Presets from the new version won't work on the old standalone version, so keep your original presets separate from LR Classic CC—most 3rd party presets are still written in the original format and converted (with the original kept intact) to xmp for use in LR C CC.
Jeff is correct regarding the catalog. What he isn't being fullsome in his response is that basically, once you convert your LR 6 catalog to the new database version, and add to it in LR C CC, you just become a thrall to Adobe. You cannot go backward unless you start over with the old catalog in LR 6 and reimport and reprocess all the new images.
In short, it's a one-way path to doing it Adobe's way and not yours.
That's not really the case, @dmeephd - if someone wants to revert to Lightroom 6 they can save their photos' metadata to the files (Library>Metadata>Save Metadata to Files / Cmd or Ctl-S) and then import them into LR 6. All editing is carried over except editing using Classic CC 7 and 8 new features. Keywording, stars, flags, and other metadata are carried over as well - the only things that aren't are pick/reject flags, step-by-step edit history, presence in collections, virtual copies.
Agreed Laura, but don't you think that's a lot to lose in the process? I do. Given the editing changes in LR 7 and LR 8, and the volume of images some of us have, it would be like going back to the days of the horsedrawn carriage after experiencing motorcars.
No thank you. Adobe essentially closed that path backwards. Possibly with intent, probably with malice, defintely with greed.
First of all that is not true. Yes, you lose a few new things like Range Mask, but not that much. Secondly, it makes all the sense in the world that if you downgrade to a previous product, you lose the improvements of the current product. That is not only true with Adobe software, it's true with any software. Older and no longer supported software will obviously be incompatible with features that were introduced after that software was fased out. By giving you the XMP option, and by giving you the free of charge DNG Converter, Adobe is doing much more for people using obsolete versions than many other software companies do.
Every version of Lightroom has been unable to save/export a catalog in a previous format. Even Lightroom 2 could not save a Lightroom 1 catalog. This has nothing to do with the subscription model.
"...a few things like Range Mask, but not that much." Really? How about ..."pick/reject flags, step-by-step edit history, presence in collections, virtual copies."
Granted, improvements to a current product will iccur issues of backwards compatability. However, these so-called imporovements to Lightroom were secondary to their primary goal; that is, to move the user base from a perpetual license model to a subscription-based model and therein lies the trap. Once you move forward, it is difficult to go back, and when Adobe drops the perpetual license scheme—oh, damn, they already did that, didn't they?—the user base is screwed.
There is absolutely no agrument whcih can be made that the current "improvements" to Lightroom could not have been made to a version in the perpetual license model. And that simple fact makes the lack of backward compatability all the more insidious in this case.
dmeephd you're beating a dead horse! The last LR perpetual license product update (6.14) was released in December 2017. You've had plenty of warning concerning its end-of-life!
If you want to revert back to LR 6 with the only the loss LR Classic CC features I've outlined a procedure you can use here:
Todd, before you jump into a conversation, you might want to read the complete thread. It was not I who was inquiring about going backwards, it was the originator of this thread.
I am quite content with LR8, so much so that I dumped my Loupedeck for the Loupedeck+ (as the former no longer works with LR 7 or LR 8). Out of pocket: $279.00 US. I have no desire to revert back to LR6. Get your facts straight.
That being said, whether or not one likes the subscription model is no reason to continue to debate the motivation of Adobe for essentially forcing users to go down that path.
Are you a Champion of the software or Adobe business practices? Come on, enquiring minds want to be able to identify a shill when they see one.
dmeephd the original poster hasn't replied back so we really don't know his motivation or concerns if any.
Jim Pool said, "Just wondering if I can still use my LR 6 stand alone version as well as Lr classic CC.
On the other hand you've been very vocal here with accusation that Adobe is forcing users to move from perpetual to a subscription license model.
dmeephd said, "What he (Jeffrey TranberryCompany Admin) isn't being fullsome in his response is that basically, once you convert your LR 6 catalog to the new database version, and add to it in LR C CC, you just become a thrall to Adobe. You cannot go backward unless you start over with the old catalog in LR 6 and reimport and reprocess all the new images."
That's what I was responding to since it isn't isn't totally correct. Using the procedures outlined at the link I provided you can fall-back to LR 6 with very little loss. You do lose the new feature edits applied to any of your image files because you are no longer paying for them. That's the way any subscription license model works. Adobe at least keeps the Library, Slideshow, Web, Book and Print Modules functioning, which is pretty darn nice of them if you ask me!
dmeephd said, There is absolutely no agrument whcih can be made that the current "improvements" to Lightroom could not have been made to a version in the perpetual license model.
Should Adobe keep developing new features for LR Classic and CC paying subscription customer and provide them for FREE to LR 6 or earlier perpetual license customers who are no longer paying? Doesn't make any sense to me no matter who's side your on (Adobe vs Users).
Todd, either you are being deliberately obtuse or you are indeed a shill for Adobe.
I never said or implied that "...Adobe keep developing new features for LR Classic and CC paying subscription customer and provide them for FREE to LR 6 or earlier perpetual license customers who are no longer paying?" That of course would make no sense. I would expect to buy a new license for LR X on a perpetual basis, and receive the patches amd minor upgrades as a matter of course. Major new releases would be a new license. No worries. TANSTAAFL!
What I implied is that Adobe should have maintained a perpetual license for LR6 to LR 7 to LR 8 and beyond instead of forcing users into a subscription model. But they did not, and there are thousands of posts on this forum expressing displeasure at this business model. I am no more vocal than anyone else who feels this way. On the other hand, I am not a shill.
Now, I am not sure if you even understand the meaning of the word "force" but if a company stops development and backwards compatibility of a perpertual license application and offers as the only alternative to keeping up to date a subscription model...well, then if that is not "force" or "coercion" or "motivation" or whatever you want to call it, I don't know what is. (Shill, clearly.)
Please forgive me if I don't get on my knees with opened mouth and supplicate myself to Lord Adobe—as shills are wont to do—for "giving" us users such features as Slideshow, Web, Book, etc. which I never asked for nor use.
If you want to suck up to your masters, that's your choice and your business. Just do not expect others to agree with you or offer praise for you. (We are allowed to giggle at your actions, however....)
This isn't relevant to the original post.Please reference the conversation below and add your comments there concerning the perpetual license product. Thank you.
Responses
JeffreyTranberry
Adobe Administrator
•
15.8K Messages
•
295K Points
2 years ago
Sr. Product Manager, Adobe Digital Imaging
0
dmeephd
294 Messages
•
4.5K Points
2 years ago
Jeff is correct regarding the catalog. What he isn't being fullsome in his response is that basically, once you convert your LR 6 catalog to the new database version, and add to it in LR C CC, you just become a thrall to Adobe. You cannot go backward unless you start over with the old catalog in LR 6 and reimport and reprocess all the new images.
In short, it's a one-way path to doing it Adobe's way and not yours.
7
0
dmeephd
294 Messages
•
4.5K Points
2 years ago
Granted, improvements to a current product will iccur issues of backwards compatability. However, these so-called imporovements to Lightroom were secondary to their primary goal; that is, to move the user base from a perpetual license model to a subscription-based model and therein lies the trap. Once you move forward, it is difficult to go back, and when Adobe drops the perpetual license scheme—oh, damn, they already did that, didn't they?—the user base is screwed.
There is absolutely no agrument whcih can be made that the current "improvements" to Lightroom could not have been made to a version in the perpetual license model. And that simple fact makes the lack of backward compatability all the more insidious in this case.
0
0
todd_shaner_6660895
Champion
•
2.3K Messages
•
37.9K Points
2 years ago
If you want to revert back to LR 6 with the only the loss LR Classic CC features I've outlined a procedure you can use here:
https://forums.adobe.com/message/10946617#10946617
0
0
dmeephd
294 Messages
•
4.5K Points
2 years ago
I am quite content with LR8, so much so that I dumped my Loupedeck for the Loupedeck+ (as the former no longer works with LR 7 or LR 8). Out of pocket: $279.00 US. I have no desire to revert back to LR6. Get your facts straight.
That being said, whether or not one likes the subscription model is no reason to continue to debate the motivation of Adobe for essentially forcing users to go down that path.
Are you a Champion of the software or Adobe business practices? Come on, enquiring minds want to be able to identify a shill when they see one.
0
0
todd_shaner_6660895
Champion
•
2.3K Messages
•
37.9K Points
2 years ago
Jim Pool said, "Just wondering if I can still use my LR 6 stand alone version as well as Lr classic CC.
On the other hand you've been very vocal here with accusation that Adobe is forcing users to move from perpetual to a subscription license model.
dmeephd said, "What he (Jeffrey TranberryCompany Admin) isn't being fullsome in his response is that basically, once you convert your LR 6 catalog to the new database version, and add to it in LR C CC, you just become a thrall to Adobe. You cannot go backward unless you start over with the old catalog in LR 6 and reimport and reprocess all the new images."
That's what I was responding to since it isn't isn't totally correct. Using the procedures outlined at the link I provided you can fall-back to LR 6 with very little loss. You do lose the new feature edits applied to any of your image files because you are no longer paying for them. That's the way any subscription license model works. Adobe at least keeps the Library, Slideshow, Web, Book and Print Modules functioning, which is pretty darn nice of them if you ask me!
dmeephd said, There is absolutely no agrument whcih can be made that the current "improvements" to Lightroom could not have been made to a version in the perpetual license model.
Should Adobe keep developing new features for LR Classic and CC paying subscription customer and provide them for FREE to LR 6 or earlier perpetual license customers who are no longer paying? Doesn't make any sense to me no matter who's side your on (Adobe vs Users).
0
0
dmeephd
294 Messages
•
4.5K Points
2 years ago
I never said or implied that "...Adobe keep developing new features for LR Classic and CC paying subscription customer and provide them for FREE to LR 6 or earlier perpetual license customers who are no longer paying?" That of course would make no sense. I would expect to buy a new license for LR X on a perpetual basis, and receive the patches amd minor upgrades as a matter of course. Major new releases would be a new license. No worries. TANSTAAFL!
What I implied is that Adobe should have maintained a perpetual license for LR6 to LR 7 to LR 8 and beyond instead of forcing users into a subscription model. But they did not, and there are thousands of posts on this forum expressing displeasure at this business model. I am no more vocal than anyone else who feels this way. On the other hand, I am not a shill.
Now, I am not sure if you even understand the meaning of the word "force" but if a company stops development and backwards compatibility of a perpertual license application and offers as the only alternative to keeping up to date a subscription model...well, then if that is not "force" or "coercion" or "motivation" or whatever you want to call it, I don't know what is. (Shill, clearly.)
Please forgive me if I don't get on my knees with opened mouth and supplicate myself to Lord Adobe—as shills are wont to do—for "giving" us users such features as Slideshow, Web, Book, etc. which I never asked for nor use.
If you want to suck up to your masters, that's your choice and your business. Just do not expect others to agree with you or offer praise for you. (We are allowed to giggle at your actions, however....)
0
0
todd_shaner_6660895
Champion
•
2.3K Messages
•
37.9K Points
2 years ago
https://feedback.photoshop.com/photoshop_family/topics/there-needs-to-be-a-lightroom-perpetual-license-option-for-enthusiast-photographers
0
0