bayernfan
Well-known
A legal battle. If you paid money for a non-subscription software, there should be absolutely no reason you cannot use it indefinitely.
krötenblender
Well-known
I think, the technical preconditions to get that far, are already totally offtopic to the initial question of the thread and its last two words: „without problems“
However: so you propose to sue a multi-billion SW-company with more lawyers than I know people at all with a claim, that you used a hacked or tricked installer to install an outdated software on an officially unsupported platform (as probably stated in the license agreement, that you agreed to...) and demand that they have to make that work for you?
Good luck with that...
Most of the technical solutions in this thread already miss the preconditions of the OP, but this one by far. I really don‘t want to defend Adobes subscription model and I stopped using their SW because of that some time ago and I‘m very happy with that decision. BUT for the technically inexperienced „just want to use that program“-type of user, all that is much worse than just to pay Adobe-Tax for the next years.
Yes. Would be simple to confirm if this works or not. Happy to test it, if anyone wants to send me the installer.
bayernfan
Well-known
Yes. Would be simple to confirm if this works or not. Happy to test it, if anyone wants to send me the installer.
edit: here is the installer:
http://prdl-download.adobe.com/Ligh...63AE8E620E/1552642986882/Lightroom_6_LS11.dmg
the link is from this page:
https://helpx.adobe.com/download-install/kb/creative-cloud-previous-version-apps-download.html
bayernfan
Well-known
No, what I am saying is that if down the road one decides to reinstall Lightroom 6.14 on the OS for which it is intended, there should be nothing preventing it. That is, Adobe should never be able to pull the plug on activation (preventing use of software), claiming the software is no longer supported.
I thought this was the potential scenario you were suggesting. It seems you were actually suggesting that Adobe may have (or may create) a method for detecting when software is running on an unsupported OS (via authentication) to prevent the use of it. I think this would be a dick move on Adobe's part.
jarski
Veteran
does Adobe still sell non-sub version of Lightroom (cannot follow their product naming, is LR "Classic" same as former 6.x)?
if they still sell it and it doesn't work in new OS, would be pretty odd.
dourbalistar
Buy more film
B&H still sells it, but you have to have a US address to activate:
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/prod..._65237578_photoshop_lightroom_6_download.html
I'm actually in a similar boat, running LR 6.4 on Mojave 10.14.5. I may eventually bite the bullet and subscribe, but I'll ride this boat until it sinks. Or until it reaches Catalina Island, or something like that.
I'll try this out later today...
Godfrey
somewhat colored
It requires your machine talk to their servers on a regular basis to vet and authenticate, and there's no guarantee that the rendering qualities from one revision to the next, remain the same. Remember that non-destructive, parametrized raw rendering is an interpretive process ... as the process is upgraded there's no way to assert that it will always produce the same results.
I don't like such things. I also don't like paying every month for something on a continuous, ongoing basis. I do it when I have to ... I don't have to in this case unless I value their software more than others that do the same job.
Never mind that there have been some interesting reported inconsistencies in the operation of the varies different Lightroom flavors that have surfaced since the subscription model was created. My original interest in LR was that it was simple, did most of what I needed, and was focused on that without all the complexities of a bazillion different processing add-one, plug ins, and versions that permitted different capabilities, etc. Those qualities of the LR environment seem to have gone by the wayside.
G
Ted Striker
Well-known
B&H still sells it, but you have to have a US address to activate:
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/prod..._65237578_photoshop_lightroom_6_download.html
I'm actually in a similar boat, running LR 6.4 on Mojave 10.14.5. I may eventually bite the bullet and subscribe, but I'll ride this boat until it sinks. Or until it reaches Catalina Island, or something like that.
I'm still running LR 5. I wonder if upgrading to LR6 will buy me anymore time with the lifetime license format.
back alley
IMAGES
does this have any impact on the owner of photoshop elements 19?
Godfrey
somewhat colored
I can't recall the details differences between LR 5 and LR 6, but I know I need LR 6.1x for Leica CL raw compatibility. (Earlier versions will open the files but the Adobe Standard camera calibration profile isn't there and the embedded profile is pretty bad, IMO.)
Again, I don't know what LR 6.4 or 6.7 might be ... they're not the same as what Adobe says is the final LR 6.14 perpetual license version, which is what I'm running. The wall in front of us on macOS Catalina is full 64-bit compatibility, and I know 6.14 is missing some of that in some piece or another.
If you're running pre-Catalina macOS, I can't see as it's a bad idea to get to the final perpetual license version.
G
bayernfan
Well-known
I appreciate it and look forward to your findings.
571514m3
Established
How far can I update OSX and still run LR6.7 without problems?
My original version was LR5, bundled with the camera. My licence code is a 6*4digit=24digit code and I did have to register with Adobe. I upgraded to 6 when that came out. Upgrade was 6.7 for some reason. Only when asking the original question did I realise that 6.14 is the latest version. Adobe website has a link to download this lates. I did that and it worked a charm. Also updated to Mojave. All is working fine. To be honest, it seems that 6.14 is the same as 6.7, but then I only use one camera and maybe it refers to compatibility as G said. Now I still have to download a boot version of Mojave on a memory stick as a safeguard. And yes, I use time machine back ups. I don't really know what I'm doing just following instructions ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
My original version was LR5, bundled with the camera. My licence code is a 6*4digit=24digit code and I did have to register with Adobe. I upgraded to 6 when that came out. Upgrade was 6.7 for some reason. Only when asking the original question did I realise that 6.14 is the latest version. Adobe website has a link to download this lates. I did that and it worked a charm. Also updated to Mojave. All is working fine. To be honest, it seems that 6.14 is the same as 6.7, but then I only use one camera and maybe it refers to compatibility as G said. Now I still have to download a boot version of Mojave on a memory stick as a safeguard. And yes, I use time machine back ups. I don't really know what I'm doing just following instructions ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
jarski
Veteran
been using Catalina now for few days. I had Lightroom installation ready, before doing the OS upgrade. seems to be running fine except Map and Web modules (rarely used those so no biggie personally).
am planning to gradually phase out LR and find replacement. its the big catalog that needs attention, so it will be usable also in post-LR days.
am planning to gradually phase out LR and find replacement. its the big catalog that needs attention, so it will be usable also in post-LR days.
krötenblender
Well-known
Map is the one thing, that I was missing, when I left LR for Capture One. Doesn‘t it work at all anymore?
That also was my biggest concern, that I had, when I switched to C1. But C1 imported my catalogs perfectly with tens of thousands of pictures, all the keywords and changed metadata were kept, as far as I concerned.
I even wrote my own LR metadata exporter script, but never needed it, because I was just fine. Of course, the image manipulations change a little, because Adobe implementation of clarity, for example, is unique and other programs can only try to come near. But it was good enough and sometimes even better in C1. Simple things like crop/rotate/... are the same, of course.
So, don‘t worry too much about your catalogs.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
The backend SPI for the Map module changed some time back due to a change at Adobe, and Adobe will not update Lightroom 6 perpetual license to be compatible. I've disabled the module in my configuration long since.
G
krötenblender
Well-known
Thats sad. I guess I have to make my own then. I liked to have images overlays with some maps in my travel-blogs. And the Map module was easy to use when assigning and synchronizing GPS-data.
Ted Striker
Well-known
Just another reason to never support Adobe. A more cretinous organization is hard to imagine.
I sure wish Apple had the stones to stick with Aperture. Sigh.....
Godfrey
somewhat colored
I have a different attitude towards this. It's just obvious to me from what Adobe is doing with their business that they don't want me as their customer, that's all. They're focused on where they make money ... full time shops that use their software commercially and constantly. That doesn't describe me. Hobbyists and part-time-fine-art-photographers they're not really all that interested in far as I can see.
Similarly with respect to Apple: They stepped away from Aperture and iPhoto in order to focus development efforts on Photos and its ecosystem of functionality across all their OS platforms (macOS, iOS, and now iPadOS). As time goes on, more and more functionality is being put into Photos, both management and editing -wise, and it's becoming a pretty good multi-platform solution integrated across the board on all their systems. Aperture really addressed only a smallish percentage of their audience and was a big development and support cost for ongoing maintenance. Photos' audience is literally the space of all Apple users, at some level or another. So they went the way of developing the broader audience's tools and nixed the pro app ... I suspect mostly because although they now have a lot of money, there simply aren't infinite numbers of the kind of people that can 'do the right thing' with respect to these development projects.
Photos coupled with RAW Power for the higher end processing capabilities seems a pretty good system nowadays. I've taken pains to be sure that MOST of my original image library can be moved from one toolset to another with minimum pain, and my finished image library is just that: finished and can be managed/used by anything that can handle industry standard TIFF and JPEG files with IPTC data embedded in them.
I'll likely experiment with Catalina next week, when I have a little more time.
G