P: Lightroom Ecosystem: Selective Sync

Somewhat blown away that selective album/folder sync does not exist in this product. The storage price per GB is way high given the fact that people are already paying a subscription for the product. The "selection" of storage tiers is flatly offensive coupled with the price differential (100GB to 1TB?). And what about people with older computers (cloud sync ramps my fans on a brand new XPS15 with 32GB) and slow upload speed? This just does not make sense given that the feature would be trivial to implement. Someone in finance is being stubborn, but such is the state of the world in 2019. This is a cash grab by Adobe to wring even more money from loyal customers who've already been slapped around aggressively during a terribly confusing product launch/transition from the outset. You want people to switch to LRCC, make it worth switching to. There is a reason C1 is gaining traction, and it isn't just because PhaseOne got great at marketing all of the sudden.

What happened to this thing. It is impossible to use Lightroom at my home. My upload speed is 0.5mbps and once it starts uploading all my internet gets jammed. I have added photos in Lightroom and now I can not control which one to sync. If I pause the sync, it will also pause any other share such as in portfolio. Hope they will fix this issue fast.

I did some more exploring and discovered I can sync albums in Lightroom Classic to Adobe Creative Cloud, allowing me to edit on the go in Lightroom CC from mobile. It's unfortunate that I can't sync Smart Albums but doing the sync manually isn't a huge inconvenience due to the low volume of photos I capture.

Thanks Victoria!

Top of my list of features is selective sync. Australian internet makes cloud storage completely useless, and therefore the idea of editing in multiple places also useless unless we have selective sync. If I added even half the photos I took per year to lightroom, that's a terabyte of RAW files. On Australian internet, that'd take about two years to upload. There's no way to tell which RAWs it uploads first either, meaning if I want to upload RAWs, I've got to wait for all the photos I add to upload before I can edit the most recent on my phone. This is a ludicrous system and makes the whole thing the opposite of convenient.

Alex, you're exactly Lightroom Classic's target audience. Even IF it were eventually to go away, that's not likely to happen until CC was a viable alternative for most users exactly BECAUSE Adobe's so profit oriented. I'd suggest you stick with Classic for now and see how things play out.

This is a related problem. With 110K pictures and movies, LR CC slows down noticeably on my 4.3GH *6 desktop, and becomes useless on my Surface Book 2 with 8GB and 256GB of memory.
In both cases my pictures and videos are on USB3 external drives.
If I could restrict LR CC database to a period of time and geography, I would have full use of LR CC without the delays involved in large databases. Is this possible? 
The same can be accomplished if I can specify which files are within LR CC and which are not on the Web.

This is going to be a long post but my frustration with the new Adobe Lightroom CC is well founded.

I've been using Adobe Lightroom for years, I think since Lightroom 2 or 3? It's a powerful tool in my workflow and I truly can't see myself without the software. When Adobe switched to the subscription based Creative Cloud I was hesitant but followed. If Photoshop CC wasn't included I wouldn't have made the switch to the subscription model.

When Lightroom was renamed to Lightroom Classic CC I was worried but figured I'd try the new Lightroom CC. It was awful, lacked many of the tools I had relied on and it felt like using a mobile app on a computer. SO I switched back and lost a lot of faith in Adobe's vision for Lightroom.

I got a new phone last year and downloaded the Lightroom CC mobile app so I could take RAW photos and edit those photos. I had seen that the apps capabilities had been vastly improved since I last used it. I was starting to become a bit more mobile in my photography and wanted to revisit using Lightroom CC on my computer so I could also edit on my phone, web, and eventually a tablet.

Now, I don't do photography as a career but more of a passionate hobby. I exported about 600 photos that I had recently taken to a new Library Catalog so I could import into Lightroom CC. To get my toes wet, so to speak. Imagine my surpise when I ran out of Adobe Cloud storage space.

I looked all through Lightroom CC's settings, looking for a way to limit the number of days I could have in the cloud at once. I discovered it's simply not possible. Every photo is uploaded to Adobe Cloud. I'm not a fan. I came back to Lightroom CC after seeing the clear improvements made, but Lightroom CC was not the Phoenix I expected it to be. Now my faith of Lightroom's future in my workflow is even lower.

I have 3TB of photos going back 8+ years. I'm probably never going to editing those photos again, let alone ones from 2 years ago or even 6 months ago. I'd have to pay $50/mo for 5TB of space, because 2TB is the last option before 5TB. As a hobbyist, I'm not paying that. Amazon let's me upload photos for free, even RAW photos. I'm not going to pay $50 a month for the privilege of editing with Adobe's latest Lightroom CC. No. You've lost me there.

I already have an online back up in place, I don't need to pay for another back up solution. It's prohibitively expensive for me to switch to the latest and greatest Lightroom.

So, let me select how many photos to keep in Adobe CC. Maybe I decide to keep 30 days? Maybe 3000 photos? Maybe the last 3 imports only?

But Alex, what if you want to edit photos from 5 years ago?
Two things can happen, and ideally a combination of these.

1. The desktop version of Lightroom CC can edit all my photos because it's connected to the hard drive/network the photos are stored. Not sure if phone, tablet, and web versions of Lightroom CC can connect to network drives but as long as I'm on my network, and connected to my NAS (or physically to a hard drive), I think it's reasonable that the desktop version of Lightroom CC can edit all of my photos.
2. Create a "Lightroom Server" that runs on a NAS or computer that the client (the desktop, mobile, and web) versions connect to. If I want to edit a photo that's not in the cloud, then the server software running at my home will upload the photo directly to my phone/tablet, so I don't use any additional Adobe Cloud space.

If I upload photos from the field to Adobe Cloud from my tablet then the Cloud should talk with the server software running on my NAS and remove the older photos from Adobe Cloud, ensuring I keep the last X days/imports of photos online and the rest locally on my NAS at home.

I feel priced out, and that I'll need to find a solution that isn't Adobe.
I love the software, I do, but if this is the stance that Adobe is taking with Lightroom I can't recommend Lightroom to my friends. I'm starting to look at other solutions. There's nothing quite like Lightroom CC yet, but the moment something exists I'm taking my business there.

I know I'm just one voice in a sea of millions to you guys but I strongly feel Lightroom CC isn't the solution Adobe advertises it to be. Revenue and shareholders will continue to drive Adobe one way while alienating users like me; hobbyists who simply want to have the freedom to edit on their tablet, phone, or web, when away from their computer and library without having to sacrifice a goat because we have terabytes of photos that Adobe insists on uploading and charging us space for.

Add the feature for manually photo sync and i will use Lightroom CC.