[BrianR]

They do state that if you ever cancel your subscription to Lightroom Classic you will still be able to forever use it as a catalogue/photo-display utility, just that the editing tools will be disabled, and I guess the sync facilities to LR mobile etc.

Do you have a link where Adobe says "forever"? (Or similar timeline, up to operating system compatibility, etc)

[pschlute]

Do you have a link where Adobe says "forever"? (Or similar timeline, up to operating system compatibility, etc)

I have searched for it in the FAQ pages on Adobe Lightroom/LR Classic pages Adobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic CC Learn & Support but cannot find it. Perhaps I misread it first time round or it has changed since Adobe split LR into two products.

Found it ....... "Can I access my images in Lightroom Classic CC on desktop after my membership ends?
Lightroom Classic CC on desktop will continue to launch and allow access to your files after your membership ends. However, the Develop and Map modules are disabled. Also, after your membership ends, synchronization with Lightroom CC on mobile devices will no longer function. "

From here https://helpx.adobe.com/uk/lightroom/faq.html

No they don't say forever, that was a poor choice of word on my part. I guess it will be compatible until an OS change renders it inoperable.

[Class A]

What We Don’t Know For Sure

For some of the questions, the answers are already known:

Will Lightroom Classic CC (or Lightroom 6) be updated any further?

LR 6 (the stand-alone version) will not receive further updates (fact).

Lightroom Classic will receive updates but how smart a name choice is "... Classic" to instil confidence that this isn't a product on the road to extinction?

With sales for serious cameras declining, I'd expect the bean counters at Adobe to pull the plug on "Lightroom Classic" some day. They just stated that running LR6 in parallel to LR CC is "no longer economically viable" for them. If the new "LR CC" takes off, I'd expect Adobe to try and force everyone to it so that they cannot only charge rent for the software but also for the storage space.

What will happen when I need to update my operating system and Lightroom 6 no longer works?

You will have to migrate to a subscription-based version of LR (fact).

EDIT: (I previously had to following twisted; I blame Adobe for their utterly confusing naming schemes. )
You won't be able to import LR Classic catalogs into LR6, if you ever decide that the subscription scheme isn't for you anymore. You should be able to export all the editing information in your LR Classic catalogs to XMP files and import those into LR6. This is not equivalent to just converting the catalogs, as some aspects (e.g., virtual copies) will not transfer. Various workarounds (such as storing snapshots for your virtual copies) may make the transfer more complete, though.

Will there ever be a perpetual licensed version of Lightroom again?

Not while users believe they are gaining with a subscription-based scheme (personal opinion).
I accept that it works for some, but don't think that it works as well as many think it does for them.

Knowing Adobe, I do not think that they'll revert their decision to kill the perpetual licence scheme (personal opinion). I wouldn't rely on customers voting with their wallets right now, as they haven't done that when the whole subscription-based saga started.

At the very least, I'd say the above means there's no need to panic and/or rush into a different workflow with alternative tools.

There is no need for panicking, that's for sure.

However, I'd think a bit about how long I'd want to add to legacy catalogs instead of investing my future work into a different tool that will still be available with a perpetual licences in the future.

[stevebrot]

The statement about "additional testing needed for perpetual licenses" no longer being "economically viable" is pure BS. Any software engineer knows that with a decent versioning control system, you can have variants like "CC" vs "stand-alone" for free. Such statements are an insult to the public and demonstrate that Adobe will lie into your face.

Agreed. The only saving is on QC for CDs and packaging. What they are saying is that they are tired of loss of margin due to warehouse shelveage and dealing with retailers. The other side of the marking mouth has consistently said that the CC (now Classic) product is the same as the CD product and in some ways has served as the Beta-testing platform for the latter up until now.


Steve

[stevebrot]

So I bought another “old” fashioned boxed LR software because of this.

The cynic in me makes me wonder whether that was Adobe's intent. I too will likely upgrade in the near future even though I don't have a particular need to.


Steve

[Just1MoreDave]

Adobe's stock price is up 300+% since they started using the subscription model, just over 4 years ago. They are not going to change their mind.

[rangercarp]

How about the latest ACDSEE? this looks promising although I am not sure if this supports the lens profile from pentax.

I purchased ACDSee pro 10 for my high school photography class this fall after considering a few options. For a school with a limited budget they were easy to work with and cut me a great deal on licenses to outfit an entire lab. ACDSee works a lot like light room. It has organizational tools, but I cannot speak to them as I do not use them in LR or ACDSee. There is no import process, which I really like for my class as students are working on community computers, not their own machines. Instead of storing edits in the catalog as LR does, ACD saves a companion file next the each image file which tracks your edits. The developing process and tools are very similar, but they do take some getting used to.

The specific gripes I have with ACD: Shadows and highlights are not in the 'basic' tab, which slows down my work flow. Also AFAIK, there is now way to mark photos as rejected and then delete all of the rejected photos at once. I use that feature all the time in LR.

This info is based on Pro10. ACDSee professional 2018 just came out, so I cannot speak to that.

---------- Post added 10-23-17 at 08:51 AM ----------

I will have to check on lens profiles and get back to you. I am still using LR for my own work and most of my students are shooting Canon rebels, so I have not looked for Pentax lens profiles.

[BrianR]

No they don't say forever, that was a poor choice of word on my part. I guess it will be compatible until an OS change renders it inoperable.

Fair enough. I'd also hope it's in perpetuity (up to compatability), but who knows what will end up happening.

You won't be able to import LR6 catalogs into LR Classic but you will be able to export all the editing information in your LR6 catalogs to XMP files and import those into LR Classic. This is not equivalent to just converting the catalogs, as some aspects (e.g., virtual copies) will not transfer. Various workarounds (such as storing snapshots for your virtual copies) may make the transfer more complete, though.

This doesn't sound right? I had thought Lightroom Classic CC was the continuation of Lightroom 6 & "the Lightroom Formerly Known as Lightroom CC", and that the migration of your catalog should be no issue.

It's moving to the new Lightroom CC from any other version where you lose a few things, snapshots being one of them: Migrate photos and videos from Lightroom Classic CC to Lightroom CC. I think you can only go from a LR6 or later version to the new LR CC. You have to do the xmp method you mentioned if you have LR5 or earlier (and you lose a bunch of stuff) OR you can first update your catalog to LR6 and then move it to LR CC (see https://laurashoe.com/2017/10/18/how-to-migrate-import-your-lightroom-classi...-lightroom-cc/).

The utter absurdity of their naming system makes it annoying to find any information.



I'm also not in a huge rush to move (I'm using standalone LR5). Other software seems to be developing rapidly, and I think they're paying more attention to cataloging systems to lure the would-be former LR6 & LR Formerly Known as LR CC (LR6&LRFKALRCC for short) users away from Adobe. Adding another year of cataloging and editing to my LR5 catalog while I waffle on a new piece of software won't be a huge addition to the 10 years already in it.

[mee]

Agreed. The only saving is on QC for CDs and packaging. What they are saying is that they are tired of loss of margin due to warehouse shelveage and dealing with retailers. The other side of the marking mouth has consistently said that the CC (now Classic) product is the same as the CD product and in some ways has served as the Beta-testing platform for the latter up until now.

That issue is resolved by simply ceasing boxed copies and offering off your website alone. That is actually how I upgraded my boxed copy of LR4 earlier this year to LR6. I bought and downloaded the upgrade straight from Adobe's website. Not a problem. They could offer it if they wanted to..


but that goes against their cloud plans...

[cpk]

The statement about "additional testing needed for perpetual licenses" no longer being "economically viable" is pure BS. Any software engineer knows that with a decent versioning control system, you can have variants like "CC" vs "stand-alone" for free. Such statements are an insult to the public and demonstrate that Adobe will lie into your face.

I have to disagree with these statements. Yes, in an ideal IT world, they may hold true; but in a career in IT of over 50 years I never found such an ideal world. Multiple variations of the same software always caused problems. We are not privy to Adobe's development environment; and what may to an outsider seem to be a supremely logical approach, may not be applicable or even possible in their environment. There may be enough hidden (to us) differences between the perpetual licence version and the subscription version to justify their statement.

[raider]

I will have to check on lens profiles and get back to you. I am still using LR for my own work and most of my students are shooting Canon rebels, so I have not looked for Pentax lens profiles.

I have also just installed the trial version of ACDSEE Photo ultimate 18. I think the software looks promising and has lens profile although missing some lenses such as the 35mm macro. Overall I think the editing is less intuitive than lightroom but i have only started to play with it so will explore further.

[rangercarp]

Overall I think the editing is less intuitive than lightroom

I agree that it is less intuitive, but I may only think that because I am used to LR. My students seem to be finding their way around okay.

[Class A]

This doesn't sound right?

Sorry, it indeed isn't right.

I meant to state it the other way around. Once you decided the subscription-based scheme isn't for you anymore, you won't be able to import your catalogs into the (now, still existing) stand-alone LR6 version (without tricks).

[Class A]

You Tube

You Tube

The interviewer isn't asking any hard questions, but the video is still interesting as an exercise in reading body language. Quite painful to watch, AFAIC.

Also note that the phrasing "We don't want it to be perceived as..." (slowly phasing out LR Classic) is quite a telling. Of course they don't want to be perceived as slowly killing LR Classic.

This statement doesn't tell us anything about their actual plans.

LR Classic fans beware. We have established earlier already that when Hogarty and Co answered in 2013 what the future of the stand-alone version of LR will be, they said it will be available "indefinitely" (leaving themselves a loophole out of a "forever" commitment).

You've got to take the hints they give you...

[Kerrowdown]

Has anybody here mentioned how much quicker the new Classic it seems to be?

No scientific measurements or stopwatches involved, just a feeling when using it.