# Adobe Announces Cloud-Based Lightroom CC



## Canon Rumors Guy (Oct 18, 2017)

```
<em>Integrated Cloud-Based Service Enables Easy Editing, Organizing, Storing and Sharing of Photography From Anywhere</em></p>
<p>LAS VEGAS–(<a href="http://www.businesswire.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">BUSINESS WIRE</a>)–Adobe (Nasdaq:ADBE) today announced the all-new Adobe Photoshop Lightroom CC cloud-based photography service. Launched over a decade ago, Lightroom became the industry’s leading desktop application for editing and organizing photography. Now in an increasingly mobile-centric world, and with major improvements in smartphone cameras, Lightroom is transforming digital photography again. Built for professionals and enthusiasts, the new Lightroom CC fulfills the demands of today’s photographers for a more accessible, cloud-based photography service for editing, organizing, storing and sharing their photos from wherever they are.</p>
<p>Featuring a streamlined user interface, Lightroom CC enables powerful editing in full resolution across mobile, desktop and the web. With Lightroom CC, photographers can make edits on one device and automatically synchronize their changes everywhere. Lightroom CC makes organizing photography collections easier with features like searchable keywords that are automatically applied without the hassle of tagging. And Lightroom CC makes it simple to share photos on social media.</p>
<p>“As the leader in digital photography, today Adobe is unveiling Lightroom CC, our next generation photography service,” said Bryan Lamkin, executive vice president and general manager, Digital Media at Adobe. “Lightroom CC answers photographers’ demand for a deeply integrated, intelligent, cloud-based photography solution.”</p>
<p><!--more--></p>
<p>Key Lightroom CC capabilities include:</p>
<ul>
<li class="bwlistitemmargb"><strong>The most powerful image editing technology:</strong><b> </b>Built on the same imaging technology that powers Photoshop and Lightroom, Lightroom CC offers a new streamlined interface with easy-to-use sliders, presets and quick adjustment tools.</li>
<li class="bwlistitemmargb"><strong>Edit anywhere:</strong><b> </b>Lightroom CC allows photographers to edit full-resolution photos anywhere – on mobile devices, desktop or the web. Edits made on one device are automatically synced across devices for anywhere access.</li>
<li class="bwlistitemmargb"><strong>Worry free back-up, cloud storage:</strong><b> </b>Lightroom CC has scalable storage options for safe and secure back up of full-resolution photos – including raw files.</li>
<li class="bwlistitemmargb"><strong>Powered by Adobe Sensei:</strong><b> </b>Adobe Sensei’s machine learning technology automatically applies searchable keywords to objects in photographs – making organization in Lightroom CC effortless.</li>
<li class="bwlistitemmargb"><strong>Built-in sharing tools:</strong> Lightroom CC makes it easy to share photos directly via social media and to create custom Lightroom web galleries that can be shared via link. Photographers can also share their work through new Adobe Portfolio integration with Lightroom CC.</li>
<li class="bwlistitemmargb"><strong>Updated award-winning mobile and web experiences:</strong>
<ul>
<li class="bwlistitemmargb">Lightroom CC for mobile on iOS: Built-in search functionality powered by Adobe Sensei, keyword support, hierarchical album support, an enhanced iPad app layout and iOS 11 files support.</li>
<li class="bwlistitemmargb">Lightroom CC for mobile on Android: Tablet support and a local adjustments brush, along with the same built-in search functionality, keyword support and hierarchical album support as seen in the iOS app.</li>
<li class="bwlistitemmargb">Lightroom CC for web: Ability to create and manage a public gallery page, as well as enhanced integration with Adobe Portfolio, which enables subscribers to easily import collections and publish their best shots to a customized Portfolio website in just a few clicks.</li>
</ul>
</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Updates to Adobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic CC

</strong>Major updates to Lightroom Classic CC, previously known as Lightroom CC, include an enhanced Embedded Preview workflow that enables users to scroll through large sets of photos to select a subset of images significantly faster than before. Lightroom Classic CC also features new editing capabilities, including a new Color Range and Luminance Masking functionality that enables users to apply precise edits. As contrasted with the cloud-centric, anywhere workflows of Lightroom CC, the new Lightroom Classic CC continues to focus on a more traditional desktop-first workflow with local storage and file and folder control.</p>
<p><strong>Availability, Plans and Pricing

</strong>The all-new Lightroom CC is available across three photography plans:</p>
<ul>
<li class="bwlistitemmargb">For photographers that want an all-in-one plan that offers the full benefits of the Lightroom CC service plus the transformative power of Photoshop, the <strong>Creative Cloud Photography plan with 1 TB</strong> includes Lightroom CC, Lightroom for mobile and web, Photoshop CC, Adobe Spark with premium features, Adobe Portfolio, and 1 TB of cloud storage ($19.99/month, but available at $14.99/month for the first year for existing Creative Cloud Photography customers).</li>
<li class="bwlistitemmargb">Lightroom CC has also been added to the existing <strong>Creative Cloud Photography plan</strong> with an additional 20 GB of storage to help users get started on the new service. This plan remains at $9.99/month and includes Lightroom CC, Lightroom for mobile and web, Lightroom Classic, Photoshop CC, Adobe Spark with premium features, Adobe Portfolio, and 20 GB of cloud storage. Creative Cloud All Apps members also have access to the new Lightroom CC service.</li>
<li class="bwlistitemmargb">The all-new <strong>Lightroom CC plan</strong> addresses the needs of photographers who want a cloud-based photography service for editing, organizing, storing and sharing their photos from wherever they are, and includes Lightroom CC, Lightroom for mobile and web, Adobe Spark with premium features, Adobe Portfolio, and 1 TB of cloud storage ($9.99/month).</li>
</ul>
<p>For those who are truly mobile and don’t require a desktop photography solution, the Lightroom Mobile plan for iOS and Android is available with 100 GB ($4.99/month).</p>

<p>For more information on available plans, please visit <a href="http://cts.businesswire.com/ct/CT?id=smartlink&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.adobe.com%2Fcreativecloud%2Fplans.html&esheet=51700961&newsitemid=20171018005521&lan=en-US&anchor=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.adobe.com%2Fcreativecloud%2Fplans.html&index=1&md5=53668dcaac3417fc4cccb0358ee0609f" rel="nofollow">https://www.adobe.com/creativecloud/plans.html</a>.</p>
<p><strong>Helpful Links:</strong></p>
<ul>
<li class="bwlistitemmargb"><a href="http://cts.businesswire.com/ct/CT?id=smartlink&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.adobe.com%2Fcreativecloud%2Fphotography.html&esheet=51700961&newsitemid=20171018005521&lan=en-US&anchor=Photography+Page&index=2&md5=ad00074f248ff06fdc30467d895b3d3f" rel="nofollow">Photography Page</a></li>
<li class="bwlistitemmargb"><a href="http://cts.businesswire.com/ct/CT?id=smartlink&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.adobe.com%2Fproducts%2Fphotohop-lightroom.html&esheet=51700961&newsitemid=20171018005521&lan=en-US&anchor=Learn+more+about+Lightroom+CC&index=3&md5=27ea3597380173139706f392ef98552a" rel="nofollow">Learn more about Lightroom CC</a></li>
<li class="bwlistitemmargb">FAQs: <a href="http://cts.businesswire.com/ct/CT?id=smartlink&url=https%3A%2F%2Fhelpx.adobe.com%2Fcreative-cloud%2Ffaq%2FCCPp.html&esheet=51700961&newsitemid=20171018005521&lan=en-US&anchor=Creative+Cloud+Photography+plan&index=4&md5=8b9c50212fdec3b199e5fd132a4bfdfb" rel="nofollow">Creative Cloud Photography plan</a>, <a href="http://cts.businesswire.com/ct/CT?id=smartlink&url=https%3A%2F%2Fhelpx.adobe.com%2Flightroom-cc%2Ffaq.html&esheet=51700961&newsitemid=20171018005521&lan=en-US&anchor=Lightroom+CC&index=5&md5=9bbeb6f22bade1448492d87254b81acb" rel="nofollow">Lightroom CC</a></li>
<li class="bwlistitemmargb">Download Lightroom CC for <a href="http://cts.businesswire.com/ct/CT?id=smartlink&url=https%3A%2F%2Fitunes.apple.com%2Fus%2Fapp%2Fadobe-lightroom%2F&esheet=51700961&newsitemid=20171018005521&lan=en-US&anchor=iPhone&index=6&md5=a5650b15fec9e2966faee2a76a285f28" rel="nofollow">iPhone</a>, <a href="http://cts.businesswire.com/ct/CT?id=smartlink&url=https%3A%2F%2Fitunes.apple.com%2Fus%2Fapp%2Fadobe-lightroom-for-ipad%2F&esheet=51700961&newsitemid=20171018005521&lan=en-US&anchor=iPad&index=7&md5=f979083c5a0343bdaa29398e97f98009" rel="nofollow">iPad</a>, <a href="http://cts.businesswire.com/ct/CT?id=smartlink&url=https%3A%2F%2Fplay.google.com%2Fstore%2Fapps%2Fdetails%3Fid%3Dcom.adobe.lrmobile&esheet=51700961&newsitemid=20171018005521&lan=en-US&anchor=Android&index=8&md5=237f11956c5eda930ff4f0417ddb9c0c" rel="nofollow">Android</a></li>
<li class="bwlistitemmargb">Blog Posts: <a href="http://cts.businesswire.com/ct/CT?id=smartlink&url=http%3A%2F%2Fblogs.adobe.com%2Fphotoshop%2F2017%2F10%2Fintroducing-lightroom-cc-lightroom-classic-cc-and-more.html&esheet=51700961&newsitemid=20171018005521&lan=en-US&anchor=Lightroom+CC&index=9&md5=8ed73310f20cfa58346c46be3de904ad" rel="nofollow">Lightroom CC</a>, <a href="http://cts.businesswire.com/ct/CT?id=smartlink&url=http%3A%2F%2Fblogs.adobe.com%2Fphotoshop%2F2017%2F10%2Fget-the-goods-announcing-updates-to-photoshop-cc-dimension-cc-and-more-today.html&esheet=51700961&newsitemid=20171018005521&lan=en-US&anchor=Photoshop+CC&index=10&md5=6349820c71bff8c5648603a77cf07ab0" rel="nofollow">Photoshop CC</a></li>
<li class="bwlistitemmargb"><a href="http://cts.businesswire.com/ct/CT?id=smartlink&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.instagram.com%2Flightroom%2F&esheet=51700961&newsitemid=20171018005521&lan=en-US&anchor=Instagram&index=11&md5=dc2fd9b58c2d9dca7a4224d640703cc2" rel="nofollow">Instagram</a></li>
<li class="bwlistitemmargb"><a href="http://cts.businesswire.com/ct/CT?id=smartlink&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2Flightroom%2F&esheet=51700961&newsitemid=20171018005521&lan=en-US&anchor=Facebook&index=12&md5=dc420d56533fae64f91614e0823af1fc" rel="nofollow">Facebook</a></li>
<li class="bwlistitemmargb"><a href="http://cts.businesswire.com/ct/CT?id=smartlink&url=https%3A%2F%2Ftwitter.com%2FLightroom&esheet=51700961&newsitemid=20171018005521&lan=en-US&anchor=Twitter&index=13&md5=07c89c9d6bb58b2497aca0aabf63404f" rel="nofollow">Twitter</a></li>
</ul>
<p><strong>About Adobe

</strong>Adobe is changing the world through digital experiences. For more information, visit <a href="http://cts.businesswire.com/ct/CT?id=smartlink&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.adobe.com&esheet=51700961&newsitemid=20171018005521&lan=en-US&anchor=www.adobe.com&index=14&md5=cd21ecf38a77ad23b023b13a83725d4b" rel="nofollow">www.adobe.com</a>.</p>
<p>© 2017 Adobe Systems Incorporated. All rights reserved. Adobe and the Adobe logo are either registered trademarks or trademarks of Adobe Systems Incorporated in the United States and/or other countries. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners.</p>
<span id="pty_trigger"></span>
```


----------



## photojoern.de (Oct 18, 2017)

One TB of photos is nothing. When I come back from a one week photo tour, I have easily 500 GB and 5.000 - 10.000 raw photos. I don´t see how this could attract anybody. Too expensive for amateurs, too small for professionals.


----------



## arthurbikemad (Oct 18, 2017)

And some of us are stuck on the end of 3.5Mbps net speeds!!! Cloud storage is worth nothing to me.


----------



## exkeks (Oct 18, 2017)

If that means, Adobe wants us to upload all our photos before we can even edit them in the new Lightroom, they must be seriously nuts. I hope this is not the beginning of the end of Lightroom (Classic). 

Furthermore: 1TB... xD 
I'm not a pro but my library wouldn't fit.


----------



## Mikehit (Oct 18, 2017)

Am I correct to read that if I were to continue with my current LR+Photoshop the price doubles? And for my current payment I will get LR+ Spark?

Looks like I may be bailing on this one.


----------



## NorbR (Oct 18, 2017)

Mikehit said:


> Am I correct to read that if I were to continue with my current LR+Photoshop the price doubles? And for my current payment I will get LR+ Spark?
> 
> Looks like I may be bailing on this one.



I don't think you are. 
Your current plan essentially stays the same, and you still get LR and PS.

The new plan at double the price gives you 1TB of cloud space to play with the new LR CC. 

At least that's how i read it, hope I'm not wrong ...


----------



## LesC (Oct 18, 2017)

“Lightroom CC answers photographers’ demand for a deeply integrated, intelligent, cloud-based photography solution.”

Really? Who are these photographers? Surely most Pros & enthusiasts favour LR on their PC/Mac/laptop.

As to cloud storage, way too expensive. Here in the UK at least, I get unlimited storage included in my Amazon Prime subscription (which also includes free postage & Amazon TV/Music).

If by renaming Lightroom CC to Lightroom Classic is Adobe's way of saying we're phasing it out, then I'll be looking elsewhere. I find LR handy as a cataloguing tool but still find editing via Photoshop quicker and easier.


----------



## Mikehit (Oct 18, 2017)

NorbR said:


> Mikehit said:
> 
> 
> > Am I correct to read that if I were to continue with my current LR+Photoshop the price doubles? And for my current payment I will get LR+ Spark?
> ...



I think you are right: LR/Photoshop/20GB or LR/1TB for the same price. 

But I agree with the above - the reference to 'LR Classic' is strange.


----------



## bitm2007 (Oct 18, 2017)

Mikehit said:


> NorbR said:
> 
> 
> > Mikehit said:
> ...



That's your two options there will be no new perpetual offerings.

https://www.theverge.com/2017/10/18/16494080/lightroom-cc-adobe-update-release-price-photography


----------



## jeffa4444 (Oct 18, 2017)

1TB sound like the starting option at $ 19.95 per month I would imagine just like Apple cloud storage you can increase this for a fee. The additional sum of $ 10 per month over Lightroom Classic CC means its cheaper to buy 1TB of local storage you own & control than give Adobe $ 120 per annum per TB. I edit all my shots on my MacBook Pro with all files stored on local drives Ive no intention of allowing any provider to control my copyright asset. 

Sure Adobe is in it to make money but my sense is Silicone Valley companies want to ever increase what they fleece out of us expensively. 

Time for China to provide some competition.


----------



## bitm2007 (Oct 18, 2017)

Can anybody download the new version of Lightroom and Photoshop ? The options are on the Adobe website, but the Creative Cloud desktop app doesn't open on my PC.


----------



## LDS (Oct 18, 2017)

LesC said:


> “Lightroom CC answers photographers’ demand for a deeply integrated, intelligent, cloud-based photography solution.”
> 
> Really? Who are these photographers? Surely most Pros & enthusiasts favour LR on their PC/Mac/laptop.



The phone photographers. In other news, Adobe is expanding its Adobe Stock service.... lots of photos in your storage and "AI" crawlers to spot some valuable ones can feed Adobe Stock easily. They can also sell services to process photos to gather data from them... that's the true value of "deeply integrated, intelligent, cloud-based photography solution" - for Adobe.


----------



## cayenne (Oct 18, 2017)

bitm2007 said:


> Mikehit said:
> 
> 
> > NorbR said:
> ...




Hmm...and with all the "innovation" apparently functionality was removed: "A few are missing, like split toning and tone curve."

I actually LIKE using those....am I the only one?

OH well...I guess I'll go ahead and buy LR6. I've been happy at LR5, but I'd like to get LR to recognize my canon 11-24mm lens I got this past year....but I guess that will be it with me and Adobe.

I'll keep my CS6, and get LR6, and I guess will be looking at all the new, seemingly *VERY* good and comparable tools to the Adobe offerings and use those as needed.

It was nice knowing you Adobe.

cayenne


----------



## Mikehit (Oct 18, 2017)

I have just upgraded my LR CC to LR Classic CC. Split toning is still there (from what I see it disappears if you go for the LRCC+1TB option)

But the previews - OH MY GOD IS IT QUICK!!
Sometimes these speed improvements last as long as it takes to fill a buffer, but for the moment I am one happy bunny!


----------



## JonAustin (Oct 18, 2017)

bitm2007 said:


> That's your two options there will be no new perpetual offerings.
> 
> https://www.theverge.com/2017/10/18/16494080/lightroom-cc-adobe-update-release-price-photography



Well, while that's disappointing news, it doesn't come as a great surprise. I'll just hang on to Lr 5.7 until I eventually migrate over to On1 Photo RAW 20xx (or Macphun Luminar or Affinity Photo or ...)


----------



## Memdroid (Oct 18, 2017)

Mikehit said:


> I have just upgraded my LR CC to LR Classic CC. Split toning is still there (from what I see it disappears if you go for the LRCC+1TB option)
> 
> But the previews - OH MY GOD IS IT QUICK!!
> Sometimes these speed improvements last as long as it takes to fill a buffer, but for the moment I am one happy bunny!



Is it Photo Mechanic quick or Fast Raw quick?


----------



## daphins (Oct 18, 2017)

No perpetual license?

Perfect! I no longer have to consider whether I’ll continuing to do business with Adobe. I’ve migrated all my other work off their dtorrionist platform, now im free to do so with LR.


----------



## peconicgp (Oct 18, 2017)

A lot to digest here. Lightroom Queen breaks it all out. I don't think it is all doom and gloom.

https://www.lightroomqueen.com/the-future-of-lightroom


----------



## photoenix (Oct 18, 2017)

Memdroid said:


> Mikehit said:
> 
> 
> > I have just upgraded my LR CC to LR Classic CC. Split toning is still there (from what I see it disappears if you go for the LRCC+1TB option)
> ...



Nope, it still takes a moment to load, but it is quite a bit more responsive. Start-up is still slow, but the previews seem to be properly GPU accelerated now. I was happy to see my GPU overlay, so first thing I did was to go to my NVIDIA Control Panel - Manage 3D Settings - Program Settings - and put the Power management mode to Prefer maximum performance for LR Classic CC. Just in case.


----------



## Mikehit (Oct 18, 2017)

Memdroid said:


> Mikehit said:
> 
> 
> > I have just upgraded my LR CC to LR Classic CC. Split toning is still there (from what I see it disappears if you go for the LRCC+1TB option)
> ...



I have only used PM briefly for previewing but it is pretty close. I am getting under a second with most images, under 2 at most whereas before I would have that damned spinning wheel for 6 to 10 seconds. Even going from from thumbnail to 1:1 view (which was a real downer for me) is almost as quick. 

EDITED TO ADD: I think a fair bet depends on if you have 1:1 previews created on import.


----------



## cayenne (Oct 18, 2017)

Mikehit said:


> Memdroid said:
> 
> 
> > Mikehit said:
> ...



Do any of these solutions to dropping LR do the cataloging and such that LR does?

I actually really like that feature for cataloging and later finding my images I tagged, etc....

cayenne


----------



## Mikehit (Oct 18, 2017)

cayenne said:


> Do any of these solutions to dropping LR do the cataloging and such that LR does?



Are you asking if PhotoMechanic or Fast raw do cataloging? 
Photomechanic does but it is no way as sophisticated as LR. I don't know about Fastraw, BreezeBrowser etc.


----------



## LDS (Oct 18, 2017)

peconicgp said:


> A lot to digest here. Lightroom Queen breaks it all out. I don't think it is all doom and gloom.
> https://www.lightroomqueen.com/the-future-of-lightroom



Not surprisingly, from someone very close to Adobe and who makes a living out of LR... 

When I see "modern cloud storage" I always read, for example, "ancient mainframe storage"... I'm old enough to remember when my data were on a remote system...


----------



## Chaitanya (Oct 18, 2017)

The quintessential middle finger from Adobe to its loyal Lightroom users.


----------



## JonAustin (Oct 18, 2017)

peconicgp said:


> A lot to digest here. Lightroom Queen breaks it all out. I don't think it is all doom and gloom.
> 
> https://www.lightroomqueen.com/the-future-of-lightroom



From an article linked from the above: _"The majority of Lightroom users have moved over to subscription and it’s reached a point that the additional testing needed for perpetual licenses is no longer economically viable."_

I wonder if The Queen based any of the above statement on actual data from Adobe.

https://www.lightroomqueen.com/end-of-perpetual-lightroom-licenses


----------



## JRPhotos (Oct 18, 2017)

I have NO interest in the cloud storage for LR. I'll continue to use the $10 month and use PS and LR locally. Editing on a tablet is crap; I tried it on vacation- not for me!

Also, their wording is a little offensive. I don't want to edit a flippin web browser, I want to use my desktop. I'm not considered the next generation of photographers? Really?


----------



## JonAustin (Oct 18, 2017)

LDS said:


> When I see "modern cloud storage" I always read, for example, "ancient mainframe storage"... I'm old enough to remember when my data were on a remote system...



I'm right there with you! 

As we observe the passing of the perpetual Lr license, I have to remind myself that there's a burgeoning generation (or two or three) coming up behind me that have never used / may never use a desktop, a laptop or an SLR camera. They live in a world of smartphones & tablets and still, streaming & social media of every kind, all stored in the cloud.


----------



## Orangutan (Oct 18, 2017)

JonAustin said:


> _"The majority of Lightroom users have moved over to subscription and it’s reached a point that the additional testing needed for perpetual licenses is no longer economically viable."_



This is just plain BS, it's trivial 2 steps:


Set license term to 1200 months (100 years is, effectively, perpetual)
Set a bit that says "no major upgrades"

Pure spin.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Oct 18, 2017)

Mikehit said:


> Am I correct to read that if I were to continue with my current LR+Photoshop the price doubles? And for my current payment I will get LR+ Spark?
> 
> Looks like I may be bailing on this one.



You might try reading the entire article.

"Lightroom CC has also been added to the existing *Creative Cloud Photography plan* with an additional 20 GB of storage to help users get started on the new service. This plan remains at $9.99/month and includes Lightroom CC, Lightroom for mobile and web, Lightroom Classic, Photoshop CC, Adobe Spark with premium features, Adobe Portfolio, and 20 GB of cloud storage. Creative Cloud All Apps members also have access to the new Lightroom CC service."


----------



## AJ (Oct 18, 2017)

> Now in an increasingly mobile-centric world, and with major improvements in smartphone cameras, Lightroom is transforming digital photography again.



It seems that Adobe doesn't really understand their audience. An app for applying some effects to cellphone snapshots is one thing. Processing 8 GB of data after a wedding on a workstation is something else. I can't imagine waiting for uploads/downloads every time you change a parameter.

Or ... this is just a bs justification and it's all about the money, money, money


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Oct 18, 2017)

I can see a big advantage for professional users who have different people assigned to different functions, and wide internet bandwidth. Sharing the database has always been a big issue, and this implies that there is a solution. For them, additional storage purchases are no issue, but they would likely have multiple backup and archive solutions. 

For those like me, cloud based solutions might not work. I'm in the country away from cable or any high speed internet, and have a wireless connection to a tower 7 miles away (No 4G either). I do get 5-15 Mb/sec downloads when people are not watching streaming video at night.


----------



## Chaitanya (Oct 18, 2017)

AJ said:


> > Now in an increasingly mobile-centric world, and with major improvements in smartphone cameras, Lightroom is transforming digital photography again.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


+1, seems like Adobe is shoving ransomware down the peoples throats on purpose screwing up the core user group of Lightroom.


----------



## Orangutan (Oct 18, 2017)

AJ said:


> > Now in an increasingly mobile-centric world, and with major improvements in smartphone cameras, Lightroom is transforming digital photography again.
> 
> 
> 
> It seems that Adobe doesn't really understand their audience.


The mobile stuff is probably to appeal to a newer audience. "Classic" is for heavy lifting.



> Or ... this is just a bs justification and it's all about the money, money, money



Of course it is, I don't pretend anything else. That's how corporations work, I just hoped that there were enough of us "perpetual" holdouts that Adobe would relent. It's OK, I'll keep going with LR6, then move to something else. I have no need to be shackled to their cloud.


----------



## magarity (Oct 18, 2017)

It seems like "CC" really stands for Credit Card.


----------



## GammyKnee (Oct 18, 2017)

Well I'll be sticking with LR 6 for a while, and then when I want to move on I guess it'll be Capture One, or more likely Affinity. The latter still has a way to go before it's a viable option for me, but it's catching up fast.


----------



## miketcool (Oct 18, 2017)

If Adobe wants to stay competitive they will need everyone to move their high quality photos online. Such a vast personal library allows them to develop cutting edge technology for searching, cataloguing, and manipulating photos. The techniques we employed 10 years ago to touch up a photo will be available by simple finger taps and sliders.

The industry is about to take a tremendous leap forward in a way that will put many people out of business if they do not change.


----------



## Orangutan (Oct 18, 2017)

miketcool said:


> If Adobe wants to stay competitive they will need everyone to move their high quality photos online. Such a vast personal library allows them to develop cutting edge technology for searching, cataloguing, and manipulating photos. The techniques we employed 10 years ago to touch up a photo will be available by simple finger taps and sliders.
> 
> The industry is about to take a tremendous leap forward in a way that will put many people out of business if they do not change.



Will they pay their customers for use of their photos as part of their data set? No? Didn't think so. 

No thank you, I'll keep my photos under my own control.


----------



## LDS (Oct 18, 2017)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> I can see a big advantage for professional users who have different people assigned to different functions, and wide internet bandwidth. Sharing the database has always been a big issue, and this implies that there is a solution. For them, additional storage purchases are no issue, but they would likely have multiple backup and archive solutions.



But it also means everything you apply to the photos is strictly stored on Adobe side, and no other non Adobe application can access it. It's a huge lock-in.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Oct 18, 2017)

I use and edit my photos in multiple locations, its a headache since the catalog cannot be shared on my NAS. Its a hassle to keep the latest version available in multiple places, so I am definitely interested in the cloud version where I can directly upload images to the cloud as soon as they are captured. Just how this would work today is a question for me, I'm not using wi-fi because it eats up batteries, but I do have a eye-fi card that might be able to upload to the cloud indirectly, I'm sure that solutions will be available. I have my NAS units disconnected from any internet connections due to security concerns, I'm not smart enough to make and keep them secure.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Oct 18, 2017)

I'm starting to look into the Cloud version, it has a lot of missing features, or ones that must be done differently, its definitely a subset of the full Lightroom CC Classic and in many ways less powerful. There is a table here that compares a long list of features that matter to photographers.

I am downloading the free quick start booklets to see what type of a workflow is recommended.

https://www.lightroomqueen.com/lightroom-cc-vs-classic-features


----------



## JRPhotos (Oct 18, 2017)

miketcool said:


> If Adobe wants to stay competitive they will need everyone to move their high quality photos online. Such a vast personal library allows them to develop cutting edge technology for searching, cataloguing, and manipulating photos. The techniques we employed 10 years ago to touch up a photo will be available by simple finger taps and sliders.
> 
> The industry is about to take a tremendous leap forward in a way that will put many people out of business if they do not change.


Gee, ok. thanks for that un-helpful Adobe PR there.

I wonder how many others will be looking at Capture One more seriously now? I know that I am.


----------



## LDS (Oct 18, 2017)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> I am definitely interested in the cloud version where I can directly upload images to the cloud as soon as they are captured. Just how this would work today is a question for me, I'm not using wi-fi because it eats up batteries, but I do have a eye-fi card that might be able to upload to the cloud indirectly



The question is is LR CC is the only way to upload and access the photos, or not. It doesn't look a kind of DropBox/OneDrive/GDrive generic storage, it looks more like Google Photos. Probably Adobe will make something available for direct uploads, but I guess it will imply a proprietary app or API.

There are also other interesting questions, for example if Adobe is running its own infrastructure, or is leaning on another one (i.e. AWS) - which leads to another - in which country and thereby jurisdiction the photos are stored, and thereby who could access it - and let's see what the US Supreme Court will rule about the DoJ asking MS to lend emails stored on its Irish servers. For professional photographers, especially photojournalists but not only, it's not something of secondary importance.

I would have liked to see Adobe spilt LR in "Lightroom Cloud", and "Lightroom Professional", the latter with higher-end features. But it looks Adobe feels its competitors are not Corel or PhaseOne or Affinity - but Google, Facebook and Amazon.

This could mean a big shift in products designs.


----------



## stevelee (Oct 18, 2017)

JRPhotos said:


> I'm not considered the next generation of photographers? Really?



I'm certainly not considered the next generation of anything. I'm from a previous generation of photographers.

I can't even see the point in my using Lightroom. The whole database kind of approach of LR or even Apple Photos doesn't fit how my mind works. I know Scott Kelby considers us Bridge + Photoshop users to be old fogeys.

My subscription is going up something like $3/month, so that is hardly motivation enough to drop it. I could probably do OK with the $9/month subscription, but I still use InDesign and Illustrator on occasion and would miss them. And when I get frustrated with trying to deal with color in FCP X, I will break out Premiere, even though I'm not good at using it otherwise.


----------



## Talys (Oct 18, 2017)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> I use and edit my photos in multiple locations, its a headache since the catalog cannot be shared on my NAS. Its a hassle to keep the latest version available in multiple places, so I am definitely interested in the cloud version where I can directly upload images to the cloud as soon as they are captured. Just how this would work today is a question for me, I'm not using wi-fi because it eats up batteries, but I do have a eye-fi card that might be able to upload to the cloud indirectly, I'm sure that solutions will be available. I have my NAS units disconnected from any internet connections due to security concerns, I'm not smart enough to make and keep them secure.



How much storage do you need?

One option might be to tell lightroom to save changes in a sidecar (XMP) file instead of the catalogue, and then use a cloud service like OneDrive. 

Then you can also have the best of both worlds; the CC version of lightroom, from that list... looks totally messed up, uselessly gimped. It's missing some really important features, like Split Toning... Compare View... Secondary Screen... max zoom 2:1... NO RENAME PHOTOS.... 

I mean really? Why can't you rename photos?!

Also, I hate collections/albums. I use folders, because I have hundreds and hundreds of folders meticulously organized in hierarchy, like, wildlife/birds/waterfowl/bufflehead/2017-10-18. I would hate to stuff buffleheads in a collection, because there is no hierarchical way to organize albums. Plus, I have some photos of subjects I rarely take grouped in broader groups (like bugs/misc or unidentified) as opposed to subjects that I take a ton of and have it sub-sorted, like heron or eagles.


----------



## photoenix (Oct 18, 2017)

Ok so I could pay 10 bucks extra each month to have 1TB of storage in the cloud...

or i could use those 120 bucks a year to buy a 4TB hard drive to store my photos locally, not restricted through download speeds or connectivity issues
well, ok now I'm worried about hard drive failure, maybe 2x2TB in a Raid 1 would be better

let's go to year 2
still paying an extra 10 bucks a month for the same 1TB of storage on Adobe's servers, not an extra TB still the same 1TB I probably filled up a long time ago...

meanwhile i could buy the same storage I bought last year and not have to wait for my pics to down/upload

I really don't get this plan.

Those 20GB that come with my already existing plan on the other hand are nice. I could see some usage for that, maybe. When I am on location and need to back up a card or to quickly transfer it to someone in the studio so they can start retouching. Then deleting the photos afterwards.


----------



## AJ (Oct 18, 2017)

It seems like it's only a matter of time before Adobe will start charging per click. Want to add an adjustment layer? That'll be twelve cents. Image rotation? Four cents. Cropping? Three cents. Cloning? One cent per click. and so on.


----------



## Don Haines (Oct 18, 2017)

Orangutan said:


> AJ said:
> 
> 
> > > Now in an increasingly mobile-centric world, and with major improvements in smartphone cameras, Lightroom is transforming digital photography again.
> ...



hmmmm.......
The computer that I use for editing and storage is not allowed to be hooked up to a network.... bye bye lightroom at work.....


----------



## mph (Oct 18, 2017)

I use Lightroom every day for my job, but my organisation will only use stand-alone versions...


----------



## digigal (Oct 18, 2017)

The direction Adobe is going in is becoming less and less useful to me. Most of my photography is wildlife done in remote areas of the world where electricity is only available occasionally so you can guess what my access to the "cloud" is! Because of the slowness of LR, I already use PhotoMechanics for downloading and culling my photos in the field and during my recent 3 weeks in Madagascar I switched from LR to Canon's DPP for converting all my RAW files. I must say that, although I like all the options of LR, DPP does a MUCH better job of noise reduction, shadow detail handling, etc. of the Canon files. I then exported the files as TIFFs to LR with all the original Metadata saved for further adjustment. If I were more fluent in PS, I would have used it instead of LR but at this point I can still do things faster in LR than PS. I can see ultimately just eliminating LR from my workflow. Of course, I will be wedded to Canon in order to do this so I have to watch how things are headed in their mirrorless/lens future, etc.
Catherine


----------



## clicstudio (Oct 18, 2017)

it's too freaking different. I know LR sucked but this is too simple and lacking lots of options from before. The interface is better at first glance. I like the new editing tools and finally no modules to switch. I can't find the second monitor option or a way to color code selected photos or view options for the grid...
 I am not migrating yet. I can't afford to waste time or make mistakes. It's just too different from before. They should have warned us...


----------



## stochasticmotions (Oct 18, 2017)

Lightroom 6 will do the job at least until I get a new camera. Already starting to look at using Affinity photo for some mobile work on the ipad pro usually while I'm far away from any internet... may need to see if the desktop version is going to be a good long term replacement. So far Darktable is not quite what I am looking for but it could get there as well. Cost wise, Lightroom has cost me about $130 every 3 years or so and I can still use the old versions from backups if I need to. Never liked the idea of monthly payments on anything (down to just phone, hydro and insurance which don't have an alternative). Cloud based storage is pretty much useless to me, way too slow....I'm not really that happy with local disk speeds and am looking at SSDs to speed up loading RAW files form both the 5Ds and A7RII although I'm assuming that the new CC is can still use local disks.
There is one thing that I might have liked about the new lightroom and that would be being able to have one database/library of changes that I can use on both my Mac and PC laptop easily and connect the external drives to whichever one I am working on at the time.


----------



## LesC (Oct 18, 2017)

Video from Adobe comparing Lightroom CC with Classic. Seems they wish to carry on supporting both versions...or so they say  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eMSNcM7C0UE


----------



## Mikehit (Oct 18, 2017)

Is it just me or are there pretty strong parallels between what Adobe is doing and how Canon develops its cameras? So many of the criticisms are more about 'what I want to see' or 'what I am comfortable with' dressed up as 'Adobe are making a big mistake'. I am pretty sure Adobe know their customer base extremely well and are changing their model in line with what they think is the progression of the curve - in fact probably ahead of it. 
I also recall many gloom-and-doom comments (which still persist in ignorance of facts) about how the CC model itself works yet many people actually went to the CC model quite happily.

I am not saying it suits how I want to work but I am sure they have solid reasons for doing so and many people (especially multi-platform users, of which I am not one) will think it is great.


----------



## Orangutan (Oct 18, 2017)

Mikehit said:


> So many of the criticisms are more about 'what I want to see' or 'what I am comfortable with' dressed up as 'Adobe are making a big mistake'. I am pretty sure Adobe know their customer base extremely well and are changing their model in line with what they think is the progression of the curve - in fact probably ahead of it.



Can you cite examples? Most of the criticisms I've read seem not to be directed at the existence of the cloud features, but the absence of perpetual/standalone features. Adobe's financial success demonstrates that it's a good business move; however, I wonder if they could have done this if they did not have, effectively, a monopoly among professionals. The subscription model is fine for people who make their living on it, but not so good for us amateurs.


----------



## W_E_Coyote (Oct 19, 2017)

Mikehit said:


> Is it just me or are there pretty strong parallels between what Adobe is doing and how Canon develops its cameras? ...snip...



Only if Canon:
Made 2 cameras, a Pro and a Pro-er model
Which do not function unless constantly connected
Many of the buttons will change functionality every 5 months
And you must make monthly payments to keep it functional

payments = (MSRP cost of new camera, in dollars)/(length of update period, in months)*(service markup, unitless)
with service markup > 1

Incoming rant, feel free to ignore.

In the old days, when dinosaurs roamed the earth, Adobe (or AutoDESK, or Microsoft, or pick a current software as a service company) would do a periodic, expensive version update. In order to get their clients to update the software, they would have to think of something new, exciting or at the very least useful to a large part of their user base. If the new version had no benefit for you or your organization, it would be skipped. That was immediate, solid (i.e. monetary) feedback to the software company that perhaps this isn't what our users want.

Now with the subscription model, you still end up paying for that periodic update, broken up into monthly payments, but now the software company doesn't have to give much, if any consideration to what their users want or need. Feedback is now soft and financially delayed, "The users are revolting. So? The users have always been revolting." They have you captive. If I was cynical, and I am, Adobe can now puppet whatever new feature they come up with as "The features our users DEMAND", with users = marketing department. 

Bang out an update full of shovelware, you don't need and/or want it? 
To bad. You have to install it. 

Change the interface and workflow, possibly dramatically?
Too bad, suck it up. This is our program, our house, our rules. You don't own it.

Jack up the monthly price for 'reasons'?
Too bad, give us our money. If you don't like it, the door is over there, and by the way, we have all your work right here, and you can't access it any longer.

The subscription model makes perfect business sense, mainly from Adobe's perspective, for tax, budgeting and other considerations. Especially if you ignore the fact that you will pay more in the long run for software that you use, while exposing your work to new, trending and exciting modes of failure that you have little or no control to resolve or mitigate.

I do photography for a hobby, but with a vast majority of my photos going to support the work that I do. (photographs of things broken, overall layout of sites, spatial orientation for the guys doing the on site work etc.) Which means I have until I decide to get a new camera to find a replacement for Lightroom. I find that annoying since I'm used to the way Lightroom operates.

If my job was directly photography related, I imagine I would be in some elevated state of seething rage. Not only would my job depend on the usual skill set (Customer relations, photographic skill, resource management etc.) but now with the added worry of:

will Big Brother Internet Connection play nice while I'm on this deadline?
will Uncle Adobe demand more money this month? 
will Uncle Adobe's lackeys botch an auto update, and bork 1000's of hours of my work?
or decide to depreciate a feature that I need to use?
or change their policy (which I have no say in) to terms that benefit their own financial endeavors?
will their security keep my financial information from very active prying eyes?
(an increasingly common failure mode, so what's it matter if there is one more weak point?)

If my job or company depended on photography, I think I'd be looking for the exit off the Adobe train.

/end rant


----------



## Talys (Oct 19, 2017)

photomachine said:


> Ok so I could pay 10 bucks extra each month to have 1TB of storage in the cloud...
> 
> or i could use those 120 bucks a year to buy a 4TB hard drive to store my photos locally, not restricted through download speeds or connectivity issues
> well, ok now I'm worried about hard drive failure, maybe 2x2TB in a Raid 1 would be better
> ...



The plan makes sense for people who use lightroom but not photoshop, since it's no more expensive than LR+PS.

Now, I'm not sure how many people would pay for $10 for LR without PS, but... 

The CC version (versus classic/folders) is missing way too many features to be useful, IMHO.


----------



## Talys (Oct 19, 2017)

Orangutan said:


> Mikehit said:
> 
> 
> > So many of the criticisms are more about 'what I want to see' or 'what I am comfortable with' dressed up as 'Adobe are making a big mistake'. I am pretty sure Adobe know their customer base extremely well and are changing their model in line with what they think is the progression of the curve - in fact probably ahead of it.
> ...



It is _definitely_ a good business move, because Photoshop went from being the most pirated piece of software to something that a lot of people are ok to pay. I even know plenty of professionals that pirated Photoshop because they couldn't afford it, before $10/mo.

There are WAY more Photoshop users than Lightroom users. I think that many (if not most) LR users use at least a bit of Photoshop, whereas there are tons of graphics artists that could give a rat's fart about Lightroom.

There are tons and tons of alternatives to Photoshop, and I've tried an awful lot of them, but it doesn't matter if you like PaintShop Pro or GiMP -- or for that matter CoreDraw instead of Illustrator, or Publisher instead of inDesign-- you must have Photoshop if you're a graphics pro, because people want you to send them PSDs, AIs, IND's and EPS's. If you send them something else, they look at you like you're a crazy person. 

It's like trying to conduct business with Apple or Google docs or spreadsheets instead of Word/Excel files. People will actually pick different vendors because they think you're weird, cheap, or worse, broke. It ain't worth it.

I actually am not crazy about Lightroom. I don't like the whole catalogue, and prefer the way DPP does it (where it's all file system). However, DPP can be a lot slower, and is often inferior at RAW processing. The one thing I do have to give LR is that their hardware support is pretty quick - they add in new cameras and lenses faster than just about any other company I'm aware of.

But I don't think LR is perfect, and I do believe that there is space on the market for an alternative to it, if someone wrote a great alternative. The problem with most RAW processors is that they're really cruddy at the whole organization/preview thing. And, LR is pretty darn good at printing and large batches.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Oct 19, 2017)

I spend a hour reading the LR Queens intro manual, and playing with LR CC. From what I see, its just another step of improving LR mobile, I have no intention of uploading TB of my images online. It is a good way to sync images taken with a smart phone to my pc, and I can deal with RAW images on my smart phone as well.

I could not figure out how to delete or remove images that are uploaded to the cloud, I'd want the ability to remove them from the cloud.

One thing that seems to be missing is any discussion of security. Is everyone supposed to believe that images on the cloud are secure and won't be lost or compromised? There are some serious issues to be considered with the CC version.

Meanwhile, the classic version continues to be great, the CC version did not cost anything, and I still don't have any kind of a work flow that lets me automatically sync images to the cloud as I take them for backup purposes, and later transfer them to my NAS and remove them from the cloud. I don't have a lot of time to fool with trying to figure this out, but it doesn't look obvious right now.


----------



## Orangutan (Oct 19, 2017)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> One thing that seems to be missing is any discussion of security. Is everyone supposed to believe that images on the cloud are secure and won't be lost or compromised? There are some serious issues to be considered with the CC version.



This is an important point: depending on the subjects and subject matter of your images, as well as any contractual language, you may put yourself at legal risk by storing your images using any cloud service.


----------



## mph (Oct 19, 2017)

Orangutan said:


> Mt Spokane Photography said:
> 
> 
> > One thing that seems to be missing is any discussion of security. Is everyone supposed to believe that images on the cloud are secure and won't be lost or compromised? There are some serious issues to be considered with the CC version.
> ...



Absolutely. This change assumes that we have control of all the rights of the photos that we have in Lightroom, where some users will have complicated contractual obligations covering different sets of photos, where they can be stored, and who can access that data.


----------



## Quackator (Oct 19, 2017)

Adobe lost me when I saw a guy fire up his laptop for a presentation
and the POS told him that he hadn't connected to "the cloud"
(=Adobe's computers) for too long and thus wasn't allowed to use 
what he pays for.

DPP, Thumbs Plus and Affinity Photo.

Video with Lightworks and Davinci Resolve. 

Done.


----------



## raptor3x (Oct 19, 2017)

Orangutan said:


> Mt Spokane Photography said:
> 
> 
> > One thing that seems to be missing is any discussion of security. Is everyone supposed to believe that images on the cloud are secure and won't be lost or compromised? There are some serious issues to be considered with the CC version.
> ...



It's a much more visible target but I'm sure the cloud servers Adobe is using are far more secure than anything you'll find in the average photographers setup.


----------



## mph (Oct 19, 2017)

raptor3x said:


> Orangutan said:
> 
> 
> > Mt Spokane Photography said:
> ...



Perhaps, but that won't help if one doesn't have permission for those photos to be on their server.


----------



## LDS (Oct 19, 2017)

raptor3x said:


> Orangutan said:
> 
> 
> > Mt Spokane Photography said:
> ...



One would have thought it about Equifax, or Yahoo, as well...


----------



## Talys (Oct 19, 2017)

LDS said:


> raptor3x said:
> 
> 
> > It's a much more visible target but I'm sure the cloud servers Adobe is using are far more secure than anything you'll find in the average photographers setup.
> ...



Most people don't have a super secure setup. For example: a lot of folks use WiFi and have configured it to have access to their LAN. The vast majority of WiFi networks are either trivial to compromise, or may be compromised using well-known exploits, and do not employ any intrusion detection at all.

Most certainly, Equifax was much more secure than nearly all home and small business setups. But, the difference is, _nobody cares about your photos secured by your crappy edge security_. It's really hard to monetize or weaponize, whereas personal information... that's gold.


----------



## LightroomQueen (Oct 19, 2017)

LDS said:


> Not surprisingly, from someone very close to Adobe and who makes a living out of LR...



Yeah, that's no secret, but my aim is always to be honest with you. If I was worried about my business relationship with Adobe, I wouldn't have warned about jumping straight into LR7 without testing it first, or called them out on the 6.2 import dialog debacle a year or two back. I do make my living out of LR, but I could just as easily switch to teaching about other software. 

The whole set of changes is a confusing mess, no question, but it's not all doom and gloom. They're not expecting all of their existing users to jump to the new CC cloud app. Some existing LR users will want to do so, but it's aimed at a different audience. The Lightroom Classic is fully staffed with a lot of newer engineers, and they're an enthusiastic bunch, so the future looks brighter for Lightroom-as-we-know-it than it has been for years. Now they have to prove it to everyone.



JonAustin said:


> I wonder if The Queen based any of the above statement on actual data from Adobe.


Yes, but obviously I can't share that data.

It sounds really simple, continuing to support perpetual licenses - and the actual switch is relatively simple - but the level of QE testing and support was simply outweighing the revenue. And then there was all the angst every time a new version came out and it didn't get the new features. I'm not a big fan of subscriptions either, and I hate renting anything, but they're a business. They get to choose what they want to sell, and we get to choose what to buy. 

I'll keep an eye on this thread and answer any questions I can, so if you get stuck, give me a shout.


----------



## LDS (Oct 19, 2017)

Talys said:


> Most certainly, Equifax was much more secure than nearly all home and small business setups.



Don't bet on it... Sony should have been as well, right? And the list is long. Within EU, next year GDPR will require security breaches that lead to personal data to be leaked/lost/etc. to be notified within 72 hours (and hefty fine will apply when non compliant). Let's see what will happen, when they can't be keep hidden.



Talys said:


> But, the difference is, _nobody cares about your photos secured by your crappy edge security_. It's really hard to monetize or weaponize, whereas personal information... that's gold.



Ransomware showed you can monetize that as well, because you can attack several systems automatically. Photos are often also personal information - and they can be used to blackmail people. Sure, funny cats and dreaming landscapes are of little use, but some, ahem, "intimate" ones can be gold as well - especially in an Internet which is obsessed with sex and gossip, and the related traffic and ads money.

I really hope Adobe got security right, and will *spend* what is needed to keep its systems *very* secure, because it will become a huge target.


----------



## Mikehit (Oct 19, 2017)

W_E_Coyote said:


> Mikehit said:
> 
> 
> > Is it just me or are there pretty strong parallels between what Adobe is doing and how Canon develops its cameras? ...snip...
> ...



So much butt hurt.
It seems to be that people are aware of the issues surrounding subscription which means 'suck it up' is completely irrelevant, and the reason I say this is because people are aware of the issues and decide to buy it despite those issues - there is no 'sucking it up' because people have a free choice. 

Go to GimP - not as streamlned as Photoshop. They use their leverage of it being free to not be as streamlined but you know what? That's tough - you have to 'suck it up' if you want freeware.
Corel? Not as many functionalities as LR/PS but guess what - well tough. You have to 'suck it up' if want to avoid the subscription model.

See what I mean?


----------



## bitm2007 (Oct 19, 2017)

I wouldn't be surprised if Lightroom CC classic is phased out in the not to distant future, in favour of the cloud only version (it's already taken it's name). This is worrying as the all new LR CC plan which doesn't include Photoshop is the same price as the Adobe Photography Plan, and the version that does include Photoshop is twice the price that i'm currently paying.


----------



## Hector1970 (Oct 19, 2017)

I'm having great fun with these upgrades so far.
I've now got a display driver issue with Photoshop which I didn't have.
Tried to find on Nvidia's site which graphics card I have and they have tool to find it but it needs a Java Plugin which is neither compatible with Microsoft Edge or Chrome.
I did install the new drivers and they failed.
On my SSD I have about 20GB of Nvidia drivers which I can't get rid of.
Nik isn't working after the upgrade. I moved the folder but all I am getting is a black screen and its freezing the computer. 
I've a pile of old versions now of Lightroom and Photoshop stuck on my PC.
Adobe don't seem to offer a clean up tool.
Neither is a stunning update. Hopefully there is something useful that I haven't spotted yet.
There are so many things they could improve upon bur I don't think they put much effort into it. Their focus is on other software.
Hopefully Lightroom will work better. My version was getting so sloooooow and unreliable on start up. I often had to open it , stop it and then open it.


----------



## SecureGSM (Oct 19, 2017)

there are couple or major issues associated with cloud based data storage that seems were not discussed yet:

1. Cloud space storage provider does not guarantee data safety. The Service provider will recover from back up and it should be all OK, but if that failed they cannot be hold accountable for data loss. read SLA carefully.

2. Your account may be hijacked and all your data stored online be deleted by attacker.. yes, hopefully your account will be reinstated and data recovered... if you are lucky. Therefore you must ensure availability of local backup for all of your "in the cloud" data.
3. Unless your internet connection is 100Mb/s or faster, it will take substantially longer to upload or download the entire set of data.

These issues can be addressed professionally. It won't be fast, cheap and good at the same time though.


----------



## niels123 (Oct 19, 2017)

Do I need to upgrade my catalogs to the new version if I want to upgrade? If so, can you downgrade as well?


----------



## Hector1970 (Oct 19, 2017)

Yes Cloud doesn't guarantee safe storage.
Flickr is now starting to have photos missing for some reason.
I've lost music on Apple ( artists seem to be able to withdraw rights to the song so it can't be redownloaded).
While Adobe are flying now nothing lasts for ever. There have been plenty of cloud providers gone out of business already.
The content of the photos probably have some value to Adobe in terms of insights into user behaviour and what could be sold to them. Facebook is built on this principle.
There is no real security as almost everyone of the major online companies have been hacked at some point and data stolen. Yahoo is a classic. They've been drip feeding the extent of the hack for years. I'd say they lost everyone's details and its led to a massive increase in spam and phishing e-mails.

It has its place as an extra backup option. Hardrives are too unreliable for important memories.

I think all the different versions are confusing. It should be one lightroom capable of doing both things.


----------



## LesC (Oct 19, 2017)

As a Photography Plan subscriber I've just has an email regarding the changes that states: 

"We know you’ve got a lot invested in the current version of Lightroom you’ve been using. Rest assured that we’ll continue to improve it while we develop the new service" 

To me that suggests Adobe will continue to improve Classic only until such time that CC has the same feature set. Then Classic will be ceased leaving CC as the only remaining option. I'm sure that's why Classic was named as such.﻿ 

I hope I'm wrong but in the meantime, I'll be looking round at alternatives.


----------



## bergstrom (Oct 19, 2017)

Happy to stay on my LR 5.7 until there's a once off download available of the new LR classic and no stupid plans. I like working on my desktop!


----------



## yeahright (Oct 19, 2017)

Mikehit said:


> So much butt hurt.
> It seems to be that people are aware of the issues surrounding subscription which means 'suck it up' is completely irrelevant, and the reason I say this is because people are aware of the issues and decide to buy it despite those issues - there is no 'sucking it up' because people have a free choice.
> 
> Go to GimP - not as streamlned as Photoshop. They use their leverage of it being free to not be as streamlined but you know what? That's tough - you have to 'suck it up' if you want freeware.
> ...


If one finds that the main if not the only purpose of running a business is to maximize revenue, then you're right. If however, one sees a moral obligation of any business, to make customers happy and not hold them captive because they are really not as free as you suggest - after all, Adobe holds a near-monopoly with several of their software packages - then the rant is well justified. I see things quite similar.


----------



## Mikehit (Oct 19, 2017)

yeahright said:


> If one finds that the main if not the only purpose of running a business is to maximize revenue, then you're right. If however, one sees a moral obligation of any business, to make customers happy and not hold them captive because they are really not as free as you suggest - after all, Adobe holds a near-monopoly with several of their software packages - then the rant is well justified. I see things quite similar.



There is no 'moral obligation' for a company to keep customers happy - it is good business (yes, keeping customers happy is part of maximising revenue). But you cannot keep everyone happy all the time and trying to do so is definitely bad business.
So the best any company can do is decide which sectors are worth chasing, so if Adobe see that in the future their best model is to enable to edit 'on the go' then they will gear their functionality to that end and if people prefer desktop editing, or if people prefer perpetual licences you assess how important those sectors are and how best to serve them.
The CC model caused a lot of confusion and, due to misinformation, a lot of complaints with no basis in fact. But in the end many (including myself) actually like it. If they abandon what they now call 'LR Classic' I will probably move to a different editing suite because what they offer does not suit me. I see no 'moral obligation' for them to cater for me if they choose to change direction.
To suggest that a company has a responsibility to keep absolutely everyone happy for no other reason than they hold a near-monopoly is simplistic.


----------



## bitm2007 (Oct 19, 2017)

LesC said:


> As a Photography Plan subscriber I've just has an email regarding the changes that states:
> 
> "We know you’ve got a lot invested in the current version of Lightroom you’ve been using. Rest assured that we’ll continue to improve it while we develop the new service"
> 
> ...



I'm expecting that to happen as well. See my post further up this pages regarding the potential pricing implications.


----------



## Canoneer (Oct 19, 2017)

If anyone isn't too thrilled about rising subscription prices, or if you simply prefer to _own_ your post-processing software, then I'd recommend ACDSee. Photo Studio Ultimate 2018 is $150 for the full suite, but 50% off promotions should hit soon for the holidays. It's a pretty robust software system: photo/catalog management (rivaling Photo Mechanic), RAW editor (it really does give Lightroom a run for its money, but falls slightlly short of what Capture One is capable of), and the layer editor which now can do just about everything Photoshop can. Oh yeah, and it's fully compatible with Adobe Photoshop plugins - so you can easily apply Alien Skin, Topaz, or Nik to any photo you're working on.


----------



## bitm2007 (Oct 19, 2017)

Mikehit said:


> I have just upgraded my LR CC to LR Classic CC. Split toning is still there (from what I see it disappears if you go for the LRCC+1TB option)
> 
> But the previews - OH MY GOD IS IT QUICK!!
> Sometimes these speed improvements last as long as it takes to fill a buffer, but for the moment I am one happy bunny!



LRCC+1TB is the poor mans LR from an editing perspective, with no Tone Curve, HSL, Split Toning, Effects or Camera Calibration panel's and reduced sharpening and noise options. It is however a more than capable RAW converter, and I'm finding it's clutter free nature refreshing, and there appears to be no colour clipping when transferring images for LR to PS (which annoyed me with previous version of LR)


----------



## LDS (Oct 19, 2017)

niels123 said:


> Do I need to upgrade my catalogs to the new version if I want to upgrade? If so, can you downgrade as well?



If you open a catalog in the new release, it will be upgraded (but the old one won't be overwritten). You can't downgrade a catalog - you need to revert to the old one.


----------



## yeahright (Oct 19, 2017)

Mikehit said:


> There is no 'moral obligation' for a company to keep customers happy - it is good business (yes, keeping customers happy is part of maximising revenue)


That's your point of view but that's not the only point of view there is.


> . But you cannot keep everyone happy all the time and trying to do so is definitely bad business.


 I am not saying that companies should try to satisfy *all* their customers. That won't ever be possible. I am saying however, that companies should not take advantage of their customers in an unfair way - by having them, and the market, over years maneuvered into a situation where there really is no alternative (because you have spent hours and hours on your catalog, perfected your workflow, use features frequently that are not present in alternative software, etc., have already invested in years of subscriptions not only to use the software in the very moment, but also to be able to use the results in the future), and then suddenly force everyone to accept completely different and in this respect immoral (yes, I think there is such a thing) terms and conditions.


----------



## LDS (Oct 19, 2017)

LightroomQueen said:


> It sounds really simple, continuing to support perpetual licenses - and the actual switch is relatively simple - but the level of QE testing and support was simply outweighing the revenue.



Sorry, but I believe that's just a lame excuse and PR damage control. I may be a lame photographer, but software development is my successful business. The two versions are not so different (it looks the perpetual has the new features simply disabled at the UI level - as some plug-ins to enable the dehaze effect shown), and unless the way Adobe tests software is really outdated and fully manual the effort to test the two versions can't be so expensive - unless in CC the real testers are the customers themselves....

It would be also more credible if Adobe didn't its best to hide the perpetual license on its site - it was very, very difficult for unaware customers to find and buy it.

I perfectly understand the Adobe decision - just, please, don't pull our legs...


----------



## Mikehit (Oct 19, 2017)

yeahright said:


> Mikehit said:
> 
> 
> > There is no 'moral obligation' for a company to keep customers happy - it is good business (yes, keeping customers happy is part of maximising revenue)
> ...



What advantage are Adobe taking of customers?
If you are using legacy Adobe perpetual license, you still have use of it. If you moved to CC you knew you had access to edits for only as long as you paid for the subscription. I am not sure what you are saying. 
What features are not present in the new software that were in the 'old' software?
Are you saying that companies who discontinue products are acting 'immorally'? Does a camera manufacturer act immorally by stopping support for long-defunct lenses that are otherwise optically sound?


----------



## cayenne (Oct 19, 2017)

JonAustin said:


> LDS said:
> 
> 
> > When I see "modern cloud storage" I always read, for example, "ancient mainframe storage"... I'm old enough to remember when my data were on a remote system...
> ...



Yeah, but are they actually trying to make $$ from it?

C


----------



## LightroomQueen (Oct 19, 2017)

LDS said:


> I perfectly understand the Adobe decision - just, please, don't pull our legs...



I'm not trying to pull your leg. It's not just hiding UI bits in the program, it's all the installation/licensing/sales stuff that causes most of the complications. A huge amount of the support stuff I deal with are due to the dual licensing systems, and that's only me!


----------



## suburbia (Oct 19, 2017)

Mikehit said:


> yeahright said:
> 
> 
> > If one finds that the main if not the only purpose of running a business is to maximize revenue, then you're right. If however, one sees a moral obligation of any business, to make customers happy and not hold them captive because they are really not as free as you suggest - after all, Adobe holds a near-monopoly with several of their software packages - then the rant is well justified. I see things quite similar.
> ...



True but what I find distasteful here is that there seems to be little awareness or attempt to thank long-term users. For example I have paid and upgraded to every release since the first version and now I am being forced to pay the full amount every month, the same as a new user. Sure change the licensing model but why not acknowledge those long term investors who have helped get the product to where it is today.


----------



## Mikehit (Oct 19, 2017)

suburbia said:


> Mikehit said:
> 
> 
> > yeahright said:
> ...


What 'full amount' are you being expected to pay? LR Classic+PS is the same price it was before. If you want 1TB cloud space then you either sacrifice PS or pay another $5 per month for PS+1TB


----------



## chasinglight (Oct 19, 2017)

Happily I can say that because I bought LR6 perpetual in April of 2015 and bought PS CS6 on a student license back in 2011 I have saved money by not moving over to CC yet. Unfortunately for me it's just a matter of how long I can hold out on LR6 before moving over to LR classic, but for as long as I can hold off upgrading, LR6 will continue to pay dividends.

Does anyone know if in recent history Adobe has done special offers (black friday deals, etc) to move people to the cloud? Perhaps a discount on the photography plan for buying the year all at once?


----------



## LDS (Oct 19, 2017)

LightroomQueen said:


> I'm not trying to pull your leg.



I didn't mean you, I meant Adobe. I apologize for not being clear, sorry.



LightroomQueen said:


> It's not just hiding UI bits in the program, it's all the installation/licensing/sales stuff that causes most of the complications. A huge amount of the support stuff I deal with are due to the dual licensing systems, and that's only me!



Installation, again, doesn't seem so different - after all it's the same application, although the installer may be different, true, still is a very simple installer. Having to support several platforms, and two desktop applications on each now, is far more complex and expensive.

Of course the trade-off with being able to capture user data in the cloud, and find a way to monetize that (Adobe Stock? Image processing and data mining?), is deemed advantageous - Adobe clearly thinks about some of the same revenues sources Facebook and Google have. And to make it work, you need to push users towards a cloud subscription.

Licensing/sales/etc. are not testing. Having two license model surely complicates things on both sides (and handling a subscription is more complex than handling one-off sales) - as I said I understood perfectly Adobe, no excuse needed to justify the dropping of the perpetual license - especially if they can't really stand scrutiny.


----------



## jthomson (Oct 19, 2017)

LightroomQueen said:


> LDS said:
> 
> 
> > I perfectly understand the Adobe decision - just, please, don't pull our legs...
> ...



Now there are two different versions of "Lightroom" with different features to support. That makes it so much simpler.


----------



## yeahright (Oct 19, 2017)

Mikehit said:


> What advantage are Adobe taking of customers?
> If you are using legacy Adobe perpetual license, you still have use of it. If you moved to CC you knew you had access to edits for only as long as you paid for the subscription. I am not sure what you are saying.
> What features are not present in the new software that were in the 'old' software?
> Are you saying that companies who discontinue products are acting 'immorally'? Does a camera manufacturer act immorally by stopping support for long-defunct lenses that are otherwise optically sound?


Yes, partly I am saying just that (except, we are not talking about long-defunct products). If Canon decided they'd discontinue the EF mount and switched to a completely different mount designed so that it were impossible to design an adaptor, and if they did that not for technical reasons but solely because they wanted their customers to buy all new lenses from them, many people would be seriously pissed, and rightfully so. That would be another example for 'immoral' behavior. It might well be that in this case pressure from the market (probably people would switch to another brand of camera in this case) would prevent such a move, but I feel that pressure from the market should not be the only source of motivation for any company's policies.


----------



## LDS (Oct 19, 2017)

yeahright said:


> If Canon decided they'd discontinue the EF mount and switched to a completely different mount designed so that it were impossible to design an adaptor, and if they did that not for technical reasons but solely because they wanted their customers to buy all new lenses from them, many people would be seriously pissed, and rightfully so.



You mean like when they switched from the FD to the EF mount? <G>

Ok, there were some sound technical reasons... yet Canon for several years didn't get any money from me


----------



## Talys (Oct 20, 2017)

yeahright said:


> ...another example for 'immoral' behavior.



I'm totally ok with immoral behavior, as long as it didn't hurt anything small, cute, furry, or feathered in the making ;D

Just make what I want at a price I'm willing to pay, then take my money, please and thank you!


----------



## Hector1970 (Oct 20, 2017)

Anyone finding Lightroom running any faster. I'm not. No quicker than before which was slooooow!. 
My catalog may be too big regardless.


----------



## bitm2007 (Oct 20, 2017)

I've just realized that there is a slider on the bottom of the histogram in the new version of LR CC, that works like the mid point slider in Photoshop's levels pallet.


----------



## bhf3737 (Oct 20, 2017)

Hector1970 said:


> Anyone finding Lightroom running any faster. I'm not. No quicker than before which was slooooow!.
> My catalog may be too big regardless.



My first empirical impression with the updated version of Lightroom Classic was that it is faster when importing and browsing through. But almost the same slow speed as before when converting CR2 files to DNG after importing. Export original size seems to be faster though. I'm using Windows core i7 machine, 64G Ram, NVIDIA 1080 GPU.


----------



## Mikehit (Oct 20, 2017)

Hector1970 said:


> Anyone finding Lightroom running any faster. I'm not. No quicker than before which was slooooow!.
> My catalog may be too big regardless.



Import and browsing - definitely much faster. Editing - not sure yet as I have not had chance to do much.


----------



## Talys (Oct 20, 2017)

"If you are interested in checking out our cloud-based mobile-first software, Lightroom CC, click on Learn More."

I think, *mobile-first* says it all for me. Really, no interest in a product that puts mobile first, since my mobile photos are mostly of stuff at Costco sent by text message to my wife to see if she wants it.


----------



## Talys (Oct 20, 2017)

First of all, the new range mask is AWESOME. In the past, in order to adjust exposure on just a range, I would create export, snapshot, create a second export, combine them in Photoshop, and mask them there. Now, that's so much easier to do directly in LR.

Second...



Mikehit said:


> Hector1970 said:
> 
> 
> > Anyone finding Lightroom running any faster. I'm not. No quicker than before which was slooooow!.
> ...



The browsing speed -- that is, time to open a 30MB CR2 with processing and have it ready to view -- is WARP SPEED compared to before, which was only a touch faster than DPP. It's essentially now instant for me.


----------



## BrightTiger (Oct 21, 2017)

it's disingenuous of MacPhun to put a click-bait survey up just to redirect to a Luminar ad. It's doubly so fro Canon Rumors to willfully play along.


----------



## Quirkz (Oct 21, 2017)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> Meanwhile, the classic version continues to be great, the CC version did not cost anything, and I still don't have any kind of a work flow that lets me automatically sync images to the cloud as I take them for backup purposes, and later transfer them to my NAS and remove them from the cloud. I don't have a lot of time to fool with trying to figure this out, but it doesn't look obvious right now.



This might be obvious to you, so I apologize in advance - I use a Dropbox folder to store my images. Lightroom imports them to that folder and accesses from there. Instant backup to the cloud, and auto sync to my laptop from my desktop. Granted, I only have a half terabyte of images because I'm a hobbiest who aggressively culls 4 out of 5 images, so it might not work for you. Then again, for a professional, more cloud storage might be a justifiable business 'insurance'.


----------



## LDS (Oct 21, 2017)

Quirkz said:


> Then again, for a professional, more cloud storage might be a justifiable business 'insurance'.



I believe a professional photographer would like much more control on whatever he or she stores to the cloud. Especially if the photos have a not little value.

Did anyone read the Adobe TOS about its cloud storage?


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Oct 21, 2017)

raptor3x said:


> It's a much more visible target but I'm sure the cloud servers Adobe is using are far more secure than anything you'll find in the average photographers setup.



Still, there is no discussion. Adobe is a huge target for hackers, so I'm sure they have spent a lot of $$ on security, but, so did Equifax.


----------



## Quirkz (Oct 21, 2017)

Since there's a lot of uncertainty in this thread, I decided to install the new CC (since Adobe *very generously* gave it to me for free along with the updated lightroom classic as part of my subscription) and play for a bit.

So here's a little of the critical things I've learned:

* Some people seem to have assumed it's something like running out of a web browser - it's *not*. It's a full local native application.

* It works *fine* without an internet connection. You can have a full copy of every image in your catalog locally, or let it just keep a percentage of the most recently used images local. Changes are synced when you are online.

* It is *fast* - Really fast to scroll through your photos, and edit. I was able to speedily apply edits and review photos while it I was importing ~1500 raws as a test set without any noticeable slowdown. That is a big improvement over classic.

* You can import more photo's than you have available adobe cloud storage for. Edit and play away, no problem - They just won't be synced, and a small warning symbol will appear. So if you like the new CC more, but don't want to pay for the storage upgrade, you don't need to.

* There is no way (as far as I can tell) to decide which photo's are in the cloud and which aren't. I'd love to be able to keep the 20gb default plan, for example, and just sync a small album of my most recent images to edit and review on the run on my iPad.

* You can create albums, and folders to organise these albums in, but they're all 'virtual' and not reflected on your hard drive - So you lose any categorisation you had, and the ability to search through the drive using other tools (I did manage to find my original DNG's in the new catalog directory, organised by how they were in the original import)

* As folks know, a bunch of tools are missing, but on the other hand for a casual user this UI is simple and easy to use (and did I say 'fast' before?  ). It's up to the end user to decide how important those particular tools are.

* Search is brilliant. I typed in 'bees', and up popped my photo's of bees. I never tagged them - This is adobes cloud based image recognition kicking in, and it's cool. No need to waste time tagging any more, just search for it like in google.

* You can't really control the syncing in the background - If you pay for data, or have poor internet, this is obviously going to be a poor choice.

* You can still back up locally to your NAS. If you set 'keep a copy of all originals', it's easy to find the images in the catalog directory you created, sorted by year/date folders (at least in the case of my import - May have been because that's the structure on my disk from my original catalog import).

* Irritatingly, it makes a copy of the originals when you import, rather than being able to keep a reference, or 'sync' to that folder like with lightroom classic.

* Security is a problem - As someone in the industry, I can tell you that it's almost certain that this service will be compromised at some point. Nothing is private any more. But if you're using services like apple iCloud, or dropbox, or google, well - you already have that problem. (arguably some of these services are likely to be more secure as they have a lot of experience in the running cloud services.)

I have to admit; I actually like it and I'm tempted to pay the extra 5$ a month upgrade fee to get the terabyte of storage and live in the new app.
I can limit the space used on my laptop for images and import photos while travelling - All while knowing that they'll be available on my workstation at home without me needing to do anything. It's compelling.


Adobe are building something new for the changing software world. I suspect that a lot of the fear is justified - Eventually, they will abandon lightroom classic in favour of the new CC. However, they will only happen when most users switch - And they will know this very clearly because since it's all cloud, they can see when users are in lightroom classic vs lightroom cloud.

Hope this helps clear up some of the confusion and doubt (and maybe some of the fear.)


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Oct 21, 2017)

I've spent the morning experimenting with Lightroom CC (Cloud) and Lightroom CC Classic. For use on mobile devices, I like the cc version. For my pc, the CC version is not quite there, it has a huge amount of missing features, but for ordinary edits, its ok.

I've decided to use the combination of Lightroom Classic for my desktop and lightroom CC for mobile devices. Its easy to choose which images to sync, so I can limit what is in the cloud, and remove what I choose easily. This is basically the same operation as the older lightroom version with lightroom mobile, create a collection that syncs with lightroom cc. Remove images from the collection to remove them from the cloud and vice versa. Changes on either end sync just fine.

So I can add images to my mobile phone or tablet or laptop running lightroom CC and they will sync to my desktop when I open it. 

Next, I want to see how well images added to my mobile directly from the camera using wi-fi or cable can be synced to all my devices. (I have a lot of them).


----------



## snoke (Oct 22, 2017)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> I've decided to use the combination of Lightroom Classic for my desktop and lightroom CC for mobile devices.



This future Adobe see. Less camera, more phone. Adobe want be in market.

Adobe want phone workflow: camera -> adobe app -> instagram/facebook/twitter.

Next Adobe feature is emoji?

Adobe renting and not buy give pirate boost.


----------



## Talys (Oct 28, 2017)

snoke said:


> Adobe renting and not buy give pirate boost.



Photoshop is now much less pirated than it used to be -- Adobe is so happy about that, that it could really care less if people pirated old versions of Lightroom (that soon won't support the newest cameras)

I agree that Adobe sees smartphone as giant future growth.

The truth is, there are billions of smartphone users, and a good portion of them care about taking pictures from their smartphones. Proportionately, there are a tiny number of photographers that shoot RAW, or that take enough photos to need software to organize them.


----------



## LDS (Oct 29, 2017)

Talys said:


> I agree that Adobe sees smartphone as giant future growth.
> 
> The truth is, there are billions of smartphone users, and a good portion of them care about taking pictures from their smartphones.



And the real question is: how many of them will pay $10 (more outside US) per month when they can use Apple Photos or Google Photos for free - directly supported by their phone OS, highly integrated with their camera apps, offering often "unlimited" space, and implementing most of the editing functions they need (Apple Photos just added Curves, by the way)? IMHO the smartphone shooters needing LR are still a tiny number. Alienating the old customers may not have been a smart move.

Tom Hogarty may have been good at using internet "influencers" (reading is LinkedIn profile is illuminating), but one thing is trying to use them against the usual Adobe competitors, another trying to go head to head against Apple and Google, which are not really newcomers in marketing - and have the required firepower. Aperture may not have been a critical product for Apple, but capturing user photos, and the large source of data within, will be.


----------

