Poll Will You buy LR5 knowing that next LR will be available through cloud only?

Started May 14, 2013 | Discussions
usedtobedontrustme
Contributing MemberPosts: 642
Like?
Re: Poll Will You buy LR5 knowing that next LR will be available through cloud only?
In reply to Marcin 3M, May 15, 2013

Marcin 3M wrote:

Will You buy LR5 knowing that next LR will be available through cloud only?

-- hide signature --

Marcin_3M

Count me in as one who doesn't "know that next LR will be on the cloud only".

The LR works with the sidecdatabase I think it wouldn't work well in a cloud format. However, if it did work in a cloud and cost less than ten dollars per month I would consider it depending on the feature set. since the future of  LR is unknown, why worry about it now???

-- hide signature --

Some of my pics are in my DPReview Gallery
dt

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Mark Smith
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,849Gear list
Like?
Re: Poll Will You buy LR5 knowing that next LR will be available through cloud only?
In reply to Marcin 3M, May 15, 2013

Marcin 3M wrote:

Mark Smith wrote:

Marcin 3M wrote:

Will You buy LR5 knowing that next LR will be available through cloud only?

It will? What does being available through the cloud mean? Are you saying it will be web based only.

No, this time cloud neans SAS (software as service) model (please note, that it is not my concept to name Adobe's service the cloud).

Ah gotcha, so the whole thread title is basically fantasy based upon 'what if's' and stirring up an already upset userbase.

You are aware Adobe said they have no plans to do this?

Would you buy a Nikon DSLR knowing that they are getting out of the camera business...

Just as valid a question....

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
RobG67
Contributing MemberPosts: 818Gear list
Like?
Glen,
In reply to Glen Barrington, May 15, 2013

if I may ask, where are you going for software? I'm curious, having just bought LR4.

-- hide signature --

Rob.
**
It's no longer about the gear; all of it's good, and most is better than our skills warrant. Go and learn the craft, learn to see the art, and make fewer, better, photographs.
Seriously, it's NOT about the gear any more.
**

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
unknown member
(unknown member)
Like?
Re: Poll Will You buy LR5 knowing that next LR will be available through cloud only?
In reply to Mark Smith, May 15, 2013

Mark Smith wrote:

Marcin 3M wrote:

Mark Smith wrote:

Marcin 3M wrote:

Will You buy LR5 knowing that next LR will be available through cloud only?

It will? What does being available through the cloud mean? Are you saying it will be web based only.

No, this time cloud neans SAS (software as service) model (please note, that it is not my concept to name Adobe's service the cloud).

Ah gotcha, so the whole thread title is basically fantasy based upon 'what if's' and stirring up an already upset userbase.

You are aware Adobe said they have no plans to do this?

Who cares.  The minute Adobe's corporate profits dive, they will consider moving LR to the cloud.  Especially if their CC efforts survive.

Would you buy a Nikon DSLR knowing that they are getting out of the camera business...

Just as valid a question....

Nope, not valid at all.  A Nikon camera can last far longer than software.   A Nikon camera does not need updating if you change OS on your computer.   A Nikon camera can be repaired if broken.  A Nikon camera can be easily sold to another person.

Nikon will not shut off your camera if you stop paying them.

Not even close to a valid comparison.

-- hide signature --

9 years of Fujifilm camera usage, ended by rampant fanboyism.

 rattymouse's gear list:rattymouse's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix F70EXR Fujifilm FinePix F10 Zoom Fujifilm FinePix F20 Zoom Fujifilm X10 Fujifilm FinePix X100 +9 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Marcin 3M
Senior MemberPosts: 1,290Gear list
Like?
Re: Poll Will You buy LR5 knowing that next LR will be available through cloud only?
In reply to usedtobedontrustme, May 15, 2013

usedtobedontrustme wrote:

Marcin 3M wrote:

Will You buy LR5 knowing that next LR will be available through cloud only?

-- hide signature --

Marcin_3M

Count me in as one who doesn't "know that next LR will be on the cloud only".

The LR works with the sidecdatabase I think it wouldn't work well in a cloud format. However, if it did work in a cloud and cost less than ten dollars per month I would consider it depending on the feature set. since the future of  LR is unknown, why worry about it now???

-- hide signature --

Some of my pics are in my DPReview Gallery
dt

I worry, because each time I add images to lr I'm making database bigger. The more effort I put into tagging fo the image, the software in more valuable, and the more difficult it would be to migrate elsewhere.

-- hide signature --

Marcin_3M

 Marcin 3M's gear list:Marcin 3M's gear list
Epson Stylus Pro 3880 Adobe Photoshop CS6 Nik Capture NX Phase One Capture One Pro Portrait Professional Studio 64 +1 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Mark Smith
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,849Gear list
Like?
Re: Poll Will You buy LR5 knowing that next LR will be available through cloud only?
In reply to rattymouse, May 15, 2013

rattymouse wrote:

Who cares.  The minute Adobe's corporate profits dive, they will consider moving LR to the cloud.  Especially if their CC efforts survive.

Well consumers care. At the moment, there are no plans to make future copies of LR CC based

Would you buy a Nikon DSLR knowing that they are getting out of the camera business...

Just as valid a question....

Nope, not valid at all.  A Nikon camera can last far longer than software.

False, as the question is still valid. Would you knowing that Nikon are going out of business buy a camera from them? Nikon may not shut off the camera but what of future parts and service, what of any outstanding warranty?

Adobe has stated the next version of LR is not going to be CC, to hypothesise that future versions might be is not knowledge but rather surmising, guessing if you like.

We have no idea of future plans of many corporations all we can do is base our purchasing decisions on market realities as they currently exist.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Digital Imaging Technician
Regular MemberPosts: 150
Like?
No
In reply to Marcin 3M, May 15, 2013

No

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Daisy AU
Senior MemberPosts: 1,561Gear list
Like?
Re: Poll Will You buy LR5 knowing that next LR will be available through cloud only?
In reply to Marcin 3M, May 15, 2013

Marcin 3M wrote:

Will You buy LR5 knowing that next LR will be available through cloud only?

-- hide signature --

Marcin_3M

I will never give Adobe one more of my Dollars!!  Will live with LR4 for many years and then move to Aperture or something else.

-- hide signature --
 Daisy AU's gear list:Daisy AU's gear list
Nikon D7000 Nikon 1 V1 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR Tokina AT-X Pro 11-16mm f/2.8 DX Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G VR +8 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Mike CH
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,543Gear list
Like?
Yes
In reply to Marcin 3M, May 15, 2013

Marcin 3M wrote:

Will You buy LR5 knowing that next LR will be available through cloud only?

Why should I not buy a perpetual license just because the next might be rental?

If I have the newest version with a perpetual license, the chances are better that I can sit out a change to a rental model. Simply because a newer version can be assumed to last longer into the future than an older version can.

If a move to a rental model does eventually come up, then - at that time - I will decde what to do.

Regards, Mike

-- hide signature --

Wait and see...

 Mike CH's gear list:Mike CH's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark III Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM Canon TS-E 24mm f/3.5L II Canon EF 180mm f/3.5L Macro USM +8 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
mujana
Senior MemberPosts: 2,952Gear list
Like?
Re: No
In reply to Digital Imaging Technician, May 15, 2013

Digital Imaging Technician wrote:

No

Agree...no.

 mujana's gear list:mujana's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm 1:4.0-5.6 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm 1:1.8 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 75mm 1:1.8
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
mobi1
Forum MemberPosts: 65
Like?
Re: No
In reply to mujana, May 15, 2013

No - I made it a personal strategy that I shall use freeware as much as possible.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
DMillier
Forum ProPosts: 17,985
Like?
Export possible?
In reply to Marcin 3M, May 15, 2013

Does LR have the capability of exporting out all your images, edits and metadata in some kind of format other programs can use such that if you were forced to move to another program you wouldn't lose a decade of work?

The idea of non-destructive editing becomes a lot less attractive if you are forced to pay Adobe a monthly fee for the rest of your life for the right to access your photos even if you do nothing with them...

There's a name for that kind of program... "Ransomware".

I do not want to have my photos held hostage because 10 years ago I made a lot of complicated edits to a raw file that exist only in LR, in a format that no other program can replicate.

Perhaps this debate is a good one as it raises awareness of the risk that Adobe could choose to do this at any point....

-- hide signature --
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
John1940
Senior MemberPosts: 1,056Gear list
Like?
Yes
In reply to Mike CH, May 15, 2013

Mike CH wrote:

Marcin 3M wrote:

Will You buy LR5 knowing that next LR will be available through cloud only?

Why should I not buy a perpetual license just because the next might be rental?

If I have the newest version with a perpetual license, the chances are better that I can sit out a change to a rental model. Simply because a newer version can be assumed to last longer into the future than an older version can.

If a move to a rental model does eventually come up, then - at that time - I will decde what to do.

I say yes for the same reason.

Regards, Mike

-- hide signature --

Wait and see...

John1940

 John1940's gear list:John1940's gear list
Sigma DP3 Merrill
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
John1940
Senior MemberPosts: 1,056Gear list
Like?
Re: Poll Will You buy LR5 knowing that next LR will be available through cloud only?
In reply to Daisy AU, May 15, 2013

Daisy AU wrote:

Marcin 3M wrote:

Will You buy LR5 knowing that next LR will be available through cloud only?

-- hide signature --

Marcin_3M

I will never give Adobe one more of my Dollars!!  Will live with LR4 for many years and then move to Aperture or something else.

I feel much the same way about several other software packages and vendors (in other fields than photography) but not about Adobe. Strangely to many, Adobe is one of the good guys. It's all relative. Adobe may fail, and, if so, that's not unusual. I believe in competition.

I have no ties to Adobe, nor Canon, nor Sigma, nor Honda, nor Ford, nor GM, nor Samsung, nor Sony, nor to people who think that all software should be free or almost free. (If it's low in cost or free and is useful for my purposes, I'll buy it or take it, however.)

-- hide signature --

Thanks,
Daisy AU - Brisbane
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ney_images/

John1940

 John1940's gear list:John1940's gear list
Sigma DP3 Merrill
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Glen Barrington
Forum ProPosts: 13,469
Like?
Re: Glen, - response kind of long, sorry.
In reply to RobG67, May 15, 2013

Well, right now, I'm still looking.

Overall, I'm pretty impressed with a combination of ACDSee Pro 6 to replace Lightroom, and ACDSee Photo Editor 6 as the companion editor.  This combination is not perfect, and I will have to change some of my probably bad habits if I continue with it.  The combination has some glaring flaws in my mind (mostly on the Editor side which is a sort of new/sort of old, product), I like the speed and organizational capabilities of Pro.

The image quality of ACDSee Pro 6 is excellent as is the raw conversion.  And ACDSee has always had strong organizational capabilities.  On the whole I rather like it.

The editor, Photo Editor 6 was their old editor, dusted off, given a new name, had some minor changes to it and recompiled for modern PCs and Windows 8.  It was state of the art for 8 years ago, so that means it is still better than most editors out there and it doesn't cost as much as a meal  at the Olive Garden!

It has excellent image quality, opens raw files natively including dng, offers full 16 bit processing, handles most Photoshop plug-ins, has excellent color management, has layers, curves, batch processing, all the important stuff.  Plus I like the user interface, it doesn't get in the way with its cleverness or a slavish devotion to Photoshop style obtuseness.

Where the editor fails, in my mind, is in 2 areas.  First, it doesn't offer the kind of seamless integration with ACDSee Pro 6 that I think it should, and it currently only comes in a 32 bit version, which means the newer high pixel count file cameras like the Nikon D800 are going to find it useless. Let me explain the integration issue a bit.

ACDSee Pro has 2 default themes charcoal colored theme similar to what you would find in Lightroom and an optional theme that is a sort of light/medium gray. Pro is reasonably easy to modify so that the background that the photo you are working on is 'sitting' on a color of your choice.

ACDSee Photo editor comes in a theme of light gray only which doesn't match any of the default colors in ACDSee Pro. The ability to adjust the background color on which the photo being worked on is extremely limited. It is impossible to adjust this color set to match the default ones in ACDSee Pro.

What this means from a practical perspective, is, that it becomes very difficult to tell if the colors within the photo has shifted in the trip to Editor from ACDSee Pro 6. The background and surrounding colors change our perception of how color 'looks' and as a result, the unsuspecting user spends a great deal of time trying to adjust the color of the photo in Editor to make it 'look' like the way it did in ACDSee Pro, when the actual color either hasn't changed at all or has changed very little.

It is easier to adjust the theme colors between ACDSee Pro and almost any other editor I have encountered than it is to match it to ACDSee Photo Editor 6. I got to tell you, this is wrong. If you want people to think of ACDSee in terms of a software system, you need consistency in the level of controls between the stand alone modules and you need to make sure they can offer the same results.

The editor is frustrating, in that what it does do, it does so darned well! But it is almost easier to use it as a companion to Lightroom (which is what I suspect they were thinking when they released the Editor 3 months ago) than it is to use it as a companion to ACDSee Pro 6.

Another area of odd Pro 6 and Editor 6 compatibility is that when you want to send a raw photo to the editor, it sends the raw photo itself.  Since the editor can open raw, that is no problem.  But Lightroom has trained us to think the round trip should occur with a 16 bit tif file.  I'm not sure if this is a problem or a feature.  but I think the user should have the option of sending a tif file if he or she wants.

I'm  in no hurry to make a final decision,  I'll continue to use my current software for the time being while I continue to evaluate the ACDSee titles and others not already rejected by me.  I really like ACDSee Pro 6 so far, and I like ACDSee Photo Editor as a companion for Lightroom but with Pro 6, not so much.

The thing is, these titles came out before the Adobe announcement.  What I would like to see is how ACDSee Pro 7 and ACDSee Photo Editor 7 integrate with each other.  To me, that will be the true indication that ACDSee is stepping up and becoming serious about taking some of Adobe's business from them.  I got time and can afford to wait to see how things shake out.

-- hide signature --

I still like soup. . .
Now that you've judged the quality of my typing, take a look at my photos. . .
http://www.jpgmag.com/people/glenbarrington/photos

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Sunny Caribe
Contributing MemberPosts: 557Gear list
Like?
Re: Export possible?
In reply to DMillier, May 15, 2013

DMillier wrote:

Does LR have the capability of exporting out all your images, edits and metadata in some kind of format other programs can use such that if you were forced to move to another program you wouldn't lose a decade of work?

IIRC the image tags I applied in Picasa migrated to my LR catalog on import.  It might be worth testing if they survive the migration back.

The idea of non-destructive editing becomes a lot less attractive if you are forced to pay Adobe a monthly fee for the rest of your life for the right to access your photos even if you do nothing with them...

Very true, but as your title suggests exporting keeper images seems like a manageable addition to one's workflow.

There's a name for that kind of program... "Ransomware".

Ooooh, good one.  I'm going to remember that.

I do not want to have my photos held hostage because 10 years ago I made a lot of complicated edits to a raw file that exist only in LR, in a format that no other program can replicate.

Perhaps this debate is a good one as it raises awareness of the risk that Adobe could choose to do this at any point....

Exactly.  The sense of betrayal many of us feel illustrates the pitfalls of the complacence we (or at least I) have become guilty of where Adobe is concerned.  In that way, shake-up is good.

-- hide signature --
-- hide signature --

Rick
Navigating DPR on an iPad is like trying to type with a shovel.

 Sunny Caribe's gear list:Sunny Caribe's gear list
Olympus E-M1 Olympus 12-40mm F2.8 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm 1:4.0-5.6 Olympus 40-150mm F2.8 Pro Panasonic Leica Summilux DG 25mm F1.4 +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Daisy AU
Senior MemberPosts: 1,561Gear list
Like?
Re: Poll Will You buy LR5 knowing that next LR will be available through cloud only?
In reply to John1940, May 15, 2013

John1940 wrote:

Daisy AU wrote:

Marcin 3M wrote:

Will You buy LR5 knowing that next LR will be available through cloud only?

-- hide signature --

Marcin_3M

I will never give Adobe one more of my Dollars!!  Will live with LR4 for many years and then move to Aperture or something else.

I feel much the same way about several other software packages and vendors (in other fields than photography) but not about Adobe. Strangely to many, Adobe is one of the good guys. It's all relative. Adobe may fail, and, if so, that's not unusual. I believe in competition.

I have no ties to Adobe, nor Canon, nor Sigma, nor Honda, nor Ford, nor GM, nor Samsung, nor Sony, nor to people who think that all software should be free or almost free. (If it's low in cost or free and is useful for my purposes, I'll buy it or take it, however.)

-- hide signature --

Thanks,
Daisy AU - Brisbane
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ney_images/

John1940

Hi John,

I don't like the lack of option approach taken by Adobe, i.e. CC or nothing.  I pay for my software and as such I like to own it, not rent it.  I mainly use CNX2 anyhow, and LR for only certain things, as well as the Nik Plug-ins and DXO.

-- hide signature --
 Daisy AU's gear list:Daisy AU's gear list
Nikon D7000 Nikon 1 V1 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR Tokina AT-X Pro 11-16mm f/2.8 DX Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G VR +8 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
John1940
Senior MemberPosts: 1,056Gear list
Like?
Re: Glen, - response kind of long, sorry.
In reply to Glen Barrington, May 15, 2013

Thanks for a useful post. It was definitely worth the read.

John1940

Glen Barrington wrote:

Well, right now, I'm still looking.

Overall, I'm pretty impressed with a combination of ACDSee Pro 6 to replace Lightroom, and ACDSee Photo Editor 6 as the companion editor.  This combination is not perfect, and I will have to change some of my probably bad habits if I continue with it.  The combination has some glaring flaws in my mind (mostly on the Editor side which is a sort of new/sort of old, product), I like the speed and organizational capabilities of Pro.

The image quality of ACDSee Pro 6 is excellent as is the raw conversion.  And ACDSee has always had strong organizational capabilities.  On the whole I rather like it.

The editor, Photo Editor 6 was their old editor, dusted off, given a new name, had some minor changes to it and recompiled for modern PCs and Windows 8.  It was state of the art for 8 years ago, so that means it is still better than most editors out there and it doesn't cost as much as a meal  at the Olive Garden!

It has excellent image quality, opens raw files natively including dng, offers full 16 bit processing, handles most Photoshop plug-ins, has excellent color management, has layers, curves, batch processing, all the important stuff.  Plus I like the user interface, it doesn't get in the way with its cleverness or a slavish devotion to Photoshop style obtuseness.

Where the editor fails, in my mind, is in 2 areas.  First, it doesn't offer the kind of seamless integration with ACDSee Pro 6 that I think it should, and it currently only comes in a 32 bit version, which means the newer high pixel count file cameras like the Nikon D800 are going to find it useless. Let me explain the integration issue a bit.

ACDSee Pro has 2 default themes charcoal colored theme similar to what you would find in Lightroom and an optional theme that is a sort of light/medium gray. Pro is reasonably easy to modify so that the background that the photo you are working on is 'sitting' on a color of your choice.

ACDSee Photo editor comes in a theme of light gray only which doesn't match any of the default colors in ACDSee Pro. The ability to adjust the background color on which the photo being worked on is extremely limited. It is impossible to adjust this color set to match the default ones in ACDSee Pro.

What this means from a practical perspective, is, that it becomes very difficult to tell if the colors within the photo has shifted in the trip to Editor from ACDSee Pro 6. The background and surrounding colors change our perception of how color 'looks' and as a result, the unsuspecting user spends a great deal of time trying to adjust the color of the photo in Editor to make it 'look' like the way it did in ACDSee Pro, when the actual color either hasn't changed at all or has changed very little.

It is easier to adjust the theme colors between ACDSee Pro and almost any other editor I have encountered than it is to match it to ACDSee Photo Editor 6. I got to tell you, this is wrong. If you want people to think of ACDSee in terms of a software system, you need consistency in the level of controls between the stand alone modules and you need to make sure they can offer the same results.

The editor is frustrating, in that what it does do, it does so darned well! But it is almost easier to use it as a companion to Lightroom (which is what I suspect they were thinking when they released the Editor 3 months ago) than it is to use it as a companion to ACDSee Pro 6.

Another area of odd Pro 6 and Editor 6 compatibility is that when you want to send a raw photo to the editor, it sends the raw photo itself.  Since the editor can open raw, that is no problem.  But Lightroom has trained us to think the round trip should occur with a 16 bit tif file.  I'm not sure if this is a problem or a feature.  but I think the user should have the option of sending a tif file if he or she wants.

I'm  in no hurry to make a final decision,  I'll continue to use my current software for the time being while I continue to evaluate the ACDSee titles and others not already rejected by me.  I really like ACDSee Pro 6 so far, and I like ACDSee Photo Editor as a companion for Lightroom but with Pro 6, not so much.

The thing is, these titles came out before the Adobe announcement.  What I would like to see is how ACDSee Pro 7 and ACDSee Photo Editor 7 integrate with each other.  To me, that will be the true indication that ACDSee is stepping up and becoming serious about taking some of Adobe's business from them.  I got time and can afford to wait to see how things shake out.

-- hide signature --

I still like soup. . .
Now that you've judged the quality of my typing, take a look at my photos. . .
http://www.jpgmag.com/people/glenbarrington/photos

 John1940's gear list:John1940's gear list
Sigma DP3 Merrill
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
unknown member
(unknown member)
Like?
Re: Poll Will You buy LR5 knowing that next LR will be available through cloud only?
In reply to Marcin 3M, May 15, 2013

I will buy LR until it becomes a lease only product like CC products are now. I understand I am actually licensing all my software right now. But I happen to think the terms of those licensing agreements are fair and reasonable.

I am currently investigating Aperture. I may use Aperture for personal work and stay with LR 5 for client work.

 wchutt's gear list:wchutt's gear list
Fujifilm X-Pro1 Fujifilm X-T1 Fujifilm XF 23mm F1.4 R Fujifilm XF 18mm F2 R Fujifilm XF 27mm F2.8 +20 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Lee Jay
Forum ProPosts: 45,306Gear list
Like?
Re: Export possible?
In reply to DMillier, May 15, 2013

DMillier wrote:

Does LR have the capability of exporting out all your images, edits and metadata in some kind of format other programs can use such that if you were forced to move to another program you wouldn't lose a decade of work?

Sort of.  It can export out all of its edit recipes and metadata, but not flags, VCs, collection information and a few other things.  Further, those edit recipes are only compatible if given to the same "cook", i.e. Camera Raw or Lightroom, so they aren't that useful if you switch to another editing program.  You could, of course, export finished images in JPEG or TIFF format, which is the only real way to preserve exact pixel values in final images.

-- hide signature --

Lee Jay
(see profile for equipment)

 Lee Jay's gear list:Lee Jay's gear list
Canon IXUS 310 HS Canon PowerShot SX260 HS Canon EOS 5D Canon EOS 20D Canon EOS 550D +23 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads