P: Lightroom Ecosystem: Selective Sync

[FeedbackCommunityMember]

I'm not a professional and have only used Lightroom for less than a year. I do love the redesign and I want to use it but I don't like the auto-sync. How hard would it be to implement an option that prevents auto sync and instead enables manual sync? 

My idea is to add a manual sync option in the settings and when you want a photo to be uploaded to the cloud you should be able to click on the cloud button and hit "Sync" or "Upload". Taking away people's ability to choose doesn't just scare away the pros but also the beginners. 
Also, some advanced features from the original Lightroom need to be added. One of them is the export function. The new export function is terrible. I only see "Small, Full Size, and Custom". The original Lightroom has a lot more export functions.

[Timothy.Spear]

I am guessing like many others, I have a laptop or mobile device which is somewhat limited in storage, therefore it is not practical to download all smart previews or original images. At the same time, I do have a series of albums and folders which I am working or a date range.

Therefore, it would be nice to either define a date range or folder for which I want to cache locally.

Tim

[Timothy.Spear]

@Deleted User

I see you merged my suggestion into this longer thread. The longer thread is about a much more complicated feature set, such as mixing/matching local and remote storage....

Mine is much more narrow in focus, instead of making the cache all or nothing for what is saved locally. Allow for a little user intelligence to be applied.

Tim

[Igloczek]

I'd love to be able to work with new Lightroom UI, but in the way the Classic offer, so directly on files, without importing everything to library and storing in Cloud / one big file locally.

For me, it's way easier and cheaper to handle sync and backup for my own, than stuck to what the app is offering.

[JP Hess]

If you're going to use Lightroom then the images WILL be stored in the cloud. If you want local storage on your hard drive then Lightroom Classic is what you need to use. Lightroom Classic will enable you to share collections of smart previews to the cloud, but Lightroom does not enable you to store and edit your master images on the local hard drive. It will enable you to store a backup image on the hard drive, but is not one that is accessible from Lightroom.

[Caleb-45]

I also would appreciate the ability to selective sync. Sometimes I have key photos that I want uploaded accross the ecosystem, while others I may want to depiroritize or review before syncing. I have limited bandwidth and time and when I need to get something right away would be great to selectively sync, or prevent form syncing, certain photos or camera imports.

[_csgrve]

Adding my name to those that are flabbergasted that this isn't a day one feature. I use Lightroom CC for personal projects and work related projects. I often take thousands of photos for work, but have no desire to have those photos on my other devices/taking up space in the cloud. On the other hand, I'd like to have my personal project photos available everywhere.

I'm currently sitting here waiting for Lr to sync 100s of work related photos before it finally gets to the photos I actually want to sync. It's been going for over an hour and probably has three or four more hours before it'll finally be done. That's most of a day just wasting energy, time and bandwidth on unecessary syncing. 

I see many replies saying "just use Lr Classic" but I've only ever used CC, and have no desire to learn an entirely new program just for one simple syncing option. It's incredibly frustrating to see Adobe employing these anti-consumer "features," trying to bottleneck people into paying for overpriced cloud storage and not being transparent about how our files are handled (don't get me started on Lr's file management, I just cleared 60gb of redundant files after finding a hidden folder where Lr had been making copies of every photo I import).

Making features only work if files are in the cloud is just...incredibly shortsighted, to put it nicely. Please add a selective sync option (on individual photos & entire albums/folders)

[Clementp]

so ... I don't know what the hell is adobe. they fall asleep I think

[willwenzel]

I'd like to be able to use Lightroom for Ipad without having to upload all raw files to Adobe's cloud.

I know that lightroom for Ipad is designed to have raw files stored in the cloud, but it works fine with just smart previews in the cloud when they're generated by Lighroom Classic on a desktop, and doesn't require full size raw images.  However, when I transfer raw images to my ipad, lightroom insists on putting the raw image in the cloud.  

As a wedding photographer, that might be 100 gbs per wedding - 2 to 4 days of uploading before its finished - even with an ethernet adapter connected.

Please Adobe, Ipads are now available with 2TB of strorage - give us the option to keep raw files on ipad and only upload smart-previews to the cloud if we absolutely have to upload anything.  You've built a piece of software that is equal to the desktop version - please enable us to just use it without waiting forever for enormous payloads to upload.

[punopunopuno]

I would love to be able to selectively sync which photos I want in Cloud Storage. There is NO way to do this in Lightroom but you can do it Lightroom Classic. 

[Jake.pf]

My problem with this is that they don't need to have two separate programs to accomplish this. But that's not my main issue. As of right now, I much prefer the UI of Lightroom over classic. I find classic clunky and annoying to use, and ugly. I prefer using Lightroom because of the sharing features but I cannot even seem to find a way to expand my storage from 100gb... I don't want to delete albums I've edited already, I constantly find myself going back to them and exporting images I previously edited, so it would be annoying to have to re-upload and re-edit every time I wanted a photo again. So the cloud services are great for sharing galleries and editing across devices, but it sucks for usability and expansion, in my opinion.

[MICHAEL.LEAHCIM]

It is in fact "anti-user" because as soon as you filled your cloud storage, Lightroom stops working properly. The same goes for bad or no internet connection. If really wanted to use it mobile (for example in the forest), wouldn't be able because Lightroom does not allow editing locally stored images without a stable internet connection. Another example: Currently, I have issues with my internet connection at home and I am not able to edit photos in real time because I have to wait half a day for them to synchronize before lightroom lets me edit them. 

[JohanElzenga]

It is in fact "anti-user" because as soon as you filled your cloud storage, Lightroom stops working properly. The same goes for bad or no internet connection. If really wanted to use it mobile (for example in the forest), wouldn't be able because Lightroom does not allow editing locally stored images without a stable internet connection. Another example: Currently, I have issues with my internet connection at home and I am not able to edit photos in real time because I have to wait half a day for them to synchronize before lightroom lets me edit them. 

By @MICHAEL.LEAHCIM

First of all, you are simply wrong. You can store a copy of your image(s) locally, both in Lightroomn desktop as well as in Lightroom Mobile. That allows you to edit images without having an internet connection. 

Secondly, if your internet connection is frequently so bad, then perhaps you should not use software that relies heavily on an internet connection. Even though that software can work without internet just fine for a while. 

[peterm95962908]

Good morning Adobe Lightroom Crew, is there anyway you can add a feature of disabling syncing from Lightroom for iPad? I'm in the process of archiving about 1,200 images onto a hard drive, and my iPad has been downloading "the original file" for now 11 hours. What I think would be a great feature to add is a way of 1) disabling cloud syncing, 2) and then allowing the syncing of a specific folder(s) when a user desires it. I know it could present risk for me NOT to have something backed up and then working with the same images on other computers, but this a needed feature (or maybe call it a fix). Contact me if you have questions. I suspect I'm not the only person to have suggested the idea. Yours truly, Peter M, Boise

[dallasl39517943]

it is anti-user if you are forcing us to use it

[JohanElzenga]

I am not forcing you to do anything. I am not Adobe and I am not working for Adobe. I just think that it is common sense to get the tool that suits your work best, not buy a hammer when you want to drive in a screw and then complain about the hammer manufacturer.

[Jake.pf]

Sorry, but I much prefer the user interface of Lightroom over Lightroom Classic. I find classics file management to be subpar and confusing for new users. Lightroom has a nice album and file system that makes managing photos very easy and rating them or moving them around. Classic is pretty clunky. The tools may be the same but I often see a difference in how my images look while editing. And I much prefer lightroom. But I much prefer local storage. The fact that Adobe is forcing us to choose and not giving us an all in one application is stupid. It's not common sense, it's preferences that could be met but are not.

[JohanElzenga]

It is as it is. If you don't like either versions of Lightroom, then look elsewhere. Adobe is not the only one writing software.

[Conrad C]

I find classics file management to be subpar and confusing for new users. Lightroom has a nice album and file system that makes managing photos very easy and rating them or moving them around.

By @Jake.pf

The interesting thing about that is because Lightroom is cloud-based, it provides the user no direct connection to the actual files on local storage. Any superior flexibility in organization found in Lightroom that makes it easier to use, comes from completely divorcing it from direct manipulation of real files in real folders. This is the same approach taken by other cloud-based photo applications like Apple Photos and Google Photos: The virtual organization in the cloud can be perceived as simpler, especially when multiple synced devices are used.

Lightroom Classic actually provides direct control over local files using the Folders panel. (In Lightroom, Folders are nothing but virtual containers for virtual Albums.) This is usually clearer and simpler for those who like thinking in terms of local files and folders. What might be confusing about Lightroom Classic is that it offers both that traditional direct organization of local files (in the Folders panel) as well as virtual organization (in the Collections panel). But if you master both, you now have the best of both worlds, complete control over both local and virtual organization. Plus, no requirement to use the cloud.

[James27704889m381]

It would be really great if there was an option to select which pictures/folder to sync on for mobile sync. As a business owner with employees, I do not expect for them to download all of their personal pictures on their phones and certainly do not want employees to have access to all of my personal pictures and videos when using the company account. I believe it would provide significant more utility to segment which phones can be selected for sync in LR cc. 

[parab47479640]

Hello
I completely agree with James27704889m381, you often need to prioritize settings over a particular session, you also share the device with other users and it would be very versatile to be able to segment the synchronizations.

[hansg19394961]

You are totally right: a manual sync-Option would be far better. The way it is now keeps me from using LR on the iphone. I don't need the adobe-cloud, I won't pay for it and I want to decide myself whrere my data is stored.

[MihaiGh]

I have a similar problem.

I've recentely switched form Lightroom CC plan to a Lightroom mobile one (since I've only use it on my tablet), but now I have too many pictures in the cloud and no way to expand storage or edit only locally.

Seems to be a marketing strategy to force users on specific plans.

[DoNotSellOrDisplayMyInfo]

that makes no sense, my photos are already offline (sd card), I want to use them directly without uploading them unless I want to (which I don't at all)

[Jake.pf]

I can't agree that it's good though. The classic interface is ugly, and annoying to learn. Lightroom cc works significantly better for my workflow but 1. There isn't enough storage nor a clear or affordable way to expand it, 2. Can't store locally. They could very well expand Lightroom classic to be more user friendly but they don't. Why? More than likely to not make it difficult for older users. But this two software method for editing photos sucks. One has what the other doesn't, making deciding which to use hard. They could resolve these issues but aren't. They don't even show you how to expand your storage capabilities. 

[Jake.pf]

How do you keep your photos organized and not a jumbled mess?