# Lightroom Classic Won't Run



## Matthew Webb (Oct 19, 2017)

Operating System: Mac OS -- High Sierra

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

Question or Description of Problem: Hello all --

I just installed Lightroom Classic on my iMac running High Sierra.  When I try to open it, I get an immediate error message that the application cannot be opened.  The "get more information" button on the error window sends me to the following old page on Adobe's webpage....Solutions to Adobe Lightroom Lightroom user permission issues on launch

I've tried the various fixes on this page (manually changed the file permissions, tried running the terminal script provided, etc.) and the only one that sort of worked was setting up an entirely different admin user account, logging into that account and running Lightroom Classic from that account.  This is not a good solution since it is a totally separate account from my normal account with all my other applications, files, etc.).

I have also used the Adobe CC uninstaller and removed Lightroom from my system (as well as all the other Adobe CC apps), reinstalled multiple times and all to no avail.

Does anyone have any idea what is going on and any other way to fix this problem?  Thank you for any help you may be able to provide.


----------



## jjespdk (Oct 19, 2017)

Matthew Webb said:


> Operating System: Mac OS -- High Sierra
> 
> Lightroom Version: Lightroom Classic
> _(Please go to Help menu > System Info to double check the exact version number)_
> ...



Don't know how to help you in this matter. But if you can, go back to your old version. Hopefully you made a complete backup, before updating? And then wait until others have beta testet the new version. Actually, always wait a couple of weeks before installing new versions. This is the safest way


----------



## Matthew Webb (Oct 19, 2017)

Unfortunately the installer deleted my old version and when I reinstalled the old version, it also had the same problem.  My catalog and underlying picture files are safe on a separate drive that is backed up in multiple places, so it is not catastrophic....but it is incredibly annoying.


----------



## jjespdk (Oct 19, 2017)

Matthew Webb said:


> Unfortunately the installer deleted my old version and when I reinstalled the old version, it also had the same problem.  My catalog and underlying picture files are safe on a separate drive that is backed up in multiple places, so it is not catastrophic....but it is incredibly annoying.



Ok, that is very annoying. Actually this is one of the biggest problems with all this "clouding" and "software subscription", where you only rent software, but don't actually buy it The customer has lost the control - and the rights...


----------



## stevevp (Oct 19, 2017)

@jjespdk. I'm not sure you ever bought the software or had any rights. You just paid up front to use/rent it under the manufacturer's terms. It's probably buried in the T&C's that nobody reads.


----------



## clee01l (Oct 20, 2017)

How did you install LR Classic?  Did you use the Adobe CC App manager and let it install LR Classic and PSCC?


----------



## jjespdk (Oct 20, 2017)

stevevp said:


> @jjespdk. I'm not sure you ever bought the software or had any rights. You just paid up front to use/rent it under the manufacturer's terms. It's probably buried in the T&C's that nobody reads.



Well I "bought" the LR 5 and 6. They can be run and used as long as I have a computer that allows it. I can run it without any check with the Adobe Police. I can even use it without internet connection. Compared to now, this was great. Now I pay a fee every month. If Adobe suddenly decides to raise the price with 400 percent from next months, I have to accept it, or stop using it. I simply don't like that idea. And with the new Adobe Cloud, you even place your own photographs and files on their server. So you are forced to pay to get access to your own work? And we just accept it? Wowww..

What will the next thing be? You will have to only rent a camera and cannot longer buy it? And if you do not pay every month, it will shut down and not take any pictures? Yes, believe me, this will come! And I still don't like it!


----------



## Johan Elzenga (Oct 20, 2017)

Depending on the price, renting a camera could be a much better deal than buying one. If the camera breaks down, the manufacturer has to repair it for free, regardless of the age. If a new and improved model comes out, you can simply switch to that new model. If you go to Africa, you rent that 4.0/600mm for the duration of the trip, rather than break the bank to buy a lens you probably won't use much after you've returned home. I don't rent _all_ my equipment, but I do rent the more specialistic stuff for exactly this reason. It's purely a financial decision for me, not an emotional one.


----------



## Wernfried (Oct 20, 2017)

jjespdk said:


> What will the next thing be? You will have to only rent a camera and cannot longer buy it? And if you do not pay every month, it will shut down and not take any pictures? Yes, believe me, this will come! And I still don't like it!




Well, even today you can do that. This company offers camera lease for 24/36 month - that is not renting equipment for a short period while holiday, for example.
You can rent a smartphone (at least in some countries), airlines do not own their aircraft's, they rent it (and call it "leasing"). Big companies do not buy any office furniture, they lease them, etc.

The big difference: Those people/companies do it out of their own decision - at Adobe you have no choice.


----------



## Johan Elzenga (Oct 20, 2017)

Wernfried said:


> Well, even today you can do that. This company offers camera lease for 24/36 month.
> You can rent a smartphone (at least in some countries), airlines do not own their aircraft's, they rent it (and call it "leasing"). Big companies do not buy any office furniture, they lease them, etc.
> 
> The big difference: Those people/companies do it out of their own decision - at Adobe you have no choice.



Of course you have a choice. Adobe is like the company that hires the planes. You are the airline that can choose to rent the planes from Adobe, or buy them somewhere else (at PhaseOne, for example).


----------



## jjespdk (Oct 20, 2017)

JohanElzenga said:


> Depending on the price, renting a camera could be a much better deal than buying one. If the camera breaks down, the manufacturer has to repair it for free, regardless of the age. If a new and improved model comes out, you can simply switch to that new model. If you go to Africa, you rent that 4.0/600mm for the duration of the trip, rather than break the bank to buy a lens you probably won't use much after you've returned home. I don't rent _all_ my equipment, but I do rent the more specialistic stuff for exactly this reason. It's purely a financial decision for me, not an emotional one.



Yes, but as you say, it is your decision. But for Lightroom you will not longer have this choice. The standalone version, where you buy the product, is now gone....


----------



## jjespdk (Oct 20, 2017)

JohanElzenga said:


> Of course you have a choice. Adobe is like the company that hires the planes. You are the airline that can choose to rent the planes from Adobe, or buy them somewhere else (at PhaseOne, for example).



Of course we have a choice. We can leave Adobe. But it gets harder and harder. When you first have placed all your files on their online services, you have get used to the LR workflow, and you have made all your changes IN the lightroom catalogue, you loose all that when you change. 

A switch will make all your work through the years, gone. Your time - your work! Yes you can save your work in TIFF and JPG etc. But still... Adobe (and other cloud service providers) know this. They speculated in this big time! And earn a lot of money on that account..


----------



## Johan Elzenga (Oct 20, 2017)

jjespdk said:


> Of course we have a choice. We can leave Adobe. But it gets harder and harder. When you first have placed all your files on their online services, you have get used to the LR workflow, and you have made all your changes IN the lightroom catalogue, you loose all that when you change.



That's the downside of non-destructive editing. It has little or nothing to do with the cloud. If you change now, from Lightroom 6 to some other raw-converter, you lose all those changes too.


----------



## jjespdk (Oct 20, 2017)

JohanElzenga said:


> That's the downside of non-destructive editing. It has little or nothing to do with the cloud. If you change now, from Lightroom 6 to some other raw-converter, you lose all those changes too.



Yes, but you are missing the point. LR in a standalone version can be used as long as you want, after you have bought it. If you decide to buy a new raw converter, fine, you loose your work, but it is YOUR choice. But with cloud solutions it is different. If Adobe suddenly finds it necessary to increase the price so you cannot longer afford it - you don't have that choice. You will have to pay what they want to charge or leave the platform... To me this is a big difference!


----------



## Johan Elzenga (Oct 20, 2017)

jjespdk said:


> Yes, but you are missing the point. LR in a standalone version can be used as long as you want, after you have bought it. If you decide to buy a new raw converter, fine, you loose your work, but it is YOUR choice. But with cloud solutions it is different. If Adobe suddenly finds it necessary to increase the price so you cannot longer afford it - you don't have that choice. You will have to pay what they want to charge or leave the platform... To me this is a big difference!



As an ex-Aperture user, I don't think I'm missing the point at all. In theory, I could still use Aperture today... That's the theory.


----------



## jjespdk (Oct 20, 2017)

JohanElzenga said:


> As an ex-Aperture user, I don't think I'm missing the point at all. In theory, I could still use Aperture today... That's the theory.


Ok, we agree then....


----------



## stevevp (Oct 20, 2017)

This has gone a bit off topic! Did the original poster resolve his problem?


----------

