Lightroom 6.1: Why don't I have Dehaze feature?

  • 16
  • Question
  • Updated 11 months ago
  • Answered
  • (Edited)
After Lightroom update to 6.1 dont have Dehaze feature http://www.upload.ee/image/4785046/li...
Photo of Andrjes Zavadskis

Andrjes Zavadskis

  • 1 Post
  • 0 Reply Likes

Posted 3 years ago

  • 16
Photo of Rikk Flohr

Rikk Flohr, Official Rep

  • 3833 Posts
  • 725 Reply Likes
Official Response
Correct. Lightroom 6.1 does not have the Dehaze feature. You must have the Lightroom CC 2015.1 in order to access the Dehaze slider.
Photo of MJ Klein

MJ Klein

  • 48 Posts
  • 14 Reply Likes
please give us one good reason for this decision to omit a feature from users who purchased the software.
Photo of MJ Klein

MJ Klein

  • 48 Posts
  • 14 Reply Likes
yes, I thought as much.... (there is no answer).
Photo of john beardsworth

john beardsworth

  • 1042 Posts
  • 240 Reply Likes
The answer is compliance with US accounting and reporting law, if you didn't know.
Photo of MJ Klein

MJ Klein

  • 48 Posts
  • 14 Reply Likes
yes John, which is why i stated previously that the perpetual license could be made into a 99 year license.
Photo of Victoria Bampton - Lightroom Queen

Victoria Bampton - Lightroom Queen, Champion

  • 4311 Posts
  • 1573 Reply Likes
Daniel, you simply sign up for the CC subscription. Or you wait until Lightroom 7 is released, assuming there is a Lightroom 7.
Photo of Steve Sprengel

Steve Sprengel, Champion

  • 2647 Posts
  • 337 Reply Likes

Tax laws prohibit Adobe adding features without you paying more money for them, which is why CC subscribers and any paid upgrade to LR 6 will get Dehaze, but pay-once LR 6 people haven’t and won’t:

http://prodesigntools.com/why-creative-cloud-gets-exclusive-features.html

Photo of Doug Stead

Doug Stead

  • 9 Posts
  • 5 Reply Likes
Thanks Jeffrey Tranberry and the swear rule is noted.  However house, your rules. 
Although there is a fine line between what is swearing/passion (justified or not) vs free speech. How about a solution to my profound frustration and freaken unhappiness please?

Just to be clear, I don't like the subscription model.  But THAT is not why I am profoundly peedoff. 

I use the stand alone (Perpeptual) version because much of my time is in the back woods, off the grid, ie: flying in and there, where the only Internet access is via satellite link. 

My desktop LR versions worked just fine, until it was forked together with a the CC version and it's interface.  Now My LR still sends data which I can't stop, can't get rid my notebook of, nor figure out what the devil-data is being sent up when only LR is running.  Turning off the link is not an option as VOIP on my notebook is also the only voice communication avaliable.

Adobe did provided me a command line tool that was to clean out the CC stuff and bring back a "stand alone" capability.  Aside from Nothing noting works and no one seems very interested or seem to care about help or tell me what data is being sent when I don't use any CC what-so-ever.  

Perhaps one of our Champions here will have better luck.
Photo of Jeffrey Tranberry

Jeffrey Tranberry, Sr. Product Manager, Digital Imaging

  • 14147 Posts
  • 1765 Reply Likes
I'm not seeing any case notes under the Adobe ID/email address you use here, so I'm not sure what sort of data you're seeing. I'll see if I can find another account under a different email address to see if I can help.
Photo of Jeffrey Tranberry

Jeffrey Tranberry, Sr. Product Manager, Digital Imaging

  • 14147 Posts
  • 1765 Reply Likes
I found one account with the save name as yours and a LR6 license, but the only case for that was troubleshooting for a bad graphics driver. If you have a case # where you discussed your issue you describe above, please provide it and I can look into it.
Photo of rowzrose

rowzrose

  • 1 Post
  • 0 Reply Likes
I have version 6.8 and it does not have the dehaze feature, what gives?
Photo of Rikk Flohr

Rikk Flohr, Official Rep

  • 3833 Posts
  • 725 Reply Likes
Dehaze is not available to Lightroom 6.x. You need to have the Creative Cloud Version to use Dehaze. CC2015.1 or later is required.
Photo of Les Boucher

Les Boucher

  • 4 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
I have found, On1 to be a better alternative to lightroom. I sometimes use Lightroom for my basic adjustments, but more and more I head straight to On1 Raw which also has dehaze abilities included.
Photo of Scott Sobel

Scott Sobel

  • 6 Posts
  • 3 Reply Likes
Does anyone else find this official answer to be morally repugnant?

I prefer to own software. I am often away from internet access for long periods. I don't like the requirement to be part of the cloud. I want nothing to do with the cloud. I work with my photos locally and just want to buy my software and be done with it rather than renting it and having a credit card charge for it every month.

Adobe is trying to force me into a software model that does not meet my needs by cutting me off from new features despite having purchased the software.

I find this to be morally reprehensible. Why would you discriminate against your customers in this way?

I have been using Lightroom since version 3 and love the features. But, please don't cut me off in this way.

True, you have answered the question. But, your answer is morally unacceptable.
Photo of Cristen Gillespie

Cristen Gillespie

  • 1268 Posts
  • 324 Reply Likes
> Does anyone else find this official answer to be morally repugnant?>

I doubt you'll like my answer, but with no real dog in this hunt, I have given your question some serious thought. I'm no fan of the subscription model. But I'm not opposed enough to boycott, and I do, and long have, boycotted several large businesses, even though it's often inconvenient or costs me more to do so.

I suppose, trying to be scrupulously fair to Adobe, there's not really been a long enough trial to decide if the customers in the main benefit more from the pricing structure of renting than they would from owning. But what I want most to retain is some choice within the Adobe stable of software to own, not have to rent to have any access to it.

Recently Adobe took PS CS6 off the market. Fair to do since it is now quite long in the tooth. However, fairer still if Adobe would now put CC 2014 out there as the new CS6—for purchase, not rent.  I understand that they've been very fair with their Photography Plan. I could still wish everyone had the choice, even with the "penalty" of not having all the features they might have enjoyed while subscribing. For Adobe, that's probably a very bad business move—or it may turn out to have been the enlightened one. I don't know.

To me, Lightroom is part of the Creative Cloud now, and I'm glad they haven't yet refused to upgrade the perpetual model of LR, leaving you stuck on a thoroughly old version of the app, the way they did with PS, nor yet decided to drop the perpetual license to a modern, working LR. They still provide choice, and a better choice than they gave us PS customers. 

But is it morally repugnant to differentiate between their products which are offered at different prices? I just can't go that far. Not offering Dehaze to LR perpetual license users is no more reprehensible than not offering us PS users the features I have to buy to supplement its functioning. They charge for PS, but still don't offer enough to keep me from wanting something they don't offer, nor can I keep them from "squandering" their resources offering me something in PS I don't want.  <BG>

There are businesses worth boycotting due to moral repugnance with their practices. I just can't find Adobe among them to my way of looking at it.
Photo of rafael espada

rafael espada

  • 5 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
But Why?

I am a registered user in LR1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and last april i pay for the LR6 upgrade... two month ago. And now I can't use the last features?

Is not possible.

When I upgrade i see the diferences between CC and Standalone only were in Mobile options, and nothing more.
Photo of Steve Sprengel

Steve Sprengel, Champion

  • 2642 Posts
  • 337 Reply Likes
When you pay again, you get more features, which will be LR 7 for non-CC LR versions.

Those of us who pay every month get new features, sooner, plus we get PS-CC.
Photo of Steve Sprengel

Steve Sprengel, Champion

  • 2642 Posts
  • 337 Reply Likes
LR 6.1 can actually render Dehaze settings if they are in your images some other way, so it is possible to use presets to access Dehaze in LR 6.1:
http://prolost.com/store/dehaze
Photo of rafael espada

rafael espada

  • 5 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
Thanks for the link ;-)

You have reason in part, but we pay two month ago 62€, the equivalent to 6 month for a suscription. If I had seen that LR6 will no have more features, I think I bought the suscription, but I do not read nothing about that.
Photo of MJ Klein

MJ Klein

  • 48 Posts
  • 14 Reply Likes
I don't want a preset! I want the functionality that's owed to me as a Lightroom purchaser!
Photo of Mandy Bagley

Mandy Bagley

  • 2 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
I have lightroom CC and still don't have the dehazing option or the pano option. Please help.
Photo of Rikk Flohr

Rikk Flohr, Official Rep

  • 3765 Posts
  • 707 Reply Likes
Go to Help>System Info: and verify that you have installed CC2015.1 or later.
(Edited)
Photo of Cristen Gillespie

Cristen Gillespie

  • 1247 Posts
  • 323 Reply Likes
Probably mean CC 2015.1 or later. Adobe is very forward looking. LOL
Photo of Mandy Bagley

Mandy Bagley

  • 2 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
WritLightroom version: 5.7e a 
Photo of Rikk Flohr

Rikk Flohr, Official Rep

  • 3765 Posts
  • 707 Reply Likes
It sounds like you need to go to the Adobe Creative Cloud app, log in with your CC Subscription and install the new version of Lightroom. That will have the Dehaze you are missing. 
Photo of Jacques Jadoulle

Jacques Jadoulle

  • 4 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
Hi Rikk,
I have the lightroom 6.7 stand-alone version. Is it normal that I do not get the Dehaze feature? I have also the Photoshop Elements 14 which includes it but I have always to switch back and forth between the 2 products which is really annoying.
I would appreciate a reply. Thanks
Photo of Victoria Bampton - Lightroom Queen

Victoria Bampton - Lightroom Queen, Champion

  • 4265 Posts
  • 1547 Reply Likes
Yes, that's expected Jacques. Dehaze was added in 2015.1, whereas the perpetual license only has the feature set that was available at the time of 6.0's release. CC subscribers get early access to new features that would be in a later paid perpetual upgrade (e.g. LR7, if there is an LR7).
Photo of aurin r

aurin r

  • 17 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
What you really want is the DeHaze feature, which you can add as a plugin to LightRoom right away https://cutthruthefog.wordpress.com/lightroom-6-dehaze/

As for panorama smartfill you can save your panorama with missing edges and open them in another photoeditor in which you apply healing brush or content aware fill.

The online features are naturally part of the online payment system, yet other companies do add new features to the current standalone program (eg along with raw profile updates)

Thus it would make more sense for Adobe to only stop updating features when a new edition is published, since buying the LR6 now will require having to pay for upgrade after a few months, thus costing much more than subscribing.
(Edited)
Photo of Rikk Flohr

Rikk Flohr, Official Rep

  • 3765 Posts
  • 707 Reply Likes
Greetings Jacques, 

Victoria has already given the correct answer. Dehaze was introduced after the release of 6.0.  Versions 6.x will receive no new features - only bug fixes, new camera and new lens support. 

Only Creative Cloud subscription versions receive on-going feature additions during the 6.x cycle. 
Photo of aurin r

aurin r

  • 17 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Yes, the confusion arises because the front page of Adobe LIghtroom advertises the dehaze feature, yet Adobe is contrary to other companies  not putting new features in the updates along with new profiles and lenses, which buyers only find out after using since few look or understand the implications of the small print. I am a it supporter and was baffled by this too, since i am used to many other programs getting real updates as long as you use the current version, and only after a new version is released will the new features stop.
Photo of Les Boucher

Les Boucher

  • 4 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
I found the same problem. To me, it is a matter of greed and locking you into a situation where you continually pay for a product. I changed horses. While I still use lightroom for the basic adjustments (and I think thats about to change as well) I use On1 software more and more these days. At least there, you get what you pay for.
Photo of Rudi Scheers

Rudi Scheers

  • 8 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Same here
Photo of rafael espada

rafael espada

  • 5 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled I found a bug in a LR6.1 Standalone version, the Dehaze panel is not visible. :-(....

I upgrade to LR 6.1 Standalone two month ago and now I can't use the last features?

When I upgrade I saw the diferences between Standalone version and the CC version were the Mobile features. Now, the 6.1 version has a new feature "Dehaze" and is for desktop versions, now... i don't understand why this feature is not in LR 6.1 Standalone version.

I suppose is a bug!

Thanks in advance
Photo of Steve Sprengel

Steve Sprengel, Champion

  • 2642 Posts
  • 337 Reply Likes
Read the rest of the replies to the topic you've been merged into. It's not a bug.
Photo of rafael espada

rafael espada

  • 5 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
Thanks and sorry...
Photo of MJ Klein

MJ Klein

  • 48 Posts
  • 14 Reply Likes
I feel that we are being purposefully screwed by Adobe for not going along with their "bleedware" model (credit card charged every month) and purchasing the software outright.

so my question is this: is this the future of Lightroom? Are the standalone users going to be denied capabilities of the CC version in all future updates?
Photo of Albert Andersen

Albert Andersen

  • 4 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled Dehaze in LR 6.1.1.

The "dehaze" function is not in the LR 6.1.1 version, but only in LR CC. Why, and how to get it?
Photo of Rudi Scheers

Rudi Scheers

  • 8 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
What a mentality is this here say, on the question of an upgrade without having to go to the cloud to want to go. Adobe unworthy, I do not want a cloud I want good software on my PC.
Photo of Steve Sprengel

Steve Sprengel, Champion

  • 2643 Posts
  • 337 Reply Likes
The two aren't mutually exclusive.  "The Cloud" is just the licensing and payment mechanism.   Both LR 6 and LR CC are the same executable program on your PC, CC just shows more features.
Photo of Rudi Scheers

Rudi Scheers

  • 8 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Yes, that I know. But give customers a chance to upgrade to a full version without CC
Photo of Steve Sprengel

Steve Sprengel, Champion

  • 2643 Posts
  • 337 Reply Likes
That will happen with LR  7, assuming there is a LR 7.
(Edited)
Photo of Tim Devick

Tim Devick

  • 3 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
it feels like Adobe is adding new Lightroom features ONLY to CC. They told us they wouldn't force us to "upgrade" to the subscription service of CC, but instead it seems like all new features go into CC: and not the standalone version. This seems to force us to go to the subscription model to stay current. This seems to violate their promise not to force us into LIghtroom CC.
Photo of MJ Klein

MJ Klein

  • 48 Posts
  • 14 Reply Likes
so, let me get this straight: Adobe, GIVES Lightroom mobile AWAY for FREE, but screws the standalone users out of functions that they are owed. concepts like "customer loyalty" "customer retention" etc. are totally lost on this company.
Photo of James Hess

James Hess

  • 216 Posts
  • 32 Reply Likes
No, if you purchased Lightroom 6 then Adobe doesn't "owe" you anything. You made the choice to purchase Lightroom 6. Lightroom 6 doesn't get feature updates, nothing different from any of the previous versions of Lightroom. New features always required a major upgrade. And users have to decide whether or not they wanted to make that purchase. New features are part of the CC program. Now it seems that Lightroom 6 users expect all the benefits of the CC program without having to pay for them. Doesn't make a lot of sense to me.
Photo of MJ Klein

MJ Klein

  • 48 Posts
  • 14 Reply Likes
James, thanks for making my point. It's still Lightroom 6 in the CC program, so it's not a "major upgrade." so, some versions of 6 have it (CC) and some versions don't. and us standalone version owners certainly DID pay for it (I did not like your inference).
Photo of James Hess

James Hess

  • 216 Posts
  • 32 Reply Likes
No, that's not correct. Lightroom 6 has the features that were included when Lightroom 6 was released. Lightroom CC is updated on a more frequent basis. And you DIDN'T pay for the newer features because they were never intended to be part of Lightroom 6. You can't freeload. If you want all the features then you have to pay for them.
Photo of MJ Klein

MJ Klein

  • 48 Posts
  • 14 Reply Likes
it's not version 6 in the CC program? it's version 7?
Photo of James Hess

James Hess

  • 216 Posts
  • 32 Reply Likes
There is no version 7. What is it that you really have?
Photo of MJ Klein

MJ Klein

  • 48 Posts
  • 14 Reply Likes
I have the standalone version 6.2.1. my question was meant to establish that no major upgrade has been released, e.g. version 6 to 7, for example. therefore, us standalone version purchasers feel that the dehaze function belongs natively to version 6. when I bought Lr6 it was called "Lightroom CC/6" indicating a synchronized version of features.

now to address your "freeloading comment" which was IMO unnecessarily personal. I've paid over USD$300 for Lr products since I started using it with version 4. at the "Photography Plan" CC rate, that's 30 months - which is longer than the package has existed. yet, someone can rent (can't say "purchase" really) CC right away and with their first payment, get features that I can't get because of corporate politics.

Lr is not available as a single app, and the other single app prices are designed to get you hooked on a package.

I could not download a standalone Lr 6 version because Adobe has stopped that (we can see where this is going). I read the reviews and bought the upgrade for 80 bucks USD. a few days later I found out that touch screen functionality was broken and now it's clear that they have no intention of fixing it (I started a thread about this issue). I would go back to Lr5 but the catalog has been modified for Lr6 (tell me that wasn't intentional). so i'm stuck with Lr6 that has several broken features that used to work in Lr5, plus no new function updates. it's a good thing I don't have a CC license because I would cancel it. thankfully I don't have to worry about my standalone version being shut down because I've already paid for it.

btw, is Adobe going to lower the Photography Plan price, now that they've given away the mobile version? don't count on it.
Photo of Steven Scagnelli

Steven Scagnelli

  • 5 Posts
  • 4 Reply Likes
This will be the last product I buy from Adobe. I paid for a full license, and I get less features because I don't want to play their game. Good work. They are even including it in Photoshop Elements, but not for us. Good job Adobe.
Photo of Pete Green

Pete Green, Customer Advocate

  • 710 Posts
  • 134 Reply Likes
Official Response
You can also see the correct answer posted here which gives Dehaze in a preset dialog - https://forums.adobe.com/thread/19461...

Lr 6.x users should be able to use this for the time being.
Photo of Tim Devick

Tim Devick

  • 3 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
it feels like Adobe is adding new Lightroom features ONLY to CC. They told us they wouldn't force us to "upgrade" to the subscription service of CC, but instead it seems like all new features go into CC: and not the standalone version. This seems to force us to go to the subscription model to stay current. This seems to violate their promise not to force us into LIghtroom CC.
Photo of Victoria Bampton - Lightroom Queen

Victoria Bampton - Lightroom Queen, Champion

  • 4300 Posts
  • 1565 Reply Likes
It's not just "feels like" Tim - they ARE only adding new features to CC. They can't add new features to a standalone version without charging for an upgrade. They're not forcing you though - they have continued to add new camera support for 2 1/2 years now, which is far longer than any previous standalone license. You may choose to move to CC to get new features though, just like in the past you may have chosen to upgrade to get new features.
Photo of Tim Devick

Tim Devick

  • 3 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
If I recall correctly, I had to pay for the upgrade to LR 5 or 6. I own PS LE now. If I want to pay for an upgrade to get new features, I can. Otherwise, the version I have will continue to work and I pay morning else. If I want new features OR, though, I have to pay monthly to use LR - forever. If I stop paying, I can no longer USE LR. This, I am forced to upgrade to CC at some point to get a useful feature and then i have to pay a monthly fee forever.

This sounds much like the old mafia "protection" racket.

Now I remember why i was doing a trial of Capture One.
Photo of Cristen Gillespie

Cristen Gillespie

  • 1263 Posts
  • 323 Reply Likes
> I own PS LE now.>

You mean Photoshop Elements? Or is there another app? There used to be Photoshop LE (for Light Edition).

> This, I am forced to upgrade to CC at some point to get a useful feature and then i have to pay a monthly fee forever. >

I think many of us feel a bit at odds with the subscription model versus the perpetual license. It does feel "coerced" in this new world of how we receive our apps. But it seems fair that those who need or want to stay current pay to keep the app improving, and the rest of us can either pay a modest annual fee if we're on the Photography Plan, or we have many, many other options to buy less, but only as often as we like. We're not contributing to their R&D when we don't upgrade, though.

When you look at the features you're getting with the subscription, a lot of what you feel you're missing out on will greatly enhance your productivity, if that's necessary, but there's still a way around it, even if slower and more demanding of your time and skills. People in PS4 (not CS4), were doing wonderful work. You just need the basic tools, especially layers (or their equivalent), channels and alpha channels and Curves. And time and patience and determination. <g>

Dehaze, for instance, can't be identically replicated, but we used to "dehaze" with curves and blend modes or in Lab color mode, and can get even closer with targeted luminosity masks. You can really do a lot with luminosity and color/saturation masks. I've read there's a 3rd party hack that exposes channels to PSE users. I don't know how fully or how well it works, but it's still around I think. At one point Nik's Color Efex Pro cost over $300. I worked on a way to come close to many filters with adjustment layers and actions that used them, until I could afford the luxury of being much quicker and more flexible about applying those effects.  And then, after years of depending upon them, they up and sold to Google<sigh>.

I would like to think that apps like Affinity will never go over to the subscription model (it's one of my backups if I quit using Adobe<g>), but then I hear so many people say that they don't find anything they need in an upgrade, they're still fine with last year's model, or the year before that, that I have to wonder how long Affinity (or Capture One, On1, Optics Pro, etc) can hold out if they're depending on new customers to provide the R&D monies. I hear myself saying about many of the apps I own that I can skip an upgrade or two.  We're not investing in the future of a program when we skip one, two, five upgrades.

So. . . it's not what I wanted, but I can't entirely say it wasn't fair of them to do it, so long as we see them putting it into R&D. If we don't feel the benefit, we try something else, as you pointed out.
Photo of Rikk Flohr

Rikk Flohr, Official Rep

  • 3818 Posts
  • 718 Reply Likes
Correction to your post above, Tim.

If you quit paying your subscription, you do not lose access to Lightroom. Lightroom continues to operate in reduced functionality mode. You will lose access to the Maps and Develop modules. 

You will still be able to use Library, Slideshow, Print, Book, and Web.  Import, Export, Organize all continue to work - you just can't use LIghtroom's develop tools nor access maps. 
(Edited)
Photo of Cristen Gillespie

Cristen Gillespie

  • 1263 Posts
  • 323 Reply Likes
Thanks for letting us know. I'd heard something vague about not being able to edit Photoshop files, but we'd still be able to open them flattened? So we'd be able to print or archive them—we weren't exactly losing access to them— but I'm not clear on what functions remain in PS. Good to know what functions remain in LR.
Photo of john beardsworth

john beardsworth

  • 1041 Posts
  • 239 Reply Likes
Photoshop itself would not work at all after the end of subscription. But you would be able to use LR to export full size TIFs or JPEGs, or use them in books, slideshow etc.
(Edited)
Photo of Cristen Gillespie

Cristen Gillespie

  • 1263 Posts
  • 323 Reply Likes
Are you sure? They don't even plan to offer a way to open a composite (flat) file? Other apps I know do open PSDs, but they may not be able to read all the layers, whereas PS could. If they don't plan to offer anything at all—well, I guess there's PSE. Can it open the files, even if not with layers intact?

As I see it, Adobe both needs to make us want to keep subscribing (so far, they're doing okay with me on that one), and relieve us of a lot of the anxiety that comes with the notion our files might not be readable by another app if they've got special layers/features used in them. I understand we can't go forward without subscribing, but we shouldn't lose anything we've done.
Photo of john beardsworth

john beardsworth

  • 1041 Posts
  • 239 Reply Likes
Yes, I am sure about that. Photoshop won't work, LR will but partially.

If the layered PSDs aren't already in LR, you can continue to import them into LR and output them after the subscription ends. In fact you can even adjust them with Quick Develop.

I don't know much about PSE. I presume it will be able to open most PSDs, but it may be unable to interpret everything you may have done in PS. 16 bit or smart objects may be problems, for example. Generally, TIF is a safer, non-proprietary format than PSD which one never really needs (except for 3 or 4 obscure uses).

Given that the nature of the deal is subscription, I feel it is quite reasonable that you can use LR as much as this after the end of the relationship. When Adobe introduced this measure, it surprised many of us. You don't lose anything you've done - you just can't change it (much).
Photo of Cristen Gillespie

Cristen Gillespie

  • 1263 Posts
  • 323 Reply Likes
You can tell I don't use LR enough to think in terms of using LR as my "future proof" app, but sure, anything PS has in its file, LR has always managed to read the composite correctly. It does need Maximize Compatibility, though?  I do always save with Maximize Compatibility, but I do hear people say for various reasons they don't ever save that way. Perhaps they always compensate by also saving a TIF.  I agree that TIF is safer for future proofing, but I want the layered PSD as long as I use PS (I composite more than print straight photos), and don't want to also save out TIF, which I never use unless I'm going into an app that can't accept PSD. Being able to import and save out as a TIF is good enough, though, in the event I end the subscription (still highly unlikely for me considering all I do with PS and the very good pricing on the Photography Plan).

> I feel it is quite reasonable that you can use LR as much as this after the end of the relationship>

I agree. There IS a pathway afterwards. I think knowing this ought to help a lot of people get over their worry about "not owning their images," as many think will be the case if they subscribe, then for whatever reason, unsubscribe.  It's obviously one of those myths that ranks right up there with "you have to always be actively connected to the Internet to use the Creative Cloud apps."
Photo of john beardsworth

john beardsworth

  • 1041 Posts
  • 239 Reply Likes
The reasons for saving as PSD (files in the Duotone image mode, use in Displacement Maps, need for transparency in InDesign) are pretty obscure and I'd be surprised if they were relevant to you. Composites work equally well in a layered TIF as it is functionally identical to a layered PSD. So even if you remember this discussion, you would have no need to import and save out as a TIF.
Photo of Cristen Gillespie

Cristen Gillespie

  • 1263 Posts
  • 323 Reply Likes
When I was growing up, layered TIFFs were very problematic with various apps, so I quit using them at all. Lots of apps would read a layered PSD's saved composite, but not know what to do with a layered TIFF. I'll have to look into how that works today. Of course, PS reads it, but I use a DAM. The old one didn't use to see layered anything unless it was a PSD with a composite image saved (maximize compatibility). That one is now defunct and I haven't tested with the new one.  Or any of the other apps that would read and open a layered PSD as a flattened image. Maybe they all can read layered TIFFs today.
Photo of john beardsworth

john beardsworth

  • 1041 Posts
  • 239 Reply Likes
I'm not saying you should switch from PSD if you don't want to, but TIFs have always been more compatible with more 3rd party programs than PSDs. That applies to old and new versions of Extensis, iView MediaPro, iMatch etc, and to bigger DAM apps, even to the operating system. It's not just about reading the file, but also writing metadata back to it, and the maximise compatibility problem is just one example of how a proprietary file format can mess things up.
(Edited)
Photo of Cristen Gillespie

Cristen Gillespie

  • 1263 Posts
  • 323 Reply Likes
I'm curious now. A long time ago in my graphic design courses we were taught to use flattened TIFs, but not layered ones. And other people talked about the same issue with several flavors of TIF, only one of PSD, so if an app could read the composite image in the PSD, it was safer to stick with PSD. Times have changed a lot since then. It won't take much to test it out in various apps and then at least I'll have options to consider. Thanks.
Photo of Vincent CLEMENCON

Vincent CLEMENCON

  • 1 Post
  • 0 Reply Likes
What à shame. I've bought LR5 and LR6 update and i don't have all the fonctions. I don't want Cc version because i don't need Ps and mobile functions. But yes for all "photo functions ". Presse MR Adobe, car you do it for me ?
Photo of MJ Klein

MJ Klein

  • 48 Posts
  • 14 Reply Likes
get ready for the Big Screw, just like what happened to Photoshop users. you can't get a standalone demo version of Lr any longer, so that means any new users can only buy the CC version (I asked Adobe why and of course, got blank stares in return). we who don't need and don't want Photoshop are forced into a package that includes it in order to get Lightroom. Adobe is treating hobby photographers like they are large corporations and trying to sell to them in the same way. this strategy is doomed to failure in the long run.
Photo of Jean-Luc Tardif

Jean-Luc Tardif

  • 2 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled Why does Lightroom 6 doesn't have the Dehaze function ?.
Photo of sophus nielsen

sophus nielsen

  • 3 Posts
  • 2 Reply Likes
This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled dehaze filter in stand alone Lightroom.

I have been using a trial version of Lightroom6 and I have been very happy about the dehaze filter. I bought the program as a stand alone and was given no information that I would loose dehaze. I am told I have so subscribe to the whole package to get it back, but I am really only interested in Lightroom, so I feel I am being cheated badly here and not informed
Photo of aurin r

aurin r

  • 17 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
I had the same experience, yet have been partly saved by the dehaze preset https://cutthruthefog.wordpress.com/lightroom-6-dehaze/ since it works for the entire photo, not any brush - yet shows how Adobe is deliberately cutting out features in the standalone since the effect is there, only the control slider is missing!
Photo of sophus nielsen

sophus nielsen

  • 3 Posts
  • 2 Reply Likes
It seems Adobe is in breach with good marketing etics - I am very disappointed with the company!!! And I cannot understand why we do not get a decent answer from those responsible for this breach!
Photo of Rikk Flohr

Rikk Flohr, Champion

  • 1373 Posts
  • 335 Reply Likes
http://blogs.adobe.com/photoshopdotco... announced on the day LR 6.0/CC2015 was released

Key text excerpted:

"You can also purchase a traditional license of Lightroom 6 for $149 (for those new to Lightroom) and $79 (for previous Lightroom customers). Please note that this version of Lightroom does not have access to any of the mobile or web workflows supported by Creative Cloud, and only Creative Cloud members receive ongoing feature updates."

This was pretty widely discussed at the April Release and again at the 2015.1 release on 6/15/2015: http://blogs.adobe.com/lightroomjourn... when the first new feature arrived.

Key text excerpted:

"* Please note that these features are not available in the standalone version of Lightroom 6.1."

Feature divergence between traditional perpetual licenses and the subscription model first occurred in LR 5.4 when support for Lightroom for mobile was added. 4/7/2014
Photo of John Dillon

John Dillon

  • 11 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Lovely. Glad I upgraded. Seems like I am in a similar boat as many folks here, not wanting CC because of how it changes things unnecessarily (see the recent kerfuffle over Importing (and the attached apology) here: http://blogs.adobe.com/lightroomjourn...

I don't want this loss of control. So, apparently, Adobe wants me to pay more and have less control. Sorry, Adobe. LR 6 is my last.
Photo of MJ Klein

MJ Klein

  • 48 Posts
  • 14 Reply Likes
hi John. unless i'm mistaken, Lr 6 is the last standalone version. there wasn't a demo of Lr 6 standalone, and there won't be a version 7 standalone. so, from now on, Lr is available for rent only.
Photo of Steve Sprengel

Steve Sprengel, Champion

  • 2643 Posts
  • 337 Reply Likes
MJ, what is your source for there being no LR 7, only CC, in the future?
Photo of MJ Klein

MJ Klein

  • 48 Posts
  • 14 Reply Likes
Adobe's history, re: Photoshop.
Photo of john beardsworth

john beardsworth

  • 1041 Posts
  • 239 Reply Likes
That's not a source, it's fear-mongering.
Photo of MJ Klein

MJ Klein

  • 48 Posts
  • 14 Reply Likes
lol. the truth is, i don't where i read it on the Adobe forums. you're welcome to do a search if you like.
Photo of Steve Sprengel

Steve Sprengel, Champion

  • 2643 Posts
  • 337 Reply Likes
Speculations is all I see when I search. Any Adobe announcement would surely be at least on an official blog, not just a random reply on a forum post.

There is someone on the DPReview forums that thought "no version updates" for LR 6 means that means there will be no LR 7, but to me it just means that LR 7 won't be included for free in the LR 6 price, which is the same as always.
Photo of Rikk Flohr

Rikk Flohr, Champion

  • 1373 Posts
  • 335 Reply Likes
Clarification: The Import dialog changes affected both 6.x and CC2015. Hard to accept that as a reason IMO.
Photo of Alex Kheidorov

Alex Kheidorov

  • 7 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
I have import problem of CANON 5D MArk III RAWs (from local folder) at version 6.3.
5.7 works fine.
I tried to install LR 6.3 several times and all the times inport doesn't work. LR 6.x for sure is very raw software.
Photo of John Dillon

John Dillon

  • 11 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Except that with CC, it auto updates. Sure, you can disable it, but that is exactly the sort of intrusion I don't want. And I don't want Adobe monitoring which tools I use.
Photo of James Hess

James Hess

  • 216 Posts
  • 32 Reply Likes
CC doesn't auto update. You are notified when updates are available, but you choose when/if to install. There are so many myths that get spread about CC that simply aren't true. And your auto update claim is one of those myths.
Photo of Rikk Flohr

Rikk Flohr, Champion

  • 1373 Posts
  • 335 Reply Likes
Think about that: "I don't want Adobe monitoring which tools I use"

How do you expect Adobe to psychically know which features are getting used, which are not, and which are needing updating/fixing? You hear the outcry when features that have low usage are removed or altered. You also hear throngs of users come forward and say "I use that". When queried, they also respond "I ain't letting Adobe know nothing"

Your secretive habits are shooting yourself in the foot.
Photo of John Dillon

John Dillon

  • 11 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Not at all. I have tools I used very infrequently. Scant use does not mean I don't want it. It was the entire logice behind the removal of auto-eject. Low usage = removal? So, if I want to try and keep a tool or feature that I value, then what are my options? Use it just to try to rig the system? Truthfully, Adobe has lost my confidence. They seem to be too interested in monetizing their customers rather than serving them.

Have you thought about the logic behind removing the feature? Adobe had to think that it isn't used much, so they should remove it. They know some people use it (thanks to CC monitoring users), but it isn't a high number of users. So, serve the masses rather than all, and then expend resources to remove something, knowing that it will impact some users. Then it had to be determined that those few users weren't worth risking angering. All so Adoobe could expend resources (employee time = money) to remove something that was already there.

So, what was the upside to Adobe to remove the feature that they were willing to affect a few customers and spend money to do so? Adobe has yet to say there was any advantage to be gained for the removal. So, why do it?

Very unhappy with Adobe's business practice here. I am trying out Capture 1, and it is quite different and I am far less good at working with it. But I have yet to see anything that would give me pause. I am really liking the output. Seems to handle color from my camera better than Adobe did.
Photo of John Dillon

John Dillon

  • 11 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
So, the auto-update hasn't hit LR? Good to know. Isn't it in PS?
Photo of James Hess

James Hess

  • 216 Posts
  • 32 Reply Likes
No, auto update isn't in Photoshop either. You choose when/if you want to install. It's all handled from the creative cloud application manager.

But as to your other point, features had to be withheld from Lightroom 6 because the Lightroom 6 users didn't pay for them. You chose to purchase Lightroom 6, and the feature set that was included. For those who want to hold out and insist on using a standalone product, there has to be income to support the continued availability of a standalone version. Yes, it's all about the money. If you want the features you'll have to pay for them. And you'll pay either a subscription fee or you will pay for an upgrade.
Photo of John Dillon

John Dillon

  • 11 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Why do believe it had to be withheld? It didn't. And Adobe has been quite clear that 6 costs more than CC in the long term. So, having paid more than CC users, how have I not paid for it? I "upgraded" a good 40 some days ago, well after dehaze was released, but so I can't even switch. And I thought I had paid for them. I should have read the fine print that 6 and CC were forked permanently. I guess I am "forked", too.
Photo of Butch_M

Butch_M

  • 291 Posts
  • 112 Reply Likes
'Your secretive habits are shooting yourself in the foot.'

Pure poppycock.

Actually, Adobe's method of research and  data  collection may be shooting themselves in the foot. Why not just ask the users what they like before they make wholesale changes? You know, like they did in an era gone by when they treated customers as a valuable asset and not like a necessary evil, or even worse, like an adversary that that needs vanquished.

That way they could actually discover what is going on in their customer's minds and daily workflow as to  what they value and what they do not instead of making incorrect assumptions based upon incomplete data. 

It's not wrong for end users to expect privacy. Adobe does not have a right to monitor our usage that closely and should not blame their users when they are not allowed to do so. It's simply the cost of doing business to stay in communication with your customers ... not monitor them like Big Brother.
Photo of Jeffrey Tranberry

Jeffrey Tranberry, Sr. Product Manager, Digital Imaging

  • 14146 Posts
  • 1765 Reply Likes
Hi Butch, you can opt out of desktop usage tracking (which features you use) or machine learning (cloud based keywording/search) within your user account here:

https://accounts.adobe.com/security
(Edited)
Photo of Butch_M

Butch_M

  • 291 Posts
  • 112 Reply Likes
Yes, Jeffrey, I am well aware of that but Rikk seems to believe that doing so results in self-inflicted injuries because Adobe places so much weight on that data for future development. (I.e. The Import dialog fiasco)

I simply pointed out that maybe Adobe should use more than one data collection method to include for consideration.
Photo of Jeffrey Tranberry

Jeffrey Tranberry, Sr. Product Manager, Digital Imaging

  • 14146 Posts
  • 1765 Reply Likes
Hi Butch, that data is one datapoint. We still do in person customer visits, user studies, surveys, private beta programs, etc. 
Photo of Butch_M

Butch_M

  • 291 Posts
  • 112 Reply Likes
Judging by recent history (and Mr. Flohr's comment here) ... Adobe should broaden the scope of those efforts. If they did, maybe they wouldn't have such serious problems with updates of late. The evidence clearly indicates that whatever datapoint collection is in current use is not offering optimum results. Or, even worse, management is ignoring the data out of arrogance.

For example, I find it incredible that Adobe does not have one single private beta tester that  utilized Ps Droplets upon export from Lightroom ... or that at least one beta tester that  used Epson printers on Mac OS X to catch the color management issues recently ... before ... they released those respective updates?

What good is your beta test group if they are all like-minded, like-equipped and nearly identical workflow paradigms ... the evidence clearly points that Adobe's methods are not broad enough to gather more correct data points nor do they reflect the reality of their user base.
(Edited)
Photo of John Dillon

John Dillon

  • 11 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
I do have to say, I am liking C1..... so long, and thanks for all the fish. I hate feeling "monetized."
Photo of James Hess

James Hess

  • 216 Posts
  • 32 Reply Likes
People, those of you who have purchased Lightroom 6 have a full version of Lightroom 6. The dehaze was not available at that time. It was added to a subsequent update to Lightroom CC. Lightroom 6 is not supposed to receive feature updates. It is a standalone version, and like all standalone versions, new features are reserved for upgrades that must be paid for. It was made known from the beginning that Lightroom 6 would receive updates to support additional cameras, but there would be no new features. Lightroom CC, on the other hand, is marketed and designed to receive periodic feature enhancements. That is part of what the creative cloud subscription offers. Nobody has been shafted, those of you who purchased Lightroom 6 have all of the Lightroom 6 features. If Adobe included all feature updates in Lightroom 6 there would be no motivation for anyone to move to a Lightroom 7 (if there should happen to be one). And there would be no development income to continue offering a standalone version. Why do you suppose it's necessary to charge for upgrades (i.e. Lightroom 6)? Somebody has to pay for the development. Adobe isn't going to give it away.

If you want continuous updates, and all the features Lightroom has to offer, then subscribe to the creative cloud. That's how it works.
Photo of Steven Scagnelli

Steven Scagnelli

  • 5 Posts
  • 4 Reply Likes
James,

That statement is ridiculous on its face because the Dehaze functionality was added to my non-CC install. The control panel to access it has just been disabled. I know this because I can create presets that call the dehaze function. Also, the complete re-write and subsequent reversion of the import tool points to how many features they are willing to change completely even in the non-cc version. Bottom line, it is a simple addition to turn on the panel. Adobe is choosing not to for people that bought the full license. They are shafting loyal customers through this action.
Photo of James Hess

James Hess

  • 216 Posts
  • 32 Reply Likes
Yes, that is true. However, you purchased Lightroom 6. You didn't pay to have the filter. It's as simple as that.

It's really no different than Camera Raw and Photoshop Elements. Camera Raw only has some of its features enabled because that is how it comes with Photoshop Elements. If you want all the features then you have to pay the price.

Adobe announced well in advance their plans to move to the creative cloud subscription plan. But there is a certain group who refuse to go that way. So Adobe has to continue to offer a standalone version to those holdouts. They said they didn't want the creative cloud. Adobe decided that's okay. They just won't get the updates that include new features. That's the way it has always been, even before the creative cloud. New features, new upgrade, costs money. You're the one who decided to purchase the standalone version. Don't blame Adobe for the choice you made.
Photo of robert Strickland

robert Strickland

  • 5 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
I just bought the Lightroom 6 Standalone and then updated with the 6.3 update and I find there is no De-haze, I bought the upgrade to be able to use this new tool. I might have as well stayed with 5.7.1 as there is not much different without the De-haze. Fro my applications the Stand alone product was best for me, but you are punishing the stand alone users by taking out valuable section like the De-haze
Photo of Rikk Flohr

Rikk Flohr, Champion

  • 1373 Posts
  • 335 Reply Likes
If you purchased in the last 30 days, you can return the Lightroom 6 and then subscribe to Lightroom CC to get Dehaze - or you can use the Presets to access global Dehaze: http://www.imaging-resource.com/news/...
Photo of John Dillon

John Dillon

  • 11 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Too late for me. And I did the same thing. Really wanted it. Stitching is nice, but I could already do that.
Photo of James Hess

James Hess

  • 216 Posts
  • 32 Reply Likes
You are not being "punished". The dehaze filter was not part of Lightroom 6 from the beginning. It was added later as an update to Lightroom CC. You chose to purchase Lightroom 6. You have the features that are for Lightroom 6. You don't have the extras because apparently you didn't want them. You can't change your mind now. Well, I guess you could and join the creative cloud. But that would have to be your choice.

You say that for your applications the standalone Lightroom was best. What makes that the case? The creative cloud version is installed locally on your computer, runs locally on your computer, performs all work on your local computer.

What you all seem to be expecting is to receive all the updates and feature improvements that Lightroom CC receives, but not have to pay anything extra for them. In other words, you seem to expect Lightroom 6 to be the version that will be perpetually updated with new features without having to pay anything for them. So essentially, it seems that you are expecting the Lightroom CC subscribers to foot the bill for all the improvements. And all you think you should have to give up is Lightroom Mobile? If there's going to be a standalone version, it seems to me that the standalone users should have to pay for the upgrade.
Photo of robert Strickland

robert Strickland

  • 5 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
CC costs, I do not want a monthly payment
Photo of Steve Sprengel

Steve Sprengel, Champion

  • 2642 Posts
  • 337 Reply Likes
Adobe employees keep getting paid but you want the fruits of their labor without paying. Once you pay them again you'll get those new features. You can pay a little every month or you can pay when a new pay-for version comes out.
Photo of James Hess

James Hess

  • 216 Posts
  • 32 Reply Likes
If you don't want a monthly payment then you will have to wait for the next release (upgrade, as in paid for) in order to get your new features. The purchase of the Lightroom 6 doesn't give you any new features, and you shouldn't expect them. Lightroom 6 is no different than any previous standalone version of Lightroom. If you wanted new features you had to pay for the upgrade. What you seem to be asking for is to have all of the enhancements to the creative cloud version included in Lightroom 6 without having to pay for them. As I see it, you are trying to be freeloaders.

It is been pointed out that the program code for Lightroom 6 is the same code that is used for Lightroom CC. It's just that new features are blocked. That's because you didn't pay for the new features. It's no different than Camera Raw (the plug-in) when it's running with Photoshop Elements. Many of the features are not available although it is the same plug-in. Again, if you want all the features you have to pay the price. If you don't want to pay the price, then stop complaining. You got what you paid for.
Photo of robert Strickland

robert Strickland

  • 5 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
We are not freeloader at all why design a new software then block some of the assets, but that's your business, I am satisfied with what I got
Photo of James Hess

James Hess

  • 216 Posts
  • 32 Reply Likes
A lot of users have your attitude. But if Adobe simply provided all of the new features to the standalone users there would be no motivation to create a new standalone version. And there would be no income generated to support another standalone version. So what you seem to be asking for is to pay $79 for one last upgrade, and then from that point on you want to be supported by those who subscribe to the creative cloud, while all you give up is the use of Lightroom Mobile. That doesn't make very good business sense, in my opinion.

If you are satisfied with what you have, why are you complaining?
Photo of MJ Klein

MJ Klein

  • 48 Posts
  • 14 Reply Likes
hi James. there is another way to look at the situation, and i believe this is more in line with their intent: if Adobe provided all of the new features to the standalone users, there would be no motivation for them to switch to the CC program, which clearly is their ultimate goal.
Photo of James Hess

James Hess

  • 216 Posts
  • 32 Reply Likes
I can agree with you on that point. But why are you so afraid of the CC program? It works! A majority of the problems on the Adobe Lightroom forum are associated with problems people are facing trying to keep the creative cloud version separated from the standalone version. People argue that they don't want a monthly payment. We have to pay our rent by the month, utilities by the month. Once the account is set up the payments are drawn automatically. The software is installed locally on the computer.

I don't work for Adobe, but I believe they would like it if more would adopt the creative cloud plan and forget about this fear factor that seems to be prevalent. The Lightroom program works the same way, creative cloud or standalone. The CC version has a few more features, true. But some people seem to think that if they subscribe to the creative cloud that all of their work is in the cloud. It isn't. Everything is done locally.

So tell me please. What is the REAL reason you are refusing to go creative cloud? Could it be the huge savings? If we take a two-year period Which would include possibly 2 standalone upgrades, you're investing $158 if you keep current. Yes, it will cost $240 (plus tax) for the creative cloud plan if you pay by the month, but you've got Photoshop as well. Is a difference of $82 spread over two years really that big of a deal breaker?
Photo of John Dillon

John Dillon

  • 11 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Because I don't like subscriptions. I like to buy a product, and own it, even if it only is a license. I don't want compaanies knowing what and how I do things. I do not like the model of subscribing. Had I known how poor of an upgrade 6 was (my ignorance), I never would have done it. Saving me money. 5 was fine. Dehaze was cool, and was my tipping point in my decision to upgrade.

Also, constant upgrades also tend to accompany a need for constant upgrades of computers. If I do not want to upgrade my system, I want that freedom.
Photo of James Hess

James Hess

  • 216 Posts
  • 32 Reply Likes
Technically speaking, isn't your Internet service basically a subscription? And how do you suggest that Adobe knows what and how you do things? In my opinion, that assertion is utterly absurd.
Photo of John Dillon

John Dillon

  • 11 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Actually, it is more like a Utility. I pay for the service to my house. But, if I choose to pick another service, there is no impact upon me personally. I lose nothing (I do not use the ISP's email address). Were I to leave LR CC, will I get to keep using LR for all of my images? Forever? There are no guarantees. Terms of Service are provided at the whim of Adobe. Even now, if I were to be a CC customer, and I terminated my service, I could not ever access the Develop (or map, I think) tabs. Why does this make sense? It doesn't. I would much prefer to buy it, and be able to continue using LR for years to come if I choose. And I choose be able to revisit my images and current changes, and tweak and adjust them whenever I want.

I don't understand how this doesn't make sense to you.
Photo of James Hess

James Hess

  • 216 Posts
  • 32 Reply Likes
Well, you just don't get it. This has gone on long enough. Bottom line is, if you want all the features Lightroom has to offer you have to pay for them. You purchased Lightroom 6. You didn't pay for all the features and that's why you don't have them. The horse is dead. You can keep beating on it if you want. But I'll not respond anymore.
Photo of John Dillon

John Dillon

  • 11 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
You sure showed me.....
Photo of MJ Klein

MJ Klein

  • 48 Posts
  • 14 Reply Likes
hi James, you asked me a question, and i feel obligated to answer it properly even though you've exited the discussion. apologizes in advance for the length.

the real reason that i am refusing to go CC is actually a couple of reasons. but before i get into the details, i feel that it's necessary to make something clear. it's not about having to pay. it's about having to pay _forever_. i find it interesting (and brilliant, actually) that Adobe have managed to figure out how to turn a perpetual license into a perpetual payment.

1. Stuff I Don't Need: i don't like having to pay for Photoshop when i've never used it, and very likely never will. if there had been a standalone demo version that i could play with, well who knows. but since Adobe only makes it available as a 30 day trial with CC and no option to NOT take it with Lr why should i? i realize i don't have to install or use it. but it does add to the cost of the program and i can't de-select it from my shopping cart, so-to-speak. if Amazon did that, well you see my point.

i have no use for any of the cloud functions. i don't collaborate with anyone on my photography that i use on my blog. i don't store anything whatsoever in the cloud, with the single exception of Dropbox, which conveniently copies to other devices (without that copy function, DB nothing more than "Skydrive" which i also do not use). the above points are not specifically reasons to "refuse to go." it's just that these unnecessary functions are not incentives to go with CC (don't get me started on the gimmicky "mobile" editing functions!)

2. No Graceful Exit Path: I've been using Lr standalone since version 4, so not that long. however, i have already paid more money than someone who subscribed to the Photography Plan since it's inception. I get it that CC has regular feature upgrades that standalone versions don't. i don't agree with that policy, since i think their reasons are flimsy. the often sited "legal" reason about limitations on perpetual licensing can be worked around by making the license term 99 years instead of perpetual. we've already discussed the incentive aspect of immediate feature upgrades. it's a dis-incentive to me.

if i stop using my camera regularly for several years, i can dust it off, charge the batteries, and it works again. i can shoot for a day, then retire it for another year - at my discretion. if i choose to not renew my subscription, then the software ceases to function. i cannot get develop access to my photos that i took on that one day when i decided to pick up my camera and play around with it again. yes, i can pay for a single month again, and do whatever i want with the software for that duration. the term for software that holds your computer hostage is "ransomware." i'm not suggesting that Adobe is doing something wrong, immoral, or illegal by any means. i'm just saying that i can't end my subscription and keep a functioning copy of the software, even if i've paid a significant amount of money. and, even if i quit on December 31, and are completely paid up on my subscription, it ceases to function and i'm left with a photo browser and a drive full of DNG files because i was stupid enough to listen to these evangelizers who convinced me that DNG files are the same as RAW files from your camera (they are NOT!). the license should be a fixed date (yearly) and if one pays up to the end of that date, then they keep what they have; otherwise it ceases to function - or something like that. there should be an exit path with allows customers to keep a working version on their machine once they've reached a certain payment point. but as it stands now, one can't go back and use the old standalone version again because of the frequent catalog updates. like i said, it's really brilliant.

i believe that this is the core issue with CC haters. it certainly is with me. but please keep in mind that CC haters are actually Lightroom LOVERS. we are subscriptionware haters.

James, when you use illustrations about services like internet, which are paid monthly, it doesn't compare to this situation. if i quit my internet subscription, i don't have to pay the internet company later, just to use the files on my computer that i acquired using the internet provider's service.

in conclusion, IF Adobe would remove the ransomware aspect of the CC program, i would consider joining the CC program, even though it does include PS. oh, one more thing, i sure would prefer being able to pay the yearly subscription price in a single lump sum, but that in itself isn't necessarily a deal breaker. i'm guessing that i'm not the only person who has these issues, and probably by a vast majority. i also believe that if a graceful exit path were created, virtually everyone would switch to the CC program. i know my reservations would vanish immediately.

thank you James. you've spent a lot of time on this discussion, and i know you've only been trying to help others understand how the program works. i do appreciate that.
Photo of john beardsworth

john beardsworth

  • 1038 Posts
  • 237 Reply Likes
"if i choose to not renew my subscription, then the software ceases to function"

To be clear, Lightroom does not cease to function. What stops is that you cannot go into Develop or Map. You can do everything that doesn't require going into those modules.
Photo of MJ Klein

MJ Klein

  • 48 Posts
  • 14 Reply Likes
hi John. yes, you are right and that is clear. other than Develop or Maps, what else does Lightroom do, really? at that point it becomes less capable than Adobe Bridge. if losing those modules is not "ceasing to function" then i don't know what is. it becomes just as i said - a photo browser. it's no longer Lightroom. i don't need crippled Lightroom to view or manage my photo collection. after the subscription ends i would probably just uninstall it.
Photo of john beardsworth

john beardsworth

  • 1038 Posts
  • 237 Reply Likes
If you think Lightroom doesn't do much other than Develop, I wonder why you want it at all anyway!

When I cancel my cable TV contract, my TV and internet certainly cease to function. After ending a CC subscription, you can continue to manage your existing photos in Lightroom, add new metadata, import new photos, make adjustments through Quick Develop and presets, export them, make slideshows, make books, print, make web galleries, install updates for new cameras. I think it's pretty mean not to acknowledge Adobe's generosity here.
Photo of John Dillon

John Dillon

  • 11 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
We have very different views on generosity. And the Develop tab is why I bought 6. And CC is apparently why I won't buy CC or 7.
Photo of john beardsworth

john beardsworth

  • 1038 Posts
  • 237 Reply Likes
As I say, I think it's pretty mean not to acknowledge Adobe's generosity here. It certainly surprised those of us who keep a close eye on Adobe and other vendors.
Photo of MJ Klein

MJ Klein

  • 48 Posts
  • 14 Reply Likes
hi John Beardsworth. fair enough, i'll tell you - i bought Lightroom for it's RAW conversion and adjustment capability. some of that other stuff can be done with Digicam or even the app that comes with a DLSR. i don't use presets (except those i created) because, well, other people's presets don't meet my requirements for my photos.

when you cancel your TV and internet contracts, your TV and computer still function. you can use your TV for standard broadcast reception, or HDMI input viewing, etc. i mentioned previously that when i quit my internet service, i can still access the files i downloaded when using that service. when you quit the CC program, your dng files are pretty much useless for other software solutions, and you're left with a crippled version of Lightroom that is little more than a file browser and viewer (of course, this is my own opinion). to be honest, I'd rather just set my DSLR back to shooting jpeg directly than to bother importing to a crippled version of Lr.

as for any of the other things you mentioned, I'll address them so you know my viewpoint:
Quick Develop: i can do that with my Nikon, in camera
Presets/Export: in camera is as good as those (see above)
Slideshow: Never made one - never used one. No need.
Books: I live in Taiwan. Doesn't work for me here.
Web Galleries: I use Flickr to host my blog photos so i don't need to upload to my web server. Don't need it.
Update for new cameras: Irrelevant if i can't make develop adjustments.

one thing that i do use is Publishing for uploading to Flickr. but i also have a very capable batch uploader that does keywording, albums, etc.

what i need is develop capability. and while we're at it, i started another thread about how Lr 6 broke touch screen editing capability. i wish i could go back to version 5 but the catalog has been updated. i could use my 27" touch screen with brush editing. it was wonderful!

if you had a car that broke the steering linkage, would you sit in it to listen to the radio with the AC on? probably not. if you can't drive it, the value is gone. i wouldn't use a crippled Lr to do any of the functions i could either do in-camera, or with other apps i already have installed. i would just delete Lr.

that's why i will continue to use the standalone version until Adobe makes it impossible to do so - and you know they will (ref. Photoshop).
thank you, sir.
Photo of john beardsworth

john beardsworth

  • 1038 Posts
  • 237 Reply Likes
Your "ref Photoshop" is only scaremongering.

But sure, if you only use Develop and don't appreciate the other features, you may as well sit in the car and listen to the radio.
Photo of MJ Klein

MJ Klein

  • 48 Posts
  • 14 Reply Likes
you're entitled to that opinion, John. and i'm entitled to use the software in a manner which suits me. it has nothing to do with "appreciation."
Photo of MJ Klein

MJ Klein

  • 48 Posts
  • 14 Reply Likes
i need to reveal something that happened to me, which illustrates just how focused Adobe is on changing people over to CC:

i (against my better judgement) installed the CC management tool so i could install Bridge, and the perpetual version of Edge. when checking for updates on my standalone Lr6, it opened the CC management tool. i noticed that it said Lightroom CC 2015 was installed. since i didn't install CC 2015, i uninstalled it from this tool. can you guess what happened? Yes, that's right - it uninstalled my standalone version. wonderful engineering.
Photo of Virginia Hourihane

Virginia Hourihane

  • 1 Post
  • 0 Reply Likes
When will the dehaze tool be added to the standalone version of Lightroom?  I just bought Lightroom 6 after doing a trial of Lightroom CC, and was UTTERLY DISGUSTED to find that the most useful feature of Lightroom for me, the dehaze tool, was not included in Lightroom 6.  If I had know this in advance I would not have bought it.  I am not interested in paying $9.99US a month for Lightroom CC as I do not want to use any other programs and it doesn't make economic sense to me. 
Photo of Steve Sprengel

Steve Sprengel, Champion

  • 2643 Posts
  • 337 Reply Likes

When you pay more for LR 7, assuming there will be a LR 7.

Photo of Rudi Scheers

Rudi Scheers

  • 8 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Always so rude? We are customers ok.
Photo of Steve Sprengel

Steve Sprengel, Champion

  • 2643 Posts
  • 337 Reply Likes

I am also just a customer.  Here is a more complete explanation about why you have to pay, again, to get new features, from an accounting/legal point-of-view although I am not an expert in either so I can only pass along what I read, not vouch for the ideas, myself:

http://prodesigntools.com/why-creative-cloud-gets-exclusive-features.html

(Edited)
Photo of James Hess

James Hess

  • 216 Posts
  • 32 Reply Likes
I can certainly understand your disappointment. And it's unfortunate that the Adobe marketing information doesn't make things clear. When Lightroom 6 was released that dehaze tool and several other features that are now in the creative cloud licensed version were not yet available. Lightroom 6 does not receive feature updates. Lightroom 6 only receives updates for support for new cameras and for some bug fixes. When/if Lightroom 7 is released as a standalone version it seems reasonable that the new features that are now part of the creative cloud license will be included. But no one here knows when that release might take place. Anyone who does know is under contractual obligation not to divulge it.

Lightroom on the creative plan receives periodic feature updates. That is one of the benefits of the creative cloud. But if that plan doesn't appeal to you then you have no choice but to be patient and wait for another standalone upgrade. Take note that it will be a paid upgrade. It will not be a free update.
Photo of Rudi Scheers

Rudi Scheers

  • 8 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Not nice from adobe point.
Photo of James Hess

James Hess

  • 216 Posts
  • 32 Reply Likes
I'm not quite sure what you are referring to. I am no legal expert, and I'm only a user of Adobe products. I am not employed by Adobe. In the past, with previous versions of Lightroom, new features were always introduced in a paid upgrade to the program. It's no different with Lightroom 6. You purchased Lightroom 6, and you are enjoying all of the features that were included in Lightroom 6. The creative cloud plan is more of a "pay as you go" It probably costs a little more than upgrading, but the updates and new features come more frequently. I have been using the creative cloud plan for nearly 2 years now, and I really like it. But I suppose it isn't for everyone. Those who choose to buy the standalone version have made their choice. They got what they paid for, and if they want new features then they will have to purchase the upgrade when/if it becomes available.
Photo of aurin r

aurin r

  • 17 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled Lightroom standalone missing the updates that are advertised by Adobe.

My expensive Lightroom standalone does not get the updates that the CC does, even though it is still the current version, i really expected this after finally deciding to use it :(

All other programs i used got updates until a new version came out, this feels so cribbled being unable to do the things that is advertised, dehaze, autofill, upright etc

At least Adobe could update along CC until a new standalone version is made, that would make the investment seem logical and worthwhile!