Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Adobe Lightroom Q&A => Topic started by: davidgp on October 18, 2017, 09:25:41 am
-
Hi,
So, Adobe is busy announced their new products, between them Lightroom CC, Lightroom Classic:
https://www.lightroomqueen.com/whats-new-lightroom-classic-october-2017-70/
https://www.lightroomqueen.com/lightroom-cc-vs-classic-features/
https://www.lightroomqueen.com/the-future-of-lightroom/
https://www.lightroomqueen.com/lightroom-cc-1-0-released/
https://www.lightroomqueen.com/end-of-perpetual-lightroom-licenses/
https://blogs.adobe.com/photoshop/2017/10/introducing-lightroom-cc-lightroom-classic-cc-and-more.html
No more standalone license, only subscription now.
Regards,
David
-
Thanks David - don't know why, but I'm signed-up and haven't received this yet. Anyhow, I followed your links and was very pleased to read about the new masking features; assuming it will work well I think this one addition to the toolset is worth the upgrade. I think readers should pay particular attention to what she says about catalog performance - it's fair warning to do a test run before committing one's full operating catalog to version 7. It's not reversible. I was disappointed not to see anything about the minimum standards of the computing environment needed to use this version efficiently. I posted a comment asking about that.
-
Thanks David - don't know why, but I'm signed-up and haven't received this yet. Anyhow, I followed your links and was very pleased to read about the new masking features; assuming it will work well I think this one addition to the toolset is worth the upgrade. I think readers should pay particular attention to what she says about catalog performance - it's fair warning to do a test run before committing one's full operating catalog to version 7. It's not reversible. I was disappointed not to see anything about the minimum standards of the computing environment needed to use this version efficiently. I posted a comment asking about that.
I'm not at home, so I can not see if the update already appears in the Adobe CC app, but if it is there, does anybody knows if it keeps both versions of Lightroom, 6 and 7? it will be more relaxing in that way to check how it performs the new version with a copy of your main catalogue.
-
I'm not at home, so I can not see if the update already appears in the Adobe CC app, but if it is there, does anybody knows if it keeps both versions of Lightroom, 6 and 7? it will be more relaxing in that way to check how it performs the new version with a copy of your main catalogue.
Yes, it does. Though 7 is officially known as "Classic".
You have to watch out if you use LR Mobile in a big way. If you think you may want to go back to 6 (you won't) switch it off in 6 before upgrading, because 7 "Classic" will assume you want to switch your synced catalogue to the upgraded file. But that's a small detail.
-
Yes, it does. Though 7 is officially known as "Classic".
You have to watch out if you use LR Mobile in a big way. If you think you may want to go back to 6 (you won't) switch it off in 6 before upgrading, because 7 "Classic" will assume you want to switch your synced catalogue to the upgraded file. But that's a small detail.
No, my idea is to go directly to classic, I barely use mobile version of Lightroom. My comment was more in line of the comment of Mark that says one needs to be careful converting the catalogue and having performance problems after it using LR7.
-
Then you are fine. Just keep your 6 catalogue backup, as I am sure you would do.
-
While my inclination is to stick with the classic CC rather than CC (aside, I don’t think this is a very good naming scheme) largely due to my Library size and workflow, there seems to be a lot of deal-breakers in this list:
https://www.lightroomqueen.com/lightroom-cc-vs-classic-features
In particular, things that stand out (for my use) include:
Greatly reduced export options including only sRGB JPEG with limited output sharpening :o (or original)
No tone curve in Develop
Merge to panorama and HDR are missing?
No soft proofing and no Print >:(
Limited zoom and comparison modes
Can’t use a second screen mode
Can’t paste settings across multiple photo’s (bulk)
No Smart Collections!
No virtual copies
No History?!
plus an assortment of other issues, big and small. I’m sure the CC version will evolve over time, but unless you need some of (1TB max or pay more - up to $100/month for 10TB) your files stored in the web, I don’t see much of an advantage vs “Classic”
On a lighter note, I’m curious to try the new Colour Range/Luminance Masks features, rather than going out to Photoshop. :)
Mike
-
What about larger file support ? PSB support ?
Gesendet von iPhone mit Tapatalk
-
Are we limited to the number of Lightroom CC windows downloads? I'd like to add this to 3-4 PCs but want to be sure I'm not exceeding the license terms. Thanks.
-
Are we limited to the number of Lightroom CC windows downloads? I'd like to add this to 3-4 PCs but want to be sure I'm not exceeding the license terms. Thanks.
What do you mean by Lightroom CC? Do you mean the new PC/Mac app that Adobe have called "Lightroom CC" or the Lightroom that's been around for 10 years that they are now calling "Lightroom Classic", which is two installations?
-
The new Lightroom CC version. I'm assuming that the classic version is limited to two copies. I've downloaded the Adobe Installer but have not yet installed Lightroom CC. It's not appearing on this list but I'm assuming that's because I first need to update the classic version. I won't have a chance to do that for several more hours, when I return to my home base PC.
-
Several hours, or try logging in and out of the CC App.
I am not sure about LR CC. I would bet there's the same 2 computer limit.
-
I'm seeing significant performance improvements in both library and develop. No apparent performance improvement to image rendering in the import module. Hope that's on the top of the list to fix.
I really like the range masking tool.
-
Tried it on OS X Sierra. Works fine, speedier, no issues. Did not try Book and Map modules as I have no interest in those.
-
Are we limited to the number of Lightroom CC windows downloads? I'd like to add this to 3-4 PCs but want to be sure I'm not exceeding the license terms. Thanks.
The 2 computer limit applies to RUNNING the program; you can have it installed on more machines, as I do, nd fly your licenses around as needed.
-
I'm so confused by this. Do I need two lightrooms on my computer now? Do the two lightrooms work together??
-
I'm so confused by this. Do I need two lightrooms on my computer now? Do the two lightrooms work together??
You don't need both Lightroom "Classic" and the new Lightroom CC. Only to play.
-
I'm so confused by this. Do I need two lightrooms on my computer now? Do the two lightrooms work together??
This might help:
Lightroom CC or Lightroom Classic CC - Which Workflow is Best for You
https://youtu.be/eMSNcM7C0UE
-
This might help:
Lightroom CC or Lightroom Classic CC - Which Workflow is Best for You
https://youtu.be/eMSNcM7C0UE
Thanks! That did help.
-
The LR product manager Tom Hogarty is Here Answering Your Questions on Lightroom CC, Lightroom Classic CC and More (http://blogs.adobe.com/lightroomjournal/2017/10/answering-your-questions-on-lightroom-cc-lightroom-classic-cc-and-more.html)
-
The LR product manager Tom Hogarty is Here Answering Your Questions on Lightroom CC, Lightroom Classic CC and More (http://blogs.adobe.com/lightroomjournal/2017/10/answering-your-questions-on-lightroom-cc-lightroom-classic-cc-and-more.html)
I'm sorry I'm being so dense about all this. Can I use both lightroom classic and lightroom cc?
-
The LR product manager Tom Hogarty is Here Answering Your Questions on Lightroom CC, Lightroom Classic CC and More (http://blogs.adobe.com/lightroomjournal/2017/10/answering-your-questions-on-lightroom-cc-lightroom-classic-cc-and-more.html)
Great Orwellian response, "Why did you abandon the Lightroom standalone version?
TH: Customers are overwhelmingly choosing the Creative Cloud Photography plan as the preferred way to get access to Lightroom. We’re aligning our investment with the direction our customers have signaled over the last several years."
Of course they did because Adobe rolled out new features to the subscription model rather than the stand alone one. Maybe this is what "indefinitely" really means.
-
Great Orwellian response, "Why did you abandon the Lightroom standalone version?
TH: Customers are overwhelmingly choosing the Creative Cloud Photography plan as the preferred way to get access to Lightroom. We’re aligning our investment with the direction our customers have signaled over the last several years."
Of course they did because Adobe rolled out new features to the subscription model rather than the stand alone one. Maybe this is what "indefinitely" really means.
Sure - their objective is to move everything into the subscription plan so they are engineering the incentives and customer responses accordingly; whether this Orwellian or Pavlovian, same deal. And whether one likes the purpose or not, with the market power they have the strategy kind of makes sense for them, don't you think?
Of course they are taking a business risk on the customer backlash and there is a fair bit of it, but I would guess still a very small fraction of their revenue base. Huge numbers would need to desert them en masse before they would feel a hit, and I kind of think this is not likely to happen, unless they stop providing value-added over the next few years while competitors do.
-
Sure - their objective is to move everything into the subscription plan so they are engineering the incentives and customer responses accordingly; whether this Orwellian or Pavlovian, same deal. And whether one likes the purpose or not, with the market power they have the strategy kind of makes sense for them, don't you think?
Of course they are taking a business risk on the customer backlash and there is a fair bit of it, but I would guess still a very small fraction of their revenue base. Huge numbers would need to desert them en masse before they would feel a hit, and I kind of think this is not likely to happen, unless they stop providing value-added over the next few years while competitors do.
Of course it is a small % of their overall revenue. Had it been a critical part, one would have seen much more effort put into LR updates than has been seen. I mentioned this yesterday, Adobe's big bucks come in from the sales of the whole creative suite of programs of which LR is just a very small part (not to those of us on LuLa but the overall graphic arts community).
-
Great Orwellian response, "Why did you abandon the Lightroom standalone version?
TH: Customers are overwhelmingly choosing the Creative Cloud Photography plan as the preferred way to get access to Lightroom. We’re aligning our investment with the direction our customers have signaled over the last several years."
Of course they did because Adobe rolled out new features to the subscription model rather than the stand alone one. Maybe this is what "indefinitely" really means.
Well, the perpetual licences were so damn hard to find on their website that I'm not surprised a lot of people caved in and went with the CC plan.
Now "Classic" seems to be hard to find (didn't check, I'm not interested) but I can see what he will answer in 1 or 2 years when being asked why they abandoned the "Classic" version :P
So the right questions to ask about stopping perpetual licenses were:
- why did you make it so hard to find the perpetual licence version on your website, do you think that might have anything to do with the lower demand?
- why did you promise upgrades could be licenced under the perpetual model as long as you were product manager?
- why do you think not a lot of people bought the LR6 version recently, do you think it might have anything to do with the fact the product is 2 1/2 years old?
- don't you think a lot of people would buy your new LR7 with a perpetual licence today if it were available?
But I don't think you'll find those Q&A's on an Adobe Blog
-
Well, the perpetual licences were so damn hard to find on their website that I'm not surprised a lot of people caved in and went with the CC plan.
Now "Classic" seems to be hard to find (didn't check, I'm not interested) but I can see what he will answer in 1 or 2 years when being asked why they abandoned the "Classic" version :P
So the right questions to ask about stopping perpetual licenses were:
- why did you make it so hard to find the perpetual licence version on your website, do you think that might have anything to do with the lower demand?
- why did you promise upgrades could be licenced under the perpetual model as long as you were product manager?
- why do you think not a lot of people bought the LR6 version recently, do you think it might have anything to do with the fact the product is 2 1/2 years old?
- don't you think a lot of people would buy your new LR7 with a perpetual licence today if it were available?
But I don't think you'll find those Q&A's on an Adobe Blog
Exactly right. Had it not been for some astute LuLa members I would still be looking at the LR6 upgrade!!!!
-
I'm sorry I'm being so dense about all this. Can I use both lightroom classic and lightroom cc?
You can do, if you want. But I wouldn't suggest using both - just too confusing. If you're a "Classic" user, ie traditional Lightroom, "Lightroom CC" (LRCC) misses so much that I see little benefit in switching.
One way to think of LRCC is as a version of Lightroom Mobile that runs on PC/Mac. Its features aren't much different - dust spots, and the country/state/city/location metadata fields. You can already import raw files into LRM on your iPad, and the originals will sync up to Adobe's cloud. LRCC is the same. So maybe you could have LRCC as if it is LRM on your laptop, import new pics into LRCC on the laptop, and they would then appear in "Classic" on your main computer.
Hope that helps.
-
That did help, thanks John.
-
Great Orwellian response, "Why did you abandon the Lightroom standalone version?
TH: Customers are overwhelmingly choosing the Creative Cloud Photography plan as the preferred way to get access to Lightroom. We’re aligning our investment with the direction our customers have signaled over the last several years."
Of course they did because Adobe rolled out new features to the subscription model rather than the stand alone one. Maybe this is what "indefinitely" really means.
Help me understand how you expect Adobe, or any company, to justify development expense for new features/function and maintenance on a product (LR6) which produces no additional revenue?
-
Help me understand how you expect Adobe, or any company, to justify development expense for new features/function and maintenance on a product (LR6) which produces no additional revenue?
Lots of us were happy and ready to pay for an upgrade that would generate revenue ,but they've chosen not to take it. Their loss.
-
Help me understand how you expect Adobe, or any company, to justify development expense for new features/function and maintenance on a product (LR6) which produces no additional revenue?
Sell it as LR7, ~75€ per upgrade licence, double that for a new licence.
Same model as before. Doesn't take much R&D and resources, LR 6 was just the same as the LR CC version at the time, only with a few features missing from the UI.
I know why they stopped it, because if they only convert 1/4 of the old LR6 users they make more money in the end. So they can lose 3/4 of their "standalone" base and still come out ahead.
-
Sell it as LR7, ~75€ per upgrade licence, double that for a new licence.
Same model as before. Doesn't take much R&D and resources, LR 6 was just the same as the LR CC version at the time, only with a few features missing from the UI.
I know why they stopped it, because if they only convert 1/4 of the old LR6 users they make more money in the end. So they can lose 3/4 of their "standalone" base and still come out ahead.
Sounds like a reasonable business decision to me.
-
Sounds like a reasonable business decision to me.
Oh yes, a very reasonable business decision, but as a customer belonging to the 3/4 group it sucks. However since I thought this would happen anyway one day I've got my plan to deal with it thought out and ready to implement. And it does not involve going to the subscription model :P
-
Oh yes, a very reasonable business decision, but as a customer belonging to the 3/4 group it sucks. However since I thought this would happen anyway one day I've got my plan to deal with it thought out and ready to implement. And it does not involve going to the subscription model :P
What's your plan and what's the cost of implementing the plan including possibly less features and large learning curves...and too boot, loss of all those edits you've done in LR all these years.
Personally I'd look at all costs before deciding to move. I know you seem to be very angry with Adobe right now...but who do you think will really lose in the end?
-
What's your plan and what's the cost of implementing the plan including possibly less features and large learning curves...and too boot, loss of all those edits you've done in LR all these years.
It's not that big of a deal, really. Many folks made such a move when Apple abandoned Aperture and the world did not end. I, for one, would never turn down buying a new car of another brand because I would have to re-learn button/knob/lever placement and action or the nuances of a new vehicle. Otherwise we would all still be driving a Model T.
The day you avoid learning, exploring new opportunities is the day you really set yourself up for failure. One should never put all their eggs in one basket just because the basket is currently the most popular.
-
What's your plan and what's the cost of implementing the plan including possibly less features and large learning curves...and too boot, loss of all those edits you've done in LR all these years.
Personally I'd look at all costs before deciding to move. I know you seem to be very angry with Adobe right now...but who do you think will really lose in the end?
First of all I'm not angry with Adobe, as I mention it's a reasonable business decision and one I saw coming. I just like to call them out on all the marketing bullshit (and lies) around the change. If they would just say "we make more money this way" and cut the crap I would believe them and agree with them. The rest is just hogwash and in my mind undermines their credibility.
My plan is to keep using LR6.12 or 6.13 as well as C1, both of which are on my computer and used and both licences are fully paid up. Some images are easier to edit in LR, some easier in C1, which is why I use both. In case I get a camera that is no longer supported by LR6 I'll convert the raw files to dng and keep using them that way in LR6. They even mention that as an option on the Adobe website.
I'm not too worried about missing out on features, most of the features I missed because I didn't subscribe to LRCC and went standalone LR6 are in my eyes not worth the money I would have paid more with the subscription.
So this move by Adobe actually saved me the 75€ I would have paid for an upgrade to LR7 standalone. I've paid those update fees every time since LR1 about 1 or 2 weeks after the new version came out and I guess that if it was possible I would have done it again.
-
It's not that big of a deal, really. Many folks made such a move when Apple abandoned Aperture and the world did not end. I, for one, would never turn down buying a new car of another brand because I would have to re-learn button/knob/lever placement and action or the nuances of a new vehicle. Otherwise we would all still be driving a Model T.
The day you avoid learning, exploring new opportunities is the day you really set yourself up for failure. One should never put all their eggs in one basket just because the basket is currently the most popular.
Apple abandoned Aperture users. Adobe has not abandoned LR users. Just asking them to pay fair share.
I think it is a fair question to ask you your plan, costs, and effort. Without stating it you are just mad and complaining about Adobe not allowing you to get a cheap upgrade. All the LR CC users have been paying monthly for the function that is now being provided. What would not be fair is for them to offer it to others for $0.10 on the $1.
-
It's not that big of a deal, really. Many folks made such a move when Apple abandoned Aperture and the world did not end. I, for one, would never turn down buying a new car of another brand because I would have to re-learn button/knob/lever placement and action or the nuances of a new vehicle. Otherwise we would all still be driving a Model T.
The day you avoid learning, exploring new opportunities is the day you really set yourself up for failure. One should never put all their eggs in one basket just because the basket is currently the most popular.
I look at it differently. I'm comfortable using LR / PS for my processing...am very used to the tools and very productive. Why do I want to change and use my time and energy on something that ain't broken when I can spend time and energy on other things.
As far as cars go, I don't buy a car until I need a new one. I don't look at the specs of new cars, don't drive by the lots with my tounge dangling and surely don't waste my time test driving the new cars. All those things are just a waste of time...like downloading something like C1 Pro and playing with it when I'm happy with LR / PS.
-
Apple abandoned Aperture users. Adobe has not abandoned LR users. Just asking them to pay fair share.
I think it is a fair question to ask you your plan, costs, and effort. Without stating it you are just mad and complaining about Adobe not allowing you to get a cheap upgrade. All the LR CC users have been paying monthly for the function that is now being provided. What would not be fair is for them to offer it to others for $0.10 on the $1.
It's actually $0.25 on the $1 and for the people who paid that it's the cost of being an early adopter.
Camera's are also more expensive at introduction then 1 or 2 years down the road. Is lowering prices over time an unfair business practice of Canon (or Nikon/Sony/Pentax/Olympus/.....) vs. the people who paid full price at the introduction?
-
And still now psb support or larger file support......
Gesendet von iPhone mit Tapatalk
-
It's actually $0.25 on the $1 and for the people who paid that it's the cost of being an early adopter.
Camera's are also more expensive at introduction then 1 or 2 years down the road. Is lowering prices over time an unfair business practice of Canon (or Nikon/Sony/Pentax/Olympus/.....) vs. the people who paid full price at the introduction?
The cost of LR/PS is trivial vs cameras and lens.
BTW your analogies of cars and cameras don’t work. Totally different business dynamics. There are car analogies that would work, but...
-
The cost of LR/PS is trivial vs cameras and lens.
I like to decide that for myself, thanks.
BTW your analogies of cars and cameras don’t work. Totally different business dynamics. There are car analogies that would work, but...
I never talked about the analogy with cars and maybe rather than avoiding my question regarding cameras it would be better to just answer it.
-
Apple abandoned Aperture users. Adobe has not abandoned LR users. Just asking them to pay fair share.
I think you are missing the point raised by those of us who were/are using the stand alone LR. We were willing to pay for major upgrades to the program but did not want to buy into the subscription model (same reason I use stand alone MSFT Office and not Office 365). We did not need to the first on the block to get new features but were willing to wait. Right now the subscriptions model is forever (or maybe in the words of Tom Hogarty 'indefinitely'). Now maybe you get new features and maybe you don't. With the standalone model that did not matter one could be happy sticking with LR with the assurance all the work one did would not get locked up by Adobe elves. The stand alone LR folks were always paying their fair share just on a different schedule from those paying the subscription fee.
I've been using Affinity Photo for the past three months and it's a nice program (not nearly the memory hog that PS is). Will they come up with a DAM LR type of program? I don't know but I'm prepared to wait and see. LR supports my current camera and I can't see purchasing a new one any time soon so LR6 is fine for me coupled with Affinity Photo when I need to do something else (I have PS CS6 as well).
-
I like to decide that for myself, thanks.I never talked about the analogy with cars and maybe rather than avoiding my question regarding cameras it would be better to just answer it.
Ok....hogloff did car analogy....it still didn’t work 😀
I stated the camera analogy did not work with the software discussion.
A child can figure out that cameras hold higher value when they are new and have more competitive function, than years later when new competing offerings come available. Also, you have the business and manufacturing dynamics of volume production and then clearing inventory. In addition, used versions of the same product come available and are in completion to new product.
One of this is fair or unfair or in anyway related to the software discussion or its business dynamics.
-
The cost of LR/PS is trivial vs cameras and lens.
BTW your analogies of cars and cameras don’t work. Totally different business dynamics. There are car analogies that would work, but...
Ya, come to think of it - leasing for example?
-
If you look at the list value-added-features, it's blindingly obvious that photographers are not their prime customer base
Better brush organization
Access Lightroom Photos **
Brush stroke smoothing
Exclusive brushes from Kyle T. Webster
Variable fonts
Quick Share menu
Curvature Pen tool
Path improvements
Copy and paste layers
Enhanced tooltips
360 panorama workflow
Properties panel improvements
Support for Microsoft Dial
Paste as plain text
Support for HEIF **
Select and Mask improvements **
And so much more
Also includes: Performance and stability improvements, ability to save large files faster, better face detection for Face-Aware Liquify, better Content-Aware Crop and Content-Aware Fill on edges, and more.
See full release notes ›
That list is mainly relevant to Photoshop, not Lightroom, and you are correct that Photoshop has a much larger user base than photographers.
-
Ok....hogloff did car analogy....it still didn’t work 😀
I stated the camera analogy did not work with the software discussion.
A child can figure out that cameras hold higher value when they are new and have more competitive function, than years later when new competing offerings come available. Also, you have the business and manufacturing dynamics of volume production and then clearing inventory. In addition, used versions of the same product come available and are in completion to new product.
One of this is fair or unfair or in anyway related to the software discussion or its business dynamics.
Some of the "new" features introduced are becoming available or better in competing products (for instance in the C1 straightening functions). Therefore they are worth less as time progresses.
And secondly, can you engage in a discussion without insults or disparaging comments, they don't impress me and only tell what kind of person you really are :P
-
That list is mainly relevant to Photoshop, not Lightroom, and you are correct that Photoshop has a much larger user base than photographers.
The "Access Lightroom Photos" and "Quick Share menu" are interesting. At least on Mac, you can open photos you've synced to LRMobile (smart previews or originals), work on them, then send the finished file back up to Adobe's LRMobile server. I've written it up here (http://lightroomsolutions.com/lightroom-inside-photoshop/).
-
Some of the "new" features introduced are becoming available or better in competing products (for instance in the C1 straightening functions). Therefore they are worth less as time progresses.
And secondly, can you engage in a discussion without insults or disparaging comments, they don't impress me and only tell what kind of person you really are :P
Well than, don’t accuse me of “avoiding my question regarding cameras”
I also do not see the logic of your C1 statement above. Over time, all competitive products have a yang and yang of functions relative to each other. The value of each product does not move up and down like the stock market base on instantaneous comparisons.
-
Well than, don’t accuse me of “avoiding my question regarding cameras”
I wasn't accusing you, I was merely stating a fact ;)
I also do not see the logic of your C1 statement above. Over time, all competitive products have a yang and yang of functions relative to each other. The value of each product does not move up and down like the stock market base on instantaneous comparisons.
If products (or features of products) get older or available from competitive products they become less valuable. For me that's true on software as well as hardware. Therefore early adopters can expect to pay a higher price, both on software as well as hardware.
-
Apple abandoned Aperture users. Adobe has not abandoned LR users. Just asking them to pay fair share.
I think it is a fair question to ask you your plan, costs, and effort. Without stating it you are just mad and complaining about Adobe not allowing you to get a cheap upgrade. All the LR CC users have been paying monthly for the function that is now being provided. What would not be fair is for them to offer it to others for $0.10 on the $1.
Nice of you to gloss over the point I made. Which was we should never stop exploring or learning about potential options. Especially if we are content with current options. Our tool selections of choice should be based upon actual experience of what is available and not simply following the 'cool kids' because of popularity. I never said or implied that Adobe abandoned their customers. I pointed out that maybe we shouldn't wait for such occurrences before exploring alternate options. Nothing lasts forever ... including Adobe.
Next ... you have no clue about anything on my mind. I'm not 'mad' at anyone. Nor am I angry. Nor do you have a clue as to what I have paid in licensing fees to Adobe since 1992. Until recently I owned and operated a full commercial photo studio (I sold controlling interest to my brother as I prepare for retirement) with four seats for Adobe products and a custom color print and graphic design business with 12 seats using Adobe products ... 6 full enchilada subscriptions and 6 seats with individual subscriptions for ID, Ps, Lr, and others spread around those work stations. (Prior to CC those stations all had either perpetual licenses for individual apps and/or full Creative Suite packages.) Plus I currently have 2 CC subscriptions as wells perpetual license for Lr 1-6 and Photoshop from v2 (not CS2) - CS6 for my personal use separate from the business. So go ahead, tell me again about paying my 'fair share' ... you have absolutely no clue.
I've been self-employed for over 44 years and have never, not once, ever missed payroll ... and I did all without your input ... so please spare me your observations on such topics.
-
I'am angry about Adobe for at least 3 reasons.
1. Because I was one of the 2000000 persons concerned by the hacking of our private datas a few years ago >:(
2. Because my Win7 production PC is never connected to the web for safety reasons, and none of my other PCs work as well as the PC which is never connected!!! So I need the perpetual license, and I'm not alone.
3. Adobe is also doing crappy spying software named Adobe Flash Player.
So what to do?!
Keep LR6 for a while and after use C1 because I think I can import my precious catalog on C1.
Have a Nice Day.
Thierry
-
Imatch and CS6 has been keeping me happy since I dumped the subscription model.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
With regards the licence, I have read that the monthly payments do not represent the actual cost of the product but simpy the repayment plan. What I'm told is that there is a clause in the contract that if you stop payments prior to you having paid the full price of the rental plan you are legally bound to pay in full immediately. The monthly payments as advertised should say the full product plan costs at a monthly rate of £/$. So read the contract carefully before you buy. If this information is correct then I am of the opinion that Adobe are being disingenuous toward their customers in burying the full payment plan details deep in the contract. I'm now many years into my retirement years and grew up with the knowledge that a product had a price which was on the product up front and you paid that price. If you could not afford the price you found a way to borrow the money or made arrangements with the company to pay weekly. Now all has changed whereby you are given the idea that the up front price is all you pay; but this may not be so. So do be carefull what you sign up to.
Bryant.
-
LR6 and CS6 are doing just fine for me on my Win 10 machine.
-
With regards the licence, I have read that the monthly payments do not represent the actual cost of the product but simpy the repayment plan. What I'm told is that there is a clause in the contract that if you stop payments prior to you having paid the full price of the rental plan you are legally bound to pay in full immediately. The monthly payments as advertised should say the full product plan costs at a monthly rate of £/$. So read the contract carefully before you buy. If this information is correct then I am of the opinion that Adobe are being disingenuous toward their customers in burying the full payment plan details deep in the contract. I'm now many years into my retirement years and grew up with the knowledge that a product had a price which was on the product up front and you paid that price. If you could not afford the price you found a way to borrow the money or made arrangements with the company to pay weekly. Now all has changed whereby you are given the idea that the up front price is all you pay; but this may not be so. So do be carefull what you sign up to.
Bryant.
Yes...Adobe wants to prevent you from subscribing for a month, stopping the subscription for a couple weeks, subscribing again for a month and so on. So once you subscribe...it's for a year and you can pay for the full year upfront, or pay monthly. If you decide you want to stop your subscription before the year is up, there is a penalty of I believe 6 months of payments.
This is common practice for subscription, rentals, even mortgages.