LR CC vs LR Classic

  • 1
  • Idea
  • Updated 5 months ago
I understand that some people may want to use CC. But why Adobe is excluding some features? I think within the next two years we are not going to see LR Classic and will be forced to use LR CC (if not sooner). This also explains why the well-established name was transferred to the cloud version.
Photo of Amir Tavakoli

Amir Tavakoli

  • 9 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like

Posted 5 months ago

  • 1
Photo of Victoria Bampton - Lightroom Queen

Victoria Bampton - Lightroom Queen, Champion

  • 3818 Posts
  • 1264 Reply Likes
The two featuresets are diverging, as LRCC focuses on cloud functionality and Classic focuses on a traditional desktop workflow. 
Photo of Monty

Monty

  • 94 Posts
  • 32 Reply Likes
I don't believe Adobe is "excluding some features."  LRCC is a completely new app, build from the ground up.  Features are not excluded, they have hot yet been implemented.  

Give Adobe time, features will come (I hope)   

Monty
Photo of Rikk Flohr

Rikk Flohr, Champion

  • 1373 Posts
  • 333 Reply Likes
What Monty said...

It takes time to build features. Will there be things in LR CC that aren't in Classic - absolutely. Will there be things in Lightroom Classic CC that will never be in Lightroom CC - absolutely. They are two distinct products for different audiences. There is overlap but each is designed to be its own solution. 
Photo of Rob Rippengale

Rob Rippengale

  • 73 Posts
  • 45 Reply Likes
This seems like the craziest thing Adobe has ever done. I cannot imagine a single Image Editing Feature that should be in one Lightroom but not the other. When you want to adjust your image, you want to adjust your image. Period. It doesn't matter where that image is being physically stored. No one thinks, "Oh, my photo is stored on the Internet, therefore I should adjust the light differently."

But of course I may be wrong. I look forward to learning what image adjustments the web Lightroom needs to do that the desktop Lightroom doesn't. Should the White Balance be set differently because the file is stored on a cloudy disk?

The only thing that needed doing is Web Storage Access, and that should have been provided to the original Lightroom with a storage module.
Photo of Victoria Bampton - Lightroom Queen

Victoria Bampton - Lightroom Queen, Champion

  • 3798 Posts
  • 1256 Reply Likes
Exactly which editing feature do you think is missing?
Photo of Rob Rippengale

Rob Rippengale

  • 73 Posts
  • 45 Reply Likes
Huh? It looks like you are specifically asking me. I am merely commenting in a thread in which the original poster said there are missing features. And I have seen other threads talking about missing or different image editing features.

Rikk has explained above that there are things in one that are not in the other.

You yourself said the feature sets are divurging.

I don't care to install the new cloudy version just to find out what is missing. My point is that the enormous disruption this has caused was completely unnecessary. Lightroom should have been given a new module to access web server storage.
Photo of Victoria Bampton - Lightroom Queen

Victoria Bampton - Lightroom Queen, Champion

  • 3798 Posts
  • 1256 Reply Likes
Ah ok. The editing tools are essentially the same in both. Tone Curve and Split Toning were delayed in the original release, but were added in the latest release. Batch editing (copy/paste/sync) hasn't made it into LRCC yet.

Other file management type tools are missing in LRCC because they don't make sense in a cloud environment, or just haven't made it in yet. Here's a comparison of the current featureset, just in case you are interested in the differences, without having to install to find out.

But in answer to your original post, they're not suggesting that you'll edit your photos differently based on where they're stored.
Photo of Rob Rippengale

Rob Rippengale

  • 73 Posts
  • 45 Reply Likes
You are as gracious as a Queen.

Great link.

Thanks for being.