Is Lightroom Classic end-of-life?

[Victoria Bampton]

Lots of people are expressing concerns about Lightroom being "on the way out". I've been mulling it over, and I'd love to get your thoughts on this logic (and to be clear, I don't have inside information in this)

Is Lightroom dying?

Since Wednesday's announcements, one of the main questions on everyone's minds is whether Lightroom (as we know it) is dying.

Adobe says it's not, but they also said they had no plans to remove perpetual licenses too, so can we believe them? I don't know what Adobe is planning, and none of us can foresee the future, but we can consider a little logic...

Firstly, what's causing the concerns?


Adobe released Lightroom CC

Yes, Lightroom now has a little baby brother. But Photoshop's had a baby brother for years without getting killed off, so that doesn't mean much.


They gave away Lightroom's name

That's more telling. They clearly see the new app as the future of Lightroom. But like any newborn baby, its current state gives few clues about how it will turn out when it grows up.


They called 'the old one' Classic

Some say that sounds like it's old and in its way out. Others think it's the dictionary definition of "of recognized and established value" or "traditional". The obvious solution would be to call it Pro, but that would suggest the new baby Lightroom wouldn't be suitable for Pros when it grows up. The fact they avoided that suggests they plan on making the new Lightroom CC suitable for pro workflows in future too. That's reassuring.


Classic didn't get many new features

It's true, it didn't get a long list of features. On the other hand, Lightroom users have been begging for performance improvements and bug fixes for years. They start working on these issues and now we're complaining? And why bother to work on these issues if they're planning to kill it off soon?


Learn from history

I can't foresee the future, although it would be a handy skill. We can, however, learn from what they've done in the past. Let's take Photoshop as an example. They announced that future versions would only be available on subscription, but they kept selling the perpetual license. Once the vast majority of users had moved to subscription, they then killed off perpetual. They've just done the same with Lightroom.


What can we learn from this? Adobe makes some weird decisions at times, but they are good at making money. They don't kill off a profitable part of their business until most customers have moved over to a new offering.


How does that help? Ok, let's assume that they're eventually going to kill off Lightroom Classic. History would suggest they wouldn't do that until they have a viable alternative for the majority of their customers. Not all, but most.


Now let's imagine that alternative-in-waiting is the new baby Lightroom CC app, all grown up. There are currently some major limitations that make it impossible for most users to migrate:

• It's lacking important features. That'll take time to develop, and they're looking to the community to learn which features are most important.
• It requires fast internet. Either the majority of the world needs superfast internet, which would take a long time, or they need some kind of selective sync, or local network sync, or...?
• You don't want some or any of your photos stored in the cloud, either for privacy or space reasons. Ok, selective sync again? Some kind of local storage only switch?

Once they've addressed those issues - and no doubt a few more besides - then potentially Lightroom CC could have tempted most of Lightroom's users, and they could be in a position to kill of Lightroom Classic.


But that couldn't happen overnight, so how long would it take? I don't know, but that same time span also gives other companies time to develop other applications.


My point? Even if we assume that Lightroom is on death row, there's no rush to make a decision about what's next. So many things can change in that time. Lightroom CC may grow up to be even better than Lightroom Classic (they must have learned a few lessons along the way!!) or another company may bring out a new superduper competitor.


I'm not saying that is or isn't going to happen - I don't know the future any more than you do - but even if we look at a worst case scenario of our beloved Lightroom being killed off someday, logically there's no reason to panic anytime soon.

 

[Zenon]

I agree with that. I tried Capture and I liked it. I was going to get it but it didn't blow my socks off for $300. Beta 11 was released so another $100 upgrade pending. I even downloaded it again after getting the plan to be sure.

I found with careful editing in LR I could do as good as Capture for my needs. Sharpening is the most important thing to me. Capture has capture, detail and export sharpening. It also has palette that has clarity and structure. I liked that Capture offers the amount for export sharpening instead if 3 modes LR does. However there is some kind magic going on in LR's export process. Besides if I need crisper I have my own actions in PS for that.

What I noticed is Capture does everything out of the box so it is pretty much ready to export. Not sure how I feel about that. It does a very good job. That is what turned me off from DXO many years ago when I tried it.

The biggest complaint about Adobe it seems is colour being washed out. I have read but not sure if this is accurate but Adobe Standard does so be design. It is up to the user to tweak to taste or create a profile using something like passport. Just changing the profile to the cameras was a simple and effective fix. I wonder how much that effects new people when comparing.

Capture offers subscription so you don't if they drop perpetual licensing as well one day.

 

[Zenon]

Many (including myself) learned that you don't to use cloud storage with the plan which made difference. The new thing is fear that within 5 years or so Adobe will scrap Classic and morph it with CC, not allow local storage and force us to use the cloud to increase it's revenue base. This day and age you have to wonder if there is a little planned disinformation out there.

I can't see that happening but there are some just don't trust Adobe. If it does I don't care as I'll just drop out of the plan if I still feel the same about cloud storage.

 

[Bernard]

C1 has layers, meaning you can do ALL edits locally, including TSL for ex. I don't think we will ever have that in LR.
Martin Evening has written an excellent article comparing C1 and LR in terms of editing (Photoshop user magazine, september 2016) .
Bernard

 

[PhilBurton]

Because photos need post processing, generally - straighten and crop almost all, exposure adjustments on many, white balance often depending on sport and whether the camera has flicker control.

There are many tasks associated with photography one needs to do (and do well) in order to produce good results. Doesn't make them fun.

True, and back in the film days, we did dodging and burning if we did our own printing. I hated the cleanup after an evening of printing. Not to mention having to reload every 36-38 exposures.

Phil

 

[Zenon]

C1 has layers, meaning you can do ALL edits locally, including TSL for ex. I don't think we will ever have that in LR.
Martin Evening has written an excellent article comparing C1 and LR in terms of editing (Photoshop user magazine, september 2016) .
Bernard

Well luckily for me I don't use layers. I can figure a lot out. I get the concept and tried but just could not get into it.

 

[PhilBurton]

Many (including myself) learned that you don't to use cloud storage with the plan which made difference. The new thing is fear that within 5 years or so Adobe will scrap Classic and morph it with CC, not allow local storage and force us to use the cloud to increase it's revenue base. This day and age you have to wonder if there is a little planned disinformation out there.

I can't see that happening but there are some just don't trust Adobe. If it does I don't care as I'll just drop out of the plan if I still feel the same about cloud storage.

I don't think that Adobe is that foolish, but if they were, they would lose a significant share of their base to that competitor or competitors that was willing to invest enough in their own product to present a viable alternative.

 

[Zenon]

I don't think that Adobe is that foolish, but if they were, they would lose a significant share of their base to that competitor or competitors that was willing to invest enough in their own product to present a viable alternative.

I agree. Adobe would be foolish to not leave that option open. They are sure trying and will try to encourage cloud usage.

 

[clee01l]

SLRLounge posted an article about the new PixelMator Pro app and crafted this very descriptive assessment of Adobe's current position. I had to chuckle. "Adobe has played their hand with the latest Creative Cloud update. Instead of the aces they hope photographers thought it would be, it ended up to be nothing better than a pair of jokers."

 

[fsuscotsman]

After listening to all of this, I'm of the opinion that anyone that doesn't take seriously the fact that Adobe doesn't care one whit about the users, especially if we aren't pro photographers. Companies make mistakes all the time, but this is just sheer arrogance. For people like us, this is an Edsel or New Coke, take your pick.

 

[PhilBurton]

After listening to all of this, I'm of the opinion that anyone that doesn't take seriously the fact that Adobe doesn't care one whit about the users, especially if we aren't pro photographers. Companies make mistakes all the time, but this is just sheer arrogance. For people like us, this is an Edsel or New Coke, take your pick.

Or else someone's tragic mis-calculation based on complete lack of understanding of the customer base. Arrogance, or just amateurism?

 

[tspear]

Or else someone's tragic mis-calculation based on complete lack of understanding of the customer base. Arrogance, or just amateurism?

Nah, at Adobe like most companies they tend to hire good people. But from top down there is a specific message. Either a product manager has a vision of where to take the product, and/or it is being driven based on business models which are in theory based on market analysis.
The problem is market based focus can often miss the current customer base.

Tim

Sent from my LG-TP260 using Tapatalk

 

[tspear]

An interesting thread on the performance.

Import - Bug: Classic import process very slow specifically when using larger catalogues

This very likely shows neither the developers nor the testing teams had systems with large catalogs or an upgraded catalog.
Since this issue is appearing for multiple users, it likely is not a one off situation.

So is this just poor testing and development; or not providing adequate resources; or ....

Tim

 

[PhilBurton]

Nah, at Adobe like most companies they tend to hire good people. But from top down there is a specific message. Either a product manager has a vision of where to take the product, and/or it is being driven based on business models which are in theory based on market analysis.
The problem is market based focus can often miss the current customer base.

Tim

Sent from my LG-TP260 using Tapatalk

If the customer base isn't included, then it is not, by accepted definition, a market analysis. What you are describing is "market segmentation" and "market targeting," which is done after market analysis. And the latter is the core issue we have all been upset about.

Phil

 

[tspear]

If the customer base isn't included, then it is not, by accepted definition, a market analysis. What you are describing is "market segmentation" and "market targeting," which is done after market analysis. And the latter is the core issue we have all been upset about.

Phil

Touche.

Tim

 

[jms969]

C1 has layers, meaning you can do ALL edits locally, including TSL for ex. I don't think we will ever have that in LR.
Martin Evening has written an excellent article comparing C1 and LR in terms of editing (Photoshop user magazine, september 2016) .
Bernard

Got a linky?

 

[Zenon]

I would not want it in LR. If I'm doing that type of work it is slow going and I won't be editing 500 files. I open onezies in PS for that. When I edit events and I need advanced stuff (which I really try to avoid) I transfer it to PS, edit and save it. Back in LR I flag the CR2, hide it under the new TIIFF then set it up so the flagged images are not exported.

 

[Bernard]

Got a linky?

Yes : Magazine Photoshop User September 2016 USA: read online, download pdf free

Bernard

 

[jms969]

Yes : Magazine Photoshop User September 2016 USA: read online, download pdf free

Bernard

Thank you very much

 

[PhilBurton]

Yes : Magazine Photoshop User September 2016 USA: read online, download pdf free

Bernard

Were you able to download this magazine without having to provide a credit card number? How?

Phil

 

[Hoggy]

Were you able to download this magazine without having to provide a credit card number? How?

This might be a better link: http://4bcokm12bvu948gi7312gnab.wpe...uploads/2016/Lightroom vs Capture One Pro.pdf

I swear I read this somewhere else - not in a pdf - but I can't find it right now.

 

[Bernard]

Were you able to download this magazine without having to provide a credit card number? How?
Phil

No download, just reading

 

[jerry12953]

Hi,

I'm sure this question has been answered somewhere but it would be really helpful if someone could answer it for me here to save me doing a long search.

I've also tried having a long "chat" with Adobe but I don't think "Selwyn" knew what he was talking about.......

Personally I've no interest in photoshop so the cost of a subscription to LR is out of the question; I'm writing a blog post for the benefit of other people and want to make sure my facts are correct. So here goes -

What happens if you sign up to Classic CC and then after the first year decide not to renew your subscription? Can you go back to LR6 and, assuming you're still using a supported camera model, use it as before?

Many thanks in advance.

 

[Johan Elzenga]

Yes, you can, but of course you will have to use the old catalog, which does not contain anything you did in the last year in Lightroom CC.

 

[jerry12953]

Oh yes, I hadn't thought of that. Neither had "Selwyn"..........

And of course there's nothing like that on the Adobe website for people who are thinking of signing up.

Talk about "short and curlies"

 

[Linwood Ferguson]

What happens if you sign up to Classic CC and then after the first year decide not to renew your subscription?

Yes, you can, but of course you will have to use the old catalog, which does not contain anything you did in the last year in Lightroom CC.

There are lots of subtle issues here, so if you want your blog posting to be well researched, you might want to dive a bit deeper. There's the issue of the catalog as Johan mentions, but you can also use the Classic catalog (i.e. V7 not V6) and not use the Develop feature; in other words your photos are still accessible, you just cannot produce new edits. You can also export the photos afterwards to TIFF and use them in a different product (as well as LR 6). Finally you can write metadata (xmp sidecards) and import them back into LR6 with possibly mixed results, since if you use LR7 features they may not show up properly in LR6. I haven't personally tried the latter, but I THINK that LR6 will just ignore features it does not recognize as opposed to rejecting the Process version 4 XMP data (anyone tried it?).

It's a deep subject; if your blog isn't just a "let me say the same thing again", you might want to spend some time experimenting with the use cases and what works well and what doesn't for those who stop subscriptions. Adobe has done quite a lot to give people a soft landing (in LR CC for example you get a year to download your photos). That doesn't take the sting out of "subscription only" for those who hate the idea of subscriptions, but it does reflect an attempt to mitigate the pain.