# Creative Cloud only?



## Hutch

With today's announcement by Adobe about the Creative Cloud, does that mean that to get LR5 you'll have to be a subscriber to the Creative Cloud and that it will not be available as a standalone purchase or upgrade?


----------



## Hal P Anderson

Robert,

It will still be available standalone: http://forums.adobe.com/thread/1206089?tstart=0

Hal


----------



## Tony Jay

Hal beat me to it!

Tony Jay


----------



## Parafly

Overall I don't like this move. I only upgrade my CS suite every 4 to 5 years to make it more economical. This is so expensive now :(


----------



## clee01l

Parafly said:


> Overall I don't like this move. I only upgrade my CS suite every 4 to 5 years to make it more economical. This is so expensive now :(


A subscription service only makes financial sense if you are a big shop.  Most people don't need all of the bells and whistles that come in CS. The only program that you might need out of CS is Photoshop.  Photoshop v13 has been available as a standalone purchase since the beginning.  The current version that was bundled in CS was (IIRC) ~$600.  It would be nice if Photoshop v14 were still sold this way.  I'm not going to count on this continuing.    For most photo post precessing you don't need PS or anything besides LR.  As  LR introduces more features, the need for PS is even less. Also PSE is going to be improved too and it seems to me to be about where PS was a few generations ago. PSE is the product for the small time user like most of us. As far as I know, PSE is still being sold as a standalone like LR.

I think there will be some push back against the subscription model and who knows perhaps Adobe will see the revenue decrease rather than increase.  They may relent and continue to sell PS14 as a standalone. The subscription model only makes sense from a consumer stand point if you need more than one component in what was called Creative Suite and now called Creative Cloud.


----------



## Victoria Bampton

Parafly, upgrade to CS6 now, and then you're sorted for the next 4-5 years in that case.  Who knows what will happen in 4-5 years.

And don't forget, if you do want the latest and greatest Photoshop, it's available as a single-app subscription at a much lower price.


----------



## Parafly

I have cs5 mc now. I also use premiere pro , after effects, sound booth and Dreamweaver regularly


----------



## Jimmsp

clee01l said:


> .... For most photo post processing you don't need PS or anything besides LR.  As  LR introduces more features, the need for PS is even less. Also PSE is going to be improved too and it seems to me to be about where PS was a few generations ago. PSE is the product for the small time user like most of us. As far as I know, PSE is still being sold as a standalone like LR.......



I second this. I stopped using PS years ago. I use PSE and LR together, along with 4-5 plug ins from Topaz. I also use some dedicated HDR software and dedicate panoramic stitching software. The cost of everything I have is less than the single newest PS.


----------



## DianeK

Victoria Bampton said:


> Parafly, upgrade to CS6 now, and then you're sorted for the next 4-5 years in that case.  Who knows what will happen in 4-5 years.
> 
> And don't forget, if you do want the latest and greatest Photoshop, it's available as a single-app subscription at a much lower price.



Glad to hear that LR will continue as a stand alone, purchasable product as that's my main editing program.  I'm another that's still on PS CS5 and was wondering if I should get CS6 or PSE.  I am just a hobbyist and a subscription is out of the question for me.  My main concern about getting CS6 now is I assume they will stop support for it.  So (a) if I get a new camera I will be hooped on Camera Raw support, or (b) if I get a new computer or have a HD crash, Adobe won't support the licence for re-installation.  Are these valid concerns Victoria?


----------



## johnbeardy

Well, you could rent Photoshop for $9.99 a month. Or pay $600 to buy it now.

John


----------



## DianeK

johnbeardy said:


> Well, you could rent Photoshop for $9.99 a month. Or pay $600 to buy it now.
> 
> John



I have PS CS5 so an upgrade licence is $200, not $600.  And the stand alone subscription, as far as I can tell is $19.99 a month.


----------



## johnbeardy

Not quite. In the first year it would be $9.99 as you own Photoshop CS5, after which it doubles. The customer loyalty discount is to let you rent for the same as an upgrade would have cost you (over 18-24 months) instead of charging the full rental price for the first year. See http://blogs.adobe.com/jnack/2013/0...-get-a-discount-moving-to-creative-cloud.html

John


----------



## DianeK

johnbeardy said:


> Not quite. In the first year it would be $9.99 as you own Photoshop CS5, after which it doubles. The customer loyalty discount is to let you rent for the same as an upgrade would have cost you (over 18-24 months) instead of charging the full rental price for the first year. See http://blogs.adobe.com/jnack/2013/0...-get-a-discount-moving-to-creative-cloud.html
> 
> John


Thanks for clearing that up.  Quite torn what to do at this point.  My main use of PS is doing collage work for powerpoint seminar slides and online courses my husband constructs.  I'm not familiar enough with PSE to know if I can do the same level of work as I now do in PS.  If so, I just might get CS6 now, then downgrade to PSE when CS7 comes out in CC only.  BTW, on Adobe's site I cannot find where I can buy the non-CC version of PS CS6.  Have they taken it off their site completely?  My local camera store (Vistek) still has the licences listed on their website though - will check with them.


----------



## DaveS

I imagine they threw a big party at Corel (Paintshop Pro) last night.


----------



## clee01l

Jimmsp said:


> ...I also use some dedicated HDR software and dedicate panoramic stitching software...


You can also use PSE for this and not need dedicated Panorama software. .


----------



## Victoria Bampton

CS6 - try this link: https://www.adobe.com/products/cata...g_sl_software_sl_creativesuite6.html?start=20

I can't tell you what to do as I don't know what's going to be right for you.  A lot of photographers are upgrading to CS6 for now, using Lightroom for their continued new camera needs, and then will reconsider down the road.  The Creative Cloud as a whole certainly makes a lot more sense for 'creative professionals' than it does for photographers.  Photoshop single-app is a pretty good deal, especially for those who don't already own CS5 or CS6.


----------



## Sverre

johnbeardy said:


> Not quite. In the first year it would be $9.99 as you own Photoshop CS5, after which it doubles. The customer loyalty discount is to let you rent for the same as an upgrade would have cost you (over 18-24 months) instead of charging the full rental price for the first year. See http://blogs.adobe.com/jnack/2013/0...-get-a-discount-moving-to-creative-cloud.html
> 
> John



Not quite the same... The major problem with this model is that if you stop paying you can not continue using the last version you payed for....


----------



## Jimmsp

clee01l said:


> You can also use PSE for this and not need dedicated Panorama software. .


Thanks. I know, but in my experience PSE doesn't work as well.
That said, I use two packages routinely, and sometimes one works better on one set of shots than the other does. 
MS ICE generally works better on handheld shots, and PTGui generally works better on those from a monopod or tripod  (but not always). Now, don't ask me why.


----------



## Replytoken

After having read a follow-up interview with Adobe at dpreview today, I am now a bit concerned about the future of LR.  The Adobe exec complained about the problems of both supporting CS and CC at the same time, and mentioned this as a reason that they would not keep supporting both products in the future.  Then, later in the article, he mentions that LR will have both versions, but that the CC version may have additional features.  Now, I can live without every feature in the stand-alone version of LR, but if they could not make CS/CC work, how are they going to do it with both versions of LR?  My guess is that we have a few more years with LR as a stand-alone piece of software, but if they, and other software companies, can make subscription software stick and replace their stand-alone counterparts, then I think we know what the future will look like.  I know that Microsoft has also talked about subscriptions for a number of years, and they are now offering a version of Office that is subscription-based.  I understand the desire for a steady revenue stream, but not everybody is using their software to make money.  Hopefully they will remember those of us if/when they set their subscription rates.

--Ken


----------



## DianeK

Replytoken said:


> After having read a follow-up interview with Adobe at dpreview today, I am now a bit concerned about the future of LR.  The Adobe exec complained about the problems of both supporting CS and CC at the same time, and mentioned this as a reason that they would not keep supporting both products in the future.  Then, later in the article, he mentions that LR will have both versions, but that the CC version may have additional features.  Now, I can live without every feature in the stand-alone version of LR, but if they could not make CS/CC work, how are they going to do it with both versions of LR?  My guess is that we have a few more years with LR as a stand-alone piece of software, but if they, and other software companies, can make subscription software stick and replace their stand-alone counterparts, then I think we know what the future will look like.  I know that Microsoft has also talked about subscriptions for a number of years, and they are now offering a version of Office that is subscription-based.  I understand the desire for a steady revenue stream, but not everybody is using their software to make money.  Hopefully they will remember those of us if/when they set their subscription rates.
> 
> --Ken



Hmmm...perhaps Aperture is in my future.
Diane


----------



## clee01l

DianeK said:


> Hmmm...perhaps Aperture is in my future.
> Diane


Don't count on it.  Aperture 3 has not had a significant feature update other than bug fixes and new RAW format support since it was released in Feb 2010.


----------



## DianeK

clee01l said:


> Don't count on it.  Aperture 3 has not had a significant feature update other than bug fixes and new RAW format support since it was released in Feb 2010.


I'm thinking if there are enough disgruntled Adobe customers, Apple will see a market opportunity and turn Aperture into a good alternative.:hm:
I would have less problem with a subscription service if they ran it like lynda.com.  If I don't need it I cancel it and when the need arises again I reactivate - no hassle.  But I'm not getting the sense Adobe is going to be that flexible.


----------



## Victoria Bampton

Replytoken said:


> Then, later in the article, he mentions that LR will have both versions, but that the CC version may have additional features.



I'm trying to find additional information on that (most of my contacts are a tad busy right now! ), but I'm assuming they're talking about the cloud features Tom previewed on the The Grid last week.  iPad sync would need cloud space, so it would make sense for that to be linked to a subscription (and it could be a LR-only subscription, not the whole CC).  Long term, they could probably use that cloud sync to sync multiple computers too.

CS and CC at the same time was confusing as anything!  Although you're building the same features either way, the whole testing timeline is completely different. You're basically doubling up on efforts, trying to test a version with bug fixes to release to CS users and a version with new features to release to CC users, and make sure one doesn't introduce new bugs into the other.  I'm sure they could find a workflow that worked eventually, but that's not cost-effective to do.  This way, they can concentrate on building great software. I think, and hope, that the Lightroom team will have learnt from the other teams, and try to introduce features into a future cloud version that are separate enough from the main app.

Either way, Elements and Lightroom have always played by different rules to the rest of the suite, so I don't see any reason to rush off to find other programs anytime in the foreseeable future.  If Adobe are going to make this work and get something positive from the backlash, they're going to have to work hard at it, and that can only be a good thing for users long term.


----------



## awp

https://blogs.adobe.com/lightroomjournal/2013/05/lightroom-and-the-creative-cloud.html


----------



## DianeK

Victoria, I know you are working hard at getting answers for us.  I have another question to put to you.  So right now I have a perpetual licensed PSCS5 resident on my computer.  If I decide to try out the cloud subscription and after a few months I don't want to be subscription-based anymore, is the CS5 I had on my computer rendered useless or does the perpetual licence remain valid and I can go back to using it?
Diane


----------



## Hutch

With today's announcement by Adobe about the Creative Cloud, does that mean that to get LR5 you'll have to be a subscriber to the Creative Cloud and that it will not be available as a standalone purchase or upgrade?


----------



## DaveS

The CC version will install alongside your old one.  You can go back to your old version at any time, it doesn't get deleted from my understanding (CS5 and CS6 for example both reside on my system, and are both accessible.  Although that's not quite the same thing).   And the license you have should remain valid.


----------



## Replytoken

Victoria Bampton said:


> I'm trying to find additional information on that (most of my contacts are a tad busy right now! ), but I'm assuming they're talking about the cloud features Tom previewed on the The Grid last week.  iPad sync would need cloud space, so it would make sense for that to be linked to a subscription (and it could be a LR-only subscription, not the whole CC).  Long term, they could probably use that cloud sync to sync multiple computers too.
> 
> CS and CC at the same time was confusing as anything!  Although you're building the same features either way, the whole testing timeline is completely different. You're basically doubling up on efforts, trying to test a version with bug fixes to release to CS users and a version with new features to release to CC users, and make sure one doesn't introduce new bugs into the other.  I'm sure they could find a workflow that worked eventually, but that's not cost-effective to do.  This way, they can concentrate on building great software. I think, and hope, that the Lightroom team will have learnt from the other teams, and try to introduce features into a future cloud version that are separate enough from the main app.
> 
> Either way, Elements and Lightroom have always played by different rules to the rest of the suite, so I don't see any reason to rush off to find other programs anytime in the foreseeable future.  If Adobe are going to make this work and get something positive from the backlash, they're going to have to work hard at it, and that can only be a good thing for users long term.



Hi Victoria,

Your efforts are greatly appreciated, but please do not rush on my account.  This is not an urgent issue by any means.  While I understand that LRCC (if we can call it that for the moment) might have different features as you have described, I am still not clear how Adobe is going to avoid a repeat disaster that they complained about with having both CS and CC being developed and supported concurrently.  In short, I guess I am wondering what makes LR/LRCC different than CS/CC in terms of development and support?  If dual products were discontinued once, what is to say that it will not happen again for the same reasons?  As the slogan says, "Enquiring minds need to know!" :bluegrin:

Thanks,

--Ken


----------



## DianeK

Here's the bad news for those of us still on CS5 and were hoping to get CS6 in disk form to tide us over while we mull over the situation.  As of two days ago, PS CS6 is only available as a download - they will not ship packaged product.  It will also be unsupported.  So if you have a hard drive crash or change computers, you cannot re-download.  This info I just got from Adobe.  So I am staying with CS5 and if LR goes CC only in the future, I am done with Adobe.
Diane


----------



## Unklejon

Seriously after this bombshell how can anyone use the terms "Adobe" and "Customer Loyalty" in the same sentence. This is a blatant divide and conquer technique upset only half your user base first with PS on subscription, keep LR and PSE users happy to see how it pans out. Then wham bam if they can get away with it LR and PSE will be cloud based as well. Adobe have bitten off a lot more bad feeling than even they expected. I love this forum, but I also read others and the rest of the web is on fire with rage, a lot of professionals are talking of walking away from Adobe. This is nothing to do with piracy or customer service it is pure corporate greed , they think they have cornered the market and have effectively doubled the price over night. UK and Europe prices are on average 35% higher than USA dollar price. The 18 month upgrade price has effectively moved from £200 (GBP) to £360 (GBP) do the maths. If they get away with this LR and PSE will be next. Adobe need to remember how they got into the dominant spot - anyone else remember QUARK - they got too big and too arrogant and customer service nose dived and Adobe slipped into the slot. There are pretenders out there waiting to fill this space - this move may well encourage the likes of On-One or Topaz to step up to the mark. They must be eyeing this move with some trepidation - perhaps that's why both became stand alone packages ... Like Diane K above and many thousands more users when - not if - LR goes subscription only I am finished with Adobe. Stand up and be counted now - Adobe are monitoring these websites and if they see apathy or simple "what can we do" thinking they will  take it as a sign of acceptance - a rubber stamp to make money at our expense..


----------



## DaveS

Victoria... 

I noted in your blog, that Adobe will give us CS6 users an updated camera raw... The question here is, they say they won't be adding new features, but will it allow us to open in CS6 photos that we've developed in LR5 with the new features.  I realize I won't be able to edit those new features in CR, just want to know if it will support what we have done in LR5 when we open them in CS6.  Cause if it won't that really makes LR5 less interesting despite the great new develop mode features.

Dave


----------



## Replytoken

DianeK said:


> Here's the bad news for those of us still on CS5 and were hoping to get CS6 in disk form to tide us over while we mull over the situation.  As of two days ago, PS CS6 is only available as a download - they will not ship packaged product.  It will also be unsupported.  So if you have a hard drive crash or change computers, you cannot re-download.  This info I just got from Adobe.  So I am staying with CS5 and if LR goes CC only in the future, I am done with Adobe.
> Diane



Diane,

I understand your frustration.  But, if you want to use CS6, why not just make your own backup after downloading?  You might as well get as much software mileage as you can before making any future decisions.

--Ken


----------



## Hal P Anderson

Dave,

Yes, you'll be able to download a version of ACR to PS CS6 that will handle LR 5's edits:

http://forums.adobe.com/thread/1207549?tstart=0

Hal


----------



## DianeK

Replytoken said:


> Diane,
> 
> I understand your frustration.  But, if you want to use CS6, why not just make your own backup after downloading?  You might as well get as much software mileage as you can before making any future decisions.
> 
> --Ken



Well I do have a Time Capsule that stores my entire system.  But as I recall, even with migration from the Time Capsule, the last time I encountered this issue was when I got my new iMac: I still had to get Adobe to reactivate my LR license to get it to work on the new computer...that was a couple of years ago so I don't remember all the details of why that happened.  Also, someone earlier said they have both CS5 and CS6 resident on their computer and can work in either, but today the Adobe rep said if I download CS6 it will overwrite CS5 and I won't have CS5 anymore.


----------



## Hal P Anderson

Diane,

What the Adobe rep told you is almost certainly wrong...another case of Adobe shooting itself in the foot.

Hal


----------



## Victoria Bampton

It's been a horrendously long few days, thanks to the amount of misinformation out there yet again, so let me just answer what I can, and apologies if I've missed anything that's already been answered. I think I need a day off tomorrow!

If you buy CS6 - burn your download to disk then you don't need to worry. Activation servers should be fine, they've only just turned off CS2 servers and they provided a get out clause so people could continue using their software. And ignore customer services, they've just had their world turned upside down. If you have problems, let me know and I'll point you in the right direction. 

CS5, CS6 and CC can all reside quite happily together. I do it on both Mac and Windows. 

Edit in CS6 from LR5 will understand LR5's edits, and also new cameras, but just won't have the new sliders in the ACR window. 

UnkleJon, £ vs $ is actually about 3% for the UK but I completely understand the concerns. The US price is quoted excluding taxes, the UK price is inclusive at 23% Irish taxes. It's definitely a bigger difference in some European countries. 

LRCC doesn't exist. There are no different features.  Bryan's comment on dpreview was completely wrong. At some point there will be subscription option for the new cloud stuff they previewed the other day, but that might not even be part of CC. Considering the difference in target market, I think it's more likely to be a separate subscription. 

The reality, as far as Lightroom goes, Adobe sees Elements/Lightroom market as completely different to the creative professionals market. I know this is all really unsettling, and a huge number of photographers aren't happy about the changes to Photoshop, but let's just step back for the minute. 

All I can suggest for now, is if you just use Lightroom and/Elements, certainly don't lose any sleep over it. And if you use Photoshop, hold tight on CS6 for now if you don't like the idea of subscription. Adobe have heard the feedback, so the ball is in their court now. Your software's perfectly good and supported for a good length of time, so there's no rush to make any snap decisions. Lightroom 5's a solid upgrade, and there's no sign of changes there. Lets see how the land lies when the dust has settled. 

And all that said, I'm off to bed! I'll try to catch up with all the other threads tomorrow, sorry guys!


----------



## Replytoken

Victoria Bampton said:


> It's been a horrendously long few days, thanks to the amount of misinformation out there yet again, so let me just answer what I can, and apologies if I've missed anything that's already been answered. I think I need a day off tomorrow!



Well, Victoria, you have certainly earned it, especially since you are not an Adobe employee.  Thanks for helping try to clear the air.  Now, get some rest and then take that cute puppy of yours for a nice long walk!

--Ken


----------



## Parafly

Is there any point in updating from cs5.5 to cs6 ..  I have the master collection


----------



## DianeK

Thank you Victoria for all your time and work here.
Diane


----------



## Unklejon

OK giving Victoria a  well   earned  brain break - can anyone else help me understand why we in UK have to pay tax at the Irish rate of 23%? Adobe will collect our tax like all multi nationals do and pay it in the country they are officially based in for tax purposes. Even if they break the mould and do  pay  the tax to the  country  where the purchase was made it will only be 20% so we are paying 3% more into Adobe not the treasury. If as Victoria suggest there are difference in other European  countries  why are we not paying an British tax rate?

Sorry to harp on about this but I have been saving like crazy to buy a legit copy of PS CS6 and it looks like the bar has been moved before I got there. I have spent the best part of 36 hours on Lynda.com learning the program thats a hell of an investment in time and effort to have the rug pulled on you.... Here in the UK we have a healthy and growing photo club competition culture. Nobody puts in a picture without Photo-shopping it first. This will now mean young up and coming  photographers will be eclipsed by  those  older members who  have PS already. Who in their right minds plays against a loaded deck of cards? This move is demoralising on so many levels. Elements appears a bit of a joke really as far a pixel editing goes, lots of fluff but no real substance, designed to deprive the user of just enough functionality to drive them into PS - Its the moral equivalent of pushers handing out cheap drugs to kids at the school gate in the knowledge that sooner or later most will get hooked and need to go  hard line then they will have a captive market with high prices. Sound a familiar business model? 

NB for you MAC users out there have you looked at Pixelmator 2.1 Cherry - not a full answer but according to my friend who uses it - pretty darn good for  the  price. Perhaps this is the kick the other companies need in a stroke Adobe have created a huge disaffected market


----------



## wianb

PS6 will be last version of PS that I will purchase and seriously considering stopping at LR 4.
Completely agree with the last post, why on earth do we in the UK have to pay the Irish rate of VAT? Be interesting to see how much tax Adobe paid to the UK, zilch or very little I suspect!
For pixel editing, The GIMP .. the UI is querky but it is powerful and its FREE!
There are other DAM solutions available and nothing develops a NEF as well as NX2.


----------



## Victoria Bampton

Their server's based in Ireland.  European VAT on downloads is based on the server location.  Someone actually ran the numbers of this thread: http://forums.adobe.com/thread/1207459?tstart=60 and I misread the 3% line, so please ignore me!  Feel free to whinge on this thread: http://forums.adobe.com/thread/996866?tstart=60  The usual reason given is 'local market conditions' which is the same logic most big companies use.  The idea is basically we earn more so we can pay more.

Unklejon, CS6 is still available for purchase, and they're going to continue supporting it as they know not everyone will want the cloud.  I bet that would keep you going for years.

To be honest, I'm hoping this means more development will go into Elements, and that will become a much more photography-centric pixel editor to use alongside Lightroom, without people having to dive into the full version of Photoshop.  If they lose some fluff and add a few extra tools, it could solve this whole issue for a lot of people.  No idea whether that'll happen though.


----------



## Sverre

Victoria Bampton said:


> To be honest, I'm hoping this means more development will go into Elements, and that will become a much more photography-centric pixel editor to use alongside Lightroom, without people having to dive into the full version of Photoshop.  If they lose some fluff and add a few extra tools, it could solve this whole issue for a lot of people.  No idea whether that'll happen though.



Very much agree Victoria! We need a photo editor tighly integrated with LR for all the editing operations you can't do in LR. Not a dumbed down editor like Elements (full 16 bit and layers support please and without organizer) and not a the giga app made for designers etc.

I think you deserve a lot of respect Victoria! :hail: You are one of the few gurus out there that dare to see this move from a user perspective!


----------



## clee01l

Sverre said:


> ...I think you deserve a lot of respect Victoria! :hail: You are one of the few gurus out there that dare to see this move from a user perspective!


 Actually, This forum is user run and user led.  While there are Adobe employees that do show up here occasionally, everyone here is a User and no one owes a special allegiance to Adobe or gets paid by Adobe for being here.  This is one reason that I participate in this forum almost exclusively.


----------



## Unklejon

I finally took the plunge and gone legit - but not without problems though. I originally went for a digital download version of CS6 at a V good price but the Adobe server was playing silly games. It would only download via an install app called Creative Cloud. This did not download a copy of the install file, it simply installed Photoshop CS6 on my machine which was an absolute pain. I wanted an install file I could keep a copy of. 
Like other people have said elsewhere many people actually come to Photoshop via illegal copies. Who in their right mind is going to chance paying a fortune or signing up to a year’s contract based on 30 days free trial. You cannot even learn the basics in 30 days let alone use it in anger. You would have to be unemployed or on 30 days holiday to even scratch the surface. 
I had downloaded a copy of CS6 from Adobe on 30 days free trial - that was months ago and it simply never stopped working. I never did anything knowingly to change the setup, it simply carried on working and never asked me to buy anything. I could have gone on like this indefinitely and to be honest probably would for a while longer if this change had not happened. I had already decided to go legit when I did the free trial but PS is not cheap so it took time to save up. I reckon that Adobe got more business out of piracy than it lost, the pirate copies are buggy and unstable sooner or later you decide I am in or I am out. The ones who don't buy never were Adobe customers so they did not lose anything. But I reckon if those who had were really honest and admit they had used a pirate copy before buying I think pirated copies brought Adobe more customers than the 30 day free trial
Anyway to echo other well-meaning members – thank you ever so much for being there for us to whinge at. I appreciate that whilst the senior members and moderators have a vested interest in supporting Adobe – they still do give very good impartial advice and are always extremely helpful. 
NB have traded in download version for a boxed version it cost £100 more, so had to raid the LR5 piggy bank, but now I will have my own copy of the program for many years to come


----------



## Replytoken

There certainly has been a lot posted about this topic throughout the web, some of it helpful, some of it just the need to vent frustrations.  I have only read a small sampling, but thought that Thom Hogan's http://bythom.com/ post last night entitled "A Few More Cloudy Thoughts" raised a couple of good points that I did not see discussed elsewhere.  In the long run, there is the potential for a big problem if Adobe ceases to exist, as somebody has to keep authorizing the software each month/quarter.  And , we are now being sold a service rather than a product.  Will Adobe's customer support reflect that change?  Interesting thoughts to consider, and not just with respect to Adobe.  For some, there are advantages to a subscription model, but for others, our status will change from "owner" (under license) to "renter", and this does create a whole new relationship, regardless of price.  While I am not happy with Adobe's proposed changes, what I really am concerned about is that they may just be the tip of the iceberg for software in general.

--Ken


----------



## Howard Routledge

I have CS5 & LR4 and I intend to upgrade to LR5 upon its release. At present, I can use the 'edit in CS5' facitity from LR4; will this facility be still available to me using LR5 or will I have to upgrade to CS6 to retain the link?


----------



## Jim Wilde

No, you'll be fine with LR5 and CS5, it'll work in the same way as does LR4>CS5.


----------



## Victoria Bampton

You guys are very welcome.  We have a lovely atmosphere here, and I don't want that to ever change.  We all work together to make it happen.  

I was talking to an Adobe staff member this afternoon, and commented on the fact I'm glad I'm not on their payroll, so I don't have to repeat the party lines.  Not everyone at Adobe is happy with the changes as they stand either, but they can't get away with saying it.  I have the freedom to say it as I see it, whether that's good, bad or ugly.  And I don't think the changes are all bad - some of the changes are actually quite good, but they just need tweaking a little for the benefit of photographers.


----------



## Hal P Anderson

Victoria,

I can see where you're coming from. I spent a couple of hours on Scott Kelby's site this afternoon reading all those posts slagging him (with some justice) for being an Adobe shill. It's a tough time to say anything publicly that appears to be pro-Adobe. It's good that you can maintain your neutrality.

I've bought the last six or so versions of Photoshop, even though I hardly use it at all. I like shiny, new software, and I was able to convince myself that upgrading made sense, and eventually I'd get around to doing something that justified the expense. Having to run PS as a subscription just doesn't feel the same, even if it would cost the same, which it won't. So I won't be going to the Cloud version, and I'll finally save the money that I should have been saving all along. 

If I had a real need for the latest and greatest, I'd subscribe, but with what I need in terms of non-LR post-processing, it would feel like I was just flushing that money down the drain. I'm sure that CS6 will do me well until it will no longer run on whatever computer I'm using, at which point I'll see what's available to replace it with. 

In the meantime, I'll need to convince myself that if I lose the ability to run Photoshop, I'll be able to use the TIFFs or PSDs that I produced with it. Will GIMP read TIFFs with layers? I don't know, but I'll find out. Maybe by that time, PSE will handle 16-bit (or more) images, and I could use that, but I can't know that from here.

The real fly in the ointment would be if Adobe decided to no longer sell some future Lightroom with a perpetual license. They probably can't hold my images ransom, but they definitely could do that with my catalogue. We'd all be put in one heck of a bind, with no real recourse but to subscribe. I don't trust them not to do it, and I don't know what I need to do to make it so I can feel OK about the possibility that they will. Trusting them to do the right thing by their users is no longer a viable strategy.

I'm not panicking, and I'm not about to make any quick changes to how I use LR or do my post-processing. I'll buy LR 5 when it comes out, and if future versions are still sold as programs, I'll buy those as well, but I'll also be looking at other DAM solutions, just in case. 

Hal


----------



## gregDT

http://news.cnet.com/8301-1001_3-57...-adobes-creative-cloud-subscription-not-very/

A link that looks into the new pricing scheme from Adobe. For myself who is a single product user (Photoshop) and who keeps it up to date the subscription model is a no brainer as well as not requiring any large single payments. The 20 gigabytes of storage is very welcome also. If  Lightroom went cloud based as well I'd have no real issue as long as the subscription price was set sensibly. I would imagine that the vast majority of Adobe's customers  are professional users who like me just want the simplest and most cost effective way to obtain the products they use. 
It does seem that the user who only upgrades every second or third version is going to be worse off. But for professionals who stay up to date with the software and especially those who collaborate on work this looks like a welcome move.


----------



## Hutch

With today's announcement by Adobe about the Creative Cloud, does that mean that to get LR5 you'll have to be a subscriber to the Creative Cloud and that it will not be available as a standalone purchase or upgrade?


----------



## Bryan Conner

Hal P Anderson said:


> Victoria,
> 
> I can see where you're coming from. I spent a couple of hours on Scott Kelby's site this afternoon reading all those posts slagging him (with some justice) for being an Adobe shill. It's a tough time to say anything publicly that appears to be pro-Adobe. It's good that you can maintain your neutrality.
> 
> I've bought the last six or so versions of Photoshop, even though I hardly use it at all. I like shiny, new software, and I was able to convince myself that upgrading made sense, and eventually I'd get around to doing something that justified the expense. Having to run PS as a subscription just doesn't feel the same, even if it would cost the same, which it won't. So I won't be going to the Cloud version, and I'll finally save the money that I should have been saving all along.
> 
> If I had a real need for the latest and greatest, I'd subscribe, but with what I need in terms of non-LR post-processing, it would feel like I was just flushing that money down the drain. I'm sure that CS6 will do me well until it will no longer run on whatever computer I'm using, at which point I'll see what's available to replace it with.
> 
> In the meantime, I'll need to convince myself that if I lose the ability to run Photoshop, I'll be able to use the TIFFs or PSDs that I produced with it. Will GIMP read TIFFs with layers? I don't know, but I'll find out. Maybe by that time, PSE will handle 16-bit (or more) images, and I could use that, but I can't know that from here.
> 
> The real fly in the ointment would be if Adobe decided to no longer sell some future Lightroom with a perpetual license. They probably can't hold my images ransom, but they definitely could do that with my catalogue. We'd all be put in one heck of a bind, with no real recourse but to subscribe. I don't trust them not to do it, and I don't know what I need to do to make it so I can feel OK about the possibility that they will. Trusting them to do the right thing by their users is no longer a viable strategy.
> 
> I'm not panicking, and I'm not about to make any quick changes to how I use LR or do my post-processing. I'll buy LR 5 when it comes out, and if future versions are still sold as programs, I'll buy those as well, but I'll also be looking at other DAM solutions, just in case.
> 
> Hal



I agree 100% with you Hal.  I am sticking with CS5, I did not see a reason to upgrade to CS6 and I very rarely use CS5.  I also will continue to use and by perpetual licenses of Lightroom as long as I can, or until something better comes along.

I also see the current situation with Adobe and the creative cloud to be the possible beginning of a new and exciting era filled with more alternatives to Photoshop and probably Lightroom.  Real competition would be a good thing for Adobe and for photographers.  Maybe Adobe will improve Elements to contain ALL of the elements of Photoshop that are utilized by photographers (16 bit layers, 32 bit HDR, smart objects, etc).


----------



## Victoria Bampton

Yeah, I said before this went live, that a lot of photographers would be just as well off by sticking with CS6 for now, and the continued support is a nod to that choice.  

Adobe are going to have to do something to convince most photographers to upgrade/subscribe, but I think that's the best result possible for photographers, because it's going to keep pushing them forward.

A lot of things are going to change in the next couple of years, not just at Adobe but with loads of other developers wanting a piece of the pie.  Now's not the time to be making decisions about future software purchases.  Lightroom 5's a good upgrade, but if you're not sold on the cloud, I wouldn't rush to do anything about Photoshop at the moment.  It still works perfectly well, and it's supported for some time to come.  By the time that's no longer an option, Adobe may have something better, or other developers may be the best bet, but it's too soon to tell.

Lightroom's pretty safe for the foreseeable future.  The market's different, and they wouldn't be able to get away with changes like this for Lightroom users.  For the Creative Cloud, the majority of the userbase are creative pros who actually benefit from the new deal (it really is a good deal for them!), so most of them will quite happily sign up.  If they tried the same thing with Lightroom or Elements, they'd wipe out most of their userbase.  So I really don't believe we have reason for concern.


----------



## Howard Routledge

Thanks Jim for your reply, I'll have to stick with CS5 anyway. Looking at the Adobe site, it appears that they have withdrawn the offer to upgrade from CS5 to 6 - no trace of it anywhere. Even Amazon are showing 'out of stock'. As I do most of my work within Lightroom, I'll be ok with CS5 for the times that I need PS. I have to say that Adobe's approach is a strange way to look after a loyal customer base.

Thank you to everyone who has contributed to this thread - very informative.


----------



## Victoria Bampton

It's still there Howard, there's just a roundabout way of getting to it (Products menu > Creative Suite > Photoshop CS6 > buy link is on the left. Here's the link if you do want CS6: https://www.adobe.com/products/cata...g_sl_software_sl_creativesuite6.html?start=10


----------



## Howard Routledge

You are correct Victoria. I don't know what to do for the best now - stick with CS5 or upgrade. I would normally upgrade just to keep within the ruling from Adobe in that we could only upgrade from the previous version. Seeing that they are to cease actually selling newer versions, I may just stop at CS5. Thanks anyway.


----------



## Towny

I was somewhat surprised by the CC only announcement as I had upgraded to CS6 in April following a marketing mail from Adobe. Today I decided to see if Customer Services would help out.
Below is the chat conversation I had with a representative I have taken his name and my personal details out other than that it is as it happened. The waiting between answers while he “checked” was considerable and I was chatting for about a hour.

_All representatives are actively assisting other customers. There are 1 customer(s) in line ahead of you. Thank you for your
patience.
You are now chatting with Rep.
*Rep: *Hello! Welcome to Adobe Customer Service.
*Rep: *Hi Jeremy, Nice to have you on chat!
*Rep: *May I please have your email address registered with Adobe?
*Jeremy ?*@.com
*Rep: *Thank you for the email address.
*Rep: *I understand that you want to concert the CS5.5 to subscription product, am I correct?
*Jeremy: *No I have just purchased CS6 but obviously I would not have if I had known about the CC 12 month subscription at the discounted price. I would like a to convert a refund into a CC sub.
*Rep: *Please give me couple of more minutes, let me check what best I can do.
*Jeremy: *ok
*Rep: *Thank you.
*Rep: *Jeremy, you can purchase the CCM complete product in $19.99 or any point product in $9.99. This offer is applicable for those customer who has purchased CS6.
*Jeremy: *Yes but I could have got that with 5.5 without upgrading which I did in response to a marketing offer by Adobe just before they announced CC
*Rep: *Thank you for waiting. One moment please.
*Rep: *With CS5.5, the price would be 29.99 USD/EUR, for CS6, Its $19.99 .
*Jeremy: *Not according to your pricing plan on the Adobe site its 9.99 for any PS from CS3 up.
*Rep: *Yes, you are correct, however that is only for a point product subscription, the above information was for creative cloud complete product.
*Jeremy: *I bought PSCS6 for 188.19 just before you offer it at 8.78 a month
*Jeremy: *https://creative.adobe.com/plans
*Jeremy: *To get CC I now have to subscribe but I did not need to buy CS6
*Rep: *Yes, you are correct and that offer is given to those customer who already purchased CS6.
*Jeremy: *That is also offered to CS5.5 as well so I need not have spent 188.19
*Rep: *Do you have CS5.5?
*Jeremy: *Yes the 188.19 was for the upgrade to CS6
*Rep: *May I have the order number or the serial number please?
*Jeremy: *Order Number #AD00????????UK Products ordered: Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Mac,English) 
Product Serial Number Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Mac,English) ??
*Rep: *May I have the order number or the serial number of CS5.5?
*Jeremy: *On 3 September 2011Order number: AD000?????UK Products ordered: Qty Product 1 Adobe Photoshop
CS5 (Mac,English) Total purchase amount: £328.80
*Jeremy: *It was boxed so do not have serial to hand
*Rep: *I have checked and see that #AD000?????UK has been cancelled.
*Jeremy: *How could that happen? does this happen when its upgraded?
*Jeremy: *I will find the box - give me a minute
*Rep: *Please give me 2 minutes, let me check it for you.
*Jeremy: *serial number: 1???-0???
*Rep: *Please give me couple of more minutes, I am checking it for you.
*Jeremy: *ok but I have the physical box in front of me so definitely not cancelled
*Rep: *Sorry for the wait. Please do stay online.
*Jeremy: *still here
*Rep: *Thank you.
*Rep: *Please allow me some more time.
*Jeremy: *I have a client meeting in the next couple of minutes. Can you email me a solution please.
*Rep: *Please give me 1 minutes.
*Rep: *I am sorry, this one is the best offer we have, we do not have any other offer.
*Jeremy: *Please ask a supervisor - I will be posting this conversation on a forum but will remove your name. Why is Adobe trying to rip off loyal customers - I would subscribe but find it invidious that you take my money just before a major change which would be better value for your customer. Let them know - another unhappy customer_

I would quite happily have subscribed to access new features going forward in PS (in fact I do not think there is a real alternative in the long term) but I am stunned by their arrogance and greed in not recognising they have extracted money from me under false pretences! I expect there will be others in this leaky boat.


----------



## Victoria Bampton

CS6 would give you the advantage of Edit in Photoshop direct compatibility, and a promise of updates to the next Windows/Mac OS.  But on the other hand, it really does depend on how much you use it, as to whether it's worthwhile.  To be honest, if you're not in a rush, I simply wouldn't make a decision about Photoshop yet.  We haven't seen Adobe's response yet, so there may yet be something better in the works.


----------



## wblink

DianeK said:


> Glad to hear that LR will continue as a stand alone



That SHOULD be nice, but I doubt it. Where and from whome did you get that info?


----------



## DianeK

Hi Victoria. I just noticed on the introductory offer of $9.99 for single app that it says "limited access to services". Do you know what won't be available with this plan?  Just thought I would point this out in case someone hasn't noticed that caveat before signing up.
Diane


----------



## Victoria Bampton

Where are you seeing that Diane?  I'll find out, but there's nothing Photoshop related that I'm aware of, so it may apply to other programs.


----------



## Unklejon

Just checking out the NASDAQ for Adobe -Systems Inc. (ADBE). The share price is starting to drop - only slightly at present - but looks as though the city analysts are getting jumpy about this move. It was actually mooted to the city back in March when Adobe registered $1.01 Billion  in sales in the first fiscal quarter that on line for $4.1 Billion this year- _(did you know the measure of Billion in the UK has now been downgraded  to lesser value USA version http://oxforddictionaries.com/words/how-many-is-a-billion)_ . These are still record sales figures. Their share Prices has virtually doubled in the last year [29.52 low -47.17 High] Yet Adobe are citing Piracy is harming their business ??? Adobe were also citing they had 500,000 confirmed cloud users back as far a March so we cannot really claim this was a shock move. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-...fit-tops-estimates-on-web-software-sales.html

This move is purely about evening out the fluctuations in Adobes cash flow which was previously controlled by Product Release Cycles. Its purely a business decision. So why cannot Adobe be open and honest with people instead of trying to dress this up as some sort of product improvement cycle... Adobe should remember " You can fool some of the people some of the time, but you cannot fool all of the people all of the time". Customer loyalty counts for nothing to any of them so no point in our trying to appeal to their "better nature" as they simply don't have one. They have one measure and that's the "bottom line".

Bear in mind investment in Adobe has historically been controlled by the Product Cycle with speculators piling in ahead of the new release bonanza and leaving after they realise their profits. Adobe have done this at the top of the investment cycle so when the speculators realise this will be the last bonanza – the milk cow has gone dry – they could as easily pile out. Long term profits are not that attractive to speculators. Only time will tell - who knows my new boxed version of CS6 may well prove to be a collectors item one day if Adobe's brave gamble fails...


----------



## Victoria Bampton

Found it Diane.  That's just referring to some of the online services, not Photoshop itself.


----------



## DianeK

Victoria Bampton said:


> Found it Diane.  That's just referring to some of the online services, not Photoshop itself.


Was just about the post the link and a screenshot but you are quicker than a bunny!
Thanks
Diane


----------



## Sverre

Unklejon said:


> Just checking out the NASDAQ for Adobe -Systems Inc. (ADBE). The share price is starting to drop - only slightly at present - but looks as though the city analysts are getting jumpy about this move. It was actually mooted to the city back in March when Adobe registered $1.01 Billion  in sales in the first fiscal quarter that on line for $4.1 Billion this year- _(did you know the measure of Billion in the UK has now been downgraded  to lesser value USA version http://oxforddictionaries.com/words/how-many-is-a-billion)_ . These are still record sales figures. Their share Prices has virtually doubled in the last year [29.52 low -47.17 High] Yet Adobe are citing Piracy is harming their business ??? Adobe were also citing they had 500,000 confirmed cloud users back as far a March so we cannot really claim this was a shock move. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-...fit-tops-estimates-on-web-software-sales.html
> 
> This move is purely about evening out the fluctuations in Adobes cash flow which was previously controlled by Product Release Cycles. Its purely a business decision. So why cannot Adobe be open and honest with people instead of trying to dress this up as some sort of product improvement cycle... Adobe should remember " You can fool some of the people some of the time, but you cannot fool all of the people all of the time". Customer loyalty counts for nothing to any of them so no point in our trying to appeal to their "better nature" as they simply don't have one. They have one measure and that's the "bottom line".
> 
> Bear in mind investment in Adobe has historically been controlled by the Product Cycle with speculators piling in ahead of the new release bonanza and leaving after they realise their profits. Adobe have done this at the top of the investment cycle so when the speculators realise this will be the last bonanza – the milk cow has gone dry – they could as easily pile out. Long term profits are not that attractive to speculators. Only time will tell - who knows my new boxed version of CS6 may well prove to be a collectors item one day if Adobe's brave gamble fails...


Good news!

Let's hope they really get a hit. I'm sure they listen more to the stock market then their customers...


----------



## Victoria Bampton

The stock market's only a little drop, it's not tanking.  It's not really surprising considering the hullabaloo at the moment.  There's a more positive post from Eric Chan here though: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=78214.msg627516#msg627516 (thanks to John Beardy for spotting that one)


----------



## gregDT

Towny said:


> I was somewhat surprised by the CC only announcement as I had upgraded to CS6 in April following a marketing mail from Adobe. Today I decided to see if Customer Services would help out.
> Below is the chat conversation I had with a representative I have taken his name and my personal details out other than that it is as it happened. The waiting between answers while he “checked” was considerable and I was chatting for about a hour.
> 
> _[snip]
> _
> I would quite happily have subscribed to access new features going forward in PS (in fact I do not think there is a real alternative in the long term) but I am stunned by their arrogance and greed in not recognising they have extracted money from me under false pretences! I expect there will be others in this leaky boat.



If you bought CS 6 in the last 30 days I'd give it another go if I was you as the Adobe FAQ clearly states that 



> [FONT=adobe-clean, sans-serif]I just purchased CS6 but want to switch to Creative Cloud. Can I return it?[/FONT]
> 
> If you bought directly from Adobe within the last 30 days, you can contact Customer Service to return the product. Any product purchased from a seller other than Adobe may only be returned to that seller, in accordance with the seller's return policy.



It's still a cheek to refuse to let anyone who upgraded from PS CS 5 to 6 not to be able to convert to CC without being out of pocket regardless when they bought PS CS6


----------



## Sverre

Have you seen this? 
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=78240.0


----------



## Victoria Bampton

Oooooooh now that sounds more interesting Sverre!!!


----------



## Towny

Glad to say I persevered with Customer Support and they have refunded the CS5.5 to CS6 upgrade and substituted the PSCC £8.78 per month subscription. Much better experience than before - maybe they have got their act together. I can now have rounder circles.


----------



## Hal P Anderson

Wow! I can't believe I read the whole thing. 

Neat stuff, if it comes to pass. I'd love to see it.

 If nothing else, one gets the treat of seeing Jeff Schewe insisting on polite discourse. 

Hal


----------



## gregDT

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2013/05/15/adobe-lightroom-5-beta-google-hangout

Sort of a definitive answer to the will they won't they question regarding LR and the subscription model. In a small way I'm almost a little disappointed as I'm quite taken with the rolling update concept. It might have worked quite  nicely with LR. Still photographers aren't graphic designers so maybe standalone with occasional big updates and the choice of when and if to upgrade is best?


----------



## clee01l

gregDT said:


> http://www.dpreview.com/news/2013/05/15/adobe-lightroom-5-beta-google-hangout
> 
> Sort of a definitive answer to the will they won't they question regarding LR and the subscription model. In a small way I'm almost a little disappointed as I'm quite taken with the rolling update concept. It might have worked quite  nicely with LR. Still photographers aren't graphic designers so maybe standalone with occasional big updates and the choice of when and if to upgrade is best?


The statement 





> Adobe has, 'no plans to make Lightroom subscription-only at any point in the future.'


 is not the same as _"Adobe will never make plans to make Lightroom subscription-only at any point in the future."
_So I would not say that this is definitive about LR beyond the short term.


----------



## gregDT

Well we'll agree to disagree then. 



> Basically we have no plans to make Lightroom subscription-only *at any point in the future*. We have plans to make Lightroom available in its current form *pretty much indefinitely*



works for me a lot better than a lot of ill informed chatter in various forums and blogs. No company ever says "We will never......" as it would be dumb to do so. Who knows, in twenty years all Adobes competition might offer subscription based software only and we might be loving it? Where would Adobe be then if they'd stated that they would NEVER do likewise? None of can say for certain how the future will unfold or how we'll be taking and processing images in the distant future. So for Adobe to make some definitive statement that something will never happen is dumb. How long would we hold them to it? Ten years? A hundred? A thousand. Never implies for all eternity, so it's nonsense for a company working in any field to say 'never' about the future of their products and services. 

I'll happily admit I'm completely wrong about Lightroom as soon as someone presents some compelling evidence that Adobe might well make it a subscription based application in the future. In the absence of these 'facts' I'll keep my logical head on and work on the assumption that Lightroom will remain subscription based "pretty much indefinitely" and get on with my life.


----------



## clee01l

gregDT said:


> Well we'll agree to disagree then...


Just call me a skeptic.


----------



## Victoria Bampton

Tom's just updated his blog post.  It says:


> *Q. Will Lightroom become a subscription only offering after Lightroom 5?
> *A. Future versions of Lightroom will be made available via traditional perpetual licenses indefinitely.



You can debate the definition of indefinitely, and I'm sure people will, but I think it's as definite as they can get.  They can't use the word forever as they can't foresee the future any more than we can.


----------



## Hutch

With today's announcement by Adobe about the Creative Cloud, does that mean that to get LR5 you'll have to be a subscriber to the Creative Cloud and that it will not be available as a standalone purchase or upgrade?


----------



## Jimmsp

Victoria Bampton said:


> Tom's just updated his blog post.  It says:
> 
> 
> You can debate the definition of indefinitely, and I'm sure people will, but I think it's as definite as they can get.  They can't use the word forever as they can't foresee the future any more than we can.


I agree. I was a sr marketing exec in a high tech company. You can never promise "forever". All you can say is "as best we can see or forecast".
He did that. Good enough for me.


----------



## awp

Good news:
http://www.dpreview.com/news/2013/05/15/adobe-lightroom-5-beta-google-hangout


----------



## clee01l

awp said:


> Good news:
> http://www.dpreview.com/news/2013/05/15/adobe-lightroom-5-beta-google-hangout


Old News perhaps.  If you read the earlier comments in this thread, you will see the link has been posted and discussed.


----------



## awp

I missed the earlier discussion.  However, 'Basically we have no plans to make Lightroom subscription-only at any  point in the future. We have plans to make Lightroom available in its  current form pretty much indefinitely' seems like we don't have too much to worry about....yet!


----------



## PatrickC

Yep, I would suggest that Apple look hard and fast at supporting Lightroom users to make the transition.

I will not be coerced into buying in to a Cloud model. If that's the way Adobe go, then they lose me as a customer, even though I was very active in the LR1 beta program, work and advice which I gave to Adobe free of charge, expecting nothing.

I feel let down and angry.

Patrick Cunningham


----------



## clee01l

PatrickC said:


> Yep, I would suggest that Apple look hard and fast at supporting Lightroom users to make the transition.


I would not look to Apple for any support here. Aperture is 2.5 years out of date.  Except for new camera support, there has not been a new version of Aperture since Jan 2011.


----------



## johnbeardy

PatrickC said:


> Yep, I would suggest that Apple look hard and fast at supporting Lightroom users to make the transition.
> 
> I will not be coerced into buying in to a Cloud model. If that's the way Adobe go, then they lose me as a customer, even though I was very active in the LR1 beta program, work and advice which I gave to Adobe free of charge, expecting nothing.
> 
> I feel let down and angry.
> 
> Patrick Cunningham



A quote for you.... "I'm currently  CTO at Adobe, where I shape Adobe's long-term technology  vision and focus innovation across the company along the lines of  multiscreen, cloud, and social computing. The most recent embodiment of  this work is Adobe Creative Cloud for creative professionals"

Well, the guy who wrote that is no longer at Adobe - in March he joined.... Apple.

John


----------



## PatrickC

And thereby hang some of the problems we face today. We are held captive - enslaved even. Our apparent purpose in life is to enrich the corporations who control the world. These days they don't need to own it, the control is economic not geographic.

Catch 22: use a product which works well, but puts you under the control of a mega corporation with whose ethics you have problems, or use a different product which doesn't work so well, which puts you under the control of a mega corporation with whose ethics you have problems. Or use something which is clunky, inefficient, even more poorly supported and requires you to mix and match several products to get enough functionality to run your business.

You may call me paranoid. I am not. There are significant problems ahead in our relationship with unelected, unaccountable amoral corporations.

For me it's good enough for the moment that there appear to be no immediate plans to make Lightroom rent only. I will be forced to downgrade to Photoshop Elements, but I can continue with Adobe and will do so until they move these to the so-called Cloud - such a cosy, comforting, endearing term for enslavement: stop paying and you lose the lot. With Lightroom, that means losing all the work you have done on your archive unless you write everything to tiffs before the plug gets pulled. I shall never go to the position where I am that much under their control. Fortunately I am old enough that I can probably avoid being dragged into their trap.

I wouldn't use one myself, but I hope there are hackers out there busily developing Cloud bypass hacks. Adobe deserve the losses.


----------



## johnbeardy

Of course, because I use DNGs I don't worry about converting to TIFs if I felt forced to move away from Adobe. I could easily use one of a number of other non-Adobe programs to print or output my raw files with all their Lightroom adjustments. But would I move away if they limited Lightroom to subscription? I wonder if we will have much real choice.

John


----------



## Bryan Conner

johnbeardy said:


> Of course, because I use DNGs I don't worry about converting to TIFs if I felt forced to move away from Adobe. I could easily use one of a number of other non-Adobe programs to print or output my raw files with all their Lightroom adjustments. But would I move away if they limited Lightroom to subscription? I wonder if we will have much real choice.
> 
> John


John, what do you think the chances are that one day our dng files that were created upon import by Lightroom will not be read by another program?  I know that Capture One for example will open the dng files with fast load etc generated by LR5 with no problem.  But, it makes me apprehensive to think that one day I may not have access to my raw files.  I wonder if my Canon CR2 files are more future proof.  What are your (or anyone else) thoughts on this matter?


----------



## Jim Wilde

I have no such apprehensions. Sure, things will change in the future, and likely some changes will impact on the way I work today.....but it's not going to be so sudden that I wake up one morning to find I've lost access to all my files. This stuff evolves, and I'll make tactical decisions based on that evolution.....but I'll not make strategic decisions today thinking that I'm somehow future-proofing myself against the impact of something that may or may not happen in the future. I'll make the decision if and when that "something" is announced.

Call me an ostrich if you like, I don't mind. I've been called worse.


----------



## johnbeardy

Bryan Conner said:


> John, what do you think the chances are that one day our dng files that were created upon import by Lightroom will not be read by another program?  I know that Capture One for example will open the dng files with fast load etc generated by LR5 with no problem.  But, it makes me apprehensive to think that one day I may not have access to my raw files.  I wonder if my Canon CR2 files are more future proof.  What are your (or anyone else) thoughts on this matter?



We're talking about slightly different things here, Bryan. I was specifically addressing the point about saving everything as TIF if one wanted to salvage all your adjustment work, and for this purpose I don't have any worries. The DNG can store an updated JPEG reflecting your adjustments, and plenty of low level programs grab those embedded JPEGs and print or output an image that's effectively-indistinguishable from one produced by Lightroom.

Your real query is about a risk of DNGs not being readable by any program. First I think we need to confine discussion to mainstream programs for humans - not the butt-ugly utilities out there that will indeed read the files but aren't for most people. Second, we can't worry too much about temporary bumps such as how C1 didn't read DNGs with fast load data, because whenever Adobe improve the spec there will be a lag before others read it properly (that said, apps don't need to reject the entire file simply because it contained supplementary elements they don't understand). 

Even if we're assuming Adobe are beyond the pale, for whatever reason, I think DNG will always be readable in mainstream programs, just like CR2 or NEF will always be readable in another program (that's not why DNG is so good!). But the doubts are more about the choice of programs and whether you can still use the one you want to use. DNGs will always be readable in some program or other, but are they readable in the mainstream program you prefer to use, and secondly how well are they read? Raw files give you a few more options, but I'd argue you'll still have enough options with DNGs. 

Right now for example Aperture handles DNGs exactly if they were proprietary raw files from the original camera, but do you want to switch OS? OK, that's not such a big deal nowadays. Or take how C1 handles DNGs as second class citizens, by which I mean if you import a CR2 raw file, C1 recognizes it's from a specific camera and applies all sorts of C1 magic, but if it's a DNG from the same camera they simply treat is as a generic DNG. It doesn't look too bad, but you're not getting the best that C1 offers - for instance, you can't apply their lens corrections. I feel they are bone-headed over DNG and all my contacts with them over the years indicate it's a firm belief coming from those who drive the product, but I'd hope their recent attempts to sell C1 to Lightroom customers (apart from importing LR catalogue, so much of their marketing and presentations are geared to trying to gain LR users) are signs that they will have to change if they want those efforts to succeed. That's two mainstream apps, and I'm rather expecting Google to enter the market and handle raw data, and I can't see why they wouldn't handle DNG for the same competitive transition reasons.

So I'm optimistic, but I've always been in the camp of advocating DNG and keeping raw files as an additional backup. 

John


----------



## Jimmsp

PatrickC said:


> ....... I can continue with Adobe and will do so until they move these to the so-called Cloud - ..... With Lightroom, that means losing all the work you have done on your archive unless you write everything to tiffs before the plug gets pulled.....


Personally, I don't see the big problem here.
If and when LR moves to the cloud only, I have a new place in time to make a decision.
My archives stay intact, and I always have access to them with the LR that I purchased "before cloud" - I will lose nothing.

Then, I make an informed decision. Do I move to the cloud, or not. My choice, not theirs. If I choose not to, I then start processing with another piece of software that I buy, and move on.
If I move to the cloud, I know what I have to do to move forward and keep all my new work done within the cloud accessible. I might choose DNGs, or Tiffs. But I can choose.

However, I already know what I will probably do - I will work with a new software package (most likely Capture One which I already use). My choice; unless CO and everything else moves to the cloud as well.


----------



## clee01l

Jimmsp said:


> Personally, I don't see the big problem here.
> If and when LR moves to the cloud only...


I don't see that happening in the next 2-3 years.  Maybe never. I do see LR data accessible through the cloud  (catalogs and Smart Previews).  Don't lose sight of the fact that the Adobe Cloud has two different meanings. One is a monthly subscription serves where the Adobe app needs to "Phone Home".  The other is the seamless transfer of data stored in the cloud.  

Where I think Adobe screwed up is bundling the two into one subscription service.


----------



## Bryan Conner

johnbeardy said:


> We're talking about slightly different things here, Bryan. I was specifically addressing the point about saving everything as TIF if one wanted to salvage all your adjustment work, and for this purpose I don't have any worries. The DNG can store an updated JPEG reflecting your adjustments, and plenty of low level programs grab those embedded JPEGs and print or output an image that's effectively-indistinguishable from one produced by Lightroom.
> 
> Your real query is about a risk of DNGs not being readable by any program. First I think we need to confine discussion to mainstream programs for humans - not the butt-ugly utilities out there that will indeed read the files but aren't for most people. Second, we can't worry too much about temporary bumps such as how C1 didn't read DNGs with fast load data, because whenever Adobe improve the spec there will be a lag before others read it properly (that said, apps don't need to reject the entire file simply because it contained supplementary elements they don't understand).
> 
> Even if we're assuming Adobe are beyond the pale, for whatever reason, I think DNG will always be readable in mainstream programs, just like CR2 or NEF will always be readable in another program (that's not why DNG is so good!). But the doubts are more about the choice of programs and whether you can still use the one you want to use. DNGs will always be readable in some program or other, but are they readable in the mainstream program you prefer to use, and secondly how well are they read? Raw files give you a few more options, but I'd argue you'll still have enough options with DNGs.
> 
> Right now for example Aperture handles DNGs exactly if they were proprietary raw files from the original camera, but do you want to switch OS? OK, that's not such a big deal nowadays. Or take how C1 handles DNGs as second class citizens, by which I mean if you import a CR2 raw file, C1 recognizes it's from a specific camera and applies all sorts of C1 magic, but if it's a DNG from the same camera they simply treat is as a generic DNG. It doesn't look too bad, but you're not getting the best that C1 offers - for instance, you can't apply their lens corrections. I feel they are bone-headed over DNG and all my contacts with them over the years indicate it's a firm belief coming from those who drive the product, but I'd hope their recent attempts to sell C1 to Lightroom customers (apart from importing LR catalogue, so much of their marketing and presentations are geared to trying to gain LR users) are signs that they will have to change if they want those efforts to succeed. That's two mainstream apps, and I'm rather expecting Google to enter the market and handle raw data, and I can't see why they wouldn't handle DNG for the same competitive transition reasons.
> 
> So I'm optimistic, but I've always been in the camp of advocating DNG and keeping raw files as an additional backup.
> 
> John




I had not used C1 in a while before today.  I only have C1 Express 6.4.4 as I did a trial of C1v7 and did not see any advantage over LR4.  

I took a shot of a ColorChecker and converted my Canon 7d raw files to dng in LR5.  I also copied the CR2 files to the same folder without the dng conversion.  The dng files and the CR2 files look identical in LR5.  They have the same white balance etc.  Even when I do a custom white balance in LR5 using the bhite balance dropper, I get the same results regardless of if the file is the dng or the CR2 version.  C1 is not the same.  The white balance is not the same between the dng and the CR2 files regardless if the method is auto, shot, or a custom white balance.  I agree, this is a terrible (and maybe unexcusable) handling of two different formats of the same raw file.

I never thought about the point of view that dng files are probably as future safe as any other raw format.  There are of course, some cameras that use dng as their raw format.  So, in that respect, dng files are the same as CR2 or NEF files.  All are raw formats that are used by camera manufacturers. 

The end result of this train of thought is that I will resume converting my images into dngs and enjoy all of the benefits.


----------



## PatrickC

Can someone explain what the benefits are in dng? When they were first introduced, and since, I have followed the arguments, but I couldn't see any real advantage. It is, after all, just another way of representing original pixels recorded in a digital camera. But it strips away any quirky extras a camera manufacturer builds in to their raw format, potentially reducing the sophistication of how the user interfaces with the image. 

I can see that an archive left stagnant for years might stand a better chance of being readable by someone much later - maybe after 20 years, when specs have moved on (assuming that the media remains readable). But for an active archive, the owner will always know when (if it ever were to happen!) any of the formats in his archive was about to become obsolete and unreadable. I would argue that the chance of the media becoming unreadable is far greater than the chance of the image file format becoming unreadable.

My decision then was to stick with Nikon .nef files. I still don't see the need to change; if I have another copy of the pixels, that means another whole drive full of files and another whole drive full of backups. That would mean six copies against my current four (two generated at capture, two more when the image is developed).

Capture One seems to agree, though I have never used it.

I suppose this might be getting OT, but it does remain relevant to switching software, and is therefore relevant to the thread.

Patrick Cunningham


----------



## Bryan Conner

One advantage that I see to dng file format is the fact that I do not have an xmp file along with my Canon CR2 file.  All of the data is contained within the dng file itself.  So, one file vs two files.  I do not keep my Canon raw files, only the dng file.  I do not see Canon's software as being a replacement for Adobe software in my future.  Another advantage to me is smaller file size.  Yes, hard drive space is cheap, but smaller is smaller.  I do not envision dng files becoming unreadable any sooner than CR2 or NEF files.  Dng is the native raw format in many cameras.  

Capture one will read dng files, but it does not treat them the same as it does raw files of another format.  If you have a dng and a CR2 or NEF file of the same image, Capture One does not treat them the same.  They do not look the same at the default settings.  In Lightroom or ACR, they look the same.  This is a failure of C1 in my opinion.

In the end, I think that you have to use the format that is best for you.  Arguments can be made all day long about which is best.  I can only say what is best for me personally.


----------

