P: Ability to copy/sync settings/adjustments across a group of photos

Well, this idea is “under consideration” as far as the tags on this forum go, so I guess that’s all we’re going to get.

Victor.. absolutely agree about communication.. and noticed I carefully worded my suggestion to say “planned” with no mention of a date or milestone. Many successful large software companies do this.. Apple, Google, Microsoft all do this with their customers especially with pro tools and web services.

Brad, if you’ve worked on multiple software projects you’re probably extremely familiar with the dangers of communicating any planned features 🙂 Priorities shift, strategies shift, markets shift. Being quiet is infinitely better than promising without delivering.

Victoria.. the original pitch for CC was “Built for professionals and enthusiasts, the new Lightroom CC fulfills the demands of today’s photographers for a more accessible, cloud-based photography service for editing, organizing, storing and sharing their photos from wherever they are.”

Again.. Read this “the NEW LIGHTROOM CC...” wonder how people think it’s the successor or a new version of LR CC, that clearly spells it out.

Now.. Directly from the press release:
“As the leader in digital photography, today Adobe is unveiling Lightroom CC, our next generation photography service,” said Bryan Lamkin, executive vice president and general manager, Digital Media at Adobe. “Lightroom CC answers photographers’ demand for a deeply integrated, intelligent, cloud-based photography solution.”

Not. “Built for Professionals” as we have discussed.. bc photo “professionals” have the need for batch editing and batch export (especially on desktop)

My advice is to stop the Corp backtracking talk bc everyone understands that this product was :
A) released without the main features needed to be considered professional
B) marketed in a way that confuses consumers
C) extremely close to fully delivering the dream of replacing a desktop dedicated workflow,

Personally I have worked on multiple major software projects , I think the main problem occurred in stating the problem you were trying to solve. “As a photographer I want to be able to edit my photos on any device and have changes sync as they are made.” You get started and during demos with photographers you either intentionally avoid professionals or didn’t present in a way where they would be able to edit on a computer AND mobile device simultaneously, which would increase your chance of finding that user needs batch edit and export functions for their daily work.

What frustrates me the most is that both you and Rick seem to understand this is an important feature, yet the development team won’t allow you to communicate IF this feature is planned. That promise alone would likely get more people interested in learning and using the current version with the hope of one day making it their replacement for Classic.

Oh yeah, the naming is silly, no question about that!

Except it's called iOS and macOS (or iPhone OS and Max OS X at the time), so it's clear that they one is not a successor to the other.

Like has been mentioned before here, taking an app called Lightroom CC, adding "Classic" to it's name, then releasing a new software called Lightroom CC and saying it isn't a successor, it's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. 

Perhaps it isn't meant to be a successor, but then the name shouldn't have been reused the way it has. Wasn't it called Lightroom Mobile in the beginning?

> It has been pointed out that LrCC is not an upgrade or successor to LrCCC. I don't know how to state that more plainly. It is a new product with a feature set based around a mobile workflow. 

Best comparison I've managed to come up with is the difference between macOS and iOS. iOS didn't have any kind of multi-tasking for a long time. How could they not let you have two apps open at the same time, after we've used computers that way for decades?!?  But it wasn't that they'd taken it away - they just hadn't added it yet, because all these things take time to develop. Copy/sync is very similar - once it's available, it'll be a huge productivity boost for us. It has to be one of the top priorities for the majority of photographers, so I think it's only a matter of time.

Rick, I realize Adobe has put you in a tough position defending their marketing strategy. Telling us what LR CC is and what it is not is not misses our point. We clearly understand what this program doesn’t do, and the frustration stems from our EXCITEMENT about what this software could be IF some of the core functionality of its predecessor was available on iPad and Desktop.

Yeah, I have to echo these comments.  The request from us as avid users has been to vote for the features that matter to us.  This feature has over 100 votes, many many more than any other feature on here.  Does that mean you can allocate some more resources to getting this done as soon as possible?

I find all of this hard to tolerate as we are all being told that if we want to keep using the software we are used to, we have to pay a lot more.  The only version of CC Classic that allows us to "try" Lightroom CC and sync back and forth is the monthly-pay version, so my perpetual license is useless.  And to get a reasonable amount of storage, and access to both programs, I'm paying 2x what I used to pay.  And now given that I've got a new camera (A7 iii), I can't even use my perpetual copy of lightroom....

All this leaves a pretty bad taste in my mouth.  I'm happy to pay a reasonable price for pro quality software.  This kindof feels like being nickel and dimed - I have to pay 2x to access the same feature set via two different apps, and is leading me to seriously consider a competitor.

Hi Rick – I respect all that you've said here, and I must say I don't envy your role as Community Specialist in a forum like this. 🙂 

That said, I know our feedback as paying customers is important, and I am here to do my part.

There are two or three main issues here for which Adobe's official explanations just don't seem to hold water. And I feel they are being a little tone-deaf about the whole thing, which isn't helping.

1) The name. For Pete's sake. It has exactly the same name as a previous product, yet it is supposed to be perceived as distinctly different. For a company so steeped in marketing and branding disciplines, giving the product a different name or tweaking their messaging should have been a no-brainer. I can *guarantee* you if they had named it something different, or called it a beta release or whatever, you would not need to be in here catching all this flak on their behalf.

2) The workflow. The new universal app appears geared toward an efficient hand-off between devices, locations, etc., which is AWESOME. I honestly love the new LrCC apps, for the most part. However... Having to switch back and forth between the new/old ecosystems (and to know all the geeky workarounds) just to make it work defeats the stated purpose. 

3) "New" features. This whole thing about pasting settings across multiple images being a "new feature" just because it wasn't in the initial release really strains credulity. Why not take away white balance and exposure controls while you're at it?? I simply cannot imagine a workflow where this would not be necessary, and I think most users would agree on that point. This isn't a matter of "my pet feature" making it into the app; it's a matter of selling me a Farrari with three wheels. It has all the power, engineering, and style... but I can't go anywhere.

Seriously, I would *love* to see statistics on how many people use split-toning vs. sync'd settings. 

Please understand that my criticism stems from my excitement for what LrCC *could* be and how much I already like it. I know it will get better. But only if Adobe listens to their customers.