P: Export images at multiple resolutions in one go

As I told you, conspiracy theories are fun (but ridiculous.) Bridge and Lightroom work a lot differently, and whether for better or worse, there is not much integration. You want a feature that isn't possible and when told that, you call me an apologist.

Some of us are working pros who rely on Adobe and we have been among the harshest critics. In private, I've let Adobe developers know how I really feel.

So maybe lighten up on the ad hominem attacks against people trying to help you, huh?

Thank you Leroy, although we all have our off moments. 😉  Our aim is to help find those workarounds and solutions. That can be hard at times, particularly when frustration spills over into a more aggressive manner, it's easy to end up on the defensive. Things can spiral easily, especially over a keyboard, which is missing body language and tone of voice. 

As for Adobe, they have a much bigger audience, and a lot more people pulling them in every direction. While I'd love for them to be as responsive as a small developer, that's not realistic, so we all try to find a middle ground.

Victoria, you've always been helpful and sincere in the many years that I've known you in several Lightroom forums.  Thank you for that. Unfortunately, I can't unreservedly say the same about many others on the Adobe forums (ACPs) .

Just this morning I had another eye-rolling exchange with one of the ACPs that I define as very clearly "Adobe Apologist/Adobe Justifier".  My question pertained to identifying images flagged in Lightroom with Bridge.  The response I got was "that's like expecting Excel to be able to do that".  Um, what????  Excel isn't a DAM/media management app made by Adobe.  It's the same reactionary "you're nuts for wanting to do that" response that is all too frequent in the Adobe forums and which Rick referred to in this thread.

In stark contrast, I asked the folks at Photo Mechanic the same question and their reply was "try method X, Y or Z.  If that doesn't work let us know and we'll figure out how to make it work."  Why can't Adobe be similarly focused on customer needs and suggestions?  Is that really expecting too much?

I can tell you that in my large circle of photographer friends and colleagues, there's no abundance of love for Lightroom or the direction Adobe is headed.  Many have jumped ship to competing products.  I've stayed, mostly because it's the devil I know.

You seem to have a conduit to the Adobe folks.  I hope you are able to communicate these frustrations to them in some sort of constructive way. 

Thank you.

I do understand your frustration Rick. 

The observations about 42 votes were accurate. The relative number of votes is taken into account when prioritizing. The small percentage of votes doesn't surprise me, because it's not a feature that "the average Lightroom user" would use. It would be very valuable to professionals, but professionals are a small percentage of the overall users, so the number of people a feature would help has to be taken into account. That doesn't mean it won't get done, but it's a factor.

The 1138 vote thread on syncing smart collections is indeed a much higher number, so that request will have been given serious consideration, and at this point, the answer is clearly no. Adobe's focusing their cloud sync efforts on the Lightroom Cloud ecosystem, which is designed for that purpose, rather than trying to sellotape it onto a program that has a strong folder-based foundation. They haven't removed existing cloud sync functionality from Classic, but they're not adding to it. So, as far as setting expectations goes... 

They're not closing threads because things change. Some feature requests have been around for years, with everyone giving up hope, and then suddenly they reach to the top of the priority list and surprise everyone. 

Thank you for responding Victoria, in fact you have always been helpful to people on the forum, without ever being patronizing, and I've appreciated that.

In this thread as well, you initiated the discussion asking ideas for how this might work. 

I see 3 parts to the problem: 

a)  based on what you have stated, Adobe seems too chicken to respond directly in the forums, and leaves the unpleasant job of setting expectations to others who have insight into the roadmap. This is the only company I know which acts like this. It is unfair to those clamoring for "low hanging fruit" changes, and it is unfair to those who have to bear the brunt of the backlash. 

b) Your responses are not patronizing. John B's were patronizing, rude. In fact he had no reason to jump in. If he'd simply let it go, this thread wouldn't be this long. He repeatedly tried to poke holes in what others said, giving inane reasons. That wasn't expectation setting, that was aggression to defend Adobe. I've nothing more to say to such a person.
But Adobe should think twice before making such people their "indirect interface" if indeed John B is part of the inner circle.

c) It is an effort to login, add comments, and upvote, when a person sees that the ticket is going on for 8 long years, there are other tickets that have a thousand votes and still languishing. It was an effort for me, to see ticket after ticket being pushed aside like this via proxy, until I finally vented out. It is not something I enjoy. But I've been seeing this for a long time now.

As far as expectations go, I've stated repeatedly earlier, that no one is asking for this to be done tomorrow, but, we expect to know whether Adobe is even considering it? That's not too much to ask. 

But the responses I got addressed everything except the above:
1. Hey, just 42 votes (no mention of that ticket which is still pending, and has 1138 votes)
2. Don't rant here - I have counted the number of times "please" has been said on this request, the 1138-vote request, pleading doesn't seem to be getting any attention either. 
3. "let me tell you how software works, and how feedback is taken" - once again, the expectation is of acknowledging a problem, that's the first step, which Adobe doesn't take. 
4. "Here's a hack, don't bother Adobe, they have more important things to do". Software engineers are supposed to prioritize on 3 parameters: Impact, Effort, and Frequency. If something is low effort, has moderate frequency, and moderate impact, best to get it done with. Or, best to say they won't do it, so people won't waste their time. Leaving a ticket open for 8 years is not done. 

I went through the thread on the $9.99 plan disappearing due to A/B testing, and on that thread, to paraphrase, it was said "phoning in helps Adobe get feedback" --> my question is, if someone is "setting expectations" by telling people "this is not an important problem for Adobe", how's Adobe going to know what their user base really wants? 

As you have their ear, I do sincerely request you to ask Adobe to either start acknowledging the basic stuff that's agitating their users, or, to start closing out tickets saying "Won't be done". Their clients deserve that clarity. 

> I found multiple threads all asking for this feature and they had anywhere from 20 votes to 200

Craig, since you've already found those additional threads, post the links and we'll merge them so the votes are combined. The moderators do try to combine requests asking for the same feature, but they're not always easy to find.

Rick, just understand that ranting gets ignored, while logical explanations of how a feature will make a big difference in your workflow gets given serious consideration, even if that can't be actioned at that time.

The product teams weigh a lot of priorities, and as you've pointed out, each new feature that's added comes at the cost of time that can't be spent on performance improvements.

It's also worth understanding that many of the "Adobe justifiers" have been involved in private conversations with the engineering team and what you see as "snuffling out" requests is usually an attempt to set expectations, based on the decisions they've been given privately. 

You began by insulting other customers, "Rick A"....

Leroy Schulz said:

Never-ending commitment?  Much like a subscription model?  😄

Best not to vanish down that rabbit hole, but let's not forget that while the subscription model was sold to us with the promise of delivering features, that doesn't mean we should whine if don't get our own pet must-haves. But as you realize, I was referring to your point #5. Adobe saying "but not now" once in x years satisfies few, and how frank could interactivity ever be? Just a simple suggestion of "it's not rocket science though relatively few people want it" leads one angry keyboard warrior to spin into an ever-more long-winded imitation of the Bruno Ganz Downfall scene. While it may be better to have this forum than not, it is like I suggested, a hostage to fortune if we users can't be realistic.

If a company maintains their own forum they owe it to those submitting ideas on that forum, to acknowledge and track their requests. Otherwise, there's always r/lightroom. 

If Adobe isn't interested in engaging with customers they should simply shut this down, instead of encouraging people to post here and then shutting them up directly or via proxy. Then we all know without a doubt that we cannot ever hope to get anything from Adobe (BTW it is an irony that the service provider is "GetSatisfaction" lol what a let down)


Leroy Shulz, thank you for documenting everything that's wrong.

John B, you seem to have enjoyed painting me as a conspiracy theorist.

However something is still very wrong with your understanding or your intent when misinterpreting my original comments: You keep insisting and trying to twist my intent as an attempt to blame all fellow customers, and I'm only directing my ire at those select few who keep turning up in many threads just to shut people up. In this thread, that role was wonderfully essayed by you.

If you want to be acrimonious, at least don't rely on twisting people's words, that will give you some credibility in the discussion.

It's my educated guess that this feature isn't costly, but AFAIK only one competing product has ever offered it, so relatively-little customer interest may well have been the key.  

What? So Apple shouldn't have added gestures to their mouse or hot corners to their GUI? And then why does Adobe have the "Enhance Detail" feature at all, by that logic? You have plunged to deeper lows here with these comments. 

As for "low customer interest" --> that applies only to resource intensive features. Something so simple and mundane like multiple export options should be a no-brainer to get done, so that you go 1-up on the competition with a wider feature set. 

Because it would be a never-ending commitment? There's a limit to what they can promise, and I'm not sure it would help much to say "we hear you" every year that passes by

Perfectly Adobesplained, as expected from a Justifier/Apologist. You have excelled at patronizing and insulting people to defend Adobe. If we really were to listen to your misplaced advice, a vendor should only take your money and never own any responsibility. Microsoft did just that, and went down the drain until finally they started actually listening to their clients. 

Your one-sided view, that Customers should have a never-ending commitment to Adobe via subscription, while Adobe shouldn't be bothered to engage with them because it risks a "never ending commitment", is just ridiculous.
Adobe will cut off their commitment to me the day I don't pay their fees. This is certainly not a never ending commitment from their side. 

And why even twist the discussion by shifting the goal post into the topic of "commitment"? Adobe is into the business of making software, to sell. If they keep behaving this way, there won't be enough people left to buy it because others are getting better. 5 years ago people on these forums weren't talking so often about switching, and the frequency of those mentions has increased. 

The problem is John B, the critics are trying to help Adobe salvage its reputation because they've become blinded by their arrogance, and that's the part that Justifiers are missing out on. On the other hand, you are the ones who are doing the greatest harm to the company by telling people to shush.

Your points thus far, John have simply been aimed at antagonizing critics and defending Adobe. No one had aimed any criticism at you and yet you wanted to jump in, and even after Leroy S put together everything in a succinct post for your consumption, you insist on poking holes in it. You really have no credibility left on this discussion John B thanks to that approach. 

Re: the comparison to other companies, I don't know anything about CatureOne's forums. 
Apple has a twitter support team, a very responsive get support site, and unlike Adobe's team, the Apple team provides resolutions in a timely manner. The Adobe team merely parrots out predefined responses. 

Apple has their own forum, and the scenario there is pretty much the same as you see on the Adobe forums. 

However, here's the difference: Apple has fewer well paying customer for its hardware, they know what those customers need most, and they know how to keep them happy. For its services, they keep churning out a slew of bug fixes and listen to the smallest tremors. 

When Apple slips up, retribution from their customers is swift and hard, as it should be, make no mistake about that.. There's no place for feudalism when you are a client. 

Lastly, you patronizingly asked me to read a comment by apmadoc.. I hope you also read my response to that comment, especially the part about "Voice of Customer". But you chose to ignore that anyway, because you think that would be a "never ending commitment" for Adobe, right?

John B, so far, you have tried to misrepresent my intent, tried to school me on how software development works, tried to teach me how customer engagement works, tried to de-emphasise the importance of this thread itself, tried to Adobesplain how features are prioritized, all the while assuming you are The Knowledgeable One and everyone else is an idiot. Please step down from that mound of dirt which you think is a mountain. 

I conclude by leaving you to ponder over this comment from Frank Kloskowski:

I am a Software Engineer by day and I it is a fact that developing this functionality would be "low hanging fruit" for Adobe compared to other functionality requests I have seen.

Never-ending commitment?  Much like a subscription model?  😄