Adobe Lightroom Mobile Version Official

[tntwit]

I'm a Techhie and I 'do' Apple..... hate Android and linuxy type systems....... 4 years of 'converting' to Apple.... never a virus or sign of one in all that time!!

I really don't know what the demographics are for each type of user, it was really just a guess based on observation.

Our IT department has one guy who is very pro Windows - he has the Windows phone, a Surface Pro and a rather healthy dislike for Apple.

We have another guy who loves Apple - iPhone, iPad, etc.

I don't know what the IT manager likes, but she was looking at him like he was crazy when he was joking around and praising Apple.

Like I said, it really amuses me how strongly people will defend one system over the other. It is the Ford Chevy argument of the tech world.

 

[tntwit]

On topic, any opinions on whether it is better to use the iPod SD adaptor vs a WiFi card?

The WiFi card would be one less step, but I think it would be rather slow by comparison, particularly with RAW (I'm assuming LR Mobile supports RAW). I would like to try a WiFi card but I hear a real mix of good and bad about them.

 

[privatebydesign]

On topic, any opinions on whether it is better to use the iPod SD adaptor vs a WiFi card?

The WiFi card would be one less step, but I think it would be rather slow by comparison, particularly with RAW (I'm assuming LR Mobile supports RAW). I would like to try a WiFi card but I hear a real mix of good and bad about them.

I have much better luck with the Camera Connector Kit than either an Eye-Fi card or a Canon WFT.

 

[tntwit]

I have much better luck with the Camera Connector Kit than either an Eye-Fi card or a Canon WFT.

Which iPad and I assume iOS7?

I heard some people were having issues with the connector kit and I don't recall if it was the iPad Air they were blaming or iOS7.

 

[privatebydesign]

I have much better luck with the Camera Connector Kit than either an Eye-Fi card or a Canon WFT.

Which iPad and I assume iOS7?

I heard some people were having issues with the connector kit and I don't recall if it was the iPad Air they were blaming or iOS7.

1st iPad and OS 5.1.1. Forget wireless RAW files, though you can do them, technically, the only way I will do them is via the WFT via FTP to Photosmith, EyeFi cards are very slow for RAW's and just not worth it.

 

[RLPhoto]

No, sorry. Lr Mobile is only available for customers with an active subscription (CC or the PS/Lr Photography Program). Perpetual licenses of Lightroom cannot sync with it.

and why is that? We have paid for our perpetual LR licenses too,. FU arrogant Adobe!

And do take note: I will not rent your software or join an annual pay subscription model ... ever, no matter what you do. And if you push me and if no better software alternative becomes available, I will revert back to Canon DPP to process RAWs.

+1

Why are they arrogant? And how does that justify FU?

It is their software, they can choose to license it how they like, if you don't like the terms then just don't buy it but there is no point to talking like that to an actual Adobe representative. He isn't going to take you seriously if you talk like that, thanks for blowing any chance we have of reasonable dialog with Adobe here now.

I never knew adobe understood the concept of "reasonable dialog". : : :

 

[privatebydesign]

No, sorry. Lr Mobile is only available for customers with an active subscription (CC or the PS/Lr Photography Program). Perpetual licenses of Lightroom cannot sync with it.

and why is that? We have paid for our perpetual LR licenses too,. FU arrogant Adobe!

And do take note: I will not rent your software or join an annual pay subscription model ... ever, no matter what you do. And if you push me and if no better software alternative becomes available, I will revert back to Canon DPP to process RAWs.

+1

Why are they arrogant? And how does that justify FU?

It is their software, they can choose to license it how they like, if you don't like the terms then just don't buy it but there is no point to talking like that to an actual Adobe representative. He isn't going to take you seriously if you talk like that, thanks for blowing any chance we have of reasonable dialog with Adobe here now.

I never knew adobe understood the concept of "reasonable dialog". : : :

Well we will never find out here now will we? The first comment to them, within four minutes, was FU, hardly an effective way of engaging anybody. If I was a corporate rep assigned this forum I'd report back that they (us) are not worth any time or effort.

I choose not to do the CC thing, and am happy with the cost of that, not getting the latest features is, as far as I am concerned, very reasonable. Besides, as I have already linked to, there are very good and established LR Mobile competitors.

 

[RLPhoto]

No, sorry. Lr Mobile is only available for customers with an active subscription (CC or the PS/Lr Photography Program). Perpetual licenses of Lightroom cannot sync with it.

and why is that? We have paid for our perpetual LR licenses too,. FU arrogant Adobe!

And do take note: I will not rent your software or join an annual pay subscription model ... ever, no matter what you do. And if you push me and if no better software alternative becomes available, I will revert back to Canon DPP to process RAWs.

+1

Why are they arrogant? And how does that justify FU?

It is their software, they can choose to license it how they like, if you don't like the terms then just don't buy it but there is no point to talking like that to an actual Adobe representative. He isn't going to take you seriously if you talk like that, thanks for blowing any chance we have of reasonable dialog with Adobe here now.

I never knew adobe understood the concept of "reasonable dialog". : : :

Well we will never find out here now will we? The first comment to them, within four minutes, was FU, hardly an effective way of engaging anybody. If I was a corporate rep assigned this forum I'd report back that they (us) are not worth any time or effort.

I choose not to do the CC thing, and am happy with the cost of that, not getting the latest features is, as far as I am concerned, very reasonable. Besides, as I have already linked to, there are very good and established LR Mobile competitors.

I guess Adobe ignored the massive backlash and took light on my +1. Good for them.

 

[RustyTheGeek]

I have much better luck with the Camera Connector Kit than either an Eye-Fi card or a Canon WFT.

Which iPad and I assume iOS7?

I heard some people were having issues with the connector kit and I don't recall if it was the iPad Air they were blaming or iOS7.

1st iPad and OS 5.1.1. Forget wireless RAW files, though you can do them, technically, the only way I will do them is via the WFT via FTP to Photosmith, EyeFi cards are very slow for RAW's and just not worth it.

Funny you guys are discussing connectivity and the iPad. I remember back in the old iPad 1 days when most folks couldn't get the Camera Connector Kit to even work and if they did, it was dead slow and killed the battery very quickly.

This is part of the reason I was/am so irritated with Apple and iPads. I really really really wanted to use an iPad for photography from day 1. It was never a realistic option due partly to limited connectivity and partly due to lack of decent apps. There was just no way to get photos on an iPad out in the field that was even remotely useful. You had to use iTunes. What a joke. At least these days there is the ability to use WiFi to some extent.

 

[RustyTheGeek]

...while I sound like an Apple hater

Just so you know, I was rather careful not to call you a 'hater'. 8)

and they don't sue what seems like the entire world at the same time they fleece the consumers within their ecosystem.

This is one way in which Apple is not perfect. I think they would be better off focusing their time, money and energy on product innovation instead of lawsuits. Whether Samsung is right or wrong, when you're at the top the competition is going to go after your market share. They are not going to sit still. Apple needs to focus on moving forward, not worrying about the competition copying what they did in the past, particularly in a field that changes so fast and the past is rapidly irrelevant.

And yes, they are expensive, really too expensive. It disturbs me that they charge $100 for each bump in storage when storage is so cheap. It disturbs me that the iPad 2 lived so long for so much money. I think Macs are incredibly expensive, though I am thinking about one at some point. But I do think they make a good product (not perfect) and it's really a personal choice if the cost is worth it for all the pros and cons.

That said, Samsung isn't shy about what they charge for their top tier products and even Amazon cranked up the price of the Fire HDX from the HD to a level I don't think they are worth.

Yeah tntwit, I really appreciate you not jumping to conclusions with my rant. I try to be objective with technology but I also try not to be taken in by marketing and pretty lights and elegant surfaces. Technology should make things better and provide productivity, not just look nice. I applaud Apple for many things. They stomp the competition with their ingenuity, innovation and the simplicity and functionality of their interfaces. There are good reasons why they are a leader. Grandparents can use their products with ease. So can most of the rest of us. Their downfall is their pompous arrogance and insistence on total control along with their ruthless corporate attitude. And over the last couple years, they have become stagnant. Steve Jobs was a master visionary and great at many things including being a perfectionist and demanding excellence. But his downside was his ego and the way he took competition so personally. He needed more Wozniak to offset his Jobs.

I have owned Apple products in the past, I have clients that have or do own Apple products. I may own another Apple product some day. I had an iPhone. Now I have an Android. My wife still has an iPhone. We have various electronics around the house, some Apple, some Android, some Windows, some Linux, etc. But overall, if I am going to spend hundreds or even thousands of dollars on something that is overpriced, I'll buy another camera, lens or photography item. At least I can get most of my money back when I sell it down the road and it probably won't fail on me or be easily damaged.

 

[lastcoyote]

Although I'm a user that has subscribed to Adobe's CC Photoshop Photography Program and feel that this particular £8.49/$9.99 'limited offer' (note the exclamation marks) is actually half reasonable, I do feel peoples pain and annoyance towards the CC model.....however I will say that I get the feeling that we are going to see this type of thing (essentially the 'rental' of software) more and more from the big software companies. It's the whole 'cloud' concept thats pushing it and it seems that's the way everything is going. I guess we just have to lump it and move with the times.....or do we? or am I just talking baloney

 

[AvTvM]

Adobe and Lightroom and I go back many years.
Up to 2005 I used Canon DPP. Then I discovered Pixmantec Rawshooter, spent 99 Euro on the premium version in April 2006 and three months later Adobe acquired the technology assets of Pixmantec, only to take Rawshooter off the market. Adobe did issue me a free license to Lightroom 1.0, which I briefly tested only to find out it was totally inadequate compared to what I was used to from Rawshooter. I went back to Canon DPP as RAW Converter and various Non-Adobe programs for photo editing. When Lightroom 2.0 came out, I gave it a try and found it useful. So I purchased the license, and subsequently also the ones for LR 3, 4 and 5.

I find it arrogant of Adobe, to cut me and all other non CC users off using from using Lightroom on our mobile devices, even when we are holding perpetual licenses to LR. I do not want anything "for free" from Adobe. I would be ready to PAY EXTRA for the Lightroom Mobile APP ... if it delivers, what I would like out of it and if we are talking about a sensible one-time payment .. lets say anything from 3,99 to 9,99 USD/Euro - in line with regular mobile APP prices.

As long as Adobe is denying their paying Lightroom customers full use of the program - both on PCs and in conjunction with mobile devices - and just to try to force us into their subscription / cloud model they can go f*ck themselves. I strongly resent all and any implications the Adobe CC model brings about:
* the ongoing subscription payment requirement
* "cloud" exchange and storage per se (I do not put images "into anybody's cloud ... they reside solely on hardware devices under my full, direct and utter control, where I and nobody else sets the rules of use)
* the fact, that countless hours of your own work on your own images will be lost, should you ever decide to stop paying and end usage of the Adobe creative cloud

So until Adobe enables EVERY paying LR user to also use LR on mobile devices I will continue to say: FU Adobe!

No, sorry. Lr Mobile is only available for customers with an active subscription (CC or the PS/Lr Photography Program). Perpetual licenses of Lightroom cannot sync with it.

and why is that? We have paid for our perpetual LR licenses too,. FU arrogant Adobe!
And do take note: I will not rent your software or join an annual pay subscription model ... ever, no matter what you do. And if you push me and if no better software alternative becomes available, I will revert back to Canon DPP to process RAWs.

+1

Why are they arrogant? And how does that justify FU?

It is their software, they can choose to license it how they like, if you don't like the terms then just don't buy it but there is no point to talking like that to an actual Adobe representative. He isn't going to take you seriously if you talk like that, thanks for blowing any chance we have of reasonable dialog with Adobe here now.

 

[expatinasia]

I find DPP perfectly adequate for most needs. Of course it is not as powerful as Lightroom etc., but it does the job, nicely and efficiently. Every picture I take starts its life in DPP, and I do have Lightroom but will not be upgrading to the CC version (yet).

Of course eventually we will all have 5D Mark IVs, 1D X Mark IIs, and dare I say it a 7D mark ii (or iii ), plus new lenses etc and Adobe's technology will move forward just as quickly, so eventually we may not have a choice of upgrading, but need to out of necessity.

Adobe are a business and I can see their logic.

What I really, really do not get is why I, or anyone else, would want this on their phone. I never edit anything on my phone.

 

[winglet]

It's fascinating to see the almost pathological level of emotion certain posters have against this company or that one. If you're so convinced one way or another that Android is better than Apple, then don't buy the Apple products, give your money to Samsung, vote with your wallet, no one cares. Likewise in reverse for the Apple fanatics. But spare us the lecturing please. For all the mocking that Apple "fanbois" receive, it's interesting to note that in this thread most of the hysterics are coming from disgruntled Win/Android users. Enough already - message received. Can we move on to the real point of here, to review LR Mobile? I'm sure Adobe will eventually release a version for Android, once they figure out how to support it on countless diverse hardware and software versions. Such is the downside of all that "choice".

Kudos to those who have tried to steer back on course. In that vein, I also agree that there are much better mobile options for syncing with LR. Photosmith has been mentioned.

 

[AvTvM]

Well, DPP may be adequate to handle some needs. unfortunately not my needs. And unfortunately it is in no way competitive to what Lightroom offers. Yes, DPP is free of charge, so no problem there. But ...

LR gives me what I always wanted: "one-stop-shopping for everything I want do with my images".

Only one software to purchase, learn and keep current. Both powerful and reasonably intuitive to use. Only 2 file formats involved: RAW ["digital slide / positive"] and .jpg ["digital prints"]. No bloated TIFFS, no proprietary multi-layer .psd files, no complicated software with multi-month learning-curves, no absurdly outdated 80's style user-interface, no functions targeted solely at graphics professionals or print shops ...

And no more need for single-trick pony software apps just to import images, rename images, add and edit EXIF/ IPTC metadata, tag images, sort, organize, catalogue, show, share and edit them.

LR has allowed me to cut all the post-processing software clutter. One seamless workflow. All editing directly on the RAWs, but totally non-destructive. Since LR 4 with the ability to also apply local adjustments, not just global ones. Everything handled in one window, rather than separate windows popping open for different types of image editing and manipulation. Excellent de-noising. Fully automatic correction for all my lenses, if and when desired.

As I am not interested in creating composites or doing extensive pixel-level manipulations or CGI content I have no need for other post-processing software whatsoever. LR does it all. Yes, there are still improvements possible, but LR 5 is pretty darn "close to perfect" for me.

Therefoe, I do not want to revert to a mere RAW-processor like DPP or Capture One or SilkyPix. I want ONE "stills images handling program". Unfortunately LR is the only sensible software option currently available to me [thanks to Adobe killing off Pixmantec and others]. Aperture ... I do not use Apple Macs. And all other programs I have tried are either subpar or total overkill relative to my requirements.

This is why I have paid the license fees for every version of Lightroom so far. I am willing to pay for it in the future. I am also willing to pay a reasonable little extra money to use it on a mobile device as well.

But I am not willing to move to Adobes creative cloud/subscription-based model.

I find DPP perfectly adequate for most needs. Of course it is not as powerful as Lightroom etc., but it does the job, nicely and efficiently. Every picture I take starts its life in DPP, and I do have Lightroom but will not be upgrading to the CC version (yet).

Of course eventually we will all have 5D Mark IVs, 1D X Mark IIs, and dare I say it a 7D mark ii (or iii ), plus new lenses etc and Adobe's technology will move forward just as quickly, so eventually we may not have a choice of upgrading, but need to out of necessity.

Adobe are a business and I can see their logic.

What I really, really do not get is why I, or anyone else, would want this on their phone. I never edit anything on my phone.

 

[AvTvM]

....
Kudos to those who have tried to steer back on course. In that vein, I also agree that there are much better mobile options for syncing with LR. Photosmith has been mentioned.

While I appreciate Photosmith being mentioned .. it is no solution for what I [and presumabley many others] would like to do.

I would like to buy = SPENDING MONEY for the following:

1. a Canon hi-end mirrorless EOS [FF sensor, roughly "5D IV equivalent"] with 2014-style .ac WIFI in it

2. flawlessly working image transfer (including RAWs) directly from camera to iPad. .AC protocol WIFI is fast enough to do this. if extra batteries are needed, I am prepared to buy some and carry them along

3. fully functional Canon "EOS Remote" app for iPhone and iPad ... offering full remote control functionality exactly like camranger today, but without need to carry along an extra piece of hardware

4. Mobile Lightroom sans creative cloud from Adobe to run on my iPad and in a pinch also on my iPhone. With full sync to LR on my desktop PC. I would use it to select, rate images, to delete failed shots, to add metadata to images [IPTC, tags] and - occasionally - to do minor editing on some images [straightening, cropping, contrast, minor WB, de-noise, sharpening when & as required] - on location or "on the go" ... while I am still away from my desktop PC.

So, essentially I want to cut out the need to carry along a notebook.

But nobody is offering what I would like to buy ... not yet.

 

[bitm2007]

LR has allowed me to cut all the post-processing software clutter. One seamless workflow. All editing directly on the RAWs, but totally non-destructive. Since LR 4 with the ability to also apply local adjustments, not just global ones. Everything handled in one window, rather than separate windows popping open for different types of image editing and manipulation. Excellent de-noising. Fully automatic correction for all my lenses, if and when desired.

If Lightroom does go the way of the cloud i'm planning to take a serious look at Cyberlink PhotoDirector 5. Lightroom users will feel instantly at home with it's development module, i've haven't had a serious look at whats under the bonnet (hood) yet however.

 

[DFM]

There will always be arguments about whether the consumer products (Lr, Elements, etc) will go 'subscription only' in future, and Adobe can't do more than to say there are no plans. There really aren't, it's not something the target customers would accept. Maybe in 30 years when the entire concept of 'installing' something is dead and buried the idea will be forced upon us all, so Adobe cannot say "never".

Right now with LR Mobile version 1, all the data flows through Adobe's network, and there's a lot of it. I do understand people are angry about having to subscribe to get the app working (personally I didn't think it was a good idea), but it's not ad-funded and there are real costs to keep the thing operational. By all means complain about it, Adobe do take note of feedback. That's what people like me are here for - I don't mind being shouted at.

..and when I'm shooting on location I run Lr5 on a Surface Pro; quite frankly it's much better. I can shoot tethered, develop stuff and hand off the final results to a client while they're watching. I'd also suggest using a small laptop in the same way; the Surface is overpriced for what it is but I got the thing for testing, and forgot to give it back..

 

[Jamesy]

On topic, any opinions on whether it is better to use the iPod SD adaptor vs a WiFi card?

The WiFi card would be one less step, but I think it would be rather slow by comparison, particularly with RAW (I'm assuming LR Mobile supports RAW). I would like to try a WiFi card but I hear a real mix of good and bad about them.

I have much better luck with the Camera Connector Kit than either an Eye-Fi card or a Canon WFT.

I have an old Eye-fi Pro X2 8GB that was given to me on a shoot last year and I just got it setup this morning and I transferred both JGP and RAW to the 'Camera Roll' on the iPad, not withstanding speed of transfer, it works great.

That said, I went into LR Mobile, created a new collection and added the new photos to the collection. The RAW images were not visible to LR Mobile, only the JPG's.

Summary: RAW images in Camera Roll but not selectable for import into LR Mobile
Anyone else having this issue?

A bit of topic, another thing I noticed is that the images transferring from the Eye-fi card to the Camera Roll get renamed coming into the iPad - anyone else experience that?
EDIT: It seems this is a function of the iPad Camera Roll API: http://forums.eye.fi/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=8715

 

[RustyTheGeek]

It's fascinating to see the almost pathological level of emotion certain posters have against this company or that one. If you're so convinced one way or another that Android is better than Apple, then don't buy the Apple products, give your money to Samsung, vote with your wallet, no one cares. Likewise in reverse for the Apple fanatics. But spare us the lecturing please. For all the mocking that Apple "fanbois" receive, it's interesting to note that in this thread most of the hysterics are coming from disgruntled Win/Android users. Enough already - message received. Can we move on to the real point of here, to review LR Mobile? I'm sure Adobe will eventually release a version for Android, once they figure out how to support it on countless diverse hardware and software versions. Such is the downside of all that "choice".

Kudos to those who have tried to steer back on course. In that vein, I also agree that there are much better mobile options for syncing with LR. Photosmith has been mentioned.

Yeah, message received. :-[ I'll accept most of the blame for going off topic and I actually already said that further up. I got a little carried away. Sorry!