We really need a "convenient" way to print. Some of us still like to create prints to hang on a wall. While I know the printing is still available in "classic", to be able to move forward with Adode, an integrated print function needs to be added to Lightroom CC.
John I hear you. But why would Adobe release something less featured than what the "old" version delivered. I won't even go into the fact that the basic 20G hardly holds the code for the basic photo subscription. I have about 10 pics synched and I get the "almost full" warning. Indicating I get to pay even more for online storage to make CC work. Not buying any of it yet.
Hi Mitch, because duplicating all the old functionality is a huge job (and some of it shouldn't be duplicated). We are going through the same issues in our company with a new cloud based version - simply duplicating what you had before is definitely not the right answer, making the important things work better is what is important (and I think Adobe are doing this with CC).
You can't 'finish' it without feedback, and you can't get the feedback without launching it.
Sure, you have to pay for more cloud storage, but the Adobe storage is not expensive compared to other applications, and it works very well.
Apologies if you found that comment to be glib, but I meant it entirely sincerely. A little background - I maintained a collection of local printers in a working studio environment 15-20 years ago, but moved to sending the files to pro labs. I'm no longer working in that environment, but still send photos offsite because for MY workflow, it's simpler.
Since you have a lovely printer like that, I completely understand why you'd be frustrated. The request has my vote, even though I wouldn't need it myself.
> It seems that CC was designed for tablets and phones.
Yes, that group of mobile photographers is the initial target audience, at least at this stage of development. And that target audience has less of a need for local printing compared to Classic's target audience. That may change in time, as it grows up, but right now this is not a replacement for Classic, and nor is it meant to be.
> Perhaps a more honest approach would have been for Adobe to christen the new Lightroom CC as "Lightroom Elements." That way, nobody expects full features.
Naming it Elements would limit its potential. It is still a baby at the moment, no question, but it'll grow up in time.
You sound like you'd be better sticking with Classic, at least for now Mitch & Jim.
______________________ The Lightroom Queen - Author of the Lightroom Missing FAQ & Edit Like a Pro books.
Victoria, that was a very thoughtful and responsive comment.
I work from several locations, so CC and universal access is very attractive as it solves my issue about how to see and work on photos in each place. But I still need to print, both for display and also for gifts and to enclose in notes. It would be helpful to know if printing in CC is “never” or “10 months out” or whatever so I can decide whether to invest my time in it. Perhaps you could share that with us.
I'm afraid I can't give a timescale because Adobe doesn't preannounce their plans. I sincerely doubt the answer is never, but there's a lot of juggling priorities at this stage as it's still so very young.
Like you, the universal access is a big benefit in my workflow, so if I needed to print locally, I'd edit in CC as normal, and then I'd save the edited photo and use any version of Lightroom (even an old perpetual license) or Photoshop to print, and then throw away the exported files. Whether that would work in your workflow, only you can tell.
______________________ The Lightroom Queen - Author of the Lightroom Missing FAQ & Edit Like a Pro books.
"and then I'd save the edited photo and use any version of Lightroom" isn't that just a jpeg at the moment, or is dng+settings a perfect quality export/import path to CC Classic?
Victoria- Thanks for your thoughtful reply. I appreciate that you took the time to understand our position. So here is an interesting fact. When I run CC on my Samsung tablet the share command offers 39 different sources I can share to. (onedrive, facebook, outlook, Kindle to name a few. Believe it or not it also lets me share to a printer. It appears the ability exists. The PC version of CC will only allow shares to Adobe or the local PC. Why are these programs so different on each platform? (a rhetorical question) It seem pretty obvious that CC is not meant for the PC
The crazy thing is thanks to iOS sharing capability, you are able to print. So why adobe is not able to use an apple API on osx to print a selected photo? What is crazy about that?
We just want a simple print function but a weird export that ask us to find the file and to open it in an another soft then print it (Damn we are not all photographer but technical people and need simple and fast mobile solution).
This is unfair from adobe to let us pay and suffer so much restriction thanks to "baby" software.
(I've renew my subscription but really I'm fade up to read this again and again)
Yes, as you note, you can share to printers on mobile. That's the operating system doing that.
> It seem pretty obvious that CC is not meant for the PC
The desktop versions are much younger, whereas the mobile apps have been available for years. Desktop also has some features that mobile doesn't have yet, and vice versa. The long term aim is feature parity, but we're a way off from that yet.
______________________ The Lightroom Queen - Author of the Lightroom Missing FAQ & Edit Like a Pro books.
I can’t believe at all it is not possible to use the layer and or an api apple offer to print something. No sorry i can’t believe it. It is possible to print with every computer since probably the first computer exists and now with this kind of software it takes year to develop something to print? Seriously? And for example speak about iOS capability. Apple offer iCloud sync capabilities. Why not use iCloud sync capabilities to sync watermark setting. Why? Why do I need to parameters on my Mac., on my iPhone, on my iPad separately? Why? Because as simple it is, it is not on top priority of adobe developers. Just crasy but it is as it. Adobe knows better than we what we need. For example Adobe decide it is not possible to find a photo with its name. Why ? Is it so hard to use offline search or string text search? It is simple but adobe décided again we do not need this feature. Such a basic feature. Resulting no possibility to search a photo when offline.
If everything was running through a single company's operating systems (e.g. Apple macOS/iOS), then yes, that would be a lot simpler. But Adobe doesn't just live in an Apple world. What happens on the macOS desktop needs to work on Windows version too, so it's not as simple as using the built-in API's.
> Because as simple it is, it is not on top priority of adobe developers.
And yes, prioritization is the crux of the matter. Like everything in life, there are limited resources, and they're trying to balance the needs of a wide range of customers. Of course that doesn't make it any less frustrating when that's the missing feature is the one you need.
______________________ The Lightroom Queen - Author of the Lightroom Missing FAQ & Edit Like a Pro books.
You're right, Adobe does not live in apple centric system. But because Adobe offer a centric cloud solution (20Gb, 100Gb or 1Tb) available across Mac, iPhone, Windows, Adroid and Web, why not use a tiny string to synchronise through adobe's cloud (instead of iCloud) for this kind of data. (I don't know if windows and android manage watermarks in fact) Anyway for a cloud centric solution the way Adobe offer with CC, everything this way should be possible or at least on top priorities.
But once again, I'm okay with you, ressources are not unlimited. Nevelseles, as a simple customer, we sometimes just asking if those ressources are efficiently used or to stay positive, we are wondering about what's in the pipe. Thats the big question in fact.
But finally and it is the more important, we are hopping those limitation are not just a case study of segmentation (marketing) to catch some news customers (with CC) and not allow existing customer (from classic) to switch from classic to CC.
Hi Sam, I am curious as to what solution you came up with when printing with Lightroom mobile using your pro 100.
I believe I am in the same situation as you were then.
I too am new to printing photos. I am using an iPad and took advantage of the canon pro 100 special at B&H, However I desperately would like to know how to print with Lightroom from my iPad.
the meagre offerings of the Canon app does not give me much choice in regard to printing management. (Colour, Art paper choice, etc)
The only version Lightroom that has ANY printing capability is Lightroom Classic CC. That is the only answer. There is no other solution. If you want to print from Lightroom using your Canon Pixma Pro 100 then you will have to use Lightroom Classic CC on a computer. If you want to print from your iPad then it will be necessary for you to find a print utility that works with your iPad. Since I have never used an iPad I have no recommendations for you. But I can tell you that you cannot print from Lightroom using your iPad because that feature isn't that. When it will be or whether it will be in the future is only known by Adobe.
That is exactly what I did. I purchased, for Lightroom CC, Photoshop Elements 2019 which also has some very good features itself. In addition, I think you can add Elements to a second computer. So, you might have a laptop and a desktop and would be able to have the entire system, Lightroom CC, and Elements 2019, on two computers for the cost of only one purchase. The two programs can work together for difficult work, or quick fixes, There are features in ElementsI like, for example, the collage feature, and several other quick editing tools. If you look, and wait, you can get Elements at a discounted price. I know it might seem like an expensive solution, but you'll never have to buy Elements 2019 again. In the years to follow, you'll only have to worry about one charge. All and all, Elements 2019 is going to give you much more versatility than Windows built-in programs for only printing. I've found for myself Photoshop Elements is a great add on for Lightroom CC.
Great! I'm glad that has proven to be a solution for you. Personally, I prefer working with Lightroom Classic CC, and occasionally print from Photoshop. Everyone has to find the best solution.
I can do everything I need to do (90% of the time) within Lightroom but when it comes to printing I have to export to another program. I just don't understand this omission, especially as it was a feature historically included in Lightroom. I'm seriously reconsidering my subscription
This is probably not the way Adobe intends it, and probably not how many users of Lightroom (the cloud version) see it. But I look at Lightroom the cloud version as some sort of an Adobe lite version. It doesn't print and it doesn't have some of the other functionality that Lightroom Classic does. However, it does provide quick access on all devices, and quickly enables users to share their images with other people wherever and whenever they wish to do so. But if you are really serious and want to print and want to have everything that Lightroom has to offer then you want to use Lightroom Classic. At least that's what I want. I share a few images on Lightroom when I want to share them with family and friends. But the bulk of my library is only in Lightroom Classic, and that's the way I like it.
Fingers crossed this eventually gets sorted... It is one of the only things stopping me from going to the cloud and leaving the desktop lightroom behind.... oh and the book module....
Do not forget : 1) your assets are captive in "adobe's cloud". Your asset is adobe shareholding. 2) Adobe creates. Adobe does not listen their customer.
ON1 Raw will present sync capability starting 2020 with real open cloud...
No they're not. You can download them to a computer for a year after cancelling, either using the desktop app or the separate downloader tool, and you can keep a copy on your local computer storage while your subscription is active too.
If you prefer to use another tool, that's absolutely fine, but it's not fair to spread misinformation.
______________________ The Lightroom Queen - Author of the Lightroom Missing FAQ & Edit Like a Pro books.
When I say "Your asset are captive" it is some kind of rhetoric.
BTW, can you explain why Adobe is not f***g capable to implement such a basic request (printing)? Is it because everything is done to push you to let your asset intos closed cloud. Maybe they are afraid people print and leave (?). Lol
Why do you think keyword are not sync between Mobile and classic. It is intentional to avoid people to use mobile to fetch tags and recover it using classic.
So yes, your asset are not captive. But you need to pay every month to develop. As a result your asset and development are virtually captive.
Thanks, some people are not blind and does not need Adobe to live.
191
Replies
AdChoices