# Lightroom "Classic" New Features Real World Experience



## [email protected] (Oct 20, 2017)

I figured I'd start a post regarding some of the new features in the "real" Lightroom - the one that runs on your computer and is fully functional. I think we need a specific post for this because the others have (inevitably) become primarily about the subscription/pricing model. This post is intended to have NOTHING TO DO with the pricing model. 

I've been playing with the luminance and color mask features, and I have to say it's a game changer for me. I've always thought that the main reason why I'd use Photoshop at all was the selection tools, less the layers functionality. I'm supremely pleased with how effective these two selection methods are. I'm able to get much more accurate and natural-looking selections. Very pleased with that. 

With the speed improvements, I'm not really seeing much in the way of that. I should note that I never really found Lightroom to be so slow as some have indicated, so perhaps my system has been configured in such a manner where I've been lucky, and others are seeing big speed improvements. I'm curious to see if others are noticing it being zipper AND whether they found it slow to begin with. 

I also notice that there is a new "process"! We'd previously been on the 2012 process, and there is now a version 4/current process. Has anyone tested out to see what's different about the new processing method? An Adobe web page states: "Auto-masking with better noise reduction by updating to Process Version 4 (Current) under Camera Calibration." Not exactly sure what that means. Perhaps it is about the performance of noise reduction when making a local adjustment that is selected using auto masking. If so, that sounds like a particularly narrow set of circumstances.


----------



## pwp (Oct 20, 2017)

Lr Classic looks very promising. My livelihood depends on a smooth running Lr so I'll be holding off for a week or so to see if any unlikely gremlins emerge. 

My comfortably high specced quad core Windows 10 system is one of the unfortunate configurations that Lr runs erratically on. The local adjustment brush is the primary kiss of death, and Radial & Gradient tools need to be used minimally or the whole thing slows to a crawl. Great when you're on a deadline! 

Therefore the promised speed boost is of huge interest to me, as is the headline new feature, the Luminence and Color masks. Adobe's Julianne Kost's demonstration video spells it out clearly.

If Lr Classic runs slow on my machine I'll be looking at a rebuild using a proven hardware configuration, provided such a component list is searchable and available. 

-pw


----------



## bitm2007 (Oct 20, 2017)

I'm finding it quite refreshing to have a version of Lightroom (the all new LR CC) that isn't as bloated as Lightroom Classic has become, if the full functionality (tone curve, noise, sharpen options etc) of the classic versions develope module (but not the other modules which I never use) is added to it the future, it would be more suited to my needs that LR classic.


----------



## LDS (Oct 20, 2017)

bitm2007 said:


> I'm finding it quite refreshing to have a version of Lightroom (the all new LR CC) that isn't as bloated as Lightroom Classic has become, if the full functionality (tone curve, noise, sharpen options etc) of the classic versions develope module (but not the other modules which I never use) is added to it the future, it would be more suited to my needs that LR classic.



Never found LR bloated, and I use the Map and Print modules quite a lot. I also have friend who like the Slideshow/Web modules quite a lot (i.e. to quickly show and sell photos at events, often outdoor). I don't use the Book module just because I create my books myself.

But I'm afraid, the people who designed LR are now mostly out of the project.

In one of the speeches, I noticed a disturbing assertion. Someone, in explaining why in CC the order of controls changed, said "we didn't find an explanation why exposure controls are between white balance and saturation".

Because the reason is LR was designed around a workflow-based interface, not a "group of controls related by some programming common factor". The former is what a competent application designer would study and design an UI around, the latter is what a lame programmer without a clue about how users work would do. 

Why WB is the first slider? Because white balance is what a photographer would do first before further editing. While Saturation is something you may never touch (but oh yes, hypersaturated images are so fashionable today), and if you do, you'll do last.

The books about LR I read always said the controls order is the average order you should use them, and that makes sense - the order was a sort of "checklist" reminding you the steps to process your image, without having to jump among many tools scattered around the interface (as you do in Photoshop, or other applications alike).


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Oct 21, 2017)

There are some issues for me that seem to prevent me wanting to use LR CC on my desktop. There is no way to restrict it from uploading all my images, and no way to remove them from the cloud except to delete them totally from the cloud and from my computer. I asked about this, they can be removed if added by a mobile device, but not if uploaded by cc from the desktop. Even if on a removable drive, they will be deleted when its connected.

I think someone who wants to use it needs to review how files are handled first, because they could lock you into something you don't want. Unfortunately, write ups are not covering the aspect of file handling, addition and removal.


----------



## Jopa (Oct 21, 2017)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> There are some issues for me that seem to prevent me wanting to use LR CC on my desktop. There is no way to restrict it from uploading all my images, and no way to remove them from the cloud except to delete them totally from the cloud and from my computer. I asked about this, they can be removed if added by a mobile device, but not if uploaded by cc from the desktop. Even if on a removable drive, they will be deleted when its connected.
> 
> I think someone who wants to use it needs to review how files are handled first, because they could lock you into something you don't want. Unfortunately, write ups are not covering the aspect of file handling, addition and removal.



Try the Classic one (not CC, but CC Classic, a.k.a CCC  ), it's no different from LR6. It also seems to be slightly faster.


----------



## jd7 (Oct 21, 2017)

I am not a fan of the LR Classic name, but it is definitely running faster for me than LR CC 2015 was running. I'm happy about that!


----------



## Jopa (Oct 21, 2017)

jd7 said:


> I am not a fan of the LR Classic name, but it is definitely running faster for me than LR CC 2015 was running. I'm happy about that!



They could have called it "LR Old Fashioned" or "LR Oldster" or simply "LR Not Cool" to promote a faster switch to the pure CC version.


----------



## bitm2007 (Oct 21, 2017)

Jopa said:


> jd7 said:
> 
> 
> > I am not a fan of the LR Classic name, but it is definitely running faster for me than LR CC 2015 was running. I'm happy about that!
> ...



I'm not a fan of the name LR CC classic either. Just Lightroom, Lighroom 7 or Lightroom Original would have been better in my opinion, after all LR CC classic has very little to do with the cloud, and the word "classic" implies that it is a high quality product that is out of date "which it isn't given that a new version has just been released, and there are future updates on the way.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Oct 22, 2017)

Jopa said:


> Mt Spokane Photography said:
> 
> 
> > There are some issues for me that seem to prevent me wanting to use LR CC on my desktop. There is no way to restrict it from uploading all my images, and no way to remove them from the cloud except to delete them totally from the cloud and from my computer. I asked about this, they can be removed if added by a mobile device, but not if uploaded by cc from the desktop. Even if on a removable drive, they will be deleted when its connected.
> ...



Of course, I use the classic, I'm referring to the CC version which is lacking in features and has several other drawbacks. Its definitely not fully functional compared to the classic, but does basic editing, which is all some need.

Do you want to print images? - I hope not

Rename images - Nope

Export as DNG, TIFF, or PSD - what are those?

3rd party plugins - Sorry

Red eye or pet eye elimination - you are supposed to like red!

By now, you get the idea, if you are a power user, or just a amateur who uses on camera flash to get red eye, you will be frustrated.

There are too many to mention individually, so here is one list, I suspect it will grow
.
https://www.lightroomqueen.com/lightroom-cc-vs-classic-features/


----------



## Don Haines (Oct 22, 2017)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> There are some issues for me that seem to prevent me wanting to use LR CC on my desktop. There is no way to restrict it from uploading all my images, and no way to remove them from the cloud except to delete them totally from the cloud and from my computer. I asked about this, they can be removed if added by a mobile device, but not if uploaded by cc from the desktop. Even if on a removable drive, they will be deleted when its connected.
> 
> I think someone who wants to use it needs to review how files are handled first, because they could lock you into something you don't want. Unfortunately, write ups are not covering the aspect of file handling, addition and removal.



WHAT!

If you are using Lightroom CC, it will automatically upload all your images to the cloud and there is no way to stop this from happening? I shot 100GB of files yesterday, and living in a rural area, I have a 250KB/ sec upload speed on my internet....on a good day! That’s 5 days to upload the files!!!!

Is this true? Is there no way to disable uploads?


----------



## Talys (Oct 22, 2017)

[email protected] said:


> I also notice that there is a new "process"! We'd previously been on the 2012 process, and there is now a version 4/current process. Has anyone tested out to see what's different about the new processing method? An Adobe web page states: "Auto-masking with better noise reduction by updating to Process Version 4 (Current) under Camera Calibration." Not exactly sure what that means. Perhaps it is about the performance of noise reduction when making a local adjustment that is selected using auto masking. If so, that sounds like a particularly narrow set of circumstances.



Hmm, nice catch! I went to some old mid-range ISO photos (1000-2000), and I can't tell the difference between v3 and v4 under 2x magnification. But hey, it isn't worse, and in some special cases, maybe it will come out better 

So far, I really like everything about the new Lightroom (Classic), except... "Adobe Lightroom Classic CC". What genius came up with that tortuous name!


----------



## Hector1970 (Oct 22, 2017)

I'm not sure what Mt Spokane is referring to about loading to the cloud. He is not referring to the classic version. The other new Lightroom cc is cloud based so this is designed to load the photos into the cloud. This is probably the way of the future as fibre broadband takes off. City users get the faster speeds years in advance of more rural locations. 
I've been using the new Lightroom classic now for a few days. I'm aware of new features but haven't spotted any of them yet. I'll have to watch the videos to work out where they are and what they do. 
I am not finding it running any quicker. I have 16GB RAM. 
There are people here who don't find Lightroom slow that have about a thousand photos in their catalog and 64GB of RAM and don't understand that most PC / Laptops sold struggle with Lightroom and Photoshop. Lightroom in particular is a bloated piece of software.
In summary for me it really like only a minor upgrade with obscure changes that most users won't use.


----------



## Labdoc (Oct 22, 2017)

LRCC classic Import with 1:1 previews seems to take just as long as the last version. Merging HDR photos was faster and even with 30 MB files or larger it was better. I managed to get 12 processes going at once and that's where I hit a wall and everything slowed down. When I took the HDR's I made and merged them into a HDR panorama, it was as slow as ever with the system crashing once while I had 2 processing and tried to start a 3rd. For me, an improvement, but like most things, not perfect.


----------



## LDS (Oct 22, 2017)

Don Haines said:


> WHAT!
> 
> If you are using Lightroom CC, it will automatically upload all your images to the cloud and there is no way to stop this from happening? I shot 100GB of files yesterday, and living in a rural area, I have a 250KB/ sec upload speed on my internet....on a good day! That’s 5 days to upload the files!!!!
> 
> Is this true? Is there no way to disable uploads?



Ligtroom Classic works as usual. But if you import images using the new LR CC they will be uploaded to the Adobe servers, and there's no way you can disable it - it has been designed explicitly this way. You can select to keep a *copy* of the locally (but it supports a single destination), otherwise the image are only stored remotely, and locally they are kept in a cache for editing, if not already in cache they are retrieved as needed.

I also suggest the read the Adobe TOS about its cloud storage - which rights they have on your photos, how you could access it using non Adobe tools, etc. Especially, read about the clauses about what happens if they lose your photos - they put big limits on what you can ask in damages, and you're forced to go through arbitration, and no class action is allowed.

Cloud may be the future, but could be full of rain, hail, lightnings, and thunderstorms... a cloud backup solution could be great, but it has to be fully contracted as such.


----------



## Talys (Oct 22, 2017)

Hector1970 said:


> I'm not sure what Mt Spokane is referring to about loading to the cloud. He is not referring to the classic version. The other new Lightroom cc is cloud based so this is designed to load the photos into the cloud. This is probably the way of the future as fibre broadband takes off. City users get the faster speeds years in advance of more rural locations.



No, I don't think so, not for volume photography. I have 180Mbps fiber (both ways), and sure, single 30MB files are individually fast to transfer one way or the other. But, for example, 30GB of data, or 60GB of data, which can be a half-day's shooting. As fast as fiber is, it isn't within the realm of SSD or RAID SSD storage on or 10gigabit LAN. The speed of going from 1 image to the next in Develop matters, and it won't be comparable.

Aslo, people with large libraries go through 10+ TB a year (or even double that). I'm not sure we'll be seeing 100TB+ cloud storage any time soon.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Oct 22, 2017)

Hector1970 said:


> don't understand that most PC / Laptops sold struggle with Lightroom and Photoshop. Lightroom in particular is a bloated piece of software.
> In summary for me it really like only a minor upgrade with obscure changes that most users won't use.



My very old and ordinary Lenovo X100 sails along with Lightroom and Photoshop very nicely. I bought it in 2009. You would have to hunt very hard today to find a laptop that can't run circles around it.


----------



## meywd (Oct 23, 2017)

Talys said:


> Hector1970 said:
> 
> 
> > I'm not sure what Mt Spokane is referring to about loading to the cloud. He is not referring to the classic version. The other new Lightroom cc is cloud based so this is designed to load the photos into the cloud. This is probably the way of the future as fibre broadband takes off. City users get the faster speeds years in advance of more rural locations.
> ...





Mt Spokane Photography said:


> Hector1970 said:
> 
> 
> > don't understand that most PC / Laptops sold struggle with Lightroom and Photoshop. Lightroom in particular is a bloated piece of software.
> ...



I don't have any inside info on Lightroom but I don't think the reason for it being slow is that its bloated, Sensors get higher and higher megapixel count, which needs more RAM, faster drives (SSDs or even SSDs in raid) and faster graphics cards.

My Home desktop which is from 2009 is doing good, I have an SSD for the main drive but I can't put the photos there, since its only 250GB and I have reached more than 1TB even after deleting many of un-needed photos, the 12GB ram is great for large Panoramas but still I face issues because I always like to keep my most used apps open and since I am a developer I always have few GBs reserved for the needed tools.

Now I am not saying that LR is not to blame, but having high res previews ready can cause serious load on the HDD and Memory, Having a fast enough PC is part of being a photographer these days.


----------



## SecureGSM (Oct 24, 2017)

I found what seems to be a bug or inconsistency in camera profile generation via X-Rite Passport version 1.1.1 Lightroom module. Lightroom CC Classic.

I used Export with preset --> Color Checker Passport option to generate a camera profile. gave the new profile a name, OK. Profile was successfully generated and saved in:

C:\Users\My_User_Name\AppData\Roaming\Adobe\CameraRaw\CameraProfiles

I restarted Lightroom but *new profile was not showing up* in Develop --> Camera Calibration --> Profile.

I repeat the procedure again and again to no avail.


I found the problem and 2 solutions:

*The problem:*

Profile was created and file was copied to the right folder but the file name contains *NO file extension*. i.e.

5D IV 24 70 F2.8 II ISO 100 Day Light instead of 5D IV 24 70 F2.8 II ISO 100 Day Light*.dcp*
notice how* .dcp* part is missing in the plugin created camera profile file name. 

That is why Lightroom did not detect the new camera profile upon restart.


The solution:

1. go to the folder where new camera profile was saved and modify the file name: add .dcp at the end of the file

or

2. instead of using Export with preset --> Color Checker Passport option, use the following procedure:

*File --> Export -->Export to: X-Rite Presets*

Give your new profile a name in DNG Profile Name box, click export, restart your Lightroom CC Classic.

I am sure that this issue will be fixed sooner or later but for now... this gets the job done.


----------



## martti (Nov 6, 2017)

I am totally confused with all the new CC applications. 
The LR CC started loading my library to the cloud which is a hopeless task with the connection I have on this island. The Bridge CC has fascinating new features but could not find some pictures on my HD. Photoshop CC seems to be working as well as the CS6 but I do not really understand what I am winning.


The modern world is divided sharply according to internet bandwidth.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Nov 6, 2017)

I confused the issue with my uploading comments.

LR CC uploads images to the cloud.

With LR Classic CC, you determine which images to upload by placing them in a collection that you set to sync with LR CC cloud. I think that all Lightroom cloud images sync with LR Classic CC when you do this.

Thats how I use it, so my tablet and phone images sync to my pc via the cloud. I have not found a way to get images from my cameras to automatically sync to LR CC Cloud, maybe Jeffrey Friedl will write a app? I can, of course sync to the Canon cloud.


----------



## docsmith (Nov 12, 2017)

Is anyone else finding LR "Classic" buggy? It is freezing up on me, screen is going green or other multi-colors. At times it seems faster, but if it is already exporting, it does not want to do anything else, something I was able to do with the previous LR version.

I could be a fan if it starts operating smoother, but right now, I feel like I am working with software from the 1990's....


----------



## Frodo (Nov 12, 2017)

I'm a confused user since LR 1.0. I "refreshed" my 7 year old Windows 10 machine and went to reintall LR. This was not helped by a "technical problem" at Adobe.com that did not have a record of my registrations. Anyway it prompted me to "update" to Lightroom Class CC, which I understand is the subscription model. With a lot of searching I finally found a place where I could download LR 6.13. So all is sweet.
By the way, I find that my PC (old i7 quad core 2.8 cpu and 6GB RAM) is okay, even with 5Ds files. But my expectations are probably lower than most of you. I'd like a faster PC but my priorities were camera, display and printer....


----------



## martti (Feb 17, 2018)

Where I live, I have to choose whether I watch garbage TV series on Netflix or download upgrades.
There is not enough bandwidth to do both. 
Even having the LR catalog on Dropbox gives hiccups to Netflix.
I wonder if people living in the 1st world realize what they have.


Well I have what they (you?) don't have.
The Indian Ocean, for instance.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Feb 17, 2018)

martti said:


> Where I live, I have to choose whether I watch garbage TV series on Netflix or download upgrades.
> There is not enough bandwidth to do both.
> Even having the LR catalog on Dropbox gives hiccups to Netflix.
> I wonder if people living in the 1st world realize what they have.
> ...



I'm rural, so its a choice of a wireless ISP, Satellite or maybe a modem? I chose Wireless ISP, service is slow, but reasonable. The tower that transmits ices up in the winter and can knock out service.

About 3 weeks ago, they replaced my radio with a less powerful 5 ghz band unit, and my downloads shot up to over 30 Mbps, so I've been very happy.


----------



## Talys (Feb 17, 2018)

martti said:


> Where I live, I have to choose whether I watch garbage TV series on Netflix or download upgrades.
> There is not enough bandwidth to do both.
> Even having the LR catalog on Dropbox gives hiccups to Netflix.
> I wonder if people living in the 1st world realize what they have.
> ...





Most people in North America, even when they have relatively slow internet connections, don't get slower internet speeds based on what they watch on "cable" TV, even when that TV is provided over the Internet (like DSL). Here, the internet uses a side channel with quality of service, reserved bandwidth just for TV, so that a Windows update doesn't screw up your television. The TV also doesn't slow down the Internet, because otherwise, nobody would ever buy services like DSL (they would get cable).

Except for people who are fortunate enough to have fiber, most people here will have cable or DSL, which means an asymmetric connection, and specifically, much faster downloads than uploads. Still, in most cases, uploading photos up to the cloud should not affect downstream traffic in any noticeable way.

And finally, if it's important for you to do so, you can always constrain the upload bandwidth (and just take longer to upload your files).

However, all that said, I only briefly had Lightroom CC (no classic) installed. I'm not sure, on the desktop, why as a photographer I would ever choose it over regular Lightroom CC Classic. It wouldn't work anyways, because my historical files go on a long time, over many hard drives, and I'd have to upload 10 terrabytes of photos up to the cloud.


----------



## LDS (Feb 17, 2018)

Talys said:


> Still, in most cases, uploading photos up to the cloud should not affect downstream traffic in any noticeable way.



It could. Some protocols are bidirectional, you receive data, but need also to send some data back to signal the transmission is happened as expected. If the upload channel is fully used by a connection, as it often happens with bulk uploads of large files like photos or videos, other connections may have issue to send those packet within the required time, and the source may slow down transmission or re-transmit data thinking the destinations can't cope or didn't receive the data.

ADSL upload channels are deliberately limited by the standard, you can get 3Mb only with special setups, otherwise it's 1Mb. VDSL and fiber allows for much higher upload speed. Some mobile standards are better, as long as the local radio capacity is not exceeded by many users.

The solution is to limit the bandwidth used by the upload channel - or get a connection with better upload speed.

Many cloud storage offerings will be hampered by the lack of adequate speed until they are improved, and it could become soon a driver to invest in faster networks.


----------



## Talys (Feb 18, 2018)

LDS said:


> Talys said:
> 
> 
> > Still, in most cases, uploading photos up to the cloud should not affect downstream traffic in any noticeable way.
> ...



Actually, TELUS ADSL is 5Mbps up/25Mbps down. Prior to fiber, I had both cable and dsl, and the upload speeds on both were pretty good (4.3+ sustained uploads on ADSL).

The solution, however, as I mentioned, is to constrain your upload channel to a lower speed, or, better, configure QoS on your network hardware.


----------



## martti (Feb 18, 2018)

@MountSpokane: Our rate limiting step is the cable where we are at the very end. Another factor is that all trafic from here is routed by Paris. True, they sell fiber connections here but even though you get lightin fast connections within the Réunion Island, once you go overseas you are looking at 800k.


@Talys: Adobe did not supply LR CC here at all for a while. They did not want to sell the 'Classic' either. I went through all kinds of things to get it downloaded, finally with the help of a guy in Finland working for Adobe. The French guy was even more ignorant than I. Cloud based services are for the First World. Here they are of no use.Or what if you go to China? the connections are totally unpredictable there, the private customer being at the bottof of the feeding chain.


----------



## Talys (Feb 18, 2018)

martti said:


> @Talys: Adobe did not supply LR CC here at all for a while. They did not want to sell the 'Classic' either. I went through all kinds of things to get it downloaded, finally with the help of a guy in Finland working for Adobe. The French guy was even more ignorant than I. Cloud based services are for the First World. Here they are of no use.Or what if you go to China? the connections are totally unpredictable there, the private customer being at the bottof of the feeding chain.



By the way, please don't get me wrong; I'm not advocating for the cloud-only LR. I am not a fan, simply because I think that 30MB-100MB files are way to freaking huge to put up to the cloud automatically. At least, not until fiber as fast as SSDs are common and people can get a tens or hundreds of terabytes of cloud storage as an affordable service.

In the absence of that, cloud services for something like Lightroom should be, at most, "sync these specific folders". Whether your upload speed is 1, 3, 5 or 15 megabits really doesn't make a difference. A 128GB SD card will take _forever_ to upload. I mean, it's brutal even at 200 megabits, which is blazing fast for the internet, and still relatively slow for local storage.

In that context, I'm curious. In your region, if Adobe wasn't supplying Lightroom CC (cloud version) and also not Classic (the one we're used to)... were they promoting any kind of Lightroom at all?


----------



## LDS (Feb 18, 2018)

Talys said:


> Actually, TELUS ADSL is 5Mbps up/25Mbps down. Prior to fiber, I had both cable and dsl, and the upload speeds on both were pretty good (4.3+ sustained uploads on ADSL).



ITU G.992.3 Annex J e G.992.5 Annex M have a theoretical max speed of 3.5 Mb/s - and you also need to be close enough to the DSLAM (and have good copper between).

I'm not denying you're getting those speed, but it doesn't look a plain ADSL2/ADSL2+ connection over phone copper wires, unless bonding is used. I've never seen those speeds offered over ADSLx, but only where DOCSIS or VDSL are employed (or symmetric solutions). 

You're lucky, for most people on ADSL connections, the upload speed is or will become an issue to upload to cloud storage a lot of data.


----------



## Don Haines (Feb 18, 2018)

martti said:


> @MountSpokane: Our rate limiting step is the cable where we are at the very end. Another factor is that all trafic from here is routed by Paris. True, they sell fiber connections here but even though you get lightin fast connections within the Réunion Island, once you go overseas you are looking at 800k.
> 
> 
> @Talys: Adobe did not supply LR CC here at all for a while. They did not want to sell the 'Classic' either. I went through all kinds of things to get it downloaded, finally with the help of a guy in Finland working for Adobe. The French guy was even more ignorant than I. Cloud based services are for the First World. Here they are of no use.Or what if you go to China? the connections are totally unpredictable there, the private customer being at the bottof of the feeding chain.


I live in a rural area, about 70K outside Ottawa, capitol city of Canada. While those in town enjoy download speeds of 50 Mbits/sec and uploads around 8, I have downloads at 500K and uploads at 100K. Then we have the remote communities up north, where the entire community is sharing a 20Mbps satcom link, complete with the associated delay.... high speed internet is not universal, even in the so called first world


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Feb 18, 2018)

Don Haines said:


> martti said:
> 
> 
> > @MountSpokane: Our rate limiting step is the cable where we are at the very end. Another factor is that all trafic from here is routed by Paris. True, they sell fiber connections here but even though you get lightin fast connections within the Réunion Island, once you go overseas you are looking at 800k.
> ...



I would have thought you could get Hughes Gen 5, but I looked at a map of the spot beams and there is a gaping hole at Ottawa. I hope they decide that they can cover the area. I wouldn't wish satellite internat on anyone who had a reasonable alternative, I've been there. It is great if you have 500K though. Gen 5 has 30 MB/sec downloads, but the high latency makes many tasks miserable.

My WISP has reasonable latency of 7-11 ms. Not great, but far better than the satellite internat.


----------



## Don Haines (Feb 18, 2018)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> Don Haines said:
> 
> 
> > martti said:
> ...



One of the things that I do at work is satellite ground stations.....hmmmmmm...... We aren't using that 13.5 meter dish....... I wonder if anyone would notice? That would give me 160MB bidirectional link if I could afford to pay for the entire X-band transceiver on the satellite.... Probably about 10 dollars a minute if I can negotiate a discount.....

Or I could just wait until the land coms get upgraded.... Fiber is now about 8K away.....


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Feb 19, 2018)

Don Haines said:


> Or I could just wait until the land coms get upgraded.... Fiber is now about 8K away.....



It might cost less to setup a relay from a hilltop where fiber is located. You could share it with others and get yours free by charging the others. 

Out here in the country, fiber is strange. A local rural power utility setup fiber to all its customers at no cost to them. The utilities are prevented by law from selling internet or phone services to users but can wholesale it, so you buy the service from a retail dealer for about the same price as cable internet.

The utility serves only the neighboring county, so it goes about 7 miles from me and stops. Our utility is not interested in providing Internet, they include quite a bit of city areas so the Rural folks get ignored.


----------



## LDS (Feb 20, 2018)

Talys said:


> I'm curious. In your region, if Adobe wasn't supplying Lightroom CC (cloud version) and also not Classic (the one we're used to)... were they promoting any kind of Lightroom at all?



That could become another absurdity of the subscription/cloud model when they feel the need to divide customers among "regions" - because of prices segregation and other silly amenities - and people living in some special locations risk to be excluded, or have anyway big issue to use software that has no reason not to be easily available there too.

With old licensing methods in you could have a CD shipped or download the installer without much issues.

The issue I'm afraid is marketing people see "exotic" locations only as holiday destinations where "locals" are there only to be at your service for your personal entertainment...


----------



## Talys (Feb 22, 2018)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> Out here in the country, fiber is strange. A local rural power utility setup fiber to all its customers at no cost to them. The utilities are prevented by law from selling internet or phone services to users but can wholesale it, so you buy the service from a retail dealer for about the same price as cable internet.
> 
> The utility serves only the neighboring county, so it goes about 7 miles from me and stops. Our utility is not interested in providing Internet, they include quite a bit of city areas so the Rural folks get ignored.



One thing I really have to commend TELUS for, is that they've extended PureFibre to many rural communities, some of them with barely four-digit populations in the middle of nowhere (and I think the plan is to have nearly all of them on fiber). They've also added rural communities concurrent with the metro rollout, so even though many rural areas are waiting for fiber, so are a lot of urban communities.


----------



## martti (Mar 14, 2018)

Talys:
_In that context, I'm curious. In your region, if Adobe wasn't supplying Lightroom CC (cloud version) and also not Classic (the one we're used to)... were they promoting any kind of Lightroom at all?_



"Promote" is not the correct word.
The French Adobe shop had no idea how I could get the "Classic" version of LR.
In Helsinki (where I come from) there was a professional person on the phone who helped me to get to the page where the SW was available. Such a possibility was not visible on the French pages at all.
The problems with Photoshop made me download and learn Affinity Photo.
Now, quite recently, I was able to download PS CC but I have not been using it at all.
This is how you lose clients but who cares as long as you master the market share.


----------



## jayjay88 (Mar 15, 2018)

martti said:


> The problems with Photoshop made me download and learn Affinity Photo.



That was a blessing in disguise, Martti  I also use Affinity and don't regret dumping Photoshop at all


----------

