Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
I was a big fan of ACSee Pro until I got my Mac. The version they do for windows pcs is excellent ... sadly not so their Mac version.
Lightroom 6
- Thread starter xavoy
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 76
- Views 14K
brbo
Well-known
A year ago. Lightroom doesn't need any license servers to work. You don't need a subscription and you still can do just about anything in Lightroom except editing (Develop and Map module).
So, your experience and that of others is obviously different. Can you provide a link to back that up. Thanks!
willie_901
Veteran
I apologize for returning the the OP's discussion regarding the new feature where the GPU can be used to improve performance.
There will be contradictory reports the GPU feature has little effect or makes a huge improvement. The benefit depend greatly on the capability of computer's GPU.
There will be contradictory reports the GPU feature has little effect or makes a huge improvement. The benefit depend greatly on the capability of computer's GPU.
willie_901
Veteran
Please don't interrupt the stream of FUD re: LR CC with factual information.
To save time conspiracy advocates may cut and paste the following text.
Well Adobe may have extended LR stand alone for LR 6, but just wait... Adobe will make LR 7 subscription only. I'm done with Adobe.
Note: in future years a simple increment of the numbers 6 and 7 means this text can be used every time a new LR version is released.
Michel154
Established
i have switched to Capture one last year it was easy to migrate my lightroom catalog
all rating and most adjustments imported as well
but it is expensive
it also helped me weed out lots of photos sort of spring cleaning ...
i like that the starting file is much nicer that in lightroom which tends to be really flat
but i really miss the x key for rejects in capture one i rate my rejects as 1 star with is a little illogical
over all i am really happy with my decision
all rating and most adjustments imported as well
but it is expensive
it also helped me weed out lots of photos sort of spring cleaning ...
i like that the starting file is much nicer that in lightroom which tends to be really flat
but i really miss the x key for rejects in capture one i rate my rejects as 1 star with is a little illogical
over all i am really happy with my decision
Duane Pandorf
Well-known
Love the new performance. Love the new gradient brush feature. Love the new Auto Crop/Constrain Crop Feature. Love the new add to Collections feature during Import. Oh yea, already said love the new GPU improved speed performance.
I don't often do bracketed exposures but now it will be easier than ever than having to rely on a plugin to merge files. Plus it makes a DNG RAW file vice an 8 bit jpg like the other programs create. Same for the Panorama.
As to the debate between subscription or outright buying a license, I like having the latest update when it becomes available.
I don't often do bracketed exposures but now it will be easier than ever than having to rely on a plugin to merge files. Plus it makes a DNG RAW file vice an 8 bit jpg like the other programs create. Same for the Panorama.
As to the debate between subscription or outright buying a license, I like having the latest update when it becomes available.
Dwig
Well-known
Agreed, they have made it extremely hard to find anything about Lr6 (perpetual license) rather than Lr/CC. You can't even see the price without attempting to purchase as copy from their Store, and then it default to the Full version and finding the switch to select the Upgrade version is not obvious.
You quality for the Upgrade price if you own ANY previous version of Lr, all the way back to v1.0.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
I don't see the problem. I found the full purchase, perpetual license version of the update in five seconds. It took me two minutes in a chat with Adobe Customer Service to locate the upgrade version, pay for it, and start the download. If I'd not been in a rush, I'd have found it by myself in a few more minutes.
I stick with the perpetual license because I don't need Photoshop or Creative Cloud services at the present time. If I did, I'd buy the subscription. It works well; they've done a good job of making it affordable IMO. 12 months at $10 a month is a lot less than the cost of Photoshop CS6 with perpetual license; it's not even the cost of a perpetual license for LR.
If I stopped using LR tomorrow, it wouldn't matter at all. All the IPTC metadata I've input over the past eight years is written to the original files and accessible to any useful image processing app that knows about IPTC and EXIF data; all my finished, rendered work is output to full resolution, 16-bit per component TIFF files for archiving. The image files are all on my storage devices in the directory structures I defined for them. What's in the LR catalog that I'd lose are virtual copies and the parametric editing specifics/history, which would be of no use in another application anyway. But I like and use LR extensively, I have no interest in moving to another image processing workflow.
Regardless, I've had just a little time to explore LR6 so far. What I see is very very good: improved rendering speed, slicker control operation, much faster import and export, etc.
Further than that I haven't had time to explore yet. But it seems a worthwhile upgrade.
G
I stick with the perpetual license because I don't need Photoshop or Creative Cloud services at the present time. If I did, I'd buy the subscription. It works well; they've done a good job of making it affordable IMO. 12 months at $10 a month is a lot less than the cost of Photoshop CS6 with perpetual license; it's not even the cost of a perpetual license for LR.
If I stopped using LR tomorrow, it wouldn't matter at all. All the IPTC metadata I've input over the past eight years is written to the original files and accessible to any useful image processing app that knows about IPTC and EXIF data; all my finished, rendered work is output to full resolution, 16-bit per component TIFF files for archiving. The image files are all on my storage devices in the directory structures I defined for them. What's in the LR catalog that I'd lose are virtual copies and the parametric editing specifics/history, which would be of no use in another application anyway. But I like and use LR extensively, I have no interest in moving to another image processing workflow.
Regardless, I've had just a little time to explore LR6 so far. What I see is very very good: improved rendering speed, slicker control operation, much faster import and export, etc.
Further than that I haven't had time to explore yet. But it seems a worthwhile upgrade.
G
Tati
Established
I was fortunate to download Lr 6 early this morning without problem. It is working. Will take a few weeks to see about problems.
One bug so far. On a second monitor in loupe mode clicking to enlarge works, but clicking again to fit into window does nothing most of the time. It does work fine on the laptop screen.
The argument about renting/subscription and buying continues. I must admit. I didn't like the idea of subscription at all. Still. When the price for photoshop + lightroom was reduced to 12.29 euros a month I was convinced to try for one year.
I was certain the price would go up and I'd cancel, but it wasn't the case. About two months ago the price actually went down here. It's now 11.99 euros a month. So, I renewed for a second year.
Ever wary, I do have Ps CS6 lying in wait. I have Lightroom 4 and am considering buying the Lr 6 upgrade for 79 as a 'just in case' measure. Maybe in a few months. Gives me an out if adobe does something wonky with Lightroom 7, etc.
I guess I just don't trust Adobe anymore.
But for now Lr 6 seems good. I've been using Photoshop since the early 1990's so I'm not eager to learn new software. So it goes.
One bug so far. On a second monitor in loupe mode clicking to enlarge works, but clicking again to fit into window does nothing most of the time. It does work fine on the laptop screen.
The argument about renting/subscription and buying continues. I must admit. I didn't like the idea of subscription at all. Still. When the price for photoshop + lightroom was reduced to 12.29 euros a month I was convinced to try for one year.
I was certain the price would go up and I'd cancel, but it wasn't the case. About two months ago the price actually went down here. It's now 11.99 euros a month. So, I renewed for a second year.
Ever wary, I do have Ps CS6 lying in wait. I have Lightroom 4 and am considering buying the Lr 6 upgrade for 79 as a 'just in case' measure. Maybe in a few months. Gives me an out if adobe does something wonky with Lightroom 7, etc.
I guess I just don't trust Adobe anymore.
But for now Lr 6 seems good. I've been using Photoshop since the early 1990's so I'm not eager to learn new software. So it goes.
David_Manning
Well-known
I'll probably switch over to Lightroom when Aperture quits working. It still open and handles all my current cameras' RAW files, so I assume it'll be when Apple updates the OS and leaves Aperture unable to open.
I prefer the uncluttered interface of Aperture, but I'm slowly coming to terms with the idea of migrating to the Adobe product. I have PS6, so it shouldn't be a huge cultural change.
I prefer the uncluttered interface of Aperture, but I'm slowly coming to terms with the idea of migrating to the Adobe product. I have PS6, so it shouldn't be a huge cultural change.
Tejasican
Well-known
Just in case someone has this issue, I installed the update this morning and then all it would do is flash the splash screen and die. After some digging found that if I log out of the service and back in (quitting is not enough) it works fine. I am using OS X Yosemite btw.
Matus
Well-known
Just upgraded to Lightroom 6 minutes ago - no problems doing so (in Germany). That "Adobe ID" is nothing more than a registration at online shop.
Should Adobe make the next version subscription only I will keep using the version 6 until it works for me (I still use Photoshop CS3 when I need to do certain stuff and it is all fine) and start at that point looking for alternatives. I only hope they will get more mature until then.
Should Adobe make the next version subscription only I will keep using the version 6 until it works for me (I still use Photoshop CS3 when I need to do certain stuff and it is all fine) and start at that point looking for alternatives. I only hope they will get more mature until then.
JP Owens
Well-known
Creative Cloud is seemless and a genuine bargain. It is also the future of software distribution. Kicking against the traces of the 21st Century may be noble, but it is genuinely a lost cause.
johannielscom
Snorting silver salts
For starters, you can only use it with a credit card. Something many private people in Europe don't own, and when your business is too small aren't eligible for a business credit card either. No means to pay by bank transfer or PayPal or whathaveyou.
I tried to inquire about alternate payment options in a phone call, my call to a Dutch number was forwarded to a US-located call center that didn't give a rat's *ss about my troubles. Very impolite.
No subscription for me, I get by with an older PS3 and a purchased LR5. No Illustrator or InDesign either but I work at a friends place whenever I need them.
Their loss actually, I'm doing fine with ignoring Adobe and all their mails go to the bin fully automated😎
xavoy
Established
hahaha 🙂 Ta. And yep, agreed, it will depend on your system.
But this brings me to my reason why I DON'T want CC. I had a setup that worked with Lightroom 5.4. 5.5 broke it. 5.6 broke it. The latest version wasn't fixed (on my system) again till 5.7 so I was back on 5.4 until then. How does CC work when you want to install an older version?
I don't want an update every few days. Windows does this already, and it breaks more things than it fixes. (Actually, outside of virus definitions, I don't think it's ever fixed something that was broken, and continually breaks things that weren't). Why would I want that with the one piece of software I use most and rely on? I want to open it up, know that it is going to work, know what is what and how it will respond to my photos.
I'm fairly certain there has been tweaks to the exposure slider in 6.0. (from 5.7) I can't quite put my finger on it, it's not better or worse, but it's just not responding in quite the same way, especially with extreme adjustments. I don't want to be second guessing the software every time I use it. I just want to get ish done. So I don't want CC.
Thankfully Adobe continues to humour me, for now. So, for now, I'll keep humuoring them with money for upgrades. When they force me onto CC, I'll jump ship.
jarski
Veteran
Yes bright new future. Spending money has been made seamless. When my camera refuses to take a photo and asks a credit card instead, its been made entirely seamless.
brbo
Well-known
CC doesn't update apps automagically. YOU are in control of updates. You did the update and it broke something? You can go back with CC.
My wallet doesn't have a luxury to make any statements about how fast (or seamless) the world should be moving forward. If I now have an option to monthly pay for software (in a span of lets say 10 years) rather than up front and still come up with less cash spent... I'll take it.
lawrence
Veteran
I just upgraded to LR6 and it's using my ancient Quadro FX 380/PCIe/SSE2 GPU (Edit | Preferences | Performance). Nice, however I get the feeling that the next upgrade will be subscription only. I have no particular objection to subscriptions for software that I will definitely update regularly but I like to have the choice. If I decide to stick with an earlier version I don't see why I should pay for upgrades that I don't use.
mani
Well-known
Ironically the (generally unpopular) subscription model has left the field much more open for Photoshop competitors: right now on Mac there’s Pixelmator, PhotoLine, Acorn, Sketch, Affinity Photo (in beta) and a few others. All of them promise to keep the standalone model for future updates. And many of them have all the features that 90% of photographers would need for a fraction of the price of Photoshop.
Where I work we’ve abandoned the entire Adobe system - we actually develop software as an online service, so programs like Sketch are actually a better fit for our needs.
Adobe are keeping the subscription price low at the moment in order to strangle the emerging flora of competitors: as soon as they’ve re-established their old near-monopoly on digital imaging then the price can be ‘adjusted’ whichever way they want.
The whole model is based on their being able to turn their continual cashflow up or down depending not on new (and hopefully useful) features, but on market conditions. Unlike the old model they don’t even need to innovate anymore - if sufficient numbers of people are tied to their subscription model then all they need to do is increment the monthly price.
And last year there were number of occasions when Adobe’s licensing servers had problems that left CC customers with applications that couldn’t be started - sometimes for several days. That could be make or break if you’re working for a client on a tight deadline.
For some people with variable incomes, the whole subscription model can get them into trouble when their future income isn’t guaranteed. It’s easier to make an informed decision about your current circumstances if you need to make a one-off purchase. If you can’t afford the next upgrade then that’s fine - you still have a functioning program that you can keep using. That’s not true with subscriptions that roll for ever.
There are obviously many cases where subscription makes more sense to some people. But if they think it’s better financially for all end-users, then you’d have to wonder why Adobe are so desperate to force everyone into the new system?
Where I work we’ve abandoned the entire Adobe system - we actually develop software as an online service, so programs like Sketch are actually a better fit for our needs.
Adobe are keeping the subscription price low at the moment in order to strangle the emerging flora of competitors: as soon as they’ve re-established their old near-monopoly on digital imaging then the price can be ‘adjusted’ whichever way they want.
The whole model is based on their being able to turn their continual cashflow up or down depending not on new (and hopefully useful) features, but on market conditions. Unlike the old model they don’t even need to innovate anymore - if sufficient numbers of people are tied to their subscription model then all they need to do is increment the monthly price.
And last year there were number of occasions when Adobe’s licensing servers had problems that left CC customers with applications that couldn’t be started - sometimes for several days. That could be make or break if you’re working for a client on a tight deadline.
For some people with variable incomes, the whole subscription model can get them into trouble when their future income isn’t guaranteed. It’s easier to make an informed decision about your current circumstances if you need to make a one-off purchase. If you can’t afford the next upgrade then that’s fine - you still have a functioning program that you can keep using. That’s not true with subscriptions that roll for ever.
There are obviously many cases where subscription makes more sense to some people. But if they think it’s better financially for all end-users, then you’d have to wonder why Adobe are so desperate to force everyone into the new system?
mani
Well-known
1. I have no idea why you are reacting so angrily in this thread?
2. You have absolutely no idea what your CC subscription will cost you over the next ten years.
Similar threads
- AndyCapp
- Photo Software
