P: Allow for family usage, i.e. from more than two computers

[T1nue]

The new Lightroom CC would be ideally suited for family use. A shared family photo library in the cloud can be built and maintained. The mobile devices (iPad, iPhone) can be easily integrated already.

Not so for PCs: The installations are limited to two. Even when an additional subscription is purchased, it can't be integrated with the existing cloud based photo library (one gets a new, independent one).

Please allow a reasonable set of PCs to access the shared cloud photo library. A ballpark number would be 5 (similar to the Microsoft Office Family License).

[FeedbackCommunityMember]

Ah thanks Rikk, that explains it! Do you have any insight whether they'll expand the plan including photoshop to 5?

I suppose for those of us on the $20/month photography 1TB plan, we could instead buy two plans...

• $10/month Lightroom 1TB plan (5 seats, no Photoshop)
• $10/month Photography 20GB plan (2 seats, Photoshop)

And that nets out to the same cost, and even an extra 20GB. They should just add the 5 seats lol...

[FeedbackCommunityMember]

Oh adobe, never quite get it right. So your users who have a higher end plan get worse benefits. Also, Andrew, I don’t think your plan would work. You can only be logged into 1 creative cloud account at a time.

[Cicuryn]

I just tested installing Lightroom from Microsoft store, where is written it can be installed on 10 computers.

I have just three computers and it works on all of them. So that is great news for me, that is all I wanted the whole time, have it installed on all my computers.

[Cicuryn]

Rikk, please, how is that with LR+PS 1TB plan?. I am thinking about upgrading my 12€ Lightroom 1TB plan to 24€ LR + PS 1TB plan, but definitely do not want to lose my seats for double money.

[Cicuryn]

Rikk, please, how is that with LR+PS 1TB plan?. I am thinking about upgrading my 12€ Lightroom 1TB plan to 24€ LR + PS 1TB plan, but definitely do not want to lose my seats for double money.

[Victoria Bampton LR Queen]

Andrew's idea (two plans, same account) should work in theory. Photoshop would only work on 2, but Lightroom Cloudy on 5.

[Cicuryn]

When I was buying the big photography plan (LR+PS+1TB) I could not find any "upgrade" option. So I just bought it directly and the got some kind of error about collision with existing plan and the previous plan was cancelled then. So 2 plans on same account probably won't work.

[Rikk Flohr: Photography]

Plans containing Photoshop allow for two seats. Plans containing only Lightroom Ecosystem +1TB allow for five seats. 

A seat is a Mac/Windows computer.  All plans provision from 10 devices (phone/tablet). 

[Cicuryn]

Thank you Rikk. So to be super clear, when i upgrade my plan, I will lose three of the seats, is that correct?

[Rikk Flohr: Photography]

You will lose three seats for Lightroom Desktop if you change to a plan containing Photoshop. 

[Cicuryn]

This might be a big deal for someone. You should include number of seats in Photography plan comparison then.

I am using PS very rarely so I only subscribe for one month when I need it. But I am also already logged in with Lightroom on three computers now. What will happen after upgrading then? Will I be logged out on all of them automatically and logging again will work only on two computers? Or will it work on three computers until I log out somewhere? Or will it destroy universe? 

[Rikk Flohr: Photography]

I've never tested it but I would guess the two computers logging in first will get priority and the third will tell you you've exceeded your seats. You can always manage your activated devices at your account page: https://account.adobe.com/

[Cicuryn]

This should be reconsidered. I can somehow understand you do not want to allow Photoshop to be used on more machines, since it is mostly used professionally, but why remove existing Lightroom CC seats at the same time?

[Victoria Bampton LR Queen]

> So 2 plans on same account probably won't work.

I'm still not convinced about this. You can have multiple single app subscriptions on the same account, so why would you not be able to have a LR+1TB and a Photography20GB on the same account. (I could imagine PhotographyPlan20GB and PhotographyPlan1TB being blocked, which could explain the collision you mentioned).

@Deleted User, any chance you can find a way of testing this please, as it's one I'm hearing more frequently now.

[Rikk Flohr: Photography]

I think we were talking about changing plans - not adding plans. 

[Cicuryn]

I was also talking about upgrading/changing plan to include PS but maybe I mashed it a little. I can try adding PS as a single app and will let you know.

[Cicuryn]

OK, buying single app Ps plan technically works with three existing LR installations working.
Problem is, that Ps alone cost as much, as Ps+Lr+1TB together. So instead 24€ of "the big" Photography plan you pay 12€+24€=36€ for the same.

[Victoria Bampton LR Queen]

Rather than LR+1TB plus PS single app, you should be able to buy LR+1TB plus PS/LR/20GB for the same price as PS/LR/1TB, but with the extra LR seats. In theory, at least!

[Cicuryn]

It is not possible to subscribe for two photography plans, checkout won't allow that. It forces you into changing your plan instead.

[Timothy.Spear]

At some point, i would like to be able to have a license scheme that allows for family usage of Lr. e.g. Have the ability for multiple family members, e.g. my wife, kids and I all be able to utilize Lr. In our case, a single shared account would be very nice from a sharing perspective, if the license issue could be solved.

e,g, existing Lr plan for 1TB is $10 a month, includes to computers and a single user. Allow to double the plan in a single account, or add additional user for $2, or additional 2 computers for $3, or additional TB for $5.

From a feature perspective, I would only want to add a few things, all should be minor:

1. Ability to have a separate copyright and photographer added to the meta-data by device instead of by the plan.

2. Ability to have a default album per device or user.

3. Search filter based on these fields.

Note: I did look at the team versions, and from what I have found they are prohibitive cost, feature wise, and Lr Cloudy is not included. Further, they are really aimed at an alternative base of users.

Tim

[dgrainger]

There seems to be a small subset of users that see LR as a TikTok or Instagram / iPhone playground, which it is not.  If two bucks is the "threshhold" beyond which one cannot afford LR, I suspect that alternatives might be more appropriate.

[Timothy.Spear]

This has nothing to do with social media, or posting on the net.This has to do with having a family photo library.

What is the phrase, content is king? If Lr wants to make FB the owner of family photo libraries, it is their loss.  (FB has a pretty descent family album feed system).

Tim

[dgrainger]

@timothy_spear 

It really gets down to a business decision: what universe of customer  users will provide the most revenues. Professionals, those who either work in large corporate graphics departments or are professional independents are obviously the most likely sources of those revenues, not family album users. For any business to survive, it must keep their eye upon where their "daily bread " is derived. It takes a LOT of CAPEX to achieve the massive complexity that is a product like LR or Photoshop, or the many other packages that Adobe offers to the professional graphics world.

That is not to say that those of us that are amateurs, or using PS or LR for our own pleasure should not have access, rather that we should be realistic about what such a powerful set of tools does cost.

My personal use is for my own pleasure; I share with (1) a website that I have setup (birdsbydave.com), (2) DropBox shares for select followers. You might consider those sorts of approaches... Best regards! Dave

[Timothy.Spear]

Dave,

No disagreement. This is why I posted it on feedback, for Adobe to consider. Not in community support, looking for answers.

Also, this specific forum is for Lr cloud based desktop solution. It is missing many features which are critical to the professional crowd you mention.

[dgrainger]

@timothy_spear  Correct.  I use Photoshop for all of my post processing, never store anything on LR nor edit anything with LR because the tools are much more robust and extensive in PS. To each his own, of course, which depends entirely upon what we are trying to accomplish!

As an aside, I follow this forum primarily out of interest in seeing how others  (1) use and (2) view the two + Adobe products. I seem to see a ratio of LR to PS comments of about 8:1, and I also see that the LR users tend to be less knowledgeable about LR than the PS users are about PS. My guess is that the much steeper learning curve for PS (and the very complex menu structure of PS) may have the effect that people tend towards LR for perceived easier use.

Also, I see many of those that post comments about LR (1) tend not to give sufficient information in their initial requests for help, and (2) are often either angry or defensive, asserting that their problem is  Bug derived and not due to lack of understanding.