Is there a future for LR Classic?

[Califdan2]

With this weeks announcement one has to wonder what Adobe's strategic plan is for Lightroom.  But, there hare hints.  First of all let's look at product naming.  Why would thay take the name of an existing product (LR CC) and give that name to a new product and then rename the prior product "Classic" (as in "old", or "obsolete")?

To me this is a strong hint that their strategic plan is to move forward with the new CC version and abandon what they now call Classic.  If that were not the case, why not call the pre-existing version "LR Pro", or :"LR Desktop" and the new one "LR Lite" or "Lightroom Elements" or "LR Web" or "LR Mobile"?  There were so many name alternatives that would have made more sense if their intention was to keep both products.  So, I suspect that keeping both products for the long term is not their intent.

Maybe the new CC product is fine for the casual user but the structure of the new LR CC is not conducive to the needs of the professional or advanced photographer.  These are people with multiple terabytes of RAW images,  These are people with multiple catalogs, these are people who do their own high end printing.  These are people who's very livelihood depends on advanced features in both the Library and the Develop module (among others).  I have no doubt that LR/CC will acquire the full range of tools from ACR, but the structure of LR/CC seems to preclude getting advanced features in the Library area.  And, as it seems to be a mainly mobile oriented tool set the idea of a robust print capability is somewhat suspect (how many people print form their iPhone?).

And then there is caqpacity.  Even if Adobe allowed unlimited cloud storage for no extra cost, who can afford the time required to upload 4 or 5 thousand images to the cloud after a shoot?   And, without a folder structure (the lack of which in CC seems to be a fundamental design construct) and non hierarchical keywords managing images becomes a nightmare. Not to mention the current lack of smart collections and publish services which many of us rely on quite heavily. 

So, I am scared that Adobe may just pull the plug on Classic in a year or two.  In fact they have already stated that they will no longer make changes to Classic other than in the Develop Module.  And they really have to do very little to incorporate new Develop Module features since they are coded in the RAW processor that is used by ACR for Photoshop, LR CC, LR Classic, and as I understand even Elements.  For LR Classic all they need to do is add the slider or panel. So, in essence they are stating that they will not be devoting resources to Classic other than adding a slider or panel to operate a new RAW Processor feature.

Remember when in CC/2015.2 they destroyed the Import Dialog in a misguided attempt to "modernize" the process (read dumb down the process)?  Remember the user backlash that eventually forced them to back track?  Well, they didn't give up.  Instead they are doing the same thing but just packaging it differently and extending it beyond just the import dialog.  The seem to be dumbing down the entire product (as they did with the import dialog)  but are trying to avoid the backlash by packaging it in a different product.  Think about this.  What would you be doing right now if they had announced that the only LR going forward was what they now call CC (or even the new CC with all the same develop module tools from Classic) and that the older version would no longer be supported?   I suspect this is their ultimate goal but they are stretching out the implementation to avoid the backlash. 

If you agree with my reasoning and have a problem with what I suspect is the ultimate goal, NOW is the time to let them know.  Don't wait till they pull the plug on Classic which I believe is the ultimate goal.  Let them know NOW that if they do they will have another "improved import dialog" disaster on their hands and it will be much worse as there are now some fine competitive products on the market where their customer base may flee to. 

NOW is the time to let them know that you want Classic to remain, to be supported, and to be upgraded with new features in ALL the modules (not just the Develop Module).   NOW is the time to let them know that LR/CC is not looking like it can be a long term solution to your needs.

Apologies for this rant but fear drives action and I'm scared.

Dan

[Jao vdL]

nbirkett51  wrote

Many people are looking for the 'create a Mona Lisa' button rather than invest the effort into learning how to create art.  Maybe the magical AI button will work for selfies and the like.  But, for real art, you need more control and more mastery of the software process.  That is being lost.

I think you are way underestimating the potential for art with these tools. This is the same argument leveled against photography originally that it was just a shortcut and you could never create real art for which you needed years of training and hours of work. Sure many of the millennials just want a magic button but they are not the target here. There are many highly creative people who couldn't care less what goes on inside the computer or simply do not have the mindset to understand it as it doesn't give them any advantage they perceive as being worth it. There are many people making real art with a phone and iPad and just some apps. Lightroom CC is just a logical extension of this. In fact I think the real dinosaurs in this whole thing are the camera manufacturers none of whom have any clue how to plug in to this ecosystem. Some try but fail miserably (think Nikon's horrible mobile apps). This is why they are losing to iPhones so badly.

I know that if I am honest about it, I could do basically everything I do for my art (I do landscape photography as my main creative outlet) with Lightroom CC and the apps around it. I do generate 1000's of images on a trip for sure so I am an edge case, but the editing tools have almost everything (I use camera matching profiles, so not completely everything) I need and I really enjoy editing images on my iPad Pro which is basically the same as Lightroom CC on a desktop but you can actually touch your images for real! I do print and I use publish services to get my images on my website and I have multiple terabytes of images on RAID storage so there is no way I can go for the Lightroom CC system as my main repository even if I wanted to. Currently I use Lightroom Classic and sync selectively from there which gives me editing capability on my iPad (unfortunately Classic only syncs Smart previews so it's not entirely what I want).

[Samoreen]

I agree with you on this. This problem is even worse as you might think. I have been teaching programmimg to developers for years and in the years preceding my retirement I started to have problems with some students. When I wanted to learn them some low level concept or mechanism, they often reacted badly and told me that this was useless. “Just tell me where I should click to generate this code”. Learning the internals is apparently no longer mandatory when using high level tools... until something goes wrong and you need to diagnose the problem. Which may explain why a lot of bugs are still waiting to be fixed in Adobe‘s software. But that’s another story.

[kwschnautz]

Samoreen  wrote

Not for people not having a technical/computing background.

AMEN.

As a controls engineer by trade, and photographer by hobby, I can't fathom why I would put all my files in a lump 'catalog' file. That's the primary reason I never could commit to using Apple's iPhoto or Photos app. I want to organize in one place (OSX Finder or Windows Explorer)**(see note) and have all my applications be able to see and use that organization. Placing files in a proprietary 'catalog file' (1) makes any edits to files invisible to other applications and (2) makes it impossible to do incremental backup and/or restore of specific files.

** the beauty of Lightroom, for me, was that my physical folder-based organization was transparent within Lightroom. If I moved a file in Lightroom, it moved it in the OS, in my backups, and even in my Smugmug galleries, when I used them. And BONUS: The edits and metadata from Lightroom were embedded INTO the original files (DNGs), so if I ever wanted to work outside Lightroom, the edits (and the original unedited file) were all available to every other application.

[kwschnautz]

Oh, and BTW... I'm probably considered the 'younger generation', as I'm under 30. So careful when we make broad assumptions based on age.

[Jao vdL]

kwschnautz  wrote

Oh, and BTW... I'm probably considered the 'younger generation', as I'm under 30. So careful when we make broad assumptions based on age.

I don't make that assumption. I was talking broad categories. There are many older folks for whom the cloud+mobile workflow is actually perfect. There are many younger folks who have deep knowledge on computer systems and software and like everything in their own control. Nothing wrong with either approach.

[nbirkett51]

kwschnautz  wrote

Oh, and BTW... I'm probably considered the 'younger generation', as I'm under 30. So careful when we make broad assumptions based on age.

I did put 'younger generation' is quotation marks.  I was trying to use it as a joking reflection of the age old argument from the 'old folks' that the 'young ones' don't know nothing   I understand that people's interests and knowledge vary greatly in all age groups - there are many brilliant artists and computer experts in the 'younger generation'.

[Jao vdL]

Samoreen  wrote

Well, 2 ACPS, 2 different opinions. Interesting. I'm teaching Lightroom to amateurs since about 5-6 years. A vast majority of them have difficulties with the catalog and complain about being forced to import images before working on them. Not even mentioning the concept of database. That's exactly what the new LR CC is targeting. No more catalog, no more folders, less features to learn, just feed the beast and it will take care of your images.

I have the exact experience in my classes. I get a mix of amateurs and more advanced users. I have taught Lightroom for beginners and "advanced lightroom editing"-type classes. For many of the students I've had, Lightroom CC would be a godsend and already does all they need. By far the whole concept in Lightroom Classic of importing and understanding what happens to their image files is just flabbergasting to them.

[Jao vdL]

Oh and I do get a smaller category of people that insists on organizing everything by hand in the file explorer/finder, which invariably messes up their Lightroom catalogs. Those would never give up control over their files to a cloud but they are a disappearing breed. Most of the younger crowd is very used to cloud everything.

[critterbug1976]

I know what your saying.  I feel the same way, and have the same concerns.  Thats the main reason I never switched from Lightroom 6 to CC and now.... NEVER will.   I will continue to use Lightroom 6 in the short term, but I have begun looking for alternatives.  I hoped Adobe would not go this direction, but they are.  Im not.

Capture One Pro 10 looks pretty impressive.  I will have to change my workflow a bit, but I think its worth it.  Im going to give the 30 day trial a test run and see how I like it. 

[nigeld36301247]

Of course LR Classic is an endangered species. So is LR6 and even LRCC!

I believe ​LIGHTROOM WEB ​is the future. No local software. Log in to LW do any edits, etc. send finished files to wherever. Log out. ETC

Maybe an uploaded/downloader app for desktop and mobile.

I believe this is the direction that most software will go. It relieves mobile devices, especially, of need to process and/or store big data. All done at Adobe, Apple, Microsoft, etc, etc, and data is stored in the cloud servers and databanks.

[David_Illig]

What is your evidence for this assertion? Do you have evidence, or is this idle speculation based on either a fear or a desire?

The argument against this is the fact that Adobe and Apple have collaborated to develop the latest iPad Pro that is “faster than 92% of laptops” to run a full version of Photoshop that will be released this year. Did you see the Adobe presentation at the Apple Keynote? t plan is laid out in living color, no need for idle speculation. Adobe could have put their money into developing a web-based version of Ps (ditto Lr) but they went for the real thing, a local application. I have this new iPad Pro and it is crazy powerful. They obviously didn’t build this to run web-based apps. Indeed, as iPad becomes more and more capable you will see additional developers bringing full-featured versions of desktop applications to iPad.

[nigeld36301247]

Sounds good David. I have An iPad Pro 9.7”, and have been happy with its performance and capabilities, and am still surprised what it will do. I actually missed the Adobe component of the keynote, and will watch that if it’s still available. I’m interested to know what you see as the purpose of the Lightroom Web option? Also, what do you see as the advantage of having software on your iPad, vs logging in to use it online & logging out afterwards. Thanks for commenting on my idea. Regards.

[CAPC]

I believe LIGHTROOM WEB is the future. No local software. Log in to LW do any edits, etc. send finished files to wherever. Log out. ETC

This assumes that everyone can benefit from a high speed internet connection in both directions. This is not going to happen tomorrow.

Moreover, I remember the time when everyone in big companies was working this way (I began my career at Big Blue). Super big mainframes and dumb terminals on the desk (the Cloud is just another name for this). Replacing them with PCs was a huge relief. Back to the future ?

[nigeld36301247]

LR Web will replace all others as soon as Adobe can. This is the way everyone will go. Devices will only need to be for accessing web-based software solutions and data storage.

[D Fosse]

nigeld36301247  wrote

LR Web will replace all others as soon as Adobe can. This is the way everyone will go.

This cloud hype really has to stop. It’s fine for casual users with a couple of hundred jpegs, but all of that could fit into one of my bigger files. And there are over a hundred thousand of them. Cloud, anyone?

The term “professional photographer” has come up a couple of times above – as if we’re a near extinct species kept artificially alive in an offline zoo. But we’re alive and well. Demand for what I do keeps going up, precisely as we’re flooded with casual, fast imagery. I work for an organization big enough to have our own Social Media Manager. She sits right across from me, and we work splendidly together. There’s no competition. We serve different purposes, with some overlap.

Yes, internet bandwidth has increased by leaps. But so has file sizes and sheer volume, and the ratio has been remarkably constant over the years. It still takes ten minutes to upload one big file to the cloud. Heck, I even have problems working over our wired company network (other problems aside). That is too slow, so don’t even talk to me about “the cloud”.

The whole idea of “the cloud taking over everything” comes from people with very simple needs, who basically can use anything for their purposes. And then they extrapolate that experience to everyone. Don’t do that.

[Test Screen Name]

I would be very wary of any computer company that promises anything "forever". It shows such a poor grasp of the English language, the evolution of computer systems, and the reality of business, that I would fear for them staying in business: this would make their "forever" particularly short.