I was one of LR original beta testers. I have been using LR since - all versions. I'm a photography educator. I have taught LR to hundreds of advanced amateur photographers. I know that most of my students will come to me for advice on what to upgrade to. I will not know what to tell them in simple words. You have created a mess, a big mess, bigger that the one you created when you tried to change the importing process. I have the feeling your business is going to pay very dearly for the confusion you have created. I, for one, will actively look for a LR/PS replacement and will advise my students of the outcome of my search.
Posted 1 year ago
Simon Chen, Principal Computer Scientist
I want to understand your perspectives on the "messy" part. Could you explain it further? Is it about the new product branding?
First, it’s the branding. Product names should explain the product with no shade of doubt. Second, it,s the icon. Who is going to notice that one of the icons has round edges and the other does not? Third, it’s the ambiguity of LR CC. How can I tell my students that this product does not have many features now, but will have a lot more features in the future? When in the future? Nothing wrong with creating two distinct products. But it should be easy to distinguish one from the other.
Victoria Bampton - Lightroom Queen, Champion
> I know that most of my students will come to me for advice on what to upgrade to. I will not know what to tell them in simple words.
This might help Sergio:
https://www.lightroomqueen.com/lightroom-cc-vs-classic-features/ (there's a bunch of other linked posts for additional clarifications on the changes)
This might help Sergio:
https://www.lightroomqueen.com/lightroom-cc-vs-classic-features/ (there's a bunch of other linked posts for additional clarifications on the changes)
Your flow chart is excellent, Victoria. Very detailed and precise. However, this is not helpful from a communication standpoint. Customers want to be able to make their decisions promptly. They don’t want to be bothered with a complicated flow chart. The marketing gurus at Adobe should know this. What is the difference between LR Classic and LR CC? Adobe has given us a confusing picture, starting with the name and the almost identical icons, all the way through the fuzzy product concept. In marketing terms, it’s the product positioning that is not clear. Based on my 30-year + marketing experience, this is likely to lead to product failure. THINK “COKE CLASSIC”.
Victoria Bampton - Lightroom Queen, Champion
Try this:
Lightroom CC - all your photos in the cloud, available everywhere
Lightroom Classic - your photos on your desktop computer, in folders
(I can't defend the marketing choices - I can only help with the definitions!)
Lightroom CC - all your photos in the cloud, available everywhere
Lightroom Classic - your photos on your desktop computer, in folders
(I can't defend the marketing choices - I can only help with the definitions!)
(Edited)
Well clarified, Victoria. But I would have to further clarify as follows:
Lightroom CC - all your photos in the cloud, available everywhere, but with reduced functionality.
Lightroom Classic - your photos on your desktop computer, in folders, though with the appearance of being twilighted.
Seems clear that a major transition is underway. And it's where it's taking the product, and intending to take me, that is not going to work for me. Lightroom Classic is a transitional name, IMHO.
Lightroom CC - all your photos in the cloud, available everywhere, but with reduced functionality.
Lightroom Classic - your photos on your desktop computer, in folders, though with the appearance of being twilighted.
Seems clear that a major transition is underway. And it's where it's taking the product, and intending to take me, that is not going to work for me. Lightroom Classic is a transitional name, IMHO.
Victoria Bampton - Lightroom Queen, Champion
Oh yeah, this is major change, no question. But transitions can take donkey's years. It's not just dependent on Adobe, but on internet connections around the world, cloud storage costs and customers preferences. There's a whole load of new engineers working on Classic, who are fired up and excited to improve it. By the time Classic is put out to pasture, the world will be a different place, so I wouldn't worry about it at this stage.
I understand the re-engineering issues. I really do. That focus is long overdue. But, though I appreciate your optimism, Victoria, I don't have a warm fuzzy feeling about just how much attention "Classic" will have. Especially now.
And the new LRCC is not an option. It will require increases in my cost of doing business in order to not impact my workflow.
Waiting for some relief from Adobe from all of the [performance] problems that have mushroomed out of control with Lightroom has been painful. But, in the face of their silence, I waited, stretched my patience, and hoped. This was a shocker.
And then there's all the reports of the bugs now introduced in Classic. I'll have to pass for now. So I'm not taking home any improvements with this major release.
With so little information from Adobe, there's no room for any more blind faith.
And the new LRCC is not an option. It will require increases in my cost of doing business in order to not impact my workflow.
Waiting for some relief from Adobe from all of the [performance] problems that have mushroomed out of control with Lightroom has been painful. But, in the face of their silence, I waited, stretched my patience, and hoped. This was a shocker.
And then there's all the reports of the bugs now introduced in Classic. I'll have to pass for now. So I'm not taking home any improvements with this major release.
With so little information from Adobe, there's no room for any more blind faith.
Indeed. Certainly no rush from Adobe to dispel fears that 'Classic' is to be phased out.
Nice overview, but it really does not help does it. Having to do such massive flowcharts is just a sympton of the mess. Adobe basically created a new program that they intent to replace the old program, but it simply not good enough yet, so they keep the old one, and as a user you have two slightly crappy programs, instead of one awesome. It's is just a classic case of losing focus, and create lot of uncertainty. Should i keep investing time in the old program that a clearly going away, so should I start using the new one that I don't know if it every will be good enough, (Come on, you can't even print!)
It reminds me of the old Apple Aperture days. While I liked the UI a lot better, I stopped using it years before it was discontinued because you could just sense the lack of focus, and I was lucky that did. Now I have that feeling again. There is no reason why Adobe could not have improve Classic and made it sync the originals to the clouds like the new Lightroom CC.
It reminds me of the old Apple Aperture days. While I liked the UI a lot better, I stopped using it years before it was discontinued because you could just sense the lack of focus, and I was lucky that did. Now I have that feeling again. There is no reason why Adobe could not have improve Classic and made it sync the originals to the clouds like the new Lightroom CC.
Nice overview, but it really does not help does it. Having to do such massive flowcharts is just a sympton of the mess. Adobe basically created a new program that they intent to replace the old program, but it simply not good enough yet, so they keep the old one, and as a user you have two slightly crappy programs, instead of one awesome. It's is just a classic case of losing focus, and create lot of uncertainty. Should i keep investing time in the old program that a clearly going away, so should I start using the new one that I don't know if it every will be good enough, (Come on, you can't even print!)
It reminds me of the old Apple Aperture days. While I liked the UI a lot better, I stopped using it years before it was discontinued because you could just sense the lack of focus, and I was lucky that did. Now I have that feeling again. There is no reason why Adobe could not have improve Classic and made it sync the originals to the clouds like the new Lightroom CC.
It reminds me of the old Apple Aperture days. While I liked the UI a lot better, I stopped using it years before it was discontinued because you could just sense the lack of focus, and I was lucky that did. Now I have that feeling again. There is no reason why Adobe could not have improve Classic and made it sync the originals to the clouds like the new Lightroom CC.
Lack of focus indeed! The "new" CC seems dumbed down and limiting, to say nothing of awkward. Call it 'something for dummies' and stay away from an excellent product. I can shoot raw with an iphone, but the process of getting photos from an iphone to lightroom CLASSIC just makes the whole exercise a pain.
Philip, getting raw from your iPhone to Classic is actually trivially easy. Just log on to the same account and when you shoot raw on the Phone using Lightroom mobile (now called CC) it just syncs the images straight into Lightroom Classic. Just ignore the hype about the new CC. Nothing is new here except that you now have a port of the Lightroom mobile app to desktop OS's and that you can migrate a Classic catalog completely over to CC. If you ignore the latter everything is as it used to be. LR CC is just LR mobile on the desktop.
Why on earth is there no option *without* photoshop? Paying €12.29 a month works out at almost €150 a year, *every* year, which is WAY TOO MUCH. It's years since Adobe seemed to care.
I will jump ship as soon as I can. Affinity has removed my need for Photoshop, I just have to hold out a year or two for their DAM ...
I will jump ship as soon as I can. Affinity has removed my need for Photoshop, I just have to hold out a year or two for their DAM ...
(Edited)
Simon Chen, Principal Computer Scientist
There is a purchase bundle without the Photoshop. See https://www.adobe.com/creativecloud/plans.html, it is the new Lightroom CC plus 1TB of cloud storage to backup your photos.
HI Simon, I think you are referring to a plan that doesn't include Lightroom Classic but the former mobile app. The topic was clearly about the full version desktop app, not the mobile one.
Simon, why should I pay for a product I won't use? I won't use Photoshop (slow and unnecessary) or the cloud service (too small, too limited, and I already have services that do the same thing but do it better and for lower cost).
I want a version of Lightroom without Photoshop and without 1TB of cloud service, for half the price. Basically, I'd pay $89 for a perpetual version or $50 a year for a rental.
And a version that actually works well on a 4k monitor would be nice too - my system is still horribly slow when plugged into the 4k monitor, even when Lightroom's not on it.
I want a version of Lightroom without Photoshop and without 1TB of cloud service, for half the price. Basically, I'd pay $89 for a perpetual version or $50 a year for a rental.
And a version that actually works well on a 4k monitor would be nice too - my system is still horribly slow when plugged into the 4k monitor, even when Lightroom's not on it.
(Edited)
I think that Adobe did a great move with the CC suite. It moved its software from discs to the cloud and it paid off nicely. I am glad CC exists and I can have continuous upgrades.
This time round, Adobe thinks it can exclusively store people's photos. Well, I think a lot of people are not going for that. Cloud storage should be an option in a single LR piece of software. There is no technical reason for this to not be possible. Adobe wants to test the water with the new CC v1 and see what happens. In the meantime I have not seen a single convincing explanation as to why the new LR twins situation is not confusing and not a branding mess.
This time round, Adobe thinks it can exclusively store people's photos. Well, I think a lot of people are not going for that. Cloud storage should be an option in a single LR piece of software. There is no technical reason for this to not be possible. Adobe wants to test the water with the new CC v1 and see what happens. In the meantime I have not seen a single convincing explanation as to why the new LR twins situation is not confusing and not a branding mess.
Simon Chen, Principal Computer Scientist
See http://blogs.adobe.com/photoshop/2017/10/introducing-lightroom-cc-lightroom-classic-cc-and-more.html "Lightroom Classic CC is designed for desktop-based (file/folder) digital photography workflows. It’s a well-established workflow solution that is distinct and separate from our new cloud-native service. By separating the two products, we’re allowing Lightroom Classic to focus on the strengths of a file/folder based workflow that many of you enjoy today, while Lightroom CC addresses the cloud/mobile-oriented workflow." The new Lightroom CC also focus on the ease of use. The professional photographers who wants all the Lightroom Classic capabilities to support their own very specific workflows have no appetite for a streamlined experience that reduce their ability to get things done quickly and efficiently.
Note that the team tried the new streamlined Import UI in Lr 6.2 and while some people liked it, many didn't. The team heard it loud and clear. The availabiltiy of this two versions of Lightroom allows each to aggressively address the needs two customer segments. Having said that, Lightroom Classic CC and Lightroom CC share much of the same key components code and developers.
Note that the team tried the new streamlined Import UI in Lr 6.2 and while some people liked it, many didn't. The team heard it loud and clear. The availabiltiy of this two versions of Lightroom allows each to aggressively address the needs two customer segments. Having said that, Lightroom Classic CC and Lightroom CC share much of the same key components code and developers.
(Edited)
Actually, the sentence you cited was the one which worried me most.
Just this year I fully adopted a mobile worfklow with desktop/tablet instead of desktop/laptop. I trusted Adobe, that they would figure out the flaws the mobile apps still have. But that sentence you cited mean, that only the cloud/mobile-oriented workflow will get those updates, which I as a LR Classic user need to improve my workflow.
With the current speed of development of LR, it will take about 5 years until LR CC will become a decent option for LR Classic user. So it seems, that LR Classic users will be opted out of a mobile workflow.
I followed the discussions of the UI change of the iPad app and I am one of the users, whose 9.7 iPad was rendered useless for LR mobile due to this update. I have not the impression from those discussions, that the LR poweruser do not need a mobile workflow which is actively developed and improved.
Just this year I fully adopted a mobile worfklow with desktop/tablet instead of desktop/laptop. I trusted Adobe, that they would figure out the flaws the mobile apps still have. But that sentence you cited mean, that only the cloud/mobile-oriented workflow will get those updates, which I as a LR Classic user need to improve my workflow.
With the current speed of development of LR, it will take about 5 years until LR CC will become a decent option for LR Classic user. So it seems, that LR Classic users will be opted out of a mobile workflow.
I followed the discussions of the UI change of the iPad app and I am one of the users, whose 9.7 iPad was rendered useless for LR mobile due to this update. I have not the impression from those discussions, that the LR poweruser do not need a mobile workflow which is actively developed and improved.
@ Victoria
> there's a bunch of other linked posts for additional clarifications on the changes)>
I'm reading this and your Quick Start to try to understand. I'm being very selfish of your time here, but if you can help me out, since it's probably fairly easy to say yes or no to which app I should use.
I shoot tethered, so I have to keep LR Classic. I don't need or want the catalog, plus other than shooting tethered, I really only want to use LR for kicking back on the couch, phone in hand, curating the JPEGs (way too many of them) from my family. I want to pick, do basic edits to see if they stand a chance of being rescued in some fashion, and add keywords. That sounds like LR CC. I don't want to have to add my keywords sitting at the desk. I have to do enough of that with Bridge, which still <SIGH> doesn't let me add them in a mobile app.
Other than syncing these JPEGs so I can do something with them away from the desktop, I don't feel I need to do much in LR. I could edit as much as I do my own photos in CR, but all the photos eventually wind their way through various apps into PS.
So IF I put LR CC on my phone, what happens to the photos when I want to push the JPEGs along further? Do they sync with LR Classic, so I don't need LR CC on my desktop? How does that work with the catalog system? Or do I run LR CC for the JPEGs, and LR Classic for tethered shooting?
> there's a bunch of other linked posts for additional clarifications on the changes)>
I'm reading this and your Quick Start to try to understand. I'm being very selfish of your time here, but if you can help me out, since it's probably fairly easy to say yes or no to which app I should use.
I shoot tethered, so I have to keep LR Classic. I don't need or want the catalog, plus other than shooting tethered, I really only want to use LR for kicking back on the couch, phone in hand, curating the JPEGs (way too many of them) from my family. I want to pick, do basic edits to see if they stand a chance of being rescued in some fashion, and add keywords. That sounds like LR CC. I don't want to have to add my keywords sitting at the desk. I have to do enough of that with Bridge, which still <SIGH> doesn't let me add them in a mobile app.
Other than syncing these JPEGs so I can do something with them away from the desktop, I don't feel I need to do much in LR. I could edit as much as I do my own photos in CR, but all the photos eventually wind their way through various apps into PS.
So IF I put LR CC on my phone, what happens to the photos when I want to push the JPEGs along further? Do they sync with LR Classic, so I don't need LR CC on my desktop? How does that work with the catalog system? Or do I run LR CC for the JPEGs, and LR Classic for tethered shooting?
(Edited)
Victoria Bampton - Lightroom Queen, Champion
From what you've said, you need to stick with Classic, and sync to the LRCC mobile apps. That works just like it did between LRCC2015 and the iOS/Android apps.
Any photos you add to the mobile apps sync down into Classic as originals. Any photos you add to Classic can be synced up to mobile as smart previews (not originals).
You can bypass the LRCC desktop app entirely, unless you want to use it as a "Lightroom mobile for a laptop".
The only gotcha you need to be aware of - keywords added in the mobile apps don't sync to Classic. You'll have to stick to your desktop to get keywords into Classic. And yes, I think that's a bad decision on Adobe's part, but Simon already knows that! ;)
There are alternatives, but a foot in both camps is messy. If/when LRCC has all the features you need, then you can think about switching.
Any photos you add to the mobile apps sync down into Classic as originals. Any photos you add to Classic can be synced up to mobile as smart previews (not originals).
You can bypass the LRCC desktop app entirely, unless you want to use it as a "Lightroom mobile for a laptop".
The only gotcha you need to be aware of - keywords added in the mobile apps don't sync to Classic. You'll have to stick to your desktop to get keywords into Classic. And yes, I think that's a bad decision on Adobe's part, but Simon already knows that! ;)
There are alternatives, but a foot in both camps is messy. If/when LRCC has all the features you need, then you can think about switching.
To me the main problem with this mess (and yes it is a mess!) is the uncertainty over the future of LR Classic. As a Photography Plan subscriber I've just has an email regarding the changes that states:
"We know you’ve got a lot invested in the current version of Lightroom you’ve been using. Rest assured that we’ll continue to improve it while we develop the new service"
To me that suggests Adobe will continue to improve Classic only until such time that CC has the same feature set. Then Classic will be ceased leaving CC as the only remaining option. I'm sure that's why Classic was named as such.
I'm getting a bit fed up with Adobe trying to tell me what I want; I know what I want & it's not the 'new' CC or cloud storage of my photos.
As others have commented, maybe time to start looking at alternatives.
"We know you’ve got a lot invested in the current version of Lightroom you’ve been using. Rest assured that we’ll continue to improve it while we develop the new service"
To me that suggests Adobe will continue to improve Classic only until such time that CC has the same feature set. Then Classic will be ceased leaving CC as the only remaining option. I'm sure that's why Classic was named as such.
I'm getting a bit fed up with Adobe trying to tell me what I want; I know what I want & it's not the 'new' CC or cloud storage of my photos.
As others have commented, maybe time to start looking at alternatives.
Victoria Bampton - Lightroom Queen, Champion
It took 10 years for Lightroom Classic to get all the features it has now. I don't think you have to worry any time soon!
They're not going to abandon Lightroom Classic while internet speeds/bandwidth/costs make Lightroom CC unviable for a huge percentage of their user base. That would be commercial suicide, and while we don't always agree with their decisions, they're not quite that stupid.
They're not going to abandon Lightroom Classic while internet speeds/bandwidth/costs make Lightroom CC unviable for a huge percentage of their user base. That would be commercial suicide, and while we don't always agree with their decisions, they're not quite that stupid.
Perhaps - hopefully - you are right. But from everything I heard from Adobe in the past 8 years, I bet on a different scenario. I personally think, that LR Classic will be among us no longer than 3 years from now. At this time LR CC will have more features, but it will definitely be nowhere near LR Classic as we know it.
And I do not think, that this would be a commercial suicide for Adobe at all. A) We all witnessed when Apple discontinued Aperture just in the blink of an eye and has gone after quite the same customer group as Adobe now does with LR CC. B) Development and maintenance of two quite different applications will eat up a lot of money. From a cost-value-perspective it might be way more efficient to cut one of the applications, even if you lose some customers. C) When looking at the whole portfolio of Adobe, photographers are a very, very small group of their customers.
It seems to me, that professional and enthusiast photographers are just not making enough money on the long run for companies like Adobe (or Apple).
But time will tell, who's prediction points in the right direction.
And I do not think, that this would be a commercial suicide for Adobe at all. A) We all witnessed when Apple discontinued Aperture just in the blink of an eye and has gone after quite the same customer group as Adobe now does with LR CC. B) Development and maintenance of two quite different applications will eat up a lot of money. From a cost-value-perspective it might be way more efficient to cut one of the applications, even if you lose some customers. C) When looking at the whole portfolio of Adobe, photographers are a very, very small group of their customers.
It seems to me, that professional and enthusiast photographers are just not making enough money on the long run for companies like Adobe (or Apple).
But time will tell, who's prediction points in the right direction.
Victoria Bampton - Lightroom Queen, Champion
Yeah, none of us can foresee the future. There will come a time when there’s not enough customers left using Classic, so it’s not worth continuing to develop, but that’s driven by customers purchasing decisions. Even if it’s only 3 years, that’s an eternity in the world of technology. That’s plenty of time for other companies to have some wonderful alternatives out in the market, or for Adobe to make the new CC app suitable for Classic customers to use too, so there’s no point worrying too much until that time comes.
eartho, Champion
> but that’s driven by customers purchasing decisions.
Not anymore! With a subscription model, users can no longer vote with their wallet. We're locked into this eco-system and Adobe's marketing dept is calling all the shots now.
With Ps, we've had failed feature after failed feature being released and they have yet to refine or fix any of the more recent disasters. Artboards, Export As, Generator, Select and Mask. All new features, and all buggy and broken.
Very little is being created for the advanced users these days, since we don't conform to marketing's idea of who the apps are for. The original LR was developed by pro's for pro's and this new CC is only proving that Adobe is interested in dumbing down the environment.
Curve's are too complicated! Take em out!
Not anymore! With a subscription model, users can no longer vote with their wallet. We're locked into this eco-system and Adobe's marketing dept is calling all the shots now.
With Ps, we've had failed feature after failed feature being released and they have yet to refine or fix any of the more recent disasters. Artboards, Export As, Generator, Select and Mask. All new features, and all buggy and broken.
Very little is being created for the advanced users these days, since we don't conform to marketing's idea of who the apps are for. The original LR was developed by pro's for pro's and this new CC is only proving that Adobe is interested in dumbing down the environment.
Curve's are too complicated! Take em out!
Victoria Bampton - Lightroom Queen, Champion
> With a subscription model, users can no longer vote with their wallet.
There's other options out there, so users CAN choose to cancel their subscriptions. The options for pros are undeniably limited though, I do agree.
There's other options out there, so users CAN choose to cancel their subscriptions. The options for pros are undeniably limited though, I do agree.
Adobe knows whether you use Lightroom Classic or Lightroom CC. They also have a very vocal set of people behind the scenes (a few on this thread ;-) ) that directly tell them when they don't like decisions. If Adobe retires Classic prematurely - i.e. before CC has essential features like selective syncing, printing, curves, camera profiles, nested keywording, etc. etc. there will be a very strong pushback and you might even see public platform defections from high profile photographers. Adobe is not stupid and they do listen to their customers.
That said, there is a major revolution and democratization of photography going on. It is not strange that Adobe wants a product that targets those people that shoot mostly on mobile devices and that want to get more quality out of their shots and that expect their images to be available everywhere just like in their Apple/Google photos apps. These are not people that identify with the old fashioned shoot a DSLR, plug in the card reader, plug in the flash card, and import the images workflow. They want everything to be available everywhere instantly. Lightroom CC really is quite a step up from the Apple and Google equivalents in that the raw support is great although not to par with classic but it is the same underlying engine on iPads, desktops, and phones. I love shooting images with my phone and working them in the Lightroom CC app on my phone or iPad and having the images show up on my desktop in Lightroom Classic. I am ambivalent on Lightroom CC on the desktop but if you are all in on that cloud workflow already and don't have a gigantic Lightroom catalog (I do so Lightroom CC is a terrible fit for me) it makes a lot of sense.
Don't like the marketing decision to name the new app "Lightroom CC" at all as it is causing endless confusion but I also guess that they were in a bind there as they had already named the mobile apps Lightroom too and so to make clear this is the same thing all across platforms they had to name it the same.
That said, there is a major revolution and democratization of photography going on. It is not strange that Adobe wants a product that targets those people that shoot mostly on mobile devices and that want to get more quality out of their shots and that expect their images to be available everywhere just like in their Apple/Google photos apps. These are not people that identify with the old fashioned shoot a DSLR, plug in the card reader, plug in the flash card, and import the images workflow. They want everything to be available everywhere instantly. Lightroom CC really is quite a step up from the Apple and Google equivalents in that the raw support is great although not to par with classic but it is the same underlying engine on iPads, desktops, and phones. I love shooting images with my phone and working them in the Lightroom CC app on my phone or iPad and having the images show up on my desktop in Lightroom Classic. I am ambivalent on Lightroom CC on the desktop but if you are all in on that cloud workflow already and don't have a gigantic Lightroom catalog (I do so Lightroom CC is a terrible fit for me) it makes a lot of sense.
Don't like the marketing decision to name the new app "Lightroom CC" at all as it is causing endless confusion but I also guess that they were in a bind there as they had already named the mobile apps Lightroom too and so to make clear this is the same thing all across platforms they had to name it the same.
Macphun are making the most of Adobe's announcement: https://macphun.com/
Luminar will be available for PC soon & they say they're working on a DAM which will be added in 2018 ...
Luminar will be available for PC soon & they say they're working on a DAM which will be added in 2018 ...
Macphun has a Windows beta available for download now.
Bill Broughton