This whole thread is getting rather personal by a few people.
Ask yourself why Interest rates are so low compared to what my generation had to pay. And by the way I CAN afford it.
and please use their services
Lightroom 7 - "will appear later this year".
- Thread starter jerry12953
- Start date
This whole thread is getting rather personal by a few people.
Ask yourself why Interest rates are so low compared to what my generation had to pay. And by the way I CAN afford it.
- Messages
- 53
- Name
- Graham
- Edit My Images
- Yes
How much benefit is there in trying to find an adobe replacement ? If any company comes up with a truly good and cheap alternative to PS and lightroom do you really think it will stay cheap for long ? They will be after the benefits of cornering the market just the same as Adobe are.
D
Deleted member 49549
Guest
Not right now.
But adobe are running two applications in parallel, and have renamed one ‘classic’. That is a very strong hint to me that this app is on the path to be discontinued, leaving the cloud only version.
D
Deleted member 49549
Guest
- Messages
- 3,398
- Name
- Tom
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I don't understand why certain people on this thread are having a go at other people for not wanting to pay a suscription. If a person only uses lightroom and not photoshop, why on earth would they want to be forced to pay over the odds because it's bundled with a product they won't use?
The fact that it's £10 - yes it isn't ridiculous but on top of the other monthly outgoings most people have and the cost of their photography kit in the first place, it's just an added expense and soon enough, these 'added expenses' start to become a considerable monthly cost.
I see the argument from both sides; that your photographic experience is enhanced by PP and LR, but the simple fact is that Adobe have become very greedy and some people don't like that. That is not a reason to have a go at someone in my opinion. Personally I am going to pay for LR6 at 64.99 as an upgrade to 4 as I want panorama and HDR on my
Mac.
The fact that it's £10 - yes it isn't ridiculous but on top of the other monthly outgoings most people have and the cost of their photography kit in the first place, it's just an added expense and soon enough, these 'added expenses' start to become a considerable monthly cost.
I see the argument from both sides; that your photographic experience is enhanced by PP and LR, but the simple fact is that Adobe have become very greedy and some people don't like that. That is not a reason to have a go at someone in my opinion. Personally I am going to pay for LR6 at 64.99 as an upgrade to 4 as I want panorama and HDR on my
Mac.
Last edited:
I really don't get why people think software is different from any other product they have purchased.
You buy something; you get a warranty for a period of time (usually 12 months) that will fix it if it breaks (think bug patches), but you don't get all the goodies they release in their next evolution of the product.
It's your decision as to whether you buy the upgraded version of not.
Exactly the same if you buy a car.
BUT... car manufacturers became wise to the fact that people like to upgrade their cars regularly - they like the bells and whistles, so along came PCP schemes - you pay a 'modest' lease on the car, and every three years, you in effect get to trade up to a later version.
There are benefits and disadvantages to both models, but you would not expect a car manufacturer to keep giving you a new car if you opted to purchase outright? It doesn't make business sense.
Just because software is perceived as intangible, doesn't make it ant different; people already get a better deal with updates being more freely available for perpetual licences, but there has to be a line drawn somewhere.
I'm on the line now as to whether a SaaS model for adobe will work for me going forward; I already have unlimited cloud storage through by Google Apps paid subscription, so I don't really want to pay for more on top of what I already have just because it's bundled with the package, and I'm not clear how LR mobile will be supported on the classic going forward, but as that situation clarifies, I'll make a decision.
Most if not all software will move to SaaS ultimately - it is already the case in business, with a massive shift in that direction, so I can see it becoming the predominate model in the consumer space too, but I think they need to work a little harder on making sure the 'offer' is attractive.
- Messages
- 6,361
- Name
- Elliott
- Edit My Images
- No
The only person I've had a go at is the person who suggested that my mortgage is subsidised. The rest has been a civil discussion.
- Messages
- 6,361
- Name
- Elliott
- Edit My Images
- No
Be careful people, we’re dealing with a genuine internet tough guy over here.
And a funny guy apparently.
- Messages
- 9,590
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I think its the photo that scares them lol
OP
- Messages
- 11,788
- Name
- Jeremy Moore
- Edit My Images
- No
Just as a reminder, in 2013 Adobe said that all future versions of LR would be available as standalone products "indefinitely". As I said in the same post, Adobe now have a very large number of us Lightroom users by the short and curlies.....
Perhaps you should look up the definition of the term “indefinitely”. It doesn’t mean forever, it means for an un determined length of time, even “for the foreseeable future”.
For all those who bought LR6 Adobe don’t have you by the curlies: LR6 will work as it did before Wednesday indefinitely. You can edit your existing and new images indefinitely until one of two things happens - you buy a camera which is no longer supported or something in Windows / macOS breaks LR6. At that point you have to make a decision ... buy a CC subscription or move to a new product.
- Messages
- 2,247
- Name
- Brian
- Edit My Images
- Yes
All your photos are on your (Windows?) disk filing system, there is no Lightroom filing system.
Lightroom knows where they are because you have imported them into it's Library.
You can still see them on your hard drive by using your system's file explorer, you do not need Lightroom to view them.
So the existing Lightroom stand alone versions are no longer being supported?
That doesn't mean they will stop working overnight - you will still be able to use them as long as they are supported by whatever Operating System you care to use.
As long as that happens, you will NOT "lose" any of your existing edits and processing.
If you are so concerned about retaning processing and edits, then you should export them as 16-bit.tiff files, which are universally supported and unlikely to become obsolete any time soon.
Last edited:
odd jim
Flimsiest Lambresta
- Messages
- 9,209
- Name
- Jim
- Edit My Images
- Yes
It depends which definition you read, there are many. One of which is "no end to". But then I guess Adobe wanted it to be vague.
OP
- Messages
- 11,788
- Name
- Jeremy Moore
- Edit My Images
- No
Note the phrasing in Adobe's statement - versions - I think that's pretty clear. As for short and curlies, you have described exactly my definition of short and curlies. You buy a new camera - you HAVE NO CHOICE but to go on the subscription model or buy new software, which doesn't yet exist anyway, and possibly never will. Nor do you get new features or performance improvements which subscription payers get.
I think bottom line is that this is the model that Adobe have gone with as cloud based fits their model. Yes paying monthly might not be ideal for some because it works out more expensive due to them only upgrading once every 4 years. However I suspect this does not help Adobe development as it is not as conducive to understanding how many volumes they will ship.
The other thing about £10 a month is whether it is actually significant. Take the target market for LR - Photographers. Who potentially spend X amount on it either as a hobby or professionally.
If you really sat down and worked out what £10 a months is, compared to what is over spent (dare I say wasted) on other things like energy, fuel, food, mobile phones, TV susbscriptions, the pumpkin spiced latte from Starbucks etc i'm sure many would find £10. The point is that in a society of convenience this extra £10 is lamented because its a change from what had come before it and people fundamentally do not like change.
However this is digressing into socio-economics and i'm sure it is counter to many others views.
The other thing about £10 a month is whether it is actually significant. Take the target market for LR - Photographers. Who potentially spend X amount on it either as a hobby or professionally.
If you really sat down and worked out what £10 a months is, compared to what is over spent (dare I say wasted) on other things like energy, fuel, food, mobile phones, TV susbscriptions, the pumpkin spiced latte from Starbucks etc i'm sure many would find £10. The point is that in a society of convenience this extra £10 is lamented because its a change from what had come before it and people fundamentally do not like change.
However this is digressing into socio-economics and i'm sure it is counter to many others views.
- Messages
- 1,230
- Edit My Images
- No
I wouldn't expect a car manufacturer to give me feature upgrades (aside from fixing faults in the warranty period)... but I would expect my car to be compatible with all future versions of petrol (camera) especially if they'd assured "indefinite" support.
- Messages
- 900
- Name
- Tony
- Edit My Images
- Yes
So would you need something like a card reader to plug in to an iPad and then load them straight to the cloud ?
My iPad is already full of apps and photos etc so they need to go “through” it rather than “in” it lol
- Messages
- 900
- Name
- Tony
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Or thinking about it my 80D has WiFi so would I send them straight to the cloud ?
You can’t go direct to the cloud, but the 80D should allow you to transfer via WiFi to the iPad. Alternatively you need the Apple Camera Connection Kit suitable for your iPad (third party readers exist but I’ve never found them as reliable as the Apple one).
- Messages
- 6,361
- Name
- Elliott
- Edit My Images
- No
You do not need to upload your images to the cloud unless you choose to use the new Lightroom CC.
Lightroom Classic CC (was Lightroom CC) works exactly like it used to. Images are stored locally.
- Messages
- 9,590
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Or convert to dng and carry on using lr6
- Messages
- 15,711
- Edit My Images
- No
As mentioned above LR6 will still be usefull for sometime to come but as Adobe stated the last 'dot'version 6.13 appears to be the last they will produce....though not 100% clear to me (did I read it anywhere?) bug fixes might persist???
But the one thing Adobe could do is give us LR6 users a parting gift
of unlocking De-Haze for us 
The De-Haze engine is in there as evidenced by the fact that the "Cut through the fog" tool works because the engine is present in the more recent 'dot' releases of v6 so in real terms no skin off of their nose to "easter egg" it and make it 'there'???
But do Adobe know the meaning of a Goodwill Gesture!
But the one thing Adobe could do is give us LR6 users a parting gift
of unlocking De-Haze for us The De-Haze engine is in there as evidenced by the fact that the "Cut through the fog" tool works because the engine is present in the more recent 'dot' releases of v6 so in real terms no skin off of their nose to "easter egg" it and make it 'there'???But do Adobe know the meaning of a Goodwill Gesture!
OP
- Messages
- 11,788
- Name
- Jeremy Moore
- Edit My Images
- No
As mentioned above LR6 will still be usefull for sometime to come but as Adobe stated the last 'dot'version 6.13 appears to be the last they will produce....though not 100% clear to me (did I read it anywhere?) bug fixes might persist???
But the one thing Adobe could do is give us LR6 users a parting gift
But do Adobe know the meaning of a Goodwill Gesture!
There is a way of doing this (Dehaze) quite easily, though I haven't done it myself; for me the big missing feature in LR6 is the ability to set the black and white points in selections rather than be restricted to shadows and highlights.
https://cutthruthefog.wordpress.com/lightroom-6-dehaze/
The chance of a goodwill gesture from Adobe? Less than zero.
- Messages
- 2,675
- Name
- Russell
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Seems to be many who are disgruntled by the way Adobe have gone with there software, I have PS CS6 (works great for still photography), Lightroom 6 (works great for still photography) also have On1, Photomatix, SNS-HDR, Machinary HDR, some Topaz Plugins, Luminosity plugins by Greg Benz (Free updates for life) and over the last couple of days seen that Topaz, On1, Adobe, Aurora and others are all launching updated or new software so there are plenty of other options out there, Adobe is now not the only one out there that produce good software and plenty of FREE trials from software developers who keep there feet on the ground and not up in the cloud!!!!
Russ
Russ
- Messages
- 15,711
- Edit My Images
- No
As mentioned above LR6 will still be usefull for sometime to come but as Adobe stated the last 'dot'version 6.13 appears to be the last they will produce....though not 100% clear to me (did I read it anywhere?) bug fixes might persist???
But the one thing Adobe could do is give us LR6 users a parting gift
But do Adobe know the meaning of a Goodwill Gesture!
Hi Jeremy
Yes, as I say in my middle paragraph/sentence ~ De-Haze can indeed be accessed and I have found it usefull on the few occasions I have tried it
And your posting the link is a heads up for a IMO good addon to LR6 users.In LR I do like the way we can visually control the clipping points (highlight & shadows) with the use of the ALT key hold down.
- Messages
- 9,590
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Beingng a Mac user I use photos for cataloguing photos,making slideshows with music of choice etc,some minor editing plus DXO pro £10 1 off for lens correction and dehaze noise reduction etc plus affinity photo,1 off payment of £20 now £50 for layers etc,
If you use a Mac there are some good options,not sure on Windows,not used it for a few years
If you use a Mac there are some good options,not sure on Windows,not used it for a few years
- Messages
- 15,484
- Name
- Rich
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I did and decided on Lamb Hotpot, tough s*** Adobe just spent the tenner on some nice chops
Lol ... so you can *hack* LR6 to add functionality that you’ve not paid for... and wonder why Adobe want to stop people buying perpetual licences!Yes, as I say in my middle paragraph/sentence ~ De-Haze can indeed be accessed and I have found it usefull on the few occasions I have tried it
In LR I do like the way we can visually control the clipping points (highlight & shadows) with the use of the ALT key hold down.
- Messages
- 15,711
- Edit My Images
- No
Hmmm! a plugin is a hack? There are plenty of plugins and presets AFAIK for for both LR and PS, do they not all make use of the "engine" within LR and PS respectively..........are all of those hacks as well???
A hack I thought was an illegal breaking of a license agreement i.e. downloaded software used with something like a keygen "breaker"!
- Messages
- 15,484
- Name
- Rich
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Something like Magic Lantern is what I class as a hack, not installing a plug in, bit poor that the CC version of LR had Dehaze yet the standalone version didn't.
Another thing that seems to have gone is the discount for students and teachers unless you get the full CC package, used to be on individual products.
Well by definition a hack is anything which circumvents restrictions in software ... in this case the plug in is circumventing the restriction that Adobe made De-haze available ONLY to paid up subscribers of Lightroom CC. Now is it "illegal" ... unlikely you could argue it is illegal. However it is the kind of action which has lead Adobe to dropping stand alone products.
No its no "a bit poor" that stand alone Lightroom didn't have Dehaze. Adobe stated that Lightroom standalone would have certain functionality when it launched the product. It also said that CC would have a continuing improvement and development that Standalone didn't have! To go back to the car analogy ... its like complaining that the radio in you 2015 model can't support Android Car / Apple Play when the one in the new 2017 model does; when the electronics of both radios are the same.
- Messages
- 15,484
- Name
- Rich
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Yes it is
Why would you expect FOR FREE something you hadn't paid for? Did Adobe promise you new functionality? Did not providing Dehaze stop anything working in your copy of Lightroom? No
Perhaps Adobe should have just launched Lightroom 6.1 with the new functionality as a paid for upgrade and dropped support for new cameras in LR6? Would that have made you happier?
D
Deleted member 3428
Guest
Had a few laughs reading this thread at some of the examples of "it is like this being that" lol The only way I see it is once you have all changed over to paying monthly they can then charge what they want for it, bit like sport and pay TV these days. I will keep my standalone version until it serves me no more.
- Messages
- 15,484
- Name
- Rich
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I'm not unhappy, I've got Dehaze
- Messages
- 15,711
- Edit My Images
- No
Right, a tad of history as I recall it!
When De-Haze first appeared there was very quickly information available about how to create a set of presets to use that feature in LR6. Now as I recall presets are a natural and readily used part of the way LR is and can be used officially, I think those De-Haze ones/method were script based......................therefore do you also deem scripted presets a hack/simply a hidden feature/a user accessible functionality???
The Cut Through the Fog was one developers solution to automate the scriptable functioning with a more user friendly interface, hence if scripted presets are AOK how come this level of automation is seen by you as a hack???
Edit ~ @Eloise you used the word circumventing to use the feature being a hack, well as I explain above the De-Haze engine is AFAIK the only such CC feature in the LR engine that is hidden(?) from normal GUI access in PL version but is scriptable so logically not 'circumventing' anything.
I could say that as it was there in LR6 and given away (free to licensed users of LR6
)in one of the (dot)version updates that is no reason for Adobe to stop selling/developing perpetual licence LR.As it is present and functionable in its early iteration in LR6 (they improved it greatly AFAIK in CC but not perpetual license version) why wouldn't Adobe in their infinite wisdom unlock it for the LR6 users who (unless there is a workable alternative one day) are quite likely to go CC route eventually?
Last edited:
- Messages
- 15,711
- Edit My Images
- No
Incidently for those that have gone CC Classic I found this thread over at Lula about a feature called "Range Mask" and being tucked away http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=121116.0
Worth a read and try for anyone here at TP who may not be aware of it............................and could comment on how and under what conditions they have found it usefull?
Worth a read and try for anyone here at TP who may not be aware of it............................and could comment on how and under what conditions they have found it usefull?
- Messages
- 6,361
- Name
- Elliott
- Edit My Images
- No
I have played with the range masking. I've only played with the luminosity masking but it comes in handy when for instance you pull down a grad filter to darken the sky but at the same time darken the mountain, tree, building or anything else that protrudes above the horizon. You can then use the range mask to only apply the grad filter to a certain luminosity range ie whites, brights or highlights, leaving the darker tones untouched and unaffected by the grad. This range masking works with all local adjustments.
The colour masking works the same way by filters by colour or a range of colours instead of luminosity values.
OP
- Messages
- 11,788
- Name
- Jeremy Moore
- Edit My Images
- No
Going back a few versions, one bought the standalone version when it came out or upgraded to it. There was then a process of continuous development and updating, with new features being introduced (in the "dot" releases) between versions -free of charge. Perhaps you don't remember that?
It is more likely that the de-haze tool was built in to LR 6 but Adobe disabled it when they started up the subscription model - just to show us the sort of thing we would be missing........
Last edited:
- Messages
- 15,711
- Edit My Images
- No
Hi Elliott
Thanks for the insight
the more they are developing (no pun intended) LR it is looking more & more like its possibly original intention of being 100% the digital version of the wet darkroom.............I still recall dodging & burning across the enlarger image with my hands and paddles/flags. NB No pixel level stuff needed like in PS?I also found this thread at LuLa about the 'Process Version' changes from PV2012 to PV4 in CCClassic and how one poster feels the shadow noise if handled better??? http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=121095.0
Last edited: