In the long run it would be nice to not only have the ability to choose which files/albums should be kept locally, but also which raw files should be local only (not uploaded to the cloud). For example I want to upload most of my recent shots (except videos and timelapses) to the cloud, but move the really old ones (also videos and timelapses) onto external drives only and keep just the smart previews online. Even though Lightroom Classic supports that workflow (with some kind of hacks), I still would like to switch completely to Lightroom CC in the long run.
Apparently my full CC subscription only gives me 100GB of cloud storage for Lightroom. This is frankly a bit ridiculous because this limitation prevents me from even starting to use the software when I know that there won't be enough space.
For this reason I was wondering if I can use the software locally? In other words: If I put my Lightroom file in my Dropbox and let Dropbox sync it, what happens if I reach the 100GB limit? Will the software not accept any additional photos?
The hard way is, the % cloud slider goes the other way. So the use can select how much to keep on their local drive (today) and also how much to sync to the cloud (feature enhancement). This would keep the the use casevto allow sync across devices of the most recently used images but not all the old ones.
This is going to be a long post but my frustration with the new Adobe Lightroom CC is well founded.
I've been using Adobe Lightroom for years, I think since Lightroom 2 or 3? It's a powerful tool in my workflow and I truly can't see myself without the software. When Adobe switched to the subscription based Creative Cloud I was hesitant but followed. If Photoshop CC wasn't included I wouldn't have made the switch to the subscription model.
When Lightroom was renamed to Lightroom Classic CC I was worried but figured I'd try the new Lightroom CC. It was awful, lacked many of the tools I had relied on and it felt like using a mobile app on a computer. SO I switched back and lost a lot of faith in Adobe's vision for Lightroom.
I got a new phone last year and downloaded the Lightroom CC mobile app so I could take RAW photos and edit those photos. I had seen that the apps capabilities had been vastly improved since I last used it. I was starting to become a bit more mobile in my photography and wanted to revisit using Lightroom CC on my computer so I could also edit on my phone, web, and eventually a tablet.
Now, I don't do photography as a career but more of a passionate hobby. I exported about 600 photos that I had recently taken to a new Library Catalog so I could import into Lightroom CC. To get my toes wet, so to speak. Imagine my surpise when I ran out of Adobe Cloud storage space.
I looked all through Lightroom CC's settings, looking for a way to limit the number of days I could have in the cloud at once. I discovered it's simply not possible. Every photo is uploaded to Adobe Cloud. I'm not a fan. I came back to Lightroom CC after seeing the clear improvements made, but Lightroom CC was not the Phoenix I expected it to be. Now my faith of Lightroom's future in my workflow is even lower.
I have 3TB of photos going back 8+ years. I'm probably never going to editing those photos again, let alone ones from 2 years ago or even 6 months ago. I'd have to pay $50/mo for 5TB of space, because 2TB is the last option before 5TB. As a hobbyist, I'm not paying that. Amazon let's me upload photos for free, even RAW photos. I'm not going to pay $50 a month for the privilege of editing with Adobe's latest Lightroom CC. No. You've lost me there.
I already have an online back up in place, I don't need to pay for another back up solution. It's prohibitively expensive for me to switch to the latest and greatest Lightroom.
So, let me select how many photos to keep in Adobe CC. Maybe I decide to keep 30 days? Maybe 3000 photos? Maybe the last 3 imports only?
But Alex, what if you want to edit photos from 5 years ago? Two things can happen, and ideally a combination of these.
The desktop version of Lightroom CC can edit all my photos because it's connected to the hard drive/network the photos are stored. Not sure if phone, tablet, and web versions of Lightroom CC can connect to network drives but as long as I'm on my network, and connected to my NAS (or physically to a hard drive), I think it's reasonable that the desktop version of Lightroom CC can edit all of my photos.
Create a "Lightroom Server" that runs on a NAS or computer that the client (the desktop, mobile, and web) versions connect to. If I want to edit a photo that's not in the cloud, then the server software running at my home will upload the photo directly to my phone/tablet, so I don't use any additional Adobe Cloud space.
If I upload photos from the field to Adobe Cloud from my tablet then the Cloud should talk with the server software running on my NAS and remove the older photos from Adobe Cloud, ensuring I keep the last X days/imports of photos online and the rest locally on my NAS at home.
I feel priced out, and that I'll need to find a solution that isn't Adobe. I love the software, I do, but if this is the stance that Adobe is taking with Lightroom I can't recommend Lightroom to my friends. I'm starting to look at other solutions. There's nothing quite like Lightroom CC yet, but the moment something exists I'm taking my business there.
I know I'm just one voice in a sea of millions to you guys but I strongly feel Lightroom CC isn't the solution Adobe advertises it to be. Revenue and shareholders will continue to drive Adobe one way while alienating users like me; hobbyists who simply want to have the freedom to edit on their tablet, phone, or web, when away from their computer and library without having to sacrifice a goat because we have terabytes of photos that Adobe insists on uploading and charging us space for.
Alex, you're exactly Lightroom Classic's target audience. Even IF it were eventually to go away, that's not likely to happen until CC was a viable alternative for most users exactly BECAUSE Adobe's so profit oriented. I'd suggest you stick with Classic for now and see how things play out.
I did some more exploring and discovered I can sync albums in Lightroom Classic to Adobe Creative Cloud, allowing me to edit on the go in Lightroom CC from mobile. It's unfortunate that I can't sync Smart Albums but doing the sync manually isn't a huge inconvenience due to the low volume of photos I capture.
This is a related problem. With 110K pictures and movies, LR CC slows down noticeably on my 4.3GH *6 desktop, and becomes useless on my Surface Book 2 with 8GB and 256GB of memory. In both cases my pictures and videos are on USB3 external drives. If I could restrict LR CC database to a period of time and geography, I would have full use of LR CC without the delays involved in large databases. Is this possible? The same can be accomplished if I can specify which files are within LR CC and which are not on the Web.
Responses
Victoria_Bampton_Lightroom_Queen
Champion
•
5.9K Messages
•
103.9K Points
3 years ago
Victoria Bampton a.k.a. The Lightroom Queen
www.lightroomqueen.com
Author of Adobe Lightroom Classic - The Missing FAQ and Adobe Lightroom - Edit Like a Pro books.
0
0
cash_williams
6 Messages
•
370 Points
3 years ago
I think this gives you what your looking for, with an additional step.
That should have you editing local RAW files without using bandwidth.
0
stephan_troyer
4 Messages
•
172 Points
3 years ago
For example I want to upload most of my recent shots (except videos and timelapses) to the cloud, but move the really old ones (also videos and timelapses) onto external drives only and keep just the smart previews online.
Even though Lightroom Classic supports that workflow (with some kind of hacks), I still would like to switch completely to Lightroom CC in the long run.
0
stefan_meingast
12 Messages
•
266 Points
3 years ago
Hello
Apparently my full CC subscription only gives me 100GB of cloud storage for Lightroom. This is frankly a bit ridiculous because this limitation prevents me from even starting to use the software when I know that there won't be enough space.
For this reason I was wondering if I can use the software locally? In other words: If I put my Lightroom file in my Dropbox and let Dropbox sync it, what happens if I reach the 100GB limit? Will the software not accept any additional photos?
cheers
0
0
steve_colen
4 Messages
•
102 Points
3 years ago
Feature Enhancement request to enable a settings which prevents Lightroom CC file library to sync to the cloud and only work locally.
0
0
steve_colen
4 Messages
•
102 Points
3 years ago
The easy way is, Never Sync setting.
The hard way is, the % cloud slider goes the other way. So the use can select how much to keep on their local drive (today) and also how much to sync to the cloud (feature enhancement). This would keep the the use casevto allow sync across devices of the most recently used images but not all the old ones.
1
0
alex_glanville
3 Messages
•
112 Points
2 years ago
This is going to be a long post but my frustration with the new Adobe Lightroom CC is well founded.
I've been using Adobe Lightroom for years, I think since Lightroom 2 or 3? It's a powerful tool in my workflow and I truly can't see myself without the software. When Adobe switched to the subscription based Creative Cloud I was hesitant but followed. If Photoshop CC wasn't included I wouldn't have made the switch to the subscription model.
When Lightroom was renamed to Lightroom Classic CC I was worried but figured I'd try the new Lightroom CC. It was awful, lacked many of the tools I had relied on and it felt like using a mobile app on a computer. SO I switched back and lost a lot of faith in Adobe's vision for Lightroom.
I got a new phone last year and downloaded the Lightroom CC mobile app so I could take RAW photos and edit those photos. I had seen that the apps capabilities had been vastly improved since I last used it. I was starting to become a bit more mobile in my photography and wanted to revisit using Lightroom CC on my computer so I could also edit on my phone, web, and eventually a tablet.
Now, I don't do photography as a career but more of a passionate hobby. I exported about 600 photos that I had recently taken to a new Library Catalog so I could import into Lightroom CC. To get my toes wet, so to speak. Imagine my surpise when I ran out of Adobe Cloud storage space.
I looked all through Lightroom CC's settings, looking for a way to limit the number of days I could have in the cloud at once. I discovered it's simply not possible. Every photo is uploaded to Adobe Cloud. I'm not a fan. I came back to Lightroom CC after seeing the clear improvements made, but Lightroom CC was not the Phoenix I expected it to be. Now my faith of Lightroom's future in my workflow is even lower.
I have 3TB of photos going back 8+ years. I'm probably never going to editing those photos again, let alone ones from 2 years ago or even 6 months ago. I'd have to pay $50/mo for 5TB of space, because 2TB is the last option before 5TB. As a hobbyist, I'm not paying that. Amazon let's me upload photos for free, even RAW photos. I'm not going to pay $50 a month for the privilege of editing with Adobe's latest Lightroom CC. No. You've lost me there.
I already have an online back up in place, I don't need to pay for another back up solution. It's prohibitively expensive for me to switch to the latest and greatest Lightroom.
So, let me select how many photos to keep in Adobe CC. Maybe I decide to keep 30 days? Maybe 3000 photos? Maybe the last 3 imports only?
But Alex, what if you want to edit photos from 5 years ago?
Two things can happen, and ideally a combination of these.
- The desktop version of Lightroom CC can edit all my photos because it's connected to the hard drive/network the photos are stored. Not sure if phone, tablet, and web versions of Lightroom CC can connect to network drives but as long as I'm on my network, and connected to my NAS (or physically to a hard drive), I think it's reasonable that the desktop version of Lightroom CC can edit all of my photos.
- Create a "Lightroom Server" that runs on a NAS or computer that the client (the desktop, mobile, and web) versions connect to. If I want to edit a photo that's not in the cloud, then the server software running at my home will upload the photo directly to my phone/tablet, so I don't use any additional Adobe Cloud space.
If I upload photos from the field to Adobe Cloud from my tablet then the Cloud should talk with the server software running on my NAS and remove the older photos from Adobe Cloud, ensuring I keep the last X days/imports of photos online and the rest locally on my NAS at home.I feel priced out, and that I'll need to find a solution that isn't Adobe.
I love the software, I do, but if this is the stance that Adobe is taking with Lightroom I can't recommend Lightroom to my friends. I'm starting to look at other solutions. There's nothing quite like Lightroom CC yet, but the moment something exists I'm taking my business there.
I know I'm just one voice in a sea of millions to you guys but I strongly feel Lightroom CC isn't the solution Adobe advertises it to be. Revenue and shareholders will continue to drive Adobe one way while alienating users like me; hobbyists who simply want to have the freedom to edit on their tablet, phone, or web, when away from their computer and library without having to sacrifice a goat because we have terabytes of photos that Adobe insists on uploading and charging us space for.
2
0
leon_rogson
41 Messages
•
698 Points
2 years ago
In both cases my pictures and videos are on USB3 external drives.
If I could restrict LR CC database to a period of time and geography, I would have full use of LR CC without the delays involved in large databases. Is this possible?
The same can be accomplished if I can specify which files are within LR CC and which are not on the Web.
0
0