Lightroom for Linux - is it possible? Most my friends and I need it, because of not using Windows and current Linux tools can't get so great instruments for raw preprocessing and organizing...
Lightroom 4.4 on WINE.
Here we go. (BTW, I will continue to add to this single post as my working log.)
WARNING: DO NOT DO ANYTHING THAT I DO HERE ELSE YOU WILL PROBABLY BREAK YOUR SYSTEM UNLESS YOU ARE A VERY BRAVE SOUL!
...you have been warned. I will mark this thread s_lved when I believe I have found a viable solution. Some assumptions are: 1) Clean Install 2) Inexperienced Linux user install.
Base System:
HP Pavilion DV-7 3085DX
RAM: 6 GB
Graphics: GeForce GT 230M 1024 MB
Kernel: 3.2.0-52-generic x64
Distro: Linux Mint 13 (maya) 64 bit
Graphics Driver: NVIDIA binary v 319.32
Note: Installing clean version of mint 13 x64 in chroot environment. (Won't mess up my system but will expose OS to native hardware).
Do some updates:
"sudo apt-get update"
"sudo apt-get dist-upgrade"
(Answer "N" when asked while updating).
Reboot your computer.
Let's clear out all of the old packages.
"sudo apt-get clean
If you have an Intel based processor, I recommend installing intel-microcode.
"sudo apt-get install intel-microcode"
Now we are going to add the wine ppa so we have the latest version of WINE.
"sudo add-apt-repository ppa:ubuntu-wine/ppa"
"sudo apt-get update"
"sudo apt-get install wine1.6" (be sure to agree to the EULA else fonts will be jacked.)
Update: Running into some .net issues. As soon as I get through this, I will post my results. Seems Adobe uses many different frameworks for LR.
My guess is it’s about money. If Adobe thought they could make enough money on a Linux version to justify the development costs, they would. But even if they did, would Linux users, most of whom are ideologically opposed to paying for software, give Adobe their money? Catch-22.
I doubt that Adobe is refusing to develop for Linux just to keep Microsoft and Apple happy. There just aren't nearly as many serious photographers using Linux and they have to make sure the development time involved to port it to Linux and then continue to maintain it would be worth the cost.
I am a professional photographer, running my own little business as my full-time occupation. The only thing keeping me running Windows is Lightroom and Photoshop. I would switch to Linux in a heartbeat and use it as my primary OS. But, would this make Adobe any more money? I'm already using the Creative Cloud. I'm paying a monthly fee to Adobe to continue using these products. I would not want to pay significantly more to get a Linux version and Adobe knows that they won't lose me as a customer if they never release a Linux version.
I love the Linux operating system. I love so many things about it, but the bottom line is that I need to get my work done and Lightroom is the best tool for the job. I could probably get by without using Photoshop for most of my work, but not without Lightroom. I could probably use GIMP for much of what I currently do in Photoshop, but I use Lightroom all day long.
If I ever quit my professional photography work and become exclusively an amateur again, I might just investigate the Linux alternatives to Lightroom. I'm sure there's some really good stuff out there, too! But, as long as I'm running a business, I'm sticking with Lightroom.
If Lightroom ever gets released for Linux, it will be a very happy day for me and I will switch immediately to Linux (even if they haven't ported Photoshop yet), but I don't need it to work on Linux. I just need it to work. If that means I need to run Windows, so be it.
Fully agree especially since the Lr for iPad is free for current user of Lr... But only on the cloud... So you need to move to the per-month payment to take full advantge of the offer.
I doubt that Adobe is refusing to develop for Linux just to keep Microsoft and Apple happy. There just aren't nearly as many serious photographers using Linux and they have to make sure the development time involved to port it to Linux and then continue to maintain it would be worth the cost.
Hard to beleive since, as I said préviously, the iPad version is a port and has demanded lot of time and effort and is free for current users.
Right, but there are a lot more iPad users than there are Linux users! I'm looking forward to the Android port, because I have multiple Android devices and no interest in the iOS platform.
corporates like Microstuff who are in constant worry about moment that their users will become enlightened and move their machines to linux.
Good God, the arrogance of you OS zealots!
I've got a laptop here at home, happily running along on Xubuntu, and you know what my impression of this "enlightened" OS is?
Big deal. It's just an OS.
And I've been around computers long enough to be familiar with command lines, assembly language, ICL VME/SCL, and punched cards, so it's not culture shock.
Despite how much you Flat Earthers argue for your ridiculous conspiracy theories, the simple fact is that Adobe will take money from wherever it can get it.
And you lot just don't matter enough to be worth Adobe's time.
We "unenlightened" users of Windows and Mac use these OS because they support the software we want - you're sitting outside of that, whining that Adobe is conspiring to deny you access to Lightroom (despite the solution being entirely in your own hands), so - seriously - who's making the stupid OS decisions here?
Not me - Lr and PS run brilliantly on my Win 7 machine. What about you?
Oh, that's right...
So remind me again - why would we want to be like you?
Please read the full thread before saying that I've asked for a version on Linux because I'm wonking on Linux and a dual boot is just not an option. I've done that 2 or 3 years, too much trouble as my main OS is Linux. It has been said that it was hard to port, lot of trouble, work, hard for the GUI part... And then an iOS version came to light. I've always argued that having already OSX and Windows means that the GUI should be mostly portable. II've just asked for a Linux version and was even ready to pay double the price for it. But again this is not about OS it seems, more to locking people into the cloud version with pay-per-month or loose everything model. I think I've said that here, not sure... But if for sure Lr is Adobe propriety the work I've done on MY pictures and all the developement process are my propriety. It could be nice if Adobe would offer the possibility to still export (yes just export) the images already developed when you stop paying the monthy fees. As you see that's not just an OS issue at all!
What is it that you actually do? Why is dual boot not an option? It seems as though photography is not your primary profession. Why is it unreasonable for you to do your regular work on Linux, and then use Windows for your photography work? You could also run Linux in a virtual machine.
I agree that it would be nice to be able to run Lightroom on Linux. In fact, I would switch to Linux on my primary system if that was the case, but you seem to be demanding it and upset that they won't give it to you. You don't have a "right" to have the software run on your OS of choice. Yes, we need to let Adobe know that we'd be interested in a Linux port, but it isn't likely to happen.
Have you investigated the alternatives to Lightroom for Linux?
This isn't about Lightroom, Nathan - it's purely about them getting their way over some arbitrary cause célèbre that allows them to wave their "hard-done-by zealot" badges around.
And yes, good question - why isn't dual-boot an option? Indeed - if access to Lr really is the motivation here - surely biting the bullet and going Windows or Mac would be the lesser ot two evils?
I while back I decided dedicate an old laptop to a Linux distro so that I could try Darktable. I can understand now why they want Lr (Darktable surely ain't Lr - or Photo Ninja, or Capture One 7 Pro) but the point is that I was open-minded enough (despite having used Windows since 3, and MS-DOS before that) to give Linux a go, rather than troll Darktable forums whining about the lack of a Windows build...
Good for you, Keith! I've been tempted to play with Darktable, but I've been too busy getting my work done in Lightroom to take the time to play with it. I just got a new desktop and, once I got the desktop all set up, I reset my laptop back to factory setup and put LR and PS back on. I set it up to dual-boot into Linux in case I had time to play. So, I'll hope to be able to play with Darktable at some point in the future. But, I can't imagine a product that would be good enough for me to abandon Lightroom at this point.
I am currently using Lightroom 5 with VirtualBox on Linux. I take tens of thousands of photos every year and I am very happy with Lightroom except of the fact it is not running on Linux.
Corel just released Aftershot Pro 2 for Linux and there are several open source alternatives like RawTherapee and Darktable.
It's a shame Lightroom and Photoshop are not available for Linux. But I guess sooner or later one of the alternatives like Aftershot Pro, RawTherapee and Darktable will be good enough for me and if Adobe does not want to support Linux and the competition does, Adobe will not get money from me and the competition will.
For me, each new version of Windows just gets worse. Linux / KDE is certainly not perfect but I definitely prefer it to Windows 8 / 8.1
I am a software developer and use Linux at work and I use Linux at home and I would really prefer not to have to run software in virtual machines. Dual-boot is not an option for me either because I have about 2 TB of photos and I prefer to keep them on my Linux partition and there is no simple way to mount ext4 file systems from Windows.
Have you tried mounting your ext4 filesystem from Windows using Ext2Fsd Project
No, I did not try the Ext2Fsd project. I used to have a dual-boot system with Linux and Windows, but it always annoyed me to have to reboot my computer to work on some photos. It's really inconvenient to work this way.
I have a pretty fast computer and running Lightroom and Photoshop in a virtual machine works fine but having to start a virtual machine to use Lightroom and Photoshop is also inconvenient.
I don't know the reasons Adobe is not porting Lightroom to Linux. I work as a software developer and I am pretty sure it is not a huge task to port it. It is probably written in a relative plattform independent way anyway because there are versions of Windows and Linux. But I guess they have their reasons.
I don't want to switch to Windows because I prefer Linux / KDE and I certainly don't like the direction Windows is going with Windows 8.
I think Lightroom is a great program and I enjoy working with it. On the other hand, running Lightroom in a virtual machine is not a solution I am really happy with and a dual-boot system is even worse for me. Thus, in the long run it is probably best for me to have a look at the alternatives available for Linux. Writing a raw converter is not such a huge task and I guess sooner or later the open-source alternatives like RawTherapee or DarkTable or commercial offerings like AfterShot Pro are good enough. But to me this seems like a mistake because once Adobe lost customers to the competition on Linux, they are likely never to come back, even if Adobe offers their products for Linux at some point or if these people buy e.g. a MacBook. I have a MacBook and if I switch from Lightroom to another RAW converter, I will certainly not run Lightroom on my MacBook either, because it makes no sense to use two different raw converters.
Yes, I expect that they should be able to port it to Linux fairly easily, given that they're already supporting two platforms and given the similarities between Linux and OSX. But, once it's been ported, it needs to be tested and debugged and maintained. Adobe needs to be convinced that supporting that third platform will be a profitable return on their investment. I hope discussions like this one encourage them to port and support Lightroom over to Linux, but I know that they also see that those of us who do this professionally will do what's necessary to be able to use the best tools, and if that means I have to run either Windows or OSX, so be it (even though Linux would be my preferred OS, if Lightroom and Photoshop could be used there.)
I think Adobe needs to see that there are a profitable number of potential customers, willing to pay for professional photography tools, who are so committed to the Linux platform that they will use alternatives if Adobe's products won't run on their chosen platform. Unfortunately, Adobe won't make any more money off of me if they port to Linux. I'll expect to be able to get it with my $10/month CC membership, so I won't expect to pay more for it. I'll be happier, and I'll tell everyone how happy I am that I can escape Windows 8 and run Lightroom on Linux. Perhaps the publicity of making the announcement would be worth supporting the additional platform?
However, I hope they prioritize getting Lightroom on Android first! That would make a real difference for me! Even just to be able to rate photos on my tablet would be a great benefit to my workflow. I'd love to be able to sync my recent shoots to my tablet and then get client feedback, or even just do my own culling, without having to lug around my laptop. My newest camera bag is designed to carry a tablet along with my camera and a few lenses. The ability to travel light, and still have some Lightroom functionality is more important to me than having a Linux version.
429
Replies
AdChoices