- 6 Posts
- 12 Reply Likes
Posted 1 year ago
- 10 Posts
- 4 Reply Likes
Simon Chen, Principal Computer Scientist
- 1537 Posts
- 496 Reply Likes
- 6 Posts
- 12 Reply Likes
Victoria Bampton - Lightroom Queen, Champion
- 4679 Posts
- 1797 Reply Likes
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)
- 6 Posts
- 12 Reply Likes
Victoria Bampton - Lightroom Queen, Champion
- 4679 Posts
- 1797 Reply Likes
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!)
- 17 Posts
- 7 Reply Likes
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
- 4679 Posts
- 1797 Reply Likes
- 17 Posts
- 7 Reply Likes
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.
- 8 Posts
- 5 Reply Likes
- 8 Posts
- 2 Reply Likes
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.
- 8 Posts
- 2 Reply Likes
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.
- 12 Posts
- 2 Reply Likes
- 192 Posts
- 61 Reply Likes
- 102 Posts
- 36 Reply Likes
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 ...
Simon Chen, Principal Computer Scientist
- 1534 Posts
- 496 Reply Likes
- 14 Posts
- 11 Reply Likes
- 990 Posts
- 136 Reply Likes
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.
- 9 Posts
- 10 Reply Likes
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
- 1532 Posts
- 495 Reply Likes
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.
- 57 Posts
- 7 Reply Likes
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.
- 1537 Posts
- 472 Reply Likes
> 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?
Victoria Bampton - Lightroom Queen, Champion
- 4679 Posts
- 1797 Reply Likes
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.
- 8 Posts
- 5 Reply Likes
"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
- 4676 Posts
- 1796 Reply Likes
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.
- 57 Posts
- 7 Reply Likes
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
- 4676 Posts
- 1796 Reply Likes
eartho, Champion
- 968 Posts
- 275 Reply Likes
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
- 4676 Posts
- 1796 Reply Likes
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.
- 192 Posts
- 61 Reply Likes
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.
- 8 Posts
- 5 Reply Likes
Luminar will be available for PC soon & they say they're working on a DAM which will be added in 2018 ...
- 52 Posts
- 26 Reply Likes
- 1 Post
- 0 Reply Likes
- 6 Posts
- 12 Reply Likes
It would have been so much simpler:
- LIGHTROOM PRO: the gold standard for desktop-based photo management and editing, now faster and new, innovative features. Will always be available as part of Adobe Creative Cloud.
- LIGHTROOM CLOUD: a new, future oriented photo management and editing program, designed to take advantage of cloud computing and ready to grow as technology advances. Available as an add-on to Adobe Creative Cloud.
These are my two pennies worth of advice. My 30+ years of high-stake consumer marketing experience give me the authority to give some friendly advice.
- 6 Posts
- 4 Reply Likes
- 12 Posts
- 2 Reply Likes
- 547 Posts
- 167 Reply Likes
Adobe went from two platforms (Mac and Windows on the desktop) to four (Mac and Windows plus iOS and Android on mobile) where usage, customer sophistication, and expectations are a lot different.
I'm a working pro who rarely shoots anything with my iPhone. My day job is product photography where loading everything in the cloud is unneeded and unwanted, and I have over 5TB of photos generated in my freelance work that I also don't want or need in the cloud. So for me personally, development of cloud and mobile is worthless. I'm unlikely to make much if any use of mobile apps or cloud storage any time soon.
OTOH, I do recognize that consumer use of mobile has exploded. I'm not sure that regular folks will have any interest in subscribing to Lightroom, though. The default price online is free and most people want silly filters and easy sharing, not anything complicated.
Adobe obviously sees the buckets of money generated by social media. They also know that without content, they will remain outsiders. The professional market is vocal but small; the potential casual market is everyone on the planet who has a cell phone.
I don't care if Adobe chases the amateur market or not. Chase away. But this is what happens with a monopoly- the monopolist can pursue whatever business strategy they want without regard to existing customers, because they have a lock on the market. Adobe knows that professional imagers don't have a lot of alternatives; this is the same situation that Microsoft has had with Windows and even more so, Office.
I'm hoping that Adobe recognizes that its pro users need different features and a different approach to development than consumer users. Please don't neglect us because you are busy chasing the mob.
- 12 Posts
- 2 Reply Likes
- 35 Posts
- 20 Reply Likes
I like LR Mobile and the ability to add certain directories to the cloud, but after a few hours with CC and a few Lynda tutorials and youtube videos on the differences, it's clear that CC is a beta thing, a play toy, and not something I'll even open again.
But, as a preview into the future, in maybe 5 years, when I do have 4TB on my iThingies, well, then, sure, why not. I assume by then all the functionality will be ported.
In the meantime LR saves me a bunch of time over editing in Bridge or PS when I run a batch of photos, so I won't be leaving anytime soon.
- 6 Posts
- 12 Reply Likes
- 6 Posts
- 12 Reply Likes
- 8 Posts
- 5 Reply Likes
- 9 Posts
- 11 Reply Likes
I find it absolutely important to have full control over how my archive is stored, and where. I would _never_ move my files into the catalog be it cloud based or not. So LrCC is not for me, will never be.
Even Apple Photos has an option to import externally managed files without moving them. And their cloud offers 2TB for $9.99.
It's obvious that Lr Classic is doomed. I tested Lr7 and couldn't find any better words than those of Thomas Fitzgerald saying "I wanted to try and evaluate the new features, all two of them, and the improved performance ... I have to admit, I’m underwhelmed". Really, if this was a new perpetual version, I wouldn't buy it. On my late 2011 SSD-modded iMac it's slower than Lr6, which I never had any speed issues with. I downgraded back to Lr6 and will keep that until my subscription runs out. I even have a Lr6 perpetual license, so I can keep it "indefinitely".
I do already own Luminar and just pre-ordered the upgrade. All my hopes and money for them. If I miss the cool from-iPhone-directly-into-my-Lightroom feature (the only Lightroom mobile feature I'm interested in), I'll just use Apple Photos and iCloud, or take a look at Mylio.
Related Categories
-
Lightroom Classic CC
- 13798 Conversations
- 3159 Followers
Bill Broughton