Adobe relabelled things, and you may have missed this. The new Lightroom CC is a completely new product, and the version you're talking about is now called Lightroom Classic CC.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Adobe Turns Lightroom CC Into a New Cloud Photography Service
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Adobe relabelled things, and you may have missed this. The new Lightroom CC is a completely new product, and the version you're talking about is now called Lightroom Classic CC.
Adobe offers additional 1 TB at an additional $9.99 / month. Which seems silly as extra would basically an archive of photos that don't need to be accessed often (or at all).
Classic is still a subscription based model so it will be around for a long time. The buy once and own it model ends at the end of 2017. It is targeted at existing professionals that already have massive HD storage setup for archiving photos and no desire to replace that with $10/month * X TBs.
My guess is the future will be a single app with a subscription for the first 0.020/1 TB and then some system to offload extra files to either a local drive or long term cloud storage at a much lower month rate.
Same to you.
Please read again my post.
I am mentioning Lightroom CC not Lightroom Classic.
Yes I meant Lightroom CC of course
But for how long. If I’m paying a subscription I want to see regular updates. I also would burn through data caps way too fast if everything was stored in the cloud. Anyone have ideas of a good alternative to Lightroom? Preferably without a subscription.
Thanks for the link, I was wondering myself. But…
Another announcement caught my eye - HPs new ZBook X2 "workstation" - which I might have otherwise missed. I need to buy some laptops for my company later this year, and the combo of 32GB RAM, up to 2TB PCIe SSD, Quadro dGPU had me call my vendor for an estimate as the prices aren't available yet. Relevant to this thread, you're wondering - HP is adding in a 1-year sub of CC in some of their SKUs, I might flip these year-on-year if the price is right and I want to remain on CC, although the Quadro will work very well with my CAD apps. Cheers!
Yeah, same here ... right now, subscription to one Adobe app would cost me in five years 1800 € (and that is a bit more, than 1800 dollars).
The Photography bundle (Lightroom CC + Photoshop CC) would cost me about 600 € in five years. If (!) Adobe doesn't raise the price.
So, say I get the new Lightroom CC, my photos are uploaded to the cloud and say next year I choose to leave the platform. It would seem to me, that downloading large libraries nearing the 1TB mark, would be excessive. I'm not sure I want my library solely in the cloud. It basically locks me into using LR perpetually.
Depends on what features you're looking to replace.
As for RAW processing, there are several good options on the market. DxO Optics Pro,CaptureOne, and Affinity Photo come to mind, though the latter is more of a photoshop alternative than a Lightroom alternative.
Fast image import/browsing/ranking/culling, check out PhotoMechanic. Pricey, but really good at what it does and super fast, as well as handling Raw+JPG pairs well.
The gap though is Digital Asset Managment (DAM) - i.e. cataloging, tagging, organizing at a layer above the filesystem. There's a bright spot on the horizon though, as Serif (Affinity) is working on a DAM product. See https://petapixel.com/2017/06/27/affinity-may-building-lightroom-competitor/
I'm looking at moving to potentially Picktorial. I'm not a pro so don't really need DAM.
Help me understand this for those that are using Lightroom in CC. I have standalone LR 5. I run it on Windows primarily now, but also have a license on Mac. I keep my photo libraries and full sized previews in OneDrive so that they are accessible on which ever machine I'm on. I move around my RAW originals in folders by shoot. I've got about 5TB of RAW originals. When I get back from a shoot, I move them to my local working drive, and copy to my primary NAS. The primary NAS is nightly backed up to a backup NAS, and also backed up to Amazon Drive, where I get unlimited photo storage for $65/year. When I'm done processing and creating outputs, I delete the folder from local working drive. They still exist on both my NAS boxes, and Amazon Drive. If I need to edit again, I can just point to the NAS and its a little slower but still works.
I don't mind paying $10/month for the use of Lightroom in CC. I don't need Photoshop... I have an older version, CS5 I think, and haven't used it in years. Its on my Mac, and I don't intend to buy it for Windows. But I am not going to pay Adobe's prices for storage of my RAW originals.
So question is for those using CC, can I move my folders of RAW files in and out of the Adobe Cloud while I'm working on them, but keep my full library and full sized previews available? Can I open CC Lightroom and access folders of RAW files in local storage as well as Adobe Cloud? Normally in stand alone LR, all I need is the library and full sized previews to do anything other than render outputs.
I don't mind paying $10/month for the use of Lightroom in CC. I don't need Photoshop... I have an older version, CS5 I think, and haven't used it in years. Its on my Mac, and I don't intend to buy it for Windows. But I am not going to pay Adobe's prices for storage of my RAW originals.
So question is for those using CC, can I move my folders of RAW files in and out of the Adobe Cloud while I'm working on them, but keep my full library and full sized previews available? Can I open CC Lightroom and access folders of RAW files in local storage as well as Adobe Cloud? Normally in stand alone LR, all I need is the library and full sized previews to do anything other than render outputs.
I guess the question is - does the new cloud service allow for selective sync like it has been (you click the albums & projects you want synced) or will it back up whole catalog now. I assume the former but clarification would be nice. And if it is selective sync, the size of your full library won't matter, just how much of it do you want to sync. And how does it work w/ multiple catalogs?
Also, the way sync did work was that a smaller version of the photo was synced that you could make edits to, not the entire original raw file so it's non-destructive. I assume it will continue to work this way but again, clarification would be nice.
Of all the products, I've looked at everyone seemed to have some short coming with DAM. I'm also just a hobbyist, but organizing my images is my major need. I'll have to google Picktorial and see what's that about.
It's funny, since I'm not a pro, I think DAM capability is even more important the image editing - but that's just me.
Another question users should ask about the cloud portion is whether it performs versioning. Can you recover deleted or changed files from three weeks or three months ago like you can with a (proper) backup methodology?
OK so I am talking about the Web one
I use Lightoom Classic and it's amazing
In that case, you are correct. The web only version is not comparable to the full desktop app aka Lightroom Classic. But it is on par with other web & app based tools. I can't imagine a Pro or even a serious enthusiast using the web version only.
Some people have photography as a hobby and don’t make money of it. This model absolutely doesn’t make sense.
I'm still happy with the perpetual license I bought for Lightroom 6 a little over two years ago. I think it was around $80.
I had to call to get it and the lady I spoke with kept saying "Are you sure-you can get Photoshop AND Lightroom for $100" and every time she said that I'd jump in and say "for one year."
Adobe did a good job of keeping LR6 up to date for a while, but I suspect that we're at the end of the line. They have updated CC(or CC Classic) for the Nikon D850, for example, but not LR6.
In any case, I adjust levels and curves on nearly every photo that passes across my screen. I consider these fundamental adjustments, and the fact that the new Lightroom seems to have eliminated these features completely means that it's a program I'd never want to use.
I had to call to get it and the lady I spoke with kept saying "Are you sure-you can get Photoshop AND Lightroom for $100" and every time she said that I'd jump in and say "for one year."
Adobe did a good job of keeping LR6 up to date for a while, but I suspect that we're at the end of the line. They have updated CC(or CC Classic) for the Nikon D850, for example, but not LR6.
In any case, I adjust levels and curves on nearly every photo that passes across my screen. I consider these fundamental adjustments, and the fact that the new Lightroom seems to have eliminated these features completely means that it's a program I'd never want to use.
I actually saw a quote from Adobe somewhere that they plan to offer one more update to LR6 before the end of 2017, specifically to add D850 support. After 2017, no more updates.
This is VERY true for me as well. I have well over 100K images, all key-worded, categorized, put in collections etc. etc. I do editing, a fair amount of it, but a DAM is what I use and need more than anything.
While I've been using CC since the beginning, what I would really like to see is the ability to drop PS from the plan and either get more storage, or reduce the monthly cost. Even for some of the more advanced stuff I occasionally do, Lightroom does more than I ever need for editing and I admit it is the best DAM I've ever used, and I migrated from Aperture when that went defunct.
The subscription model is the way companies are combating pirated software. Microsoft, Autodesk and Adobe together likely found that 90% of their user based never paid for the software. Why? Because paying got you another you couldn't get for free. Now with a subscription you get features the pirated software does not have. You get a service and access to all your data on every device. They manage your data and back it up. They keep your software up to date. And they do this for a price that is less then anything else a bussines would pay. Adobe costs less then those K-cup coffee pods I use in the Keurig coffee machine.
I think at one point Autodesk's "Autocad" was the most pirated software. Their new product now is Fusion and it is free for students and small time professional shops. These are the people who never paid before. But now it is free until you do $50,000 worth of bussines using their software, then they want a monthly fee. But then you can afford it too. That is Autodesk's plan, Microsoft has Office 360 and Adobe now is phasing out everything but their service.
Even Apple is giving away Mac OS and a tiny amount of storage but for more serious use you pay for iDrive as a subscription.
This all solves a problem where in the past small time users by and large just didn't pay. What Adobe has done different is just told the small tie users to "Go Away! We don't want you." This is reasonable as their products are not suited to casual use.
I've always thought that the best way to counter software pirates was to make paying seem like it is worth it by offering some kind of service.
Finally, One More Thing: In the US, we can deduct to full amount of a else or subscription right off the top of our taxable income. Capital equipment is put on a schedule. If you are running photo or graphic arts shop you pay the subscription is un-taxed money so it costs less.
I am only a hobbyist, so tax deductions, etc do not apply to me. My main use for LR is the DAM part. The only editing I I do on my photos are the curves and sliders in the LR 5 I have. So PS is not even a factor at all for me.
I also would not feel comfortable *paying* an entity so they can have copies of my photos, get locations of where I've been, so they can eventually profit from said information. And these would be on all of my photos I import into LR, not just those I choose to share in the internet.
I've paid for LR since LR1, and I'd continue paying if there were none of these cloud stuff, or at least make it optional for those who want/need it. But I guess I'll have to look for another DAM software. Too bad Apple gave up on Aperture.
I also would not feel comfortable *paying* an entity so they can have copies of my photos, get locations of where I've been, so they can eventually profit from said information. And these would be on all of my photos I import into LR, not just those I choose to share in the internet.
I've paid for LR since LR1, and I'd continue paying if there were none of these cloud stuff, or at least make it optional for those who want/need it. But I guess I'll have to look for another DAM software. Too bad Apple gave up on Aperture.
90%? Is that your opinion or is that stated somewhere? I think 90% piracy rate borders on the extreme.
What subscriptions provide is a constant flow of cash, where as people would only upgrade when they had too, so the money coming into companies would spike at new versions but flatten out pretty quick. Now with subscriptions its a constant flow.
Or if you have a really crap ISP and bandwidth. If you live in rural USA, that is your lot. I have 300Mbs connection in my home. Go just 3 miles from my house and satellite is your only option, along with its data caps and weather sensitivity.
Is there a Photoshop replacement that offers pixel editing and pure black and white bitmap handeling?
Check out Affinity Photo from Serif. I believe they have a trial version so you can check out whether it does what you need. It satisfies all my pixel editing needs. I'm sure there's a bunch of stuff PS does that Affinity Photo doesn't, but I've been really happy with the product.