Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Adobe Lightroom Q&A => Topic started by: ErikKaffehr on November 25, 2014, 01:16:45 am
-
Adobe doesn't let me install on a case sensitive volume, and doesn't even offer to choose an alternative volume.
No clouds for me.
I have using case sensitive volumes since I had Apple and all applications work except some Adobe stuff. Adobe, how about doing your homework?
Best regards
Erik
-
Nowt to do with Creative Cloud. Lightroom has always required Mac's case insensitive default setup, and last time I looked it was properly documented in the system specs.
-
I have using case sensitive volumes since I had Apple
Why?
Jeremy
-
A possible solution or two (http://hints.macworld.com/article.php?story=20120118103118881).
Also as Jeremy says, why do you use case sensitive volumes? Do you use some obscure software that foolishly requires it?
-
Also as Jeremy says, why do you use case sensitive volumes?
Why does it matter? Good software can, no, should be able to cope with that, and preferably also offer to install to another location than the system drive.
Cheers,
Bart
-
Nowt to do with Creative Cloud. Lightroom has always required Mac's case insensitive default setup, and last time I looked it was properly documented in the system specs.
You mean Macs allow case-sensitive naming? That's another entry on my why-I-won't-get-a-Mac list.
Oh, the pain and grief caused by case-sensitive programming languages (unfortunately: most of them) when two names that ought to be the same are different - or two that really are different confusingly look the same!
-
I'm not sure about Mac OS, but on my Windows 7/8 systems, the Creative Cloud app allows me to change the location of my installed apps:
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/10724484/Screenshot%202014-11-25%2008.11.39.png) (https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/10724484/Screenshot%202014-11-25%2008.11.39.png)
This might be a possible workaround for you, in addition to the other suggestions of tricking the installer.
-
Oh, the pain and grief caused by case-sensitive
the only place for case sensitivity is for authentication
-
You mean Macs allow case-sensitive naming? That's another entry on my why-I-won't-get-a-Mac list.
Oh, the pain and grief caused by case-sensitive programming languages (unfortunately: most of them) when two names that ought to be the same are different - or two that really are different confusingly look the same!
Yes, a hangover from Unix, but it's not the default OSX installation and the user has to deliberately set it up that way - presumably for a good if obscure reason. If Lr were to run under it, Adobe would have to code for all sorts of oddities - eg should you allow ThisFile.nef to exist in the same folder as thisfile.NEF, and how do you then handle the user moving work to a Windows box?
-
Why does it matter? Good software can, no, should be able to cope with that,.....
It matters because a case sensitive volume can lead to problems and is maybe why 'good' software avoids letting itself be installed on it. :P
So what benefits do you accrue from such formatting?
and preferably also offer to install to another location than the system drive.
CC can be installed to a location of your own choosing IIRC.
-
You mean Macs allow case-sensitive naming? That's another entry on my why-I-won't-get-a-Mac list.
Macs allow case-sensitive naming: underneath the prettiness, they're running Unix which has historically had case-sensitive filesystems. However, it's not the default setup and a disk has to be reformatted with that option specifically chosen in order for it to be enabled.
Coincidentally, there has been a discussion on the mailing list of a database application (4th Dimension) that use, in the last week, on exactly this point. 4D won't work on case-sensitive volumes. The consensus among the professional programmers (of whom I am definitely not one) was that the user of a case-sensitive volume was creating a rod for his own back: all pain and no gain.
Jeremy
-
Hi,
I should mention that I am a Unix junkie, since 1984…
Best regards
Erik
Yes, a hangover from Unix, but it's not the default OSX installation and the user has to deliberately set it up that way - presumably for a good if obscure reason. If Lr were to run under it, Adobe would have to code for all sorts of oddities - eg should you allow ThisFile.nef to exist in the same folder as thisfile.NEF, and how do you then handle the user moving work to a Windows box?
-
I wont join either. Your reasons may vary. I will force learning a new application before I join.
-
I hqave a different reason for not "joining".
I use Photoshop CS6 (or, should I say I use about 5% of it) and Lightroom. For as long as CS6 continues to hugely exceed my requirements and Lightroom continues to be available on a perpetual licence, I see no imperative to change to CC.
However, for anyone starting photo-processing from scratch (as many new members of our camera club are), then Adobe CC at £8.98 per month is really the only sane option and I heartily recommend it to them.
-
for anyone starting photo-processing from scratch then Adobe CC at £8.98 per month is really the only sane option
Really ? Elements probably does everything most beginners need without any ongoing financial commitment. Plus there are other cheap editors like Photoline, The Gimp, PhotoPlus, Irfan view, Paint.net, Paint Shop Pro that cost very little or are free.
When you admit you only use 5% of a program it seems odd to recommend it to beginners who are likely to need even fewer facilities.
Let's not mention the intimidating interface and learning curve in becoming proficient with PS.
-
After realizing that the only real benefit CC has for me over CS6 is the more sophisticated sharpening and that I haven't even brought an image into CC from my perpetual license copy of LR in months anyway, I am going to abandon my CC membership....
-
Funny how many have not read the opening post [and its refutation, it seems that its not something special to CC] and just tag along putting up statements they have probably made before
-
Hi,
I may share that view. Unfortunately, some plugins are now available via CC.
Best regards
Erik
I hqave a different reason for not "joining".
I use Photoshop CS6 (or, should I say I use about 5% of it) and Lightroom. For as long as CS6 continues to hugely exceed my requirements and Lightroom continues to be available on a perpetual licence, I see no imperative to change to CC.
However, for anyone starting photo-processing from scratch (as many new members of our camera club are), then Adobe CC at £8.98 per month is really the only sane option and I heartily recommend it to them.
-
Really ? Elements probably does everything most beginners need without any ongoing financial commitment. Plus there are other cheap editors like Photoline, The Gimp, PhotoPlus, Irfan view, Paint.net, Paint Shop Pro that cost very little or are free.
When you admit you only use 5% of a program it seems odd to recommend it to beginners who are likely to need even fewer facilities.
Let's not mention the intimidating interface and learning curve in becoming proficient with PS.
You seem to be obsessed with cost.
But, think about it........
All the power and flexibility of LR and PS for a smidgeon over £2 per week - most of our camera club members probably spend more on petrol coming to our weekly meetings.
But the real reason is that LR is so easy to learn, so intuitive and such a superb workflow management system - and the benefits are much greater if employed from the start of a photographic "career", rather than attempting to convert at a later date. Yes, they may initially only click through to PS when they need layers (that's the only reason that I ever do when, for example, producing a composite photo), but at such low cost, it is worth having that facility available.
-
You seem to be obsessed with cost.
But, think about it........
What do you want to spend your money on ? Continuing to pay for a program you use very little of when you could get the same from a free program ?
Spend the money on something more useful; more/better lenses, accessories or even just funding trips to interesting places to photograph.
Beginners just don't need Photoshop, in fact most advanced photographers don't need Photoshop, they're just used to it.
-
For me the cost of Photoshop CC is no more than I used to spend on Lightroom (I've always updated every release) and Photoshop (I used to upgrade every 2 or 3 releases, when you could do that).
I don't realy like renting software, and I don't much like Adobe - who, as is often the case with mature-to-old companies (> 30 years old) are not very responsive to customers. But I'm not going to let that get in the way of rational self-interest, which is (for me) that CC is a reasonable choice.
-
... in fact most advanced photographers don't need Photoshop, they're just used to it.
+1
There's a lot of truth to that. Armed with Lr and/or the C1 V8, all the majority really need is a 'layers for Lightroom' program of which there are several alternatives, most of which seem to improve with each new release.
A seldom mentioned advantage of CC though is that you can upload your settings, and it's easy to activate /deactivate installations remotely across multiple computers in different locations. Not something you can do with C1. But I agree, few users would really need that.
-
But I'm not going to let that get in the way of rational self-interest, which is that (for me) that CC is a reasonable choice.
And that's why CC survived and will continue to survive the initial outcry, just as long it remains ' a reasonable cost-effective choice'
-
A seldom mentioned advantage of CC though is that you can upload your settings, and it's easy to activate /deactivate installations remotely across multiple computers in different locations. Not something you can do with C1.
Hi,
Not sure about the differences (I don't use CC), but C1 is pretty easy to deactivate and reactivate on-line.
Cheers,
Bart
-
Not sure about the differences (I don't use CC), but C1 is pretty easy to deactivate and reactivate on-line.
Hi Bart,
Yes, but not remotely as in 'I forgot to deactivate my other computer' when you may be on location or travelling. And, yes, I do know that a licence allows for two installations - as I said, few users would need that.
With CC, wherever you are, whatever machine you have access to, download the program, download your settings and you're 'good to go'.
Best,
M
-
Yes, but not remotely as in 'I forgot to deactivate my other computer' when you may be on location or travelling. And, yes, I do know that a licence allows for two installations - as I said, few users would need that.
Ah, I see, remotely deactivate on another computer. Sounds dangerous though ...
Cheers,
Bart
-
What do you want to spend your money on ? ...
Spend the money on something more useful; more/better lenses, accessories or even just funding trips to interesting places to photograph.
Beginners just don't need Photoshop, in fact most advanced photographers don't need Photoshop, they're just used to it.
+1 one more
Totally agree.
I also hate greedy companies that have already made their millions, and then on top of it wanting to lock me into a a RENTAL program that limits my usage. We already rent the phone line for communication. We rent cable lines or satelite feeds for "News/BS" and entertainment. The financial system has already designed obsolesence of cars to less than 10 years, and many people lease. What else are we going to rent? How much resources do we have to use up recycle, and abuse before we realize its meaningless.
You can say "Its only x$" a week, or month all you want. For me its bad for our future, and its bad business.
If you want to help it, you need help. If you don't like it you should be proactive.(although not much activity is required, just don't CC)
I use CS5 with no need to upgrade, although I probably will regardless(to CS6).
-
OK - because I have an artistic temperament (like, hopefully, most photographers), I have a tendency to respond to what is written in chatrooms like this by replying at an emotional level rather than in a more aridly phlegmatic manner.
Instead of saying:
However, for anyone starting photo-processing from scratch (as many new members of our camera club are), then Adobe CC at £8.98 per month is really the only sane option and I heartily recommend it to them.
it might have engendered less hostility if I had phrased it as:
"However, for anyone starting photo-processing from scratch (as many new members of our camera club are), then Adobe CC at £8.98 per month is an option which makes a lot of sense and I heartily recommend it to them."
I really should not cast doubts upon the sanity of anyone who disagrees. Apologies for any offence caused.
-
+1 one more
Totally agree.
I also hate greedy companies that have already made their millions, and then on top of it wanting to lock me into a a RENTAL program that limits my usage. We already rent the phone line for communication. We rent cable lines or satelite feeds for "News/BS" and entertainment. The financial system has already designed obsolesence of cars to less than 10 years, and many people lease. What else are we going to rent? How much resources do we have to use up recycle, and abuse before we realize its meaningless.
You can say "Its only x$" a week, or month all you want. For me its bad for our future, and its bad business.
If you want to help it, you need help. If you don't like it you should be proactive.(although not much activity is required, just don't CC)
I use CS5 with no need to upgrade, although I probably will regardless(to CS6).
you shall be happy that you do not pay per processed bytes in PS... like with some cell plans you pay per data transferred... but I am sure that will come, want to click some menu item in PS ? $0.01 per 1000 clicks ;D
-
A seldom mentioned advantage of CC though is that you can upload your settings, and it's easy to activate /deactivate installations remotely across multiple computers in different locations. Not something you can do with C1. But I agree, few users would really need that.
that can as well be done w/ perpetual license... the code, you see, is not in the cloud, it is on your computer