# It it true there is no option to print in the new LRcc



## AndrewS

*Operating System:* 

*Lightroom Version:* 
_(Please go to Help menu > System Info to double check the exact version number)_

*Question or Description of Problem:*


----------



## AndrewS

Reading all the posts about the new wonder Lightroom one of the many things that concerns me is the suggestion printing has been ignored in Lightroom CC. Surely this can't be true?


----------



## Hal P Anderson

It's true. So far. As has been pointed out several times, LR CC is only at version 1, and will have stuff added to it in future.


----------



## AndrewS

Hal P Anderson said:


> It's true. So far. As has been pointed out several times, LR CC is only at version 1, and will have stuff added to it in future.


Well that kills it for me.


----------



## Victoria Bampton

Killing the baby before it's taken its first breath Andrew?   You'll hear the fanfare when it's added, I'm sure, and then you can see if it suits you. It's very early days.


----------



## AndrewS

Victoria Bampton said:


> Killing the baby before it's taken its first breath Andrew?   You'll hear the fanfare when it's added, I'm sure, and then you can see if it suits you. It's very early days.


Very early days seems accurate. I'll sit back and wait, tone curves, printing, hierarchical keywording,. I'll monitor the forum, keep updated on the expert reviews and keep my fingers crossed. The overall concept seems great, cloud storage, usage across different hardware, but its got a long way to go.


----------



## Johan Elzenga

The question is always what comes first. I remember Lightroom 1.0 beta. It did have a print module, but it did not have spot removal yet. So I told an Adobe representative who demonstrated the software that the printing module would be of little use without having a spot removal tool to clean up my images first. She was very surprised that I didn't want to print images with visible dust spots...


----------



## PhilBurton

Victoria Bampton said:


> Killing the baby before it's taken its first breath Andrew?   You'll hear the fanfare when it's added, I'm sure, and then you can see if it suits you. It's very early days.


There is a product management concept called, "Minimum Viable Product," meaning which features must be in the product for it to be viable and competitive in the marketplace.  Without printing, etc., etc., I would argue that Lightroom CC is not viable in the market for many people.

I'm amazed that they released this two-headed creation.  Or quoting from the movie _Casablanca_, "shocked, shocked ..."

Phil


----------



## pknoot

There is no excuse for Adobe to publish a product that requires immediate updates to correct oversights.


----------



## PhilBurton

pknoot said:


> There is no excuse for Adobe to publish a product that requires immediate updates to correct oversights.


How do we know that updates to address deficiencies will be immediate?

Phil


----------



## clee01l

Victoria Bampton said:


> Killing the baby before it's taken its first breath Andrew?   You'll hear the fanfare when it's added, I'm sure, and then you can see if it suits you. It's very early days.


This baby might be stillborn.  Do consider that.  There is no reason for any of us to be Adobe "Fanboys".


----------



## tspear

clee01l said:


> This baby might be stillborn.  Do consider that.  There is no reason for any of us to be Adobe "Fanboys".


Like the import dialog fiasco with 6.04 if I recall?

Tim


----------



## Johan Elzenga

Lightroom 6.2 if I'm not mistaken. That was different because that was a bad change of an existing product. Lightroom CC is brand new and version 1.0. It's obvious that some functionality is still missing.


----------



## tspear

JohanElzenga said:


> Lightroom 6.2 if I'm not mistaken. That was different because that was a bad change of an existing product. Lightroom CC is brand new and version 1.0. It's obvious that some functionality is still missing.



I was making reference to Cletus's comment that it might be stillborn. I probably should have been a little more clear. The import dialog has been resurrected as the new Lr CC!
You see the same design philosophies and goals; it would not surprise me the reaction Adobe received at that point is what created the new product. The timeline just about fits also, when you consider the fact that @Victoria Bampton has to have been testing it for a while (and still has a disorganized mess of files per her other posts) and the initial feature set is pretty solid. That stuff is not developed in a day, and when you consider the complexities in sync systems? That is a lot of design, coding and testing to make such core features work. 

Tim


----------



## Johan Elzenga

Lightroom CC was first shown as a 'sneek peek' at Adobe MAX 2016, if I'm not mistaken. I can't say how long it was available for beta-testing, but anyone can guess that it can't have been written in the last two weeks or even two months.


----------



## clee01l

JohanElzenga said:


> Lightroom CC is brand new and version 1.0. It's obvious that some functionality is still missing.


Yet it is being promoted as if it were the future and fully developed.   If Adobe had said. "Here is our first release of what we hope to be our new flagship Product.  Now all of the important features are there yet but stay tuned..."  Then Lightroom CC would have been received for what it is, a start at making LR available through the cloud.  All of the promotion is on Lightroom CC and none on Lightroom Classic.  The Advertising hype implies that everyone should move to the cloud platform and pick up their workflow from where they left off.  This is misleading and causes great confusion from those that NEED a fully functional LR app.  Compounding that with the simultaneous gnashing of teeth over the demise of the perpetual license.  Adobe deserves all of the bad press that they are bringing on them selves.


----------



## Johan Elzenga

clee01l said:


> Yet it is being promoted as if it were the future and fully developed.   If Adobe had said. "Here is our first release of what we hope to be our new flagship Product.  Now all of the important features are there yet but stay tuned..."  Then Lightroom CC would have been received for what it is, a start at making LR available through the cloud.  All of the promotion is on Lightroom CC and none on Lightroom Classic.  The Advertising hype implies that everyone should move to the cloud platform and pick up their workflow from where they left off.  This is misleading and causes great confusion from those that NEED a fully functional LR app.  Compounding that with the simultaneous gnashing of teeth over the demise of the perpetual license.  Adobe deserves all of the bad press that they are bringing on them selves.



I agree with that. The problem isn't Lightroom CC itself. That is a nice enough product, especially considering that it's the version 1.0 release. The problem is that it takes the name of the established product, and is already promoted as 'the future of photography', even though it's clearly still in its infancy. It's like saying that a six month old baby is the next president of the USA. No, I don't think that is a good analogy, because that is already true.


----------



## Gnits

JohanElzenga said:


> It's like saying that a six month old baby is the next president of the USA. No, I don't think that is a good analogy, because that is already true.



Some times it is good to laugh out loud.


----------



## clee01l

JohanElzenga said:


> It's like saying that a six month old baby is the next president of the USA. No, I don't think that is a good analogy, because that is already true.


See what happens when you promote something that is ready before it is ready...  "Trump, the cloud based app formerly known as Lightroom CC"


----------



## rob211

I kinda see it as Lr Mobile App for the Desktop. And although you can print from an app, that's not done as much as sharing. I expect the sharing, aside from FB, to grow. And to probably include printing. I suppose this might deter Lr CC-only subscribers though, although I'd bet a lot don't do much printing.


----------



## Victoria Bampton

I completely agree they've messed up their marketing, at least as far as existing users go. For new users starting photography now, it probably is the way to go. But they sure have scared a lot of users in the process.

As to whether it's stillborn, we'll have to wait and see. Adobe are betting the house on this, so they must have some pretty good evidence to support the decisions.

I have been using it for quite some time now. I was very skeptical to start with, and let's be honest, I'm probably among the more advanced Lightroom users, so I was convinced I wouldn't like it. I was wrong. It has massively grown on me. It's made photography fun again, rather than fighting bugs constantly. It's still lacking some features that I need, so I don't see most existing Lightroom users switching anytime soon, but I can see its potential.


----------



## mark.anderson1979

I know this is an old tread but I couldn’t see a new one.  I encouraged my dad to upgrade from v6, when it stopped working after latest Mac  Software release (yes he should have waited), to the shiny new  Lightroom CC.  He tells me it can’t print;   My question is whether we think it is a function that will ever be added or not.  Any thoughts?  Many thanks! Mark .


----------



## Johan Elzenga

mark.anderson1979 said:


> I know this is an old tread but I couldn’t see a new one.  I encouraged my dad to upgrade from v6, when it stopped working after latest Mac  Software release (yes he should have waited), to the shiny new  Lightroom CC.  He tells me it can’t print;   My question is whether we think it is a function that will ever be added or not.  Any thoughts?  Many thanks! Mark .


I can't answer that, but why didn't you advise him to upgrade to Lightroom *Classic*?


----------



## mark.anderson1979

Johan Elzenga said:


> I can't answer that, but why didn't you advise him to upgrade to Lightroom *Classic*?


Well the full detail, if it helps, was that I actually recommend he let me review which one to go for. (Since I use classic) However he’s an impatient fellow and just returned from a tiger watching holiday and couldn’t help himself.  He thought 1TB of storage was good and he didn’t use Photoshop so ‘no brainier’ right?   To be fair though; even if I’d done the research I think I wound have still just assumed you could print.


----------



## Johan Elzenga

I think there's more to it than just printing or having Photoshop or not. Lightroom Classic is the Lightroom he knows, Lightroom cloud is a new application. That alone would be a good reason to consider Lightroom Classic, unless he had specific reasons to prefer Lightroom cloud. But yes, dads making up their own minds... What can you do?


----------



## AndrewS

*Operating System:* 

*Lightroom Version:* 
_(Please go to Help menu > System Info to double check the exact version number)_

*Question or Description of Problem:*


----------



## clee01l

It may be possible to contact Adobe and ask that the new subscription be converted to the Photographer plan with Lightroom (cloudy), Lightroom Classic, Photoshop and 20 GB of cloud storage IF he still has his LR6 catalog file


----------



## Rob26

Well it has just caught me out as well. Received a notification in my creative cloud that it was on special offer until today, So I decided to enter the subscription scheme. I must admit to expecting a bit more and incorrectly assumed that  my old Lightroom would get updated at least as far as my OS X would allow.
But no update and now I find out that I can't even print from the cloudy version. 
So two choices I think, pay the extra and do full update or just cancel and stick with 6.14 which does print.
At the moment I'm feeling duped and most likely to cancel. I'll sleep on it got 10-13 days I think.


----------



## clee01l

Printing in Cloudy is possible.  It is more akin to printing from your phone. If you did not get the Photographers plan that includes Classic, you might be able to talk Adobe into switching you over tho the Plan that includes cloudy, Classic, Photoshop and only 20GB of cloud storage for the same price.  

Otherwise,  you can export to a file and use a third party robust printing package.


----------



## Rob26

I must admit that is what I expected to get. But when I go to Lightroom 6 all that seems to have changed is the info label. No updated software.
Discovered a workaround though  I now have Adobe Camera Raw and can use with Bridge.
Best to take my time and do some research before making any hasty decisions
Maybe my iMac won't update further that 6.14


----------



## Jim Wilde

Yes,  a bit more research is needed. There IS an updated version of LR6, called Lightroom Classic (currently at version 9.2), which is available in one of the TWO different Photography Plans (which are only available with a subscription). This is the current UK pricing of the various plans (which shows three plans because the Classic-based plan has two storage options):



And these are the system requirements for Lightroom Classic on MacOS:


----------



## Rob26

Useful info Jim
So I have purchased the Photography Plan (20GB) but for a discounted price. Looking at the other doc you sent do I not also get Lightroom for my Desktop? Under the Plan every thing is ticked so why have I not got a more up to date version of my 6.14


----------



## Rob26

Solved
What I did't realise and was not that clear is the need to download 9.2 So I think all is resolved. I am hoping that I have got a margin from Adobe 
and have the Lightroom I need at a good rate. Time will tell.


----------



## Rob26

bargin


----------



## Denis Pagé

I may be late to the party but... Even if there is no dedicated menu option, to print from iOS or iPadOS I simply use the share icon (square with up arrow) then choose print, select printer etc. It more like printing from any other app. The drawback is that you need an AirPrint enabled printer. I can not use my big photo printer even if I can connect it by USB-C wire on the iPad Pro.


----------



## clee01l

Denis Pagé said:


> ...The drawback is that you need an AirPrint enabled printer. I can not use my big photo printer even if I can connect it by USB-C wire on the iPad Pro.


It does not have to be an air print printer. It just has to be on the same ethernet network. And shared. 



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Denis Pagé

Thanks for the hint Cletus but I have such a shared printer on same LAN and it is not accessible. Either wired with an RJ-45 LAN cable or with a USB cable. Maybe because there are no antennas whatsoever on than printer. Only my wife's little portable printer works over LAN. Do I. miss something?


----------



## clee01l

Denis Pagé said:


> Thanks for the hint Cletus but I have such a shared printer on same LAN and it is not accessible. Either wired with an RJ-45 LAN cable or with a USB cable. Maybe because there are no antennas whatsoever on than printer. Only my wife's little portable printer works over LAN. Do I. miss something?


I guess it was me that was missing "something".  My Mx920 printer was set up with a wired Lan and as a test I switched it to WiFi   The  iPhone continued to see it as "Canon MX920 Series" location: Study.  I went into the printer setting s on my iMac to change the name  and Location.  The iPhone continued to refer to it as as "Canon MX920 Series" location: Study.    Only when I went to the printer's web page did I see the AirPrint designation and the *Bonjour* Service Name designation: "Canon MX920 Series" location: Study.  I have been using AirPrint all along and did not realize it.    So,  my apologies.


----------

