P: Add Luminance Range Masking

I'm not sure how this would work entirely, but here's what i would find incredibly useful for real estate photography. I find that in dealing with window lighting as well as interior lighting it can be hard to find a balance between the different colors. I would love a feature similar to the HSL settings but instead of only being able to tint the color to have the ability to white balance that specific color. For example, cool lighing coming in through a window in a room lit with mostly warm lamps. If I could go to the HSL panel and select the blue color channel and rather than only being able to tint from green to purple, if I could actually warm the blue channel to match the rest of the white balance in the room that would be a game changer. Also, the opposite if I could select orange or yellow and cool the color temp instead of only tinting. Basically make those different light sources look as if they are the same color instead of trying to balance between them. To make this feature even more valuable it would be great to be able to select a range of colors as well, so maybe have an option to adjust temperature on cool colors (blue, green and aqua) and an option to change temperature on warm colors (orange, yellow, and red). A feature like this could be incredible for matching different light sources in hard to control environments like peoples homes and events where lighing is not always under the photographers control. I deal with mainly high volume fast turn around HDR real estate photography so bringing in my own lighting is not a valuable use of my time to get in and out fast. And in my option bringing in my own lights does not represent the home the way that it looks in person since I'm adding lighting that isn't there in the home. 

Updatng Status

@Erik Chittick Different pros have different priorities. Many have vast numbers of photos, so are better suited to Classic's local storage. Personally, the convenience of cloud storage suits me best. If you haven't used Classic, it does come with a significant learning curve, so I'd probably pin my hopes on Adobe improving masking in the cloud version.

This thread is being merged into an existing authoritative thread for better tracking and response. Please review the official answer (if any) in the second post on the thread for more information. 

Thank you for that thoughtful reply. It confirms what I thought, and have begrudgingly decided to forego the luminance masking capabilities in the interest of keeping my life simpler. I'm curious which application most professional photographers use, since it would seem unwise to choose not to have access to the deeper editing tools, but with people being increasingly mobile and reliant on universal cloud access, it would seem like quite a compromise to limit your editing to such time that you're able to sit at your desktop -- especially given how much travel factors into the profession. But I don't have experience with Classic, and don't have a feel for the differing model of file management, so it's possible I'm misunderstanding the inconvenience entailed.. 

It's possible, yes, but you are correct in thinking that it can create a fair bit of confusion if you want originals in the cloud. You have to decide which will be your primary tool - probably the cloud one in your case. Classic will sync down all of the originals you've uploaded in the cloud versions, so you need enough storage to keep those originals separately to any local cloud cache, and be careful what you do in Classic as not everything syncs up.

Adobe have heard the request for extending the masking tools in the cloud version, so I wouldn't be surprised if it wasn't added in due course, but I don't have a timescale to share.

I was introduced to Lightroom as a mobile user who wanted the flexibility of working from the cloud, and it has been a fantastic experience. I've become comfortable using all of the features that Lightroom offers, but have recently become aware of the Luminance Masking features in Classic that have made me wonder if I should shift to the Classic version. The problem is that I'd be sacrificing the cloud flexibility that I've come to depend on. 

Is it possible to use the Lightroom Classic platform within the Lightroom CC system? Or is there an easy way to use both applications -- Classic for more powerful editing, but organizing the libraries with the file structuring of the CC? I have both applications on my desktop and it seems that I ought to be able to use both, but I expect it would lead to all kinds of confusion. 

I'm sure this issue has been raised many times before, but really feel that there should be a way to take advantage of the editing power of Classic without having to move my library and adjust my workflows.

It's time to implement this feature to LR CC too. It's available for CC classic for some time now, and it would be a great help in CC, to adjust images more accurate.