Creative Cloud storage pricing is absurd.

  • 1
  • Idea
  • Updated 3 weeks ago
Adobe knows very well that the most efficient workflow possible between Lightroom CC or Classic and the mobile app is keeping all the full res files in their cloud. To increase my storage to 5tb they want triple the price of my membership to a price unreasonable for a small business. Every major cloud storage company has pricing that makes sense for small businesses, but for some reason even though adobe is getting every penny from us they can through subscription pricing, they won’t give us the courtesy of fair pricing for storage. Ive been fighting this for years trying to make my workflow actually work without moving to a competitor, but my patience is about gone. Why do you charge such ridiculous prices for storage adobe?!?!?!
Photo of Elizabeth Armstrong

Elizabeth Armstrong

  • 13 Posts
  • 9 Reply Likes
  • frustrated

Posted 4 weeks ago

  • 1
Photo of Carlos Cardona

Carlos Cardona

  • 777 Posts
  • 149 Reply Likes
Your assumption about "the most efficient workflow possible" may be true for you, but for others it is totally incorrect. Like most photographers, I am a one man shop, and have NO NEED for sharing full res files in the cloud. Also, as a former 25-year Mac IT Pro, my mantra was always "work locally, save globally". In other words, it's ALWAYS slower if you're working on a cloud file, rather than the RAID 5 array on your desk (or in the server room). THEN you save offsite, as a 3rd backup.

Yeah, Adobe makes some bad decisions sometimes, no one disagrees with that (except the Board of Adobe I assume). But don't assume everyone wants what you want. Have you tried putting your images on Google Drive?
Photo of Dan Hartford Photo

Dan Hartford Photo

  • 450 Posts
  • 208 Reply Likes
Elizabeth, I don't agree with your opening statement.  For men keeping my own control of my master images is a non negotiable point.   I do not want my master images subject to the marketing whims of Adobe or any other for profit company who will make who knows what decisions.  Also from an "efficiency" perspective, even with fast internet connections maintaining large files over the internet is anything but efficient compared to local hard drives.   

I actually applaud Adobe for not charging me to store Smart Previews of my images on their servers as that offers me the ability to use the cloud based suite of LR apps at no additional cost for storage.  Except for that I too would be complaining about the price Adobe charges for their Cloud storage.  the one thing though that I do complain about is the gaping black hole in their syncing technology related to Keywords.  I'm OK with not having my Classic folders sync to the Cloud and not having sync between collections/collection sets in Classic and Folders/albums in the Cloud. but I''m not OK that keywords don't sync.  

So, other than keywords, my question to you is, why are you fixated on keeping your full size master images in the cloud rather than in Classic?   A 4TB drive is in the $120 range and should last a half dozen or more years?  Even if you need a second one for backup you're still way ahead of the game. 

Photo of Jerry Syder

Jerry Syder

  • 497 Posts
  • 226 Reply Likes
Elizabeth, I'm afraid you're going to have many on here echoing the same thing. And that is that it's actually not the most efficient workflow possible. I for one, see it the opposite; I would not depend on my photos being in the cloud for many reasons that have already been mentioned here. So my workflow is LR Classic for serious work and LR Web/ Mobile/ Desktop for a bit of fun or to have a play when I'm out and about. It's not a primary but rather, a secondary in my workflow. 
Photo of Dave Grainger

Dave Grainger

  • 404 Posts
  • 72 Reply Likes
As an alternative, you could use a backup service called Carbonite (carbonite.com) which does an automatic incremental backup to secure-site servers, and is very low cost.
Photo of eartho

eartho, Champion

  • 1472 Posts
  • 495 Reply Likes
why in the world do you need Adobe to back up 5TB of raw files? Why would you need those to be online and active 100% of the time?
Photo of Carlos Cardona

Carlos Cardona

  • 777 Posts
  • 149 Reply Likes
Uh, let's say your are a magazine, and you have shooters in one state, photo editors in another, and your Director of Photography in a 3rd? Using Lightroom Desktop, with every RAW file in the cloud, is perfect!
Photo of eartho

eartho, Champion

  • 1472 Posts
  • 495 Reply Likes
Hmmm, i'd say it could be perfect, but Lr is definitely not designed with those kind of workflows in mind.
I imagine most teams and organizations like that will probably be using a totally different kind of DAM.
Photo of Carlos Cardona

Carlos Cardona

  • 777 Posts
  • 149 Reply Likes
You are correct, at New York Magazine we used the Quark Publishing System (back in '04) and then switched to the K4 Publishing System. Those are overkill and too expensive for a smaller operation, or occasional use, and that's where Adobe could be useful.