Adobe Announces Cloud-Based Lightroom CC

Mikehit said:
Memdroid said:
Mikehit said:
I have just upgraded my LR CC to LR Classic CC. Split toning is still there (from what I see it disappears if you go for the LRCC+1TB option)

But the previews - OH MY GOD IS IT QUICK!!
Sometimes these speed improvements last as long as it takes to fill a buffer, but for the moment I am one happy bunny!

Is it Photo Mechanic quick or Fast Raw quick? :P

I have only used PM briefly for previewing but it is pretty close. I am getting under a second with most images, under 2 at most whereas before I would have that damned spinning wheel for 6 to 10 seconds. Even going from from thumbnail to 1:1 view (which was a real downer for me) is almost as quick.

EDITED TO ADD: I think a fair bet depends on if you have 1:1 previews created on import.

Do any of these solutions to dropping LR do the cataloging and such that LR does?

I actually really like that feature for cataloging and later finding my images I tagged, etc....

cayenne
 
Upvote 0
peconicgp said:
A lot to digest here. Lightroom Queen breaks it all out. I don't think it is all doom and gloom.
https://www.lightroomqueen.com/the-future-of-lightroom

Not surprisingly, from someone very close to Adobe and who makes a living out of LR... :)

When I see "modern cloud storage" I always read, for example, "ancient mainframe storage"... I'm old enough to remember when my data were on a remote system...
 
Upvote 0
peconicgp said:
A lot to digest here. Lightroom Queen breaks it all out. I don't think it is all doom and gloom.

https://www.lightroomqueen.com/the-future-of-lightroom

From an article linked from the above: "The majority of Lightroom users have moved over to subscription and it’s reached a point that the additional testing needed for perpetual licenses is no longer economically viable."

I wonder if The Queen based any of the above statement on actual data from Adobe.

https://www.lightroomqueen.com/end-of-perpetual-lightroom-licenses
 
Upvote 0
I have NO interest in the cloud storage for LR. I'll continue to use the $10 month and use PS and LR locally. Editing on a tablet is crap; I tried it on vacation- not for me!

Also, their wording is a little offensive. I don't want to edit a flippin web browser, I want to use my desktop. I'm not considered the next generation of photographers? Really?
 
Upvote 0
LDS said:
When I see "modern cloud storage" I always read, for example, "ancient mainframe storage"... I'm old enough to remember when my data were on a remote system...

I'm right there with you!

As we observe the passing of the perpetual Lr license, I have to remind myself that there's a burgeoning generation (or two or three) coming up behind me that have never used / may never use a desktop, a laptop or an SLR camera. They live in a world of smartphones & tablets and still, streaming & social media of every kind, all stored in the cloud.
 
Upvote 0
JonAustin said:
"The majority of Lightroom users have moved over to subscription and it’s reached a point that the additional testing needed for perpetual licenses is no longer economically viable."

This is just plain BS, it's trivial 2 steps:

  • Set license term to 1200 months (100 years is, effectively, perpetual)
  • Set a bit that says "no major upgrades"

Pure spin.
 
Upvote 0
Mikehit said:
Am I correct to read that if I were to continue with my current LR+Photoshop the price doubles? And for my current payment I will get LR+ Spark?

Looks like I may be bailing on this one.

You might try reading the entire article.

"Lightroom CC has also been added to the existing Creative Cloud Photography plan with an additional 20 GB of storage to help users get started on the new service. This plan remains at $9.99/month and includes Lightroom CC, Lightroom for mobile and web, Lightroom Classic, Photoshop CC, Adobe Spark with premium features, Adobe Portfolio, and 20 GB of cloud storage. Creative Cloud All Apps members also have access to the new Lightroom CC service."
 
Upvote 0
Now in an increasingly mobile-centric world, and with major improvements in smartphone cameras, Lightroom is transforming digital photography again.

It seems that Adobe doesn't really understand their audience. An app for applying some effects to cellphone snapshots is one thing. Processing 8 GB of data after a wedding on a workstation is something else. I can't imagine waiting for uploads/downloads every time you change a parameter.

Or ... this is just a bs justification and it's all about the money, money, money
 
Upvote 0
I can see a big advantage for professional users who have different people assigned to different functions, and wide internet bandwidth. Sharing the database has always been a big issue, and this implies that there is a solution. For them, additional storage purchases are no issue, but they would likely have multiple backup and archive solutions.

For those like me, cloud based solutions might not work. I'm in the country away from cable or any high speed internet, and have a wireless connection to a tower 7 miles away (No 4G either). I do get 5-15 Mb/sec downloads when people are not watching streaming video at night.
 
Upvote 0
AJ said:
Now in an increasingly mobile-centric world, and with major improvements in smartphone cameras, Lightroom is transforming digital photography again.

It seems that Adobe doesn't really understand their audience. An app for applying some effects to cellphone snapshots is one thing. Processing 8 GB of data after a wedding on a workstation is something else. I can't imagine waiting for uploads/downloads every time you change a parameter.

Or ... this is just a bs justification and it's all about the money, money, money
+1, seems like Adobe is shoving ransomware down the peoples throats on purpose screwing up the core user group of Lightroom.
 
Upvote 0
AJ said:
Now in an increasingly mobile-centric world, and with major improvements in smartphone cameras, Lightroom is transforming digital photography again.

It seems that Adobe doesn't really understand their audience.
The mobile stuff is probably to appeal to a newer audience. "Classic" is for heavy lifting.

Or ... this is just a bs justification and it's all about the money, money, money

Of course it is, I don't pretend anything else. That's how corporations work, I just hoped that there were enough of us "perpetual" holdouts that Adobe would relent. It's OK, I'll keep going with LR6, then move to something else. I have no need to be shackled to their cloud.
 
Upvote 0
Well I'll be sticking with LR 6 for a while, and then when I want to move on I guess it'll be Capture One, or more likely Affinity. The latter still has a way to go before it's a viable option for me, but it's catching up fast.
 
Upvote 0
If Adobe wants to stay competitive they will need everyone to move their high quality photos online. Such a vast personal library allows them to develop cutting edge technology for searching, cataloguing, and manipulating photos. The techniques we employed 10 years ago to touch up a photo will be available by simple finger taps and sliders.

The industry is about to take a tremendous leap forward in a way that will put many people out of business if they do not change.
 
Upvote 0
miketcool said:
If Adobe wants to stay competitive they will need everyone to move their high quality photos online. Such a vast personal library allows them to develop cutting edge technology for searching, cataloguing, and manipulating photos. The techniques we employed 10 years ago to touch up a photo will be available by simple finger taps and sliders.

The industry is about to take a tremendous leap forward in a way that will put many people out of business if they do not change.

Will they pay their customers for use of their photos as part of their data set? No? Didn't think so.

No thank you, I'll keep my photos under my own control.
 
Upvote 0
Mt Spokane Photography said:
I can see a big advantage for professional users who have different people assigned to different functions, and wide internet bandwidth. Sharing the database has always been a big issue, and this implies that there is a solution. For them, additional storage purchases are no issue, but they would likely have multiple backup and archive solutions.

But it also means everything you apply to the photos is strictly stored on Adobe side, and no other non Adobe application can access it. It's a huge lock-in.
 
Upvote 0
I use and edit my photos in multiple locations, its a headache since the catalog cannot be shared on my NAS. Its a hassle to keep the latest version available in multiple places, so I am definitely interested in the cloud version where I can directly upload images to the cloud as soon as they are captured. Just how this would work today is a question for me, I'm not using wi-fi because it eats up batteries, but I do have a eye-fi card that might be able to upload to the cloud indirectly, I'm sure that solutions will be available. I have my NAS units disconnected from any internet connections due to security concerns, I'm not smart enough to make and keep them secure.
 
Upvote 0
I'm starting to look into the Cloud version, it has a lot of missing features, or ones that must be done differently, its definitely a subset of the full Lightroom CC Classic and in many ways less powerful. There is a table here that compares a long list of features that matter to photographers.

I am downloading the free quick start booklets to see what type of a workflow is recommended.

https://www.lightroomqueen.com/lightroom-cc-vs-classic-features
 
Upvote 0