Lightroom 7 rumor

[AvTvM]

I want LR 7 "LITE" *without catalogue database* but with everything in it needed to work on stills images. Nothing more, nothing less. As a perpetual license to serve me the next 4-5 years. Would be willing to pay up to 99 €/USD for it.

A combination of Adobe Camera Raw software and GIMP may give you all that you need, for free.

GIMP user interface makes me puke even more than PS ...

 

[bitm2007]

I want LR 7 "LITE" *without catalogue database* but with everything in it needed to work on stills images. Nothing more, nothing less. As a perpetual license to serve me the next 4-5 years. Would be willing to pay up to 99 €/USD for it.

A combination of Adobe Camera Raw software and GIMP may give you all that you need, for free.

GIMP user interface makes me puke even more than PS ...

I'm fed up with the lack of new development modes feature in Lightroom CC (nothing of an use to me for almost two years), so I am planning to switch back to a perpetually licenced LR7 (if possible), for use in conjunction with Affinity Photo (which looks like a genuine Photoshop killer for my uses), for a one of payment of £48.99 ($66)

https://affinity.serif.com/en-gb/photo/

 

[LDS]

I'm fed up with the lack of new development modes feature in Lightroom CC (nothing of an use to me for almost two years), so I am planning to switch back to a perpetually licenced LR7 (if possible), for use in conjunction with Affinity Photo (which looks like a genuine Photoshop killer for my uses), for a one of payment of £48.99 ($66)

I'm afraid that as long as LR is sold standalone, Adobe doesn't want it to move into PS territory too much. If it sold only together, there may be less reasons not to overlap them more. It is true for a pure photographic work many of PS features are useless.

 

[bitm2007]

I'm fed up with the lack of new development modes feature in Lightroom CC (nothing of an use to me for almost two years), so I am planning to switch back to a perpetually licenced LR7 (if possible), for use in conjunction with Affinity Photo (which looks like a genuine Photoshop killer for my uses), for a one of payment of £48.99 ($66)

I'm afraid that as long as LR is sold standalone, Adobe doesn't want it to move into PS territory too much. If it sold only together, there may be less reasons not to overlap them more. It is true for a pure photographic work many of PS features are useless.

Totally agree, if Lightroom goes CC only I'd happily renew my subscription on the assumption that new features will be added on a more frequent basis. If not, I see little value in renewing my subscription as nothing ground breaking is likely to happen for the foreseeable future. If that's the case I'm struggling to justify paying £10 a month for the Adobe Photography Plan until LR8 arrives, when I can get LR7 (assuming there is one) and Affinity Photo for less than £150 on perpetual licences.

 

[hoodlum]

Confirmed by Adobe

https://twitter.com/AdobeCare/status/913407774469521408

 

[LDS]

Totally agree, if Lightroom goes CC only I'd happily renew my subscription on the assumption that new features will be added on a more frequent basis. If not, I see little value in renewing my subscription as nothing ground breaking is likely to happen for the foreseeable future.

I wasn't promoting one model or the other. I was just seeing it from an Adobe perspective - as long as LR for one reason or another has to be available standalone, Adobe will be careful not to let it eat into CC revenues too much with too many features that make PS less useful.

The day Adobe decides it has no longer reasons to sell it standalone, it may "hybridize" the two products much more, without fears the cheaper one may eat the more expensive one.

But the existence of Affinity Photo and other tools may tell Adobe it could be better to still sell a standalone LR - although it will need to stay competitive as well. I'd like to be a fly and listen to some Adobe meetings....

 

[SteveM]

As I've commented earlier, there isn't only Affinity there is 'ACDSee Ultimate' - a one stop solution. Were I as unhappy as some appear to be with Lightroom/subscription model, I would be looking very closely at this.

 

[bitm2007]

As I've commented earlier, there isn't only Affinity there is 'ACDSee Ultimate' - a one stop solution. Were I as unhappy as some appear to be with Lightroom/subscription model, I would be looking very closely at this.

I am aware that there are other options out there that will probably for-fill my photo editor needs. Affinity Photo just stands out due to it's PS like interface and tools, but I will take a good look at what else is available if I ever reach the point where I end my Adobe Photography Plan. That point could be pretty soon, if the next version of Lightroom isn't subscription only.

 

[bitm2007]

But the existence of Affinity Photo and other tools may tell Adobe it could be better to still sell a standalone LR - although it will need to stay competitive as well. I'd like to be a fly and listen to some Adobe meetings.... [/quote]

Personally i'm viewing Photo Affinity more as a PS alternative (with a familiar interface and tools), than a Lightroom competitor (where I do 90%+ of my post processing). If I ever do switch away from LR, it's most likely to be in the direction Capture One, who also currently offer a perpetually licenced option. This along with LR will go subscription only IMO, it's a matter of when, not if.

 

[SteveM]

But the existence of Affinity Photo and other tools may tell Adobe it could be better to still sell a standalone LR - although it will need to stay competitive as well. I'd like to be a fly and listen to some Adobe meetings....

Personally i'm viewing Photo Affinity more as a PS alternative (with a familiar interface and tools), than a Lightroom competitor (where I do 90%+ of my post processing). If I ever do switch away from LR, it's most likely to be in the direction Capture One, who also currently offer a perpetually licenced option. This along with LR will go subscription only IMO, it's a matter of when, not if.
[/quote]

Whilst I mostly use CS6, for a variety of reasons I also use Capture One (they currently offer both perpetual and subscription method) and ironically I bought Affinity a while ago out of curiosity for its retouching ability as Capture One doesn't have this. For me, I find the Affinity Raw Converter lacking, but the retouching excellent. So I have an alternative workflow should I ever need it.
I am very curious about ACDsee, pricey, but maybe you get what you pay for.....and slightly cheaper as a package than Capture One plus Affinity.
There is also a new kid coming to the block with 'Luminar' (to be released soon on pc), this has only previously been available on Mac. Don't know what it's like.
As a Raw Converter on its own I also like DXO.
However, it's good to have these choices, and they must be selling product to still be in business, I suspect that is due to them offering perpetual licences.
Without this competition I honestly believe the Adobe subscription plan would currently be $/£20 per month and who wouldn't pay it? ....where would you go?
So, I will continue using CS6 (cc for those on subscription) until whatever Windows platform I am using won't support it anymore, then I'll move to Capture One plus Affinity probably.
I don't see them all going subscription for a long long time as this is likely where their business is coming from, the fact they offer perpetual licences. How many of these offered strong competition when Photoshop could be bought on a perpetual licence?

 

[SteveM]

As a footnote to the above, I used to upgrade with every new iteration of Photoshop (from version 7), there genuinely was a serious improvement each time. When CS6 was reached, in my opinion, Photoshop/ACR was just so good the only reason to upgrade was for new camera support when you upgraded your camera. Cameras now are just so good.....
When the 7D mklll comes out, that will likely be my last camera for a long long time, and therefore my last paid software upgrade.

 

[deorum]

Perhaps stupid question but here it goes.

If im a subscriber in Lightroom CC now, do i get free the update to LR 7.0 ?

Thank you

 

[privatebydesign]

Perhaps stupid question but here it goes.

If im a subscriber in Lightroom CC now, do i get free the update to LR 7.0 ?

Thank you

CC users get all updates automatically, there are no model numbers per se, you just get everything perpetual license users get plus a lot more. Well you get the choice, if you don’t want an upgrade you can choose to not install it.

Like most app’s you can set preferences to auto update, tell me when there is an update or manually look for updates.

 

[bitm2007]

Perhaps stupid question but here it goes.

If im a subscriber in Lightroom CC now, do i get free the update to LR 7.0 ?

Thank you

You won't get a free upgrade to LR 7.0 (if it's released), you would however be able to download the creative cloud version (probably Lightroom CC2017.0 or CC2018.0) for free.

Lightroom 5, Lightroom 6 etc is/was the term for the perpetually licenced version of Lightooom, CC followed a year and a dot number is used for the subscription release.

 

[bitm2007]

Adobe confirm that Lightroom 7 will be released this year tweet.

https://photorumors.com/2017/09/30/this-is-the-deleted-tweet-where-adobe-confirmed-that-lightroom-7-will-be-announced-this-year/

 

[cayenne]

To be clear: I want LR to remain standalone, and to take on some additional PS features

I don't. I want Adobe to go 100% subscription and revert to their early business model of working for professional image makers and creatives. I am fed up of the noisy tail wagging the dog, they should free themselves of the noisy minority (of revenue streams) and focus on actual professionals, if that prices them out of the amateur market so be it, there are plenty of alternatives for those that don't see the value in the products and options Adobe give.

I guess it's true what they say......"There's a sucker born every minute"

I guess it's true what they say... "Cost of doing business"

10 minutes into the first paid gig of the year, and I've paid for the entire year of the CC photography plan. You go ahead and keep crying about a monthly expense that costs less than a really cheap lunch, and I'll keep laughing at you.

You can keep raving about the benefits of paying more for a product in perpetuity that's seen little to no development over the last 4 years and I'll keep laughing at you.

Pay more? Lightroom + Photoshop for ~$100/yr. Unless you only upgrade every 8+ years, it's LESS expensive to do the subscription.

Well, considering the sever lack of truly meaningful improvements or advances of LR and PS, I would posit that upgrading every 8 years would be about right...if THAT often.

 

[cayenne]

I want LR 7 "LITE" *without catalogue database* but with everything in it needed to work on stills images. Nothing more, nothing less. As a perpetual license to serve me the next 4-5 years. Would be willing to pay up to 99 €/USD for it.

A combination of Adobe Camera Raw software and GIMP may give you all that you need, for free.

Yeah, if you were going for a Photoshop replacement...I'd go likely with Affinity Photo. Its engine is REALLY fast, and does about 99% of what anyone would normally do with PS from what I"ve seen so far.

It has a develop section on it, but I've not tried that part much.

I actually LIKE the cataloging of LR...if they'd incorporate that into Affinity Photo, I might just go all in on that.

Affinity Photo...perpetual license, Mac/Windows..and is only like $50 US.

Hard to beat that...they just need to get the shortcut keys working for color picker with a brush for me at this point, that's my main complaint at this time.
GIMP user interface makes me puke even more than PS ...

 

[privatebydesign]

To be clear: I want LR to remain standalone, and to take on some additional PS features

I don't. I want Adobe to go 100% subscription and revert to their early business model of working for professional image makers and creatives. I am fed up of the noisy tail wagging the dog, they should free themselves of the noisy minority (of revenue streams) and focus on actual professionals, if that prices them out of the amateur market so be it, there are plenty of alternatives for those that don't see the value in the products and options Adobe give.

I guess it's true what they say......"There's a sucker born every minute"

I guess it's true what they say... "Cost of doing business"

10 minutes into the first paid gig of the year, and I've paid for the entire year of the CC photography plan. You go ahead and keep crying about a monthly expense that costs less than a really cheap lunch, and I'll keep laughing at you.

You can keep raving about the benefits of paying more for a product in perpetuity that's seen little to no development over the last 4 years and I'll keep laughing at you.

Pay more? Lightroom + Photoshop for ~$100/yr. Unless you only upgrade every 8+ years, it's LESS expensive to do the subscription.

Well, considering the sever lack of truly meaningful improvements or advances of LR and PS, I would posit that upgrading every 8 years would be about right...if THAT often.

Well that depends on how you value the improvements they have made.

Personally I use LR Mobile on the iPad and can't imagine not using it now, automatic syncing of images, adjustments, keyboarding, ratings etc is a massive time saver for me. Also now Apple have opened up a 100% RAW workflow that plays well with LR Mobile if you travel and don't want to take a laptop it is a killer system.

Of course if you don't use or want functionality like that then those improvements hold little value. But it is entirely untrue to say there are no meaningful improvements development and upgrading, how relevant those changes might be to you personally is up for discussion, but the blanket crap you guys come out with is just pathetic.

 

[cayenne]

To be clear: I want LR to remain standalone, and to take on some additional PS features

I don't. I want Adobe to go 100% subscription and revert to their early business model of working for professional image makers and creatives. I am fed up of the noisy tail wagging the dog, they should free themselves of the noisy minority (of revenue streams) and focus on actual professionals, if that prices them out of the amateur market so be it, there are plenty of alternatives for those that don't see the value in the products and options Adobe give.

I guess it's true what they say......"There's a sucker born every minute"

I guess it's true what they say... "Cost of doing business"

10 minutes into the first paid gig of the year, and I've paid for the entire year of the CC photography plan. You go ahead and keep crying about a monthly expense that costs less than a really cheap lunch, and I'll keep laughing at you.

You can keep raving about the benefits of paying more for a product in perpetuity that's seen little to no development over the last 4 years and I'll keep laughing at you.

Pay more? Lightroom + Photoshop for ~$100/yr. Unless you only upgrade every 8+ years, it's LESS expensive to do the subscription.

Well, considering the sever lack of truly meaningful improvements or advances of LR and PS, I would posit that upgrading every 8 years would be about right...if THAT often.

Well that depends on how you value the improvements they have made.

Personally I use LR Mobile on the iPad and can't imagine not using it now, automatic syncing of images, adjustments, keyboarding, ratings etc is a massive time saver for me. Also now Apple have opened up a 100% RAW workflow that plays well with LR Mobile if you travel and don't want to take a laptop it is a killer system.

Of course if you don't use or want functionality like that then those improvements hold little value. But it is entirely untrue to say there are no meaningful improvements development and upgrading, how relevant those changes might be to you personally is up for discussion, but the blanket crap you guys come out with is just pathetic.

Yeah, to each his own.

The web enabled stuff, isn't something I'd use. When I sit down to edit photos or video for serious work, I'm in front of a real, full blown computer as my workstation. Now...I do "play" a little on my iPad pro, with Affinity Photo and now I'm dabbling with Procreate, but those are usually just something for me to play with and keep from being bored while on a flight or at a restaurant waiting on friends, etc.

When I was speaking to the lack of innovation and new improvements on CC for PS or LR...I was talking about the main apps themselves that you'd run on a real computer....such as engine speed improvements, possibly cleaning up the interface a little...get rid of some redundancy...new tools....meaningful improvements to existing tools, etc.

That being said...I'm starting to be of the thought that a tool like PS....likely is close to EOL as a development platform...and is something that is doing into maintenance mode. I mean, what more really can anyone think of having it to do? I'm wondering if there are really any breakthrough improvements to be made as far as innovation with Photoshop?

If that is the case....and maybe Adobe knows this....they HAD to put it in rental mode, as that if no new real compelling reasons to buy PS/LR itself (not the small adjunct mobile add ons)...there would really be no compelling reason for people to keep upgrading the perpetual license....

Smart move for them, but maybe not so much for the customer.

But your mileage may vary. And everyone has their own workflow that works best for them, and I'm sure the mobile stuff proves convenient and invaluable to some workflows, yours for example.

So, what do I know? I'm just publishing my ponderings while on work breaks.

But that's how I see it.


C

 

[Diko]

1/ No, Adobe have released the numbers several times, amateurs/non subscription customers customers are a relatively small percentage of income.

3/ That's because you don't use the newer tools every single day, if you did you'd see the cross platform work they have done. LR Mobile is a killer tool, synced Collections non Adobe (customers) can access and give feedback on is an amazing time saver. Heck simple things like a reference image in the Develop module saves hours of time getting images in a series balanced. Brush adjustments included on the gradient filter, dehaze, etc etc.

4/ I don't care if they get competition, you will though, because any time any company gets close to Adobe they will realize the only way they can balance the books for ever developing software is a subscription model. No company can survive the fickle nature of periodic upgraders who will skip this generation or two because they 'don't see the value'.

On 1/ Could you be so kind to provide some more recent links?

On 3/ Exactly. Even have been using it with clients.

On 4/