# Is Lightroom dead?



## 1361

Adobe doesn't seem interested in continuing on with Lightroom. It's been well over two years since a new release. Should I start looking for something else? What are my alternatives?  I see talk of on1, there must be others. What are they?  

It seems like Adobe is more interested in "Project Nimbus" and are aiming for younger, new markets. My dollar must not have the longevity they're looking for. <Big Sigh>It was nice while it lasted...


----------



## johnbeardy

So what have they added in the last couple of years?


----------



## Ian.B

lightroom will be here forever IMO or until adobe surprises us with a whole new single program for photographers . Not much point looking for something else as LR still holds most of the best balls for  photo management  and a still the better single stand alone program to do most editing . ON1 is giving it a good go but they are not ready as a stand alone program; especially for pros and those who think photos like the better pros .
Having said that; I haven't moved past LR5 but I now use ON1 for most advanced editing even if it's rather frustrating at time.


----------



## PhilBurton

1361 said:


> Adobe doesn't seem interested in continuing on with Lightroom. It's been well over two years since a new release. Should I start looking for something else? What are my alternatives?  I see talk of on1, there must be others. What are they?
> 
> It seems like Adobe is more interested in "Project Nimbus" and are aiming for younger, new markets. My dollar must not have the longevity they're looking for. <Big Sigh>It was nice while it lasted...


Actually, Adobe has been releasing new features. However instead of "Big Bang" releases they are releasing features incrementally over time. And that approach is completely consistent with the subscription model.

Phil


----------



## Jack Henry

But only for the subscription model. Those of us that use the perpetual license miss out on a lot of enhancements. And there is no reason for that (as it's the same software) except for trying to force you to move to the subscription model.


----------



## HawaiianEye

I bought the perpetual, standalone, Lightroom 6. 
I'm glad it's still LR 6! And they keep updating it here and there.
If they keep this up for 10 more years without making us need to repurchase LR 7, that will be fine with me!!!!!
I guess different people view the same situation with different wishes for the future.


----------



## Jack Henry

I agree about staying with the current version 6. However, there a lot of 'improvements & additions' to the CC version that the perpetual license did not get. There is NO reason for holding those back from the perpetual license other than a money grab by Adobe.


----------



## HawaiianEye

So far, the only thing I can remember feeling jipped over is the Haze Filter.
What other worthwhile exclusions are there? Oooops! I'm not up to date!


----------



## clee01l

Jack Henry said:


> I agree about staying with the current version 6. However, there a lot of 'improvements & additions' to the CC version that the perpetual license did not get. There is NO reason for holding those back from the perpetual license other than a money grab by Adobe.


 At least half of the additions to LRCC2015 have been associated with LR Mobile and not applicable to LR6.   There is no reason to develop new functionality and then give it away.   When you bought LR6, it came with the initial functionality.  I can understand Adobe wanting to make this new functionality available to perpetual license holders only for an upgrade fee but not for free.  However, there are bookkeeping costs associated with an upgrade fee.   It is quite likely that Adobe feels there are not enough perpetual license holders willing to upgrade to make an upgrade version available until there is a version 7 if there is a version 7.   If there is a LRCC2017 or LRCC2018, there might be an LR7 to roll all of the accumulated new functionality for perpetual license holder willing to pay an upgrade price.


----------



## PhilBurton

Jack Henry said:


> But only for the subscription model. Those of us that use the perpetual license miss out on a lot of enhancements. And there is no reason for that (as it's the same software) except for trying to force you to move to the subscription model.


That is our *choice*. By the way that's my choice. However Adobe does give us a choice.

Phil


----------



## PhilBurton

Jack Henry said:


> I agree about staying with the current version 6. However, there a lot of 'improvements & additions' to the CC version that the perpetual license did not get. There is NO reason for holding those back from the perpetual license other than a money grab by Adobe.


Au contraire.  Adobe is a profit-making business and they are entitled to set whatever pricing model they choose, and live or die by their decision.

I can't believe that I'm defending Adobe here.


----------



## johnbeardy

HawaiianEye said:


> So far, the only thing I can remember feeling jipped over is the Haze Filter.
> What other worthwhile exclusions are there? Oooops! I'm not up to date!



Apart from Mobile-related stuff, which is extensive, two I particularly like are Guided Upright and Reference View.


----------



## 1361

clee01l said:


> It is quite likely that Adobe feels there are not enough perpetual license holders willing to upgrade to make an upgrade version available until there is a version 7 if there is a version 7.   If there is a LRCC2017 or LRCC2018, there might be an LR7 to roll all of the accumulated new functionality for perpetual license holder willing to pay an upgrade price.


This is my point exactly. I usually upgrade every other version. Not because of the money, but because there usually isn't a big enough difference in versions for me to need it. Now I'm at the point of why even bother with 6? It's already beyond it's end of life cycle for an Adobe product. This seems to indicate there will not be a new release. I hope I'm wrong. Lightroom is a wonderful tool.

I've never been a fan of the subscriptions. If I ever did join, I'd just buy a year at a time. But I just don't see the value in it for personal use. The math just doesn't make sense to me. I've got what I need and can get by with it. But I would like to see Lightroom grow and flourish. I'm just not convince Adobe shares my opinion.


----------



## 1361

johnbeardy said:


> So what have they added in the last couple of years?


That's hard for me to know, I'm still on 5.7. Had I bought 6, I would still be money ahead over the cost of the subscription. Doesn't that kind of defeat the whole reason for subscribing?


----------



## davidedric

I find it hard to believe this is still a live topic.

When Adobe introduced the subscription model for Lightroom, *in addition to the existing licence,* they were crystal clear about the terms.

Of course Adobe would prefer that Lightroom users adopted the subscription model, and so it follows that the time between perpetual upgrades would increase - if indeed there is another one.

If you have the perpetual licence you have exactly what you paid for and you can continue using at as the excellent product it is, you can wait for the next version and decide if you want to stump up, you can decide to go subscription, or you can look for another product.

That's it.  Dave


----------



## DGStinner

1361 said:


> That's hard for me to know, I'm still on 5.7. Had I bought 6, I would still be money ahead over the cost of the subscription. Doesn't that kind of defeat the whole reason for subscribing?


Don't forget that the subscription plan also includes Photoshop.  If you consider the price of Photoshop pre-CC pricing, Lightroom would only be a few dollars out of the $10/monthly.


----------



## johnbeardy

1361 said:


> That's hard for me to know, I'm still on 5.7. Had I bought 6, I would still be money ahead over the cost of the subscription. Doesn't that kind of defeat the whole reason for subscribing?



I'm not fan of subscriptions, but the whole reason for subscribing is to get more and/or better features for your money. See these two pages on new features and CC vs 6 vs 5 which omits Guided Upright and Reference View.


----------



## Gnits

I just reviewed the matrix of features.   I am a PS CC user, but as far as I am concerned I would happily ditch all of the CC features listed with the exception of Photoshop and DeHaze.   I used to use Lr as a slideshow on my moibile, but have stopped using that.  These features are a sink for Adobe development resources, chasing perhaps the next generation of Instagram users and leaving the professional community, which have been the backbone to Adobe, in an abandoned backwater.  Hopefully Adobe are busy in the background working on the next generation of Lr.


----------



## tspear

Gnits said:


> I just reviewed the matrix of features.   I am a PS CC user, but as far as I am concerned I would happily ditch all of the CC features listed with the exception of Photoshop and DeHaze.   I used to use Lr as a slideshow on my moibile, but have stopped using that.  These features are a sink for Adobe development resources, chasing perhaps the next generation of Instagram users and leaving the professional community, which have been the backbone to Adobe, in an abandoned backwater.  Hopefully Adobe are busy in the background working on the next generation of Lr.



The next generation of "professionals" are using those mobile devices. For example, at my cousins wedding I attended in January, the professional photographer not only used a couple of very nice Nixons; but she also had her phone out. She took multiple pictures with the smart phone, edited them via Lr and shared them with the bride to post the images near real time on social media.

oh, the best part, the professional photographer was in her 60s, and was taught how to do everything on her phone by her granddaughter who was there helping to learn the trade.

So although I do not currently use mobile, I get why it is a focus.

Tim


----------



## johnbeardy

Gnits said:


> with the exception of Photoshop and DeHaze



Though I'd add Guided Upright and (to a lesser extent) Reference View and Boundary Warp, that's a genuine "what have the Romans ever done for us?" moment, don't you think?! I think you've also got to look at the raw processing on phones before you accuse Adobe of just chasing the Instagram generation .

John


----------



## Mike-Photos

No one ever talks image quality any more, and image quality, the way I see it, is falling behind. Why do you think there's an explosion of new RAW processing software products? It's Adobe's own fault. 
We haven't had a new process engine in a long while, and other companies are overtaking Lightroom. I'm also having issues with Lightroom speed.

Capture One just added almost complete support for Fuji. I'm trialling it. It's way quicker, the hardware acceleration works (currently Lightroom crashes on my system even though the diagnostic passes), and more important, the image quality is just better. I know hardly anything about C1 yet, but I can produce a great image with almost no work. I miss some of the develop tools in Lightroom, but I'm sure I'll be able to work out alternative methods.

I've been a Lightroom user from version 1.0, and I'm really disappointed in Adobe. I don't want to move away, but for what I do, I just don't see the sense in staying with it. 

On the subscription thing. Adobe could have added many more smaller features over time. If they were needing to get users to pay for upgrades, they would have done so, guaranteed. No-one here would have shelled out for an upgrade from the original 2015 CC to the current version, there just isn't enough new to warrant it. They really suckered us into this.

In addition, they need to upgrade the process engine, and that's a major upgrade. Not everything can be slipped into minor upgrades.

Perhaps they are working on something wonderful, and there will be a 2018 CC version that really ups their game. I would still be disappointed. One-man software companies are producing software that produces arguably better images and definitely runs much quicker. As complex as the whole Adobe environment is, there is just no excuse for falling so far behind in the Develop module. We are not being treated well.

Mike


----------



## Roelof Moorlag

Mike-Photos said:


> I've been a Lightroom user from version 1.0, and I'm really disappointed in Adobe. I don't want to move away, but for what I do, I just don't see the sense in staying with it.


Did you take a look at the Phase One user forum? I think there are a lot more disappointed users there than here...

Because it's time consuming and very complex to migrate to another DAM, i postponed that for a very long time. However, some time ago i took the leap and migrated to Lightroom. Not perfect but realy better than what i used before.

In the Netherlands we have got an expression "At the neighbours the grass is always greener"...


----------



## Mike-Photos

Roelof Moorlag said:


> Did you take a look at the Phase One user forum? I think there are a lot more disappointed users there than here...
> 
> Because it's time consuming and very complex to migrate to another DAM, i postponed that for a very long time. However, some time ago i took the leap and migrated to Lightroom. Not perfect but realy better than what i used before.
> 
> In the Netherlands we have got an expression "At the neighbours the grass is always greener"...



Gooie dag Roelof
I don't use any DAM features at all. My interest is in the image processing capabilities only.
Of course no software is perfect, and every product has its pros and cons. I've been reading the C1 forum for months.
But right now, for me and my Fuji camera, C1 is just streaks ahead of Lightroom, and I'm just starting to learn it. And on Fuji forums, users are going through hops and jumps to get a decent starting point for Fuji RAW files, involving round trips, TIFF files, etc. I looked at a friend's Nikon NEF RAW files in Lightroom and C1, and the difference is noticeable there too.

I'll be in Schipol airport Monday morning on the way to my country of birth, South Africa.


----------



## johnbeardy

CaptureOne's "almost complete support" for Fuji is.... they now support compressed RAF files. That's only about a year after Adobe did so. 

I own C1 and find it remarkably fiddly - far too many menu items and other white text jostling for visibility with other white text. It's not getting any better as they are now squeezing cataloguing features into the same interface (the sessions-catalog division is a mess) and while they make a great noise about being able to create your own tool panels, that's only great because you have to do so! And on Windows when you no longer want a floating tool palette, removing it minimizes the program. And just don't try to put too many images into CaptureOne, if it will let you.

Give me the focus mask, structure as well as clarity, and its tethering features. Default image appearance, maybe prettier, but nothing Lightroom can't match.


----------



## Mike-Photos

johnbeardy said:


> CaptureOne's "almost complete support" for Fuji is.... they now support compressed RAF files. That's only about a year after Adobe did so.
> 
> I own C1 and find it remarkably fiddly - far too many menu items and other white text jostling for visibility with other white text. It's not getting any better as they are now squeezing cataloguing features into the same interface (the sessions-catalog division is a mess) and while they make a great noise about being able to create your own tool panels, that's only great because you have to do so! And on Windows when you no longer want a floating tool palette, removing it minimizes the program. And just don't try to put too many images into CaptureOne, if it will let you.
> 
> Give me the focus mask, structure as well as clarity, and its tethering features. Default image appearance, maybe prettier, but nothing Lightroom can't match.



Hi John
I'm not trying to have a discussion about C1 vs Lightroom here. I'm just pointing out that Lightroom isn't doing much for me right now, in fact it's going backwards - it's slowing down.

BTW, I don't use catalogues, just sessions, and they work well for me. 10.1 supports focus mask, auto-masking, and LCC for Fuji.

Lightroom is quicker with camera support.

Mike


----------



## Replytoken

1361 said:


> That's hard for me to know, I'm still on 5.7. Had I bought 6, I would still be money ahead over the cost of the subscription. Doesn't that kind of defeat the whole reason for subscribing?


"The food tasted horrible, and the portions were small!"

You have not tried out version 6 (which can be purchased outright) and its new features to see what it offers you over your current version, and yet you seem upset enough to want to start looking for something else to replace LR.  Have you considered approaching this from the point of what LR cannot specifically do for you right now (assuming you had purchased v.6) that you need, rather than worrying about your belief that Adobe is not interested in LR?  It just seems somewhat odd to be complaining about a lack of features when you are not even using what has been offered to you?

--Ken


----------



## johnbeardy

Replytoken said:


> You have not tried out version 6... and its new features



Which does specifically include improvements in Fuji image quality. I agree there is a speed problem with Fuji files - my estimate is they're about 25% slower.


----------



## 1361

Replytoken said:


> "The food tasted horrible, and the portions were small!"
> 
> You have not tried out version 6 (which can be purchased outright) and its new features to see what it offers you over your current version, and yet you seem upset enough to want to start looking for something else to replace LR.  Have you considered approaching this from the point of what LR cannot specifically do for you right now (assuming you had purchased v.6) that you need, rather than worrying about your belief that Adobe is not interested in LR?  It just seems somewhat odd to be complaining about a lack of features when you are not even using what has been offered to you?
> 
> --Ken


First and foremost, you'll never hear me complaining about a lack of features. Most Adobe software, including Lightroom, is so robust, I'll never learn enough about it to fully utilize all that it offers. I just don't have that kind of time to invest in this. That's the true benefit of forums like this. It helps me to learn. Personally, I'd rather see them perfect and improve the features they already have. But that's not the reason for this post. I enjoy using LIghtroom and want to see it continue to mature and grow. My point was rather to question if Adobe sees it this way as well. I admit, that as an aging photographer, I see the fiscal limitations of my contributions to Adobe. I understand the need to continually bring in a new customer base. I accept that these new customers will not have the same wants and needs as my own. I openly admit that it must be difficult for an organization like Adobe to support existing customers and cater to and/or attract the new at the same time.

Finally, in the end I also brought the subscription business model into the discussion. As a  "Perpetual" license holder, I make a one time investment and can use the product for the rest of my life. This is perfect for me, and is my preferred method. When I upgrade, I can share the older copies with family members and bring new interest into Adobe products. I just upgraded my computer. I'd like to give my old computer to my nephew so he can learn to use Lightroom as well. This only works if I install the newest, latest and greatest version of Lightroom on my new computer. Right now, that offering is a product that is over two years old and at the end of it's life cycle. Buying it right now does not make sense. Last night, I had to install 5.7 on the new machine. I'll continue to use it. I've always said, Lightroom is a wonderful tool.

As a "Subscription" license holder, it's my understanding that I can only use the product as long as I continue to pay. I stop paying, I have to stop using. This makes good sense if I always need the latest and greatest features and updates. Or perhaps as a business to get a better handle on my expenses. As an individual, imho, not so much. If I joined the "CC" when 6 first came out, what would I have as the results of that investment? Perhaps a few more features. Certainly not anything I could use if I didn't continue to pay. That model only seems reasonable if new development continues and new releases stay forthcoming. That doesn't seem to be the case here.

I sill like and regularly use Lightroom. But if it's done, I'll need to find something else to fill the void.


----------



## johnbeardy

1361 said:


> As a "Subscription" license holder, it's my understanding that I can only use the product as long as I continue to pay. I stop paying, I have to stop using.



No, after you stop paying you can't go into Develop and Map or use Mobile, but everything else will work as it does now.

Why are you still with 5.7 when Adobe improved Fuji processing since then?


----------



## tspear

@1361 Actually, if you purchase an upgrade, you cannot pass the old copy on to your grandson. Only if you purchase a new perpetual copy can you pass on the old one.

Tim


----------



## 1361

johnbeardy said:


> ...after you stop paying you can't go into Develop...


Develop is the reason I use Lightroom. If I can't use that feature, it is of no use.


johnbeardy said:


> Why are you still with 5.7 when Adobe improved Fuji processing since then?


Because that's what I have. I only move forward with every other version release.


----------



## 1361

tspear said:


> @1361  Only if you purchase a new perpetual copy can you pass on the old one.
> 
> Tim


I buy the new version every other release. 1, 3, 5 and now I'm waiting on 7...  A full copy of Lightroom isn't unreasonably expensive.


----------



## Victoria Bampton

1361 said:


> I buy the new version every other release. 1, 3, 5 and now I'm waiting on 7...



So far there are no signs that there's going to be a 7, although there hasn't been an announcement either way. 



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Replytoken

1361 said:


> First and foremost, you'll never hear me complaining about a lack of features. Most Adobe software, including Lightroom, is so robust, I'll never learn enough about it to fully utilize all that it offers. I just don't have that kind of time to invest in this. That's the true benefit of forums like this. It helps me to learn. Personally, I'd rather see them perfect and improve the features they already have. But that's not the reason for this post. I enjoy using LIghtroom and want to see it continue to mature and grow. My point was rather to question if Adobe sees it this way as well. I admit, that as an aging photographer, I see the fiscal limitations of my contributions to Adobe. I understand the need to continually bring in a new customer base. I accept that these new customers will not have the same wants and needs as my own. I openly admit that it must be difficult for an organization like Adobe to support existing customers and cater to and/or attract the new at the same time.
> 
> Finally, in the end I also brought the subscription business model into the discussion. As a  "Perpetual" license holder, I make a one time investment and can use the product for the rest of my life. This is perfect for me, and is my preferred method. When I upgrade, I can share the older copies with family members and bring new interest into Adobe products. I just upgraded my computer. I'd like to give my old computer to my nephew so he can learn to use Lightroom as well. This only works if I install the newest, latest and greatest version of Lightroom on my new computer. Right now, that offering is a product that is over two years old and at the end of it's life cycle. Buying it right now does not make sense. Last night, I had to install 5.7 on the new machine. I'll continue to use it. I've always said, Lightroom is a wonderful tool.
> 
> As a "Subscription" license holder, it's my understanding that I can only use the product as long as I continue to pay. I stop paying, I have to stop using. This makes good sense if I always need the latest and greatest features and updates. Or perhaps as a business to get a better handle on my expenses. As an individual, imho, not so much. If I joined the "CC" when 6 first came out, what would I have as the results of that investment? Perhaps a few more features. Certainly not anything I could use if I didn't continue to pay. That model only seems reasonable if new development continues and new releases stay forthcoming. That doesn't seem to be the case here.
> 
> I sill like and regularly use Lightroom. But if it's done, I'll need to find something else to fill the void.


I appreciate the detailed reply.  It provides me with a different understanding that your OP did.  I can understand your situation, and I believe that you are correct that Adobe will continue to add features to bring in new customers.  It seems it is that way will almost all software and hardware.  And while I am not fan of subscription models, the release of v.6 with "phone home" technology was almost equally annoying, so the cost part is not really as big of an issue as I tend to purchase every upgrade (albeit late in the cycle).  I wish you well as LR continues to develop.  It is hard to be a base user in a world where every one wants the latest bell and whistles.

Good luck,

--Ken


----------



## Replytoken

Victoria Bampton said:


> So far there are no signs that there's going to be a 7, although there hasn't been an announcement either way.
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


I realize that no announcement has been made, but this was disappointing news (no signs to date) to hear from you.  IIRC, I thought that Thomas Knoll had lent support, via some statements, to keeping both versions available a few years ago.

--Ken


----------



## NJHeart2Heart

Victoria Bampton said:


> So far there are no signs that there's going to be a 7, although there hasn't been an announcement either way.
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk



This would be truly disappointing. Like the OP I am on 5.7 and happy with it. Seems 6 would offer me nothing in terms of stuff I'd want to add to my workflow and is more buggy and slow.  I also agree with OP, it would be nice to see Adobe strengthen what it has, but sounds like they are going to force users to the subscription model.  I personally hate that.  Like with most of my hobbies, I am off and on again with my interests, and having to continually pay for a subscription when I haven't been using the product for months just annoys the heck out of me. If I stopped, when I want to start back up again I'll have to go through the annoying process of signing up again, and I don't know if they have any rules about how long you have to wait to re-subscribe. Whereas, with the standalone, I don't have to continually pay for it, and it's there when I am ready to come back to it, whenever.   Very sad... Maybe I should look into this competitor software?  The way the consumer market is going, I'm going to wind up getting stuck with having to subscribe to a bunch of stuff I may not be using all the time.. that's just a lot of wasted money .. very annoying.


----------



## Victoria Bampton

Thank you everyone for keeping this conversation fairly positive. It's greatly appreciated.



NJHeart2Heart said:


> Maybe I should look into this competitor software?



All of this is pure speculation at this point. Even if they did announce no LR7, your current version won't stop working. I'd suggest waiting until we actually have an official answer, and THEN make your decision, whether that's to look around at competitors or whatever. You've just said you're happy with 5.7, so it seems a little hasty to throw the baby out with the bath water!


----------



## NJHeart2Heart

True enough   More of an emotional response.  I'm not looking or planning to make any big moves. I've invested too much time into learning and using LR!


----------



## mcasan

I wonder if we have to wait to wait for MAX in November?    I hope not.


----------



## Mike-Photos

Victoria Bampton said:


> Thank you everyone for keeping this conversation fairly positive. It's greatly appreciated.
> 
> 
> 
> All of this is pure speculation at this point. Even if they did announce no LR7, your current version won't stop working. I'd suggest waiting until we actually have an official answer, and THEN make your decision, whether that's to look around at competitors or whatever. You've just said you're happy with 5.7, so it seems a little hasty to throw the baby out with the bath water!



You are a gem, Victoria, and even if you know something you of course cannot say. 
I hope Adobe come through, but even if they do, there's a bad taste about this. They are making piles of money from us after all. There's no reason not to communicate in some way with us. Make some hype, just say there's something coming! Keep us in the loop, we're customers.


----------



## mcasan

At least now we all start to know how it feels to be an Aperture or Nik Collection user.   


https://petapixel.com/2017/05/30/google-abandons-nik-collection-popular-photo-editing-software/


----------



## Victoria Bampton

Mike-Photos said:


> There's no reason not to communicate in some way with us.



There's a crazy amount of red tape involved in a big company like that. They will make an announcement, but it's a matter of time.


----------



## HawaiianEye

NJHeart2Heart said:


> and having to continually pay for a subscription when I haven't been using the product for months just annoys the heck out of me. If I stopped, when I want to start back up again I'll have to go through the annoying process of signing up again, and I don't know if they have any rules about how long you have to wait to re-subscribe.


My understanding from chatting with an Adobe rep is: The $9.99 photographer CC package, with Lr and PS, can be handled on a month to month, as needed basis.
Once installed, it can be used on Home computers and mobile devices, completely off-line if need be, with only the need to get online once a month to "check-in and pay" to keep it active.
So, if you stop paying, what happens? Well, Lightroom is not removed from your devices! Just "castrated". You still have Lightroom to use, with the *Develop* Module turned off.
You can still use Lightroom's *Library* module to view all of your images, (Which stay on whatever storage "drive" you keep them on), and to export those images to whatever sizes you need for printing or producing jpegs, etc. I don't know how they "turn-off" Photoshop.
In a couple of months, or whenever you need, you can re-subscribe, and continue using the full Lightroom and Photoshop programs.
I particularly asked the rep about this several times, to reaffirm, and they said you can subscribe and stop, and start, stop and start, indefinitely, they don't care!
My real concern was the ability to also subscribe as needed to an add-on program like After Effects.
Perhaps subscribing for a few months to learn the program, then stopping and only subscribe when I had a job that needed After Effects.
And YES! This can be done also, no problem! But, the cost of AE month to month is $29. vs yearly subscription of $19.99 monthly.
Sidenote: Adobe's single program/App plan ( for instance, for Photoshop only ) is $29.99 a month.
BUT, The Photography plan (Photoshop AND Lightroom), is not double that, or a "two-for" at $29.00, not even $19.99, but $9.99 a month. That's less than 35 cents a day.
Still, I stay with the stand-alone Lr 6.


----------



## Victoria Bampton

HawaiianEye said:


> My understanding from chatting with an Adobe rep is: The $9.99 photographer CC package, with Lr and PS, can be handled on a month to month, as needed basis.



Unfortunately, support staff have been known to be wrong (or misunderstood). Photography Plan an annual plan, paid monthly or annually. 12 month minimum term. Only single-app or full CC are available on a month-to-month basis.


----------



## HawaiianEye

Sorry, I am wrong! Victoria, you are correct!
Should I edit or delete the incorrect info posts, I left in this and another thread?

Photography plan only has 2 flavors: *Annual* prepaid, and *Annual* pay monthly! There is no _month to month_ in the drop down menu, like other added apps have.
I was presumptuous in assuming what they actually told me, applied to the Photography plan also. It doesn't.
They were explaining that an _additional_ single CC app could be added and subtracted to the annual photography plan as many times as I wanted/needed.

So, the question of what's the difference between a prepaid annual  vs monthly annual subscription, came to mind.
Cancelling charges are one difference.
Quotations are pasted from Adobe subscription page.
PREPAID: "If you cancel within 14 days of your order, you’ll be fully refunded. Should you cancel after 14 days, your payment is non-refundable and your service will continue until the end of your contracted term. Cancellations can be made any time by contacting Customer Support."
MONTHLY: "If you cancel within 14 days of your order, you’ll be fully refunded. Should you cancel after 14 days, you’ll be charged 50% of your remaining contract obligation and your service will continue until the end of that month’s billing period. Cancellations can be made any time by contacting Customer Support."


----------



## Ian.B

speaking as a weekend happy snapper
because adobe can add smaller 'upgrades' to CC at any time there is no need for them to bring out a LR7. As for buying LR7; imo that might be a dream unfortunately. There is no doubt adobe prefer the cash flow subscriptions and many against it at the start are now happily  using it.  
In australia CC is $12 a month and for those using it all the time it's great value; however Dawn has made a good point about happy snappers not needing/using CC _ALL_ the time so I'm not sure Adobe seems too interested with weekend happy snappers
I would also make the point again that many weekend happy snappers often don't have the _time_ to learn lr _AND_ ps  as both are quite a head full. LR is still #1 for filing/finding photos/above basic editing, however there are other editing programs and _easier to use_ editing programs starting to surface that would suit WHS (that's a new one) far more than ps imo.
I'm slowly learning the  better we can get the photo in the camera the less we need all the whiz bang time consuming powerful programs and when we [whs] get it right in the camera  we don't really need the harder to edit raw files . [ that will shake hornet's nest ]


----------



## Victoria Bampton

HawaiianEye said:


> Should I edit or delete the incorrect info posts, I left in this and another thread?"



Oh, no, we can leave it. It's sure to help someone else.


----------



## Ian.B

not about LR but still an interesting read; especial for those using Google's Nik a lot 
Another Nail in the Coffin of Photography Software

I have also seen a newish  mac editing program is going to be released for windows in the near future -- sorry forgotten name and the source --- anyone ??

Still leaves LR at the top for filing/finding pics thought


----------



## DGStinner

Ian.B said:


> I have also seen a newish  mac editing program is going to be released for windows in the near future -- sorry forgotten name and the source --- anyone ??


Macphun Luminar
Celebrate: Macphun photo editors are coming to #Windows


----------



## Ian.B

DGStinner said:


> Macphun Luminar
> Celebrate: Macphun photo editors are coming to #Windows


Yep; that's it -- thank you


----------



## PhilBurton

Ian.B said:


> not about LR but still an interesting read; especial for those using Google's Nik a lot
> Another Nail in the Coffin of Photography Software
> 
> I have also seen a newish  mac editing program is going to be released for windows in the near future -- sorry forgotten name and the source --- anyone ??
> 
> Still leaves LR at the top for filing/finding pics thought


Good article, albeit a bit pessimistic.

Phil


----------



## clee01l

PhilBurton said:


> Good article, albeit a bit pessimistic.
> 
> Phil


You do know that ex-Nik executives teamed up with the Ukrainian photo editing software firm MacPhun to produce Luminar and Creative Kit.


----------



## Ian.B

clee01l said:


> You do know that ex-Nik executives teamed up with the Ukrainian photo editing software firm MacPhun to produce Luminar and Creative Kit.


now that's interesting although  not so surprising ---I believe ON1 poached a few from other companies; matt kowalski seemed very much in the adobe/kelby camp before on1


----------



## Man-Machine

I'm in no way thinking about leaving Lr for any other software at this point. Still I'm somewhat disappointed because of the lack of major updates for Lr. I'm talking about "dehaze"-size upgrades, not to mention a faster engine.
I think that Adobe is working on the upgrade to end all upgrades ; to integrate all it's editing software with the cloud. 
How and when this can be achieved is anybodys guess - as what the prize for the consumer will be.


----------



## PhilBurton

clee01l said:


> You do know that ex-Nik executives teamed up with the Ukrainian photo editing software firm MacPhun to produce Luminar and Creative Kit.


No I didn't know that, but it doesn't surprise me.  Guys who build software companies aren't guys who want to retire early.  After a while sitting around the house they get restless.  They have new ideas.  They usually start a new company, or become venture capitalists if they have enough scratch.

Phil


----------



## johnbeardy

clee01l said:


> You do know that ex-Nik executives teamed up with the Ukrainian photo editing software firm MacPhun to produce Luminar and Creative Kit.



Let's just add "some". While "some" ex-Nik executives joined MacPhun, "some" stayed with Google and "some" went elsewhere, including to Adobe. 

John


----------



## clee01l

johnbeardy said:


> Let's just add "some". While "some" ex-Nik executives joined MacPhun, "some" stayed with Google and "some" went elsewhere, including to Adobe.
> 
> John


Aren't we the pedant today?


----------



## johnbeardy

Yes, I guess so. Though I think it is important to note that Adobe got one of the names I knew from Nik, and OnOne got another.


----------



## mcasan

Did anyone see the Affinity for iPad demo that was part of the WWDC keynote?    It would appear that Affinity for iPad is a functional match for desktop Affinity.    To me that is one more case where Adobe needs to step up.   Let's hope there is some action on their part by the end of the year on the desktop and mobile environments.


----------



## johnbeardy

Affinity Photo on iPad: Will anyone care?


----------



## mcasan

They will if they did not want to carry a MacBook int the field and yet want the same capability as on the desktop.   Adobe's mobile apps do not give parity with Lr and PS on the desktop.


----------



## johnbeardy

Adobe's apps don't offer parity because, as Nack's article says, if people want the same capability, they reach for a real computer.


----------



## Gnits

johnbeardy said:


> .... if people want the same capability, they reach for a real computer.



Yes .... but ...
Adobe still seem to be spending more of their dev budget on mobile devices than looking after existing desktop/laptop  users....


----------



## johnbeardy

Gnits said:


> Yes .... but ...
> Adobe still seem to be spending more of their dev budget on mobile devices than looking after existing desktop/laptop  users....


Well, isn't that just a natural perception during the gap between big releases of desktop apps? There's also a view that these mobile app workflows are part of the same ecosystem as desktop apps, and that Adobe can't neglect the fastest-changing sector.


----------



## Gnits

johnbeardy said:


> Well, isn't that just a natural perception during the gap between big releases of desktop apps?



Prior to CC customers had some sense of when major updates might be due, we might also get some glimpses in advance, etc... 

Now .... we have no idea when a new major update might occur (and we can be forgiven for believing such a major update may never occur).

I live in fear that the next major release will be in reality a beta version of a new paradigm / platform for Adobe and all the really good suggestions made by Lightroom professionals over the years since beta will once more be consigned to the status of "kick those cans down the road". I hope not and would be delighted to see the next major release, with a reasonable percentage of the effort focused on improving existing usability and features.


----------



## Linwood Ferguson

Gnits said:


> I live in fear that the next major release will be in reality a beta version of a new paradigm / platform for Adobe and all the really good suggestions made by Lightroom professionals over the years since beta will once more be consigned to the status of "kick those cans down the road".


That a major update might bring a paradigm shift, to me, is even more likely in a "major release that has to be sold" model of perpetual than a CC subscription model, as in the former there is a lot more pressure to give Marketing something truly major to push as "new, improved".  Though I join you in hoping it is a "improved features".

Windows 10 has been interesting.  It is more like the subscription model in that they are doing more updates faster rather than big ones to "sell".  It has now been through two "major" updates in that cycle, and honestly one can hardly tell, you have to hunt for the "major" part.  The pressure is off to make each one revolutionary just because they have to sell it, as opposed to it really is an improvement.  There is some reason to hope the CC model extends that same freedom to Adobe, and that updates will be real and functional as opposed to "just for the sake of rearranging things to call it new".   At least I try to convince myself of it.  

Though of course the split perpetual/CC Lightroom model means that comment applies more to photoshop than Lightroom, so who knows.  Depends on whether there's a 7, or just a CC-only forward.


----------



## clee01l

Gnits said:


> Yes .... but ...
> Adobe still seem to be spending more of their dev budget on mobile devices than looking after existing desktop/laptop  users....


Mobile device image processing is not the place to find serious photography enthusiasts and professionals.  I can see where Adobe is trying to reach a broader audience, but it mystifies me that they seem to be putting all of their emphasis on the mobile market at the exclusion of the desktop apps.  (Note this is a market where you give away for free the mobile app in hope that the mobile user will buy into the Creative Suite running on a real computer. )


----------



## Linwood Ferguson

clee01l said:


> Mobile device image processing is not the place to find serious photography enthusiasts and professionals.  I can see where Adobe is trying to reach a broader audience, but it mystifies me that they seem to be putting all of their emphasis on the mobile market at the exclusion of the desktop apps.  (Note this is a market where you give away for free the mobile app in hope that the mobile user will buy into the Creative Suite running on a real computer. )


But it's where everyone is going, so I do not blame Adobe more than others.  I'm a Smugmug user, and for some years their main efforts have been chasing the mass mobs rather than the much more limited serious photographers.  And I really do get it... it's better to sell even relatively small items to millions of people, rather than even fairly pricey items to hundreds or thousands.  Google makes most of its money micro-cents at a time, and has proven it adds up.


----------



## clee01l

Ferguson said:


> nd I really do get it... it's better to sell even relatively small items to millions of people, rather than even fairly pricey items to hundreds or thousands.


What small items does Adobe sell?  Every  Adobe app in the iOS app listing is free.


----------



## Linwood Ferguson

clee01l said:


> What small items does Adobe sell?  Every  Adobe app in the iOS app listing is free.


Nothing yet.  Though there are no free big company aps, you pay for all of them in some fashion - advertising, building loyalty, skimming your information for their use, as a gateway to other purchases, selling disk storage as you fill the "free" part up.

Google is "free" also, seen the price of their stock lately.  

My point is that I think inevitably as serious photographers our appeal to big companies as a target market will continue to wane in comparison to all those cell phones.  Whether any of them quite knows how to monetize that hoard's attention is another question, but it's understandable that it is too big an audience to turn down.

Or as they say about Facebook -- you are not a customer, but part of the product.  I'm sure Adobe has noticed that aspect as well.


----------



## Victoria Bampton

clee01l said:


> it mystifies me that they seem to be putting all of their emphasis on the mobile market at the exclusion of the desktop apps


This'd be where the market is growing... not that desktop is going away, but mobile-connected workflows are the fastest growing sector.

There is a team working on desktop, but there's been major transition going on behind the scenes, which takes time.


----------



## clee01l

Victoria Bampton said:


> This'd be where the market is growing.


You are correct, this is where the market is growing.  But I don't see a revenue stream in the mobile market using Adobe's mobile products. While just about everything ties into the Creative Cloud, many of these apps work without a cloud component. And I don't see  the emphasis placed on needing the cloud product (which seems to be languishing in the shadow of the Mobile apps)


----------



## PhilBurton

clee01l said:


> Mobile device image processing is not the place to find serious photography enthusiasts and professionals.  I can see where Adobe is trying to reach a broader audience, but it mystifies me that they seem to be putting all of their emphasis on the mobile market at the exclusion of the desktop apps.  (Note this is a market where you give away for free the mobile app in hope that the mobile user will buy into the Creative Suite running on a real computer. )


Looking at the Adobe website these days, several things stand out:
They have gone "cloud-crazy."  Not just the Creative Cloud.  Now there is the Document Cloud and the Experience Cloud.  That last is further composed of the Advertising Cloud, the Analytics Cloud, and the Marketing Cloud.  All these clouds seem oriented towards businesses.  What does an individual consumer, either a "happy snapper" or a serious amateur, need from any of these developments?  Not much.  
Adobe has very little to offer the individual, except "legacy" products like Lightroom and the various Creative Suite applications.

However, the business world is embracing clouds in a very big way.  Just yesterday, a software developer in a large US bank told me that the edict from top management is, "All new developments will be cloud-based.  And he also said that Amazon Web Services is changing the way that software developers write their applications.  As a non-software programmer, I can't judge that second part. But the first part, I see evidence of that trend all the time.  And so does Adobe, apparently.  As does Microsoft.

I'm also speculating here that Adobe decided that making Lightroom cloud-aware was the way to make Lightroom useful for workgroups, rather than making the desktop version multi-user capable. 

These trends go in waves, the pendulum swings.  Just now, the pendulum is very much towards re-engineering business processes and applications to take advantage of the Web, mobile devices, and the Internet of Things.  Where does that leave us desktop users?  On the other side of the pendulum's arc. 

In a couple of years, the pendulum will move towards desktop applications again.  Except that the desktop of the future won't be like today's desktop.

Phil Burton


----------



## Judith Nicholls

johnbeardy said:


> No, after you stop paying you can't go into Develop and Map or use Mobile, but everything else will work as it does now.



Can you provide confirmation of this?  The reason I ask is this thread, scroll down to "You may want to read this post of mine on another site:"  
What happens when I cancel my Creative Cloud me... |Adobe Community

His LR CC gave him "activation failed" and nothing more.  After hours and hours with Adobe they finally gave him 7 days free trial to get his photos off.  That is quite different from what we thought, that you have permanent access to your files AND the LR editing done.  The link he provides doesn't get me to the information about cancelling, just how to cancel.  It may be there somewhere but I can't find any words about what happens to Lightroom if you cancel your contract with Adobe.  

I did find out there is no month to month contract for Lightroom, not even at $30/month.  So if you want to get out I guess you have to take a year to do it because you are going to pay for a year's access.

Judy


----------



## Linwood Ferguson

Judith Nicholls said:


> Can you provide confirmation of this?



Here's Adobe's FAQ:

Adobe Creative Cloud FAQ

Expand the one that asks "what happens to my photos if I end my membership".

To me that is their policy.  The technical implication, I think, may have had some challenges (and I guess could in the future), but the policy seems fairly clear.  Your referenced posting appears to discuss Photoshop, not Lightroom. I believe Photoshop, being a destructive editor, just quits working but all edited photos in Photoshop proper are, well, editing, so you do not need it to access your images (ACR-only edits and access through Bridge of course are a bit of a grey area, but I guess are not accessible, though they would themselves work in LR I think with a read-metadata).


----------



## Judith Nicholls

Ferguson said:


> Here's Adobe's FAQ:
> 
> Adobe Creative Cloud FAQ
> 
> Expand the one that asks "what happens to my photos if I end my membership".
> 
> To me that is their policy.  The technical implication, I think, may have had some challenges (and I guess could in the future), but the policy seems fairly clear.  Your referenced posting appears to discuss Photoshop, not Lightroom. I believe Photoshop, being a destructive editor, just quits working but all edited photos in Photoshop proper are, well, editing, so you do not need it to access your images (ACR-only edits and access through Bridge of course are a bit of a grey area, but I guess are not accessible, though they would themselves work in LR I think with a read-metadata).



Thanks!  Yes, that says:

"You'll still have access to all your photos on your local hard drive through Lightroom for the desktop. You can continue to import and organize photos as well as output your edited photos through Export, Publish, Print, Web, or Slideshow. Access to the Develop & Map modules and Lightroom for mobile are not available after your membership ends."

I was looking under Lightroom and maybe the Phototography section. I also did a search but that wouldn't work because who would search for "end my membership"...   This is what I understood from the inception.  So I guess people for whom this does not work should have been given what this says rather than 7 days to save their stuff...


----------



## 1361

I am thrilled to see that Adobe still has an interest in Lightroom. I sure would like to see a new and improved release with a "Perpetual" lic.
On Lightroom Performance


----------

