> ...



Exactly my problem with the CC model. I strongly prefer the perpetual license plus paid software maintenance to keep current, like Mathworks uses. Offer the initial license at a reasonable price, offer a software maintenance subscription plan that pays for their ongoing development and keeps users current on features, but let users "get off the train" and keep using what they have. If you want to "get back on the train" you pay a reinstatement/catch-up fee then resume maintenance. Or buy another perpetual license and start over.

If I have a down year, financially, or don't like the direction they're taking the product, I don't want to have to pay ransom to keep using the software I've been paying for all along. That's too much risk for me. I'm staying with CS6 and stand-alone LR for just this reason, so they're not getting any more money from me whereas I'd be willing to pay for a maintenance plan.


----------



## IslanderMV (Dec 17, 2014)

_If I have a down year, financially, or don't like the direction their taking the product, I don't want to have to pay ransom to keep using the software I've been paying for all along. That's too much risk for me. I'm staying with CS6 and stand-alone LR for just this reason, so they're not getting any more money from me whereas I'd be willing to pay for a maintenance plan._

Ditto !


----------



## David Hull (Dec 17, 2014)

wsheldon said:


> David Hull said:
> 
> 
> > LetTheRightLensIn said:
> ...


Of all the ones that I use, I think MathWorks is the closest to having something that works for both them and the customers too. I think that part of the problem is that Adobe sells to a lot of individuals while these other guys tend to be paid out of a corporate coffer somewhere. Regardless though, I think this is going to be the future of SW. These people have a steady flow of R&D that goes into the products but the existing model doesn't guarantee a steady revenue stream to support it. They have all discovered that as the product matures (and PS is certainly in that stage of life) that they are providing more of a service and the subscription model works best. The only thing that seems lacking for Adobe is a way for people to gracefully opt out.


----------



## miah (Dec 17, 2014)

The OP shouldn't feel like a "turncoat" for signing up for Adobe's CC, he should feel like a rational person who sensibly concluded that it's worth it. Honestly, I am sick and tired of the whining that goes on about how the onerous Adobe is taking us all to the cleaners. Let's look at the facts:

1. Adobe owns the market, right now. There are competing products, even after Aperture's untimely demise, but there is nothing even close to the performance and flexibility of Photoshop and Lightroom. Nothing.

2. Adobe is a business just like any other. They aren't running it for fun, they're running it to create value for their shareholders, aka make a profit. At the point that they piss off their customers with poor products or truly onerous conditions, their customers will flee to the open arms of another entrepreneur who will be thrilled to accept them (this may take some time, but there are millions of people using this software, so the opportunity is huge).

3. The license you "own" in perpetuity is only as good for as long as the hardware you're running it on, and the operating system you're running it in, will last. Should you want to run it "forever without paying another dime," you better be prepared to keep the same computer running forever and never upgrade to an unsupported OS--security be damned. I mean, get real, CSx's feature-set will not only become dated, it will become useless as hardware and OS technologies inevitably advance. You can own it "forever," but will you be able to use it forever?

4. So much is made of the cost of subscription without examining the math. I use Ps and Lr almost everyday, but I was still able to get by upgrading the stand-alone products every other or even every third round. In addition to that, my wife's a teacher, so I got the very significant educator discount (applicable to immediate family members). I keep a running spreadsheet of my computer/photography purchases, so I looked back over the past *decade* and totaled up my expense of BUYING Ps and Lr, skipping 1 or 2 versions in between, and getting the huge educator discount. I then divided that number by the amount of time I had used it, up until that point. It came to $17/month. Per month! That means by switching to the subscription service even I was able to _save_ $7 a month AND start using the latest and greatest features on whatever hardware I typically upgrade to every 3-5 years.

5. When Adobe first announced their subscription plans their prices were out of touch with reality. Then came the uproar. So, Adobe listened to the market and brought the price of their Photography Bundle down to a very reasonable $9.99/month. I've been in business all my life and know from experience that if enough of us clamor for even better terms, like those offered by MathWorks, Adobe will seriously consider it. Business isn't a democracy, but every business worth its salt knows that pleasing customers is in their long-term best interest.


Now, can we put this to rest? For some, who use this type of software only occasionally, 10 bucks a month is too much. For them there's DPP, Pixelmator, and the like. For others, who choose to try and keep the same hardware and OS in perpetuity, there are still old, boxed versions of CSx. But for anyone who has carefully examined the pros and cons of Adobe's subscription service, $9.99/month is a remarkably good deal.


----------



## AcutancePhotography (Dec 17, 2014)

I just wonder how soon will Adobe start to increase this rental, once they have their customer base hooked. A tenner a month may not be objectionable to many customers, but what if  when it goes up?

Miah, if you don't like reading discussions about Adobe, then there is not reason to be "sick and tired", simply choose not to read threads that discuss it. You do not get to choose what can be discussed and what should be "put to rest".


----------



## miah (Dec 17, 2014)

AcutancePhotography said:


> I just wonder how soon will Adobe start to increase this rental, once they have their customer base hooked. A tenner a month may not be objectionable to many customers, but what if  when it goes up?
> 
> Miah, if you don't like reading discussions about Adobe, then there is not reason to be "sick and tired", simply choose not to read threads that discuss it. You do not get to choose what can be discussed and what should be "put to rest".



Come on, Acutance, nobody's trying to play arbiter of what is and is not discussed, I just think that this "Damn Adobe!" sentiment is getting a little long in the tooth. Further, instead of just lurking, I tried to throw out why I feel their Photography Bundle for $10 a month is actually a _better_ deal than buying and "owning" the software over the long haul. People are free to disagree with my analysis, but I'd love to hear on what grounds.

Regarding the possibility of a rate increase, Adobe has publicly stated that they have no plans to increase the rate within the foreseeable future. And if they do, we as customers, who vote with our greenbacks, hold the final say.


----------



## Zv (Dec 18, 2014)

I wonder if anyone can answer a question about CC. 

If in the future I decide to stop paying could I still use those files (let's say they are DNG for argument's sake) that are stored locally in an older version of LR? I don't really see that situation happening but was just curious as someone mentioned being stuck paying forever. The RAW files themselves stay on your hard drive, right? So you could do what you want with them. You just lose your edits and ability to edit. And if you start paying again you get them back, right? 

So the issue is you can't play with your files without paying? That seems like a funny complaint since you have to pay anyway, even with perpetual license. 

I pay for Netflix monthly. Stop paying - no movies. Seems unfair to say "Hey, Netflix gimme the movies I've watched already even though I'm not paying". Why should it be different for Adobe? 

That said, you can still access some features such as the Slideshow, Web, Book or Print creations if you decide to quit according to the CC help pages. I wonder if you can export at all?


----------



## miah (Dec 18, 2014)

Zv said:


> I wonder if anyone can answer a question about CC.
> 
> If in the future I decide to stop paying could I still use those files (let's say they are DNG for argument's sake) that are stored locally in an older version of LR? I don't really see that situation happening but was just curious as someone mentioned being stuck paying forever. The RAW files themselves stay on your hard drive, right? So you could do what you want with them. You just lose your edits and ability to edit. And if you start paying again you get them back, right?
> 
> ...



Your images reside on your hard drive in a folder that remains accessible, with or without Lightroom. Losing Lightroom means losing Lightroom's feature-set and edit libraries, but the original photos don't go anywhere. You'd be free to open them with any other viewing or editing software and do with them whatever you like.

I don't think your Netflix analogy is quite accurate, in this case. You're paying Netflix for a service: to watch a film you do not own. With Lightroom--provided you purchased the stand-alone product--you actually own a perpetual license to that version of the software for use in organizing and manipulating images that you also own (provided your hardware and OS still support the singular version of Lr that you purchased). Subscribing to Lightroom, however, is more like Netflix's service model, where you can use the software to do your work, but if you choose to end your subscription, the service is no longer available. Your original images remain, but their organizational structure and the work you already put into editing them would be inaccessible until you renew your subscription.

This is why some here have argued that it would be more reasonable for Adobe to adopt a subscription model more similar to MathWork's, where you're able to continue using the version of Lr you were last using when you canceled your subscription. I think this is a very reasonable request and I think it behooves all of us to lobby Adobe for just such a change. That said, I don't think I personally would cancel my subscription because I prefer to push Adobe to continue advancing Lightroom's features. Too, I won't always have the same computer or the same OS or the same camera or the same lenses, all of which will require updates from Adobe to fully utilize Lightroom.


----------



## RLPhoto (Dec 18, 2014)

tron said:


> LetTheRightLensIn said:
> 
> 
> > David Hull said:
> ...


+2 I will not adopt CC out of principal. Thankfully, I'm not in publishing or video because the tools I own can last me for another 4 years easily. Those other professions are pretty much at adobe's mercy and the price hikes will come.


----------



## miah (Dec 18, 2014)

I just had another thought. Though the only thing I know about MathWorks' subscription model is what has been revealed in this thread, it just occurred to me that allowing someone to continue using software that they once subscribed to has major pitfalls for the publisher. For instance, it wouldn't take long for people to figure out that they could game the system by subscribing for a single month, paying their $9.99, then canceling. They could then go on using two versions (both Ps and Lr) that they had just rented until such time that they wanted to "upgrade." They'd then resubscribe, get the newer versions, then cancel again. This tactic would cost Adobe millions.

One possible way to allay the fears of subscription-resisters, who think that if they cannot or will not continue to pay Adobe a monthly fee they will lose their ability to access their edited files, or that a price increase above the current $9.99 is untenable, would be to set up some sort of fee-based exit strategy. For example, they could implement a $50 exit fee that would allow anyone who had already subscribed for a set amount of time, say one year (I'm just making up numbers), to keep using the version they're on--without additional updates--in perpetuity. This would disincentivize would-be subscription-ditchers by having them weigh the cost of 5-months-worth of rental fees along with no updates against staying the course. But, importantly, it would also give someone an out--when for financial or other reasons they just want to strike that monthly fee from their budget.

What do you all think of this strategy? It might be a viable win-win.


----------



## wsheldon (Dec 18, 2014)

miah said:


> I just had another thought. Though the only thing I know about MathWorks' subscription model is what has been revealed in this thread, it just occurred to me that allowing someone to continue using software that they once subscribed to has major pitfalls for the publisher. For instance, it wouldn't take long for people to figure out that they could game the system by subscribing for a single month, paying their $9.99, then canceling. They could then go on using two versions (both Ps and Lr) that they had just rented until such time that they wanted to "upgrade." They'd then resubscribe, get the newer versions, then cancel again. This tactic would cost Adobe millions.



Technically Mathworks and similar companies don't offer a subscription model, but rather a software maintenance service (SMS) model. They sell you a perpetual license to use the software for a sizable fee (similar to buying a new copy of PS or LR) that includes 1 year of free software maintenance, then prompt you to pay a much reduced fee (e.g. 20%) each year after that to renew your SMS. So it's like buying a full update every 5th year, but giving you all the updates in between and giving them a steady revenue stream. Lots of technical software I use works this way.

As said up the thread, the big benefit for users is that they can keep current on all the releases as long as they want, but stop paying at any time and just keep using their last version as long as their hardware supports it. They can restart their SMS later, but they effectively have to pay a catch-up fee equivalent to the time they skipped (or just buy a new full license with 1 year SMS if that's cheaper). So there's no way for the publisher to get screwed by people churning their subscription as you postulated.

Also, I'm not saying there are not people who benefit from the Adobe subscription model. As others have said, if you're a media professional who always has to stay up to date on versions, or if you're just starting out and haven't already bought these professional-grade software packages, it's a huge bargain. No doubt about that. It's those of us in between who have already invested in these tools and want a way to upgrade only if and when we really need to and have the means to, but want to have perpetual access to our catalogs and editing tools REGARDLESS of what Adobe does in the future, that have a problem with the CC model.


----------



## miah (Dec 18, 2014)

wsheldon said:


> miah said:
> 
> 
> > I just had another thought. Though the only thing I know about MathWorks' subscription model is what has been revealed in this thread, it just occurred to me that allowing someone to continue using software that they once subscribed to has major pitfalls for the publisher. For instance, it wouldn't take long for people to figure out that they could game the system by subscribing for a single month, paying their $9.99, then canceling. They could then go on using two versions (both Ps and Lr) that they had just rented until such time that they wanted to "upgrade." They'd then resubscribe, get the newer versions, then cancel again. This tactic would cost Adobe millions.
> ...



Thanks for the clarification on MathWorks' policy, wsheldon; that's really helpful to know.

So, given your stated needs, if Adobe were to come to you and ask how they could improve their policy to make you feel good about their subscription service--while still allowing them to make a reasonable profit from their labors--what would be your answer? There are obviously a number of ways to skin this cat, but I think the photo-hobbiest market has a legitimate beef with their current policy and if we can communicate that to Adobe they may be willing to listen.


----------



## wsheldon (Dec 18, 2014)

miah said:


> Thanks for the clarification on MathWorks' policy, wsheldon; that's really helpful to know.
> 
> So, given your stated needs, if Adobe were to come to you and ask how they could improve their policy to make you feel good about their subscription service--while still allowing them to make a reasonable profit from their labors--what would be your answer? There are obviously a number of ways to skin this cat, but I think the photo-hobbiest market has a legitimate beef with their current policy and if we can communicate that to Adobe they may be willing to listen.



Honestly, I think a hybrid approach would be ideal. Offer a CC subscription option with a higher start-up fee that gives you the right to keep using your latest version if you stop subscribing, but still offer the lower priced pay-as-you-go option with no start-up for the people that makes sense for. Basically an option for a perpetual license but within the existing CC infrastructure. 

Offering hold-outs like me who are clinging to our full versions of CS6 and LR5 a discount for that perpetual license option would be even better (and smooth our ruffled feathers).


----------



## lintoni (Dec 18, 2014)

I've got MY copy of Lightroom, and I'm learning to use the Gimp, so no need for CC. If I need to buy a RAW processor in future, it will be DXO Optics Pro, or possibly Photo Ninja.


----------



## miah (Dec 18, 2014)

wsheldon said:


> miah said:
> 
> 
> > Thanks for the clarification on MathWorks' policy, wsheldon; that's really helpful to know.
> ...



That sounds a whole lot like my exit-fee strategy, only mine would put the cost of a perpetual license on the tail-end instead of the front-end. This would lower the entry barrier and raise the exit barrier, something I think Adobe would be happier with. 

So, if Adobe offered you a contract where the price of exit/perpetual license couldn't go up after you agree to subscribe, and your sole cost of entry is paying $9.99 to subscribe to the latest versions of both Ps and Lr with all the updates, technical support and behance thrown in, would you do it? Mind you, if they decided to jack the rate at some point, say to $14.99/month, you could always exercise your exit strategy, pay the agreed upon exit fee for your fixed-version, perpetual copy, and go on your way.

I'm just trying to get to the bottom of this argument, if that's possible. Like I said previously, I think the non-fulltime photographers have a legitimate concern; I'd just like to see if there's a formula that both those folks and Adobe can live with.


----------

