Is Lightroom dead?

Is Lightroom Dead?

  • Yes, Adobe can't make enough money from a bunch of old shutterbugs...

    Votes: 3 16.7%

  • No, Adobe will keep supporting us and continue to bring us new releases...

    Votes: 5 27.8%

  • Calm down rookie, it's only been a few years, they'll get around to us eventually...

    Votes: 10 55.6%
  • Total voters
    18
Status
Not open for further replies.
1361

1361

Member
Joined
Sep 5, 2012
Messages
34
Location
Northern California
Lightroom Experience
Beginner
Lightroom Version
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...
 
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.
 
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...
Click to expand...
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
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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!
 
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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
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.
Click to expand...
That is our choice. By the way that's my choice. However Adobe does give us a choice.

Phil
 
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.
Click to expand...
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:confused:.
 
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!
Click to expand...

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

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.
 
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.
 
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.
Click to expand...

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
 
Gnits said:
with the exception of Photoshop and DeHaze
Click to expand...

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
 
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
 
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.
Click to expand...
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"...
 
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"...
Click to expand...

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.
 
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.
 
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.
Click to expand...

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
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top