[pschlute]

Thanks subsea. Yes, I am aware of this, and it is probably what I will do. However, I was content to continue using LrC as a dumb viewer for old files on an ongoing basis, as per their stated policy. However, the ability to approximately recover these edits using other software does not seem to me to absolve Adobe of the responsibility to allow me access to my own edited images, made under full license. It seems to say, "If you ever use LrC for a time, you are locked in to paying for it forever." Is this even legal?

Have you tried asking Adobe ?

[Paul the Sunman]

Have you tried asking Adobe ?

Yes. No response yet. But it is hard to think it is anything other than deliberate, as it is a very specific pop-up.

[pid]

try to convert with Avalanche from Cyome. Migrate your Aperture, Lightroom or Luminar libraries without losing your settings.

[house]

You can never migrate 1:1. The tools are never 100% identical across software.

[TonyW]

..... But it is hard to think it is anything other than deliberate, as it is a very specific pop-up.

Well, the Internet should be awash with users complaining about access denial if Adobe has changed their terms and conditions without prior notice - but that does not seem to be the case AFAIK.

There are many things that can break certain applications including malware, adding new programs, OS upgrades (Mac OS seems particularly susceptible), etc.

While you are waiting for an Adobe response you may wish to seek response from Specialists forums e.g.

Lightroom Classic on Adobe Support Community Just sign in using your Adobe ID

Lightroom Queen Forums

[mtkeller]

I did have a look on the Adobe website and it states that after you end your subscripition you are no longer a "member" but you get a free member-ship instead. The free membership does not include any access (be it limited to view only) to your old creative cloud software.

This is simply not accurate. Adobe has said that you can still use most of the Lightroom modules after you let your subscription lapse. This allows one to export images including all edits that had been made before. Further edits are not allowed.

[TonyW]

This is simply not accurate. Adobe has said that you can still use most of the Lightroom modules after you let your subscription lapse. This allows one to export images including all edits that had been made before. Further edits are not allowed.

That is correct and was covered in post #18

Lightroom Classic

You continue to have access to all your photos on your local hard drive through Lightroom for the desktop. You can continue to import and organize photos and output your edited photos through Export, Publish, Print, Web, or Slideshow. Access to the Develop & Map modules and Lightroom for mobile is not available after your membership ends.

If you are using the Cloud storage - you will have one year from cancellation or lapse of subscription

[subsea]

I guess you think you have a full license, but as far as I know that licence is only valid as long as you are subscribed to it, which is their stated policy. You only have a lifetime licence if you have a stand alone version for which you pay once. That lifetime license is only for that version of the program and the free updates that belong to that license. So yes, in a way you are locked in to paying forever if you want to use the LR Classic edit options, they cannot deny you access to your pictures, unless they were saved to their cloud facility which ended as soon as you cancelled your membership. But they can not deny your access to your own edited images on your computer, you are able to view them with any photo viewer you like. It is a bit like a subscription to a magazine, as long as you pay you will receive monthly editions, after cancelling the subscription you are not getting new editions, but you can keep on reading the old editions. That is what Adobe does, you ended the subscription and you keep access to your edited images (which means you can view them), but cannot change, or create new, edits. They do not have to provide a free software for that.

This, also, is not completely true. They have no obligation to provide updates to the software to keep it running as computers and operating systems continue to evolve. For instance, varieties of macOS through Mojave will allow you to run 32-bit software. More recent varieties of macOS will not. The stand alone versions of Lightroom and Photoshop are 64-bit apps and should run on newer versions of macOS. However, if you upgrade your mac to a newer model that comes with a newer version of macOS, Adobe treats your existing Lightroom and Photoshop installations as being new. Both apps try to phone home to verify that you are authorized to run them. However, the software that phones home is only 32-bit and will not run on the new computer. Consequently, since you can't run the needed software, you can't authorize them, you can't run the apps, and can't use them to access your existing edited files. There is no known workaround for this and Adobe has neither any plans to make 64-bit versions of the authorization software, nor any incentive to do so. Calls to tech support are a waste of time because they won't provide a solution to this -- or at least they wouldn't when I was bitten by it late last year.

[AfterPentax Mark II]

Perhaps there is a misunderstanding?: You and MTKeller are quite right. To prevent further discussion about what I learned from Adobe (in another part of the world) I deleted my messages so that we can get back on topic. Sorry . One thing that springs to mind is: that instead of starting the desktop version Paul's link to Lightroom Classic on the desktop has changed so that he is starting the web-version instead of the desktop version? I agree with Paul the Sunman that it is odd that if you start a desktop program you get a response that looks like you try to enter a web application and that the user is not recognized as a subscriber. The desktop program either works or gives a message that it can not find the catalogue or the path or whatever and then gives you an option to go to the right folder or to quit.

---------- Post added 10th May 2021 at 17:37 ----------

"They have no obligation to provide updates to the software to keep it running as computers and operating systems continue to evolve". That is what all software companies do, it is called EOL. It happens all the time if software (and hardware too) is no longer compatible with the operating system. It means that even if your version of Photoshop or Lightroom is still working for you, the moment you acquire a new computer some of the software can not be used anymore. But that is more a problem for which the developer of the OS is responsible than, in this case, Adobe. So Adobe states it supports the latest version and the previous one, but not the one before that. And in this case Apple is to blame that they do not support 32-bit applications anymore. And Adobe just wants you to buy a new edition of the software.

[mee]

Are you using the cloud to host your images? That might be a problem. But you were paying for hosting now you're not if so.

If not, I wasn't using the cloud but I was on the 7 day trial last week in Lightroom. It expired. It still let me import images and see them. It's just the develop tab and features were greyed out.


So I don't think what the OP says is correct. And, even if it was, the raw files are on your computer (provided not using adobe cloud) and are easily accessible through Windows Explorer or the Mac Finder. You're not beholden to the app to access your images.

[Cerebum]

LOL. So many people are disturbed by the thought of not being able to escape from Adobe, and then attacking the person who brought it to their attention.

I like Adobe. It really works for me, also my laptop is old. I have tried affinity and the others and they all slowed my laptop to a crawl.

[Wheatfield]

And I am convinced Adobe is using straw-men on fora to promote their products and to compensate for critical voices.

I'm quite certain that there are professiomal Adobe haters out there throwing shade whenever they can.
It's the only explanation I can see, other than there are a lot of people who are angry that if they want an Adobe product they now have to pay for it rather than stealing it.
Adobe's business model has changed in an attempt to stop out of control piracy of their software. People may not like it, but I bet those same people would be screeching like a queen in heat if the fruits of their labour was being stolen 4 times for every time it was purchased.

[mtkeller]

I'm quite certain that there are professiomal Adobe haters out there throwing shade whenever they can.
It's the only explanation I can see, other than there are a lot of people who are angry that if they want an Adobe product they now have to pay for it rather than stealing it.
Adobe's business model has changed in an attempt to stop out of control piracy of their software. People may not like it, but I bet those same people would be screeching like a queen in heat if the fruits of their labour was being stolen 4 times for every time it was purchased.

It also seems that Adobe has done a good amount of innovating with two major feature releases per year and two minor bug fix releases per year since getting the subscription model off the ground. I would be really curious to see their financials on Photoshop pre/post Creative Cloud. I suspect they are finding a more stable revenue stream that they can pour into R&D. I would have had a very hard time justifying buying a PS standalone license, but with the subscription model, I always have the latest features and at a price that I find works for me. I'm someone who tends to upgrade when worthwhile upgrades are released, and so when you look at the price for the remaining standalone products every time they come out with an annual upgrade (or even one every 18 months), Adobe still tends to come out ahead.

[BarryE]

I'm quite certain that there are professiomal Adobe haters out there throwing shade whenever they can.
It's the only explanation I can see, other than there are a lot of people who are angry that if they want an Adobe product they now have to pay for it rather than stealing it.
Adobe's business model has changed in an attempt to stop out of control piracy of their software. People may not like it, but I bet those same people would be screeching like a queen in heat if the fruits of their labour was being stolen 4 times for every time it was purchased.

"throwing shade" & "screeching like a queen in heat" . Think I can work out what you mean

I agree with you. Adobe had to do something to stop this revenue leakage, much like Microsoft and Office, and before that IBM who tied their customers into their mainframes. Building a subscription model allows businesses to plan and fund R&D. Providing they get it right both sides win and can both concentrate on building their businesses. Where it is problematic is where the customer is an occasional user and not committed for the long term. Guess Adobe reasoned the flack from "occasional" users would be offset by the steady revenue.

When they converted to the subscription model I was regular user of many of their creative suite products. I chose to stick with CS5 for these as the cost was too much. The photography subscription was very reasonable in comparison.

[Mooncatt]

Are you using the cloud to host your images?

I think this is the crux of the problem. This was asked beforebut but not answered. I don't use Adobe, so is it even possible to save edits to the cloud without additionally saving to your hard drive? If so, this is the only explanation I can think of. If it does require saving to the hard drive as well, then everything should be there intact. Adobe can't lock you out of your own locally stored files.

If the OP was only saving edits to the cloud, then this is 100% on them for not being stored locally or having backups. To this, I can only say good luck.