P: Additional options needed when exporting

Export limitations are a bad Thing for all platforms. It limits the users in their workflow and does not allow further editing without loosing Qualität. Sure, a high quality jpeg ist not bad at all but there are many use cases you need loosless exports like tif or psd. I am sure this would be very easy to implement because these formats are state of the art and maybe just export parameters.

Additionally, if you want to print photos, you may need a quality that is somewhere betweend the two offered options. You may not believe it, but in many regions upload speed is still limited. However, let the user define the compression rate and size of the picture would and should also not be a big thing. I am sure you use existing libraries for that and they all allow to export with parameters (type, compression, size, etc). So how long would it take to implement and test? 1 day? Maybe 2

> Adobe seems to be taking advantage of (or ignoring) this confusion when prioritizing features, blaming users for not knowing where to voice there opinion.
For example, they‘ve implemented “sync settings” on desktop but not mobile, claiming that people haven’t voted for the mobile feature.

Don't worry, all of the feature requests get considered, whether they're showing as mobile or desktop.

Mobile is considered a first class platform, but each team has its own features to be working on, so the different platforms tend to leapfrog each other. Each platform has its own strengths and weaknesses, for example, the mobile team has camera improvements to fit into their development time, which doesn't apply to desktop, and mobile operating systems and devices have different limitations to desktop ones.

Rick, you’ve merged a topic specifically referring to the mobile product into a desktop product thread.

I offer more examples of this repeated behavior here: https://feedback.photoshop.com/photos...

Given that Adobe seems to be putting a lot of weight on where exactly features are requested when prioritizing them, perhaps you can elaborate into where users should ask for feedback for a specific platform, and why mobile is treated as a second class citizen given how topics are merged and how thread comments are interpreted?

Absolutely crazy that this has not been solved, finally decided to give lightroom cc mobile a go, upgraded to the 1tb plan, imported 2000 photos, spent hours editing a selection, now I wish to make further edits in affinity for example, but there is no point in making any further edits to a lossy jpeg! Wished I had done further research into the export options before investing a lot of time and money into this! Will need to look for an alternative solution, maybe scrap adobe all together, and stick to capture one on desktop too.

The fun part is that Adobe likes to pretend like this particular forum isn’t about Lightroom on iOS or Android at all (despite the fact that it’s called Lightroom CC on all platforms).

There are two product forums for Lightroom (not counting Classic):
Lightroom CC: https://feedback.photoshop.com/photos...
Lightroom for Mobile: https://feedback.photoshop.com/photos...

People post in either one of these product forums, referring to mobile products inside “Lighroom CC” and vice-versa. And of course they do, this product is called “Lighroom CC” everywhere. Adobe seems to be taking advantage of (or ignoring) this confusion when prioritizing features, blaming users for not knowing where to voice there opinion.

For example, they‘ve implemented “sync settings” on desktop but not mobile, claiming that people haven’t voted for the mobile feature. However, it’s clear that comments have been referencing all platforms extensively: https://feedback.photoshop.com/photos...

Another example: Adobe has been merging requests marked for both “Lightroom mobile” + “Lightroom CC” (desktop) into desktop-only threads, without a corresponding topic or vote in the mobile-only thread: https://feedback.photoshop.com/photos...

To do these things, yet also claim that more people vote for desktop but not mobile is either disingenous or proof that Adobe doesn’t know how to receive feedback. They’re doing a lot of great things, but I’m baffled at their continuous refusal to treat mobile as a first class platform.

So I guess you’ll have to more actively voice your opinion in the other product forum if you want to get something on iOS, then hope that Adobe listens to you in a few years 🙂

I'm currently testing Lightroom CC on iOS and staggered about the non-existing export options. I really like the possibilities for the basic editing. But I don't understand that I can't define the export details like format/compression (JPG, TIFF, ...), ICC-Profile or dimensions of the photo. Please add these very basic options in the near future to keep up with your claim to be the best mobile editing app ...

Came here solely with the hope that the export limitations are known and other people care. Of all possible features, the lack of control on export types/quality is the most crippling.

> Contrary to what Adobe probably assumes, most users don't visit these forums at all.

Adobe knows only a small number of their users visits the forum, but the percentage of votes compared to other requests still provides useful feedback, rather than focusing on the actual number of votes. In my experience, the percentages are fairly accurate when compared against the feedback I hear from a wide range of sources. 

Contrary to what Adobe probably assumes, most users don't visit these forums at all. I doubt that the vast majority even cares about expressing their satisfaction or dissatisfaction in a forum like this one at all. They're angry and talk about it with their friends or just switch to a different product.

Getting useful feedback from your users is hard. But Adobe is worse at doing it that many other companies (perhaps intentionally).

If they added a more streamlined way for people to request for features (like an obvious button in the application's UI), the signal would increase dramatically... along with the noise.

You are right, Export the original is possible. But: Then I don't need Lightroom, the original is already on my SD Card. Since most tools I know do not (fully) interpret the XMP File that is exported with the original, the way to use Lightroom as a tool between makes no sense.