Subject: Re: Lightroom CC
On Oct 23, 2017, Tony Cooper wrote
> The following are observations and comments on the new Lightroom CC
> and not at all criticisms. Each of us who use Lightroom have our own
> workflow that we've become used to and a requirement to change that
> workflow is usually not viewed well. And, each of us has different
> I have no particular need for, or interest in, access to LR from more
> than one work station. But, I downloaded LR CC and gave it a run.
> Some of the differences between LR CC and LR Classic baffle me. I
> don't understand why Adobe created these differences.
> When shooting a series of photographs taken on the same outing, I
> always open the first one, set certain things (Clarity, Vibrance, Crop
> Size, and Lens Correction) and then Synch all the shots in that
> import. I can over-ride a synched setting, but I seldom do so.
> In LR CC, there is no Synch command*. The user can copy the settings
> from that first image and paste it to the rest in the series to
> accomplish the same thing, but I don't understand why Adobe changed a
> workflow step that works to a different workflow step.
> My workflow includes naming each shot in a date format: 2017-10-23-01.
> LR Classic has a drop-down that displays the thumbnails by File Name.
> LR CC does not have that option. There are options (eg: Capture
> Date, Modified Date), but that does not allow putting the images in
> sequence desired.
> LR Classic allows me to display thumbnails in Grid with certain
> information. Mine shows file name above each thumbnail. I have to go
> to the small "i" to show the file name for each photo. The info is
> there, but the user has to look over to the panel and the screen is
> reduced by the panel.
> LR CC removes certain settings from the Basic panel and puts them in a
> different panel. Clarity is in Effects, for example. No problem
> really, but the person who using LR CC has to figure where things are
> now and adjust. There doesn't seem to be a good reason for that type
> of change.
> If the function is there in both versions, then it would seem sensible
> to have the interface as close as possible to the same on both rather
> than make the users figure out where what is.
> For the person who has frequent need to access their images away from
> their home work station, LR CC will be a very valuable addition to
> Adobe's stable. I understand this.
> I do wonder if that person will upload all of their files to LR CC or
> just the more current files. That 20 Gb free (CC Photography
> subscribers, not full CC users) is not going to accommodate a lot of
> users for all of their images. That means that they will not being
> going over to LR CC entirely, but will be using both versions. And,
> adjusting each time.
> As their current images start to exceed the 20 Gb size, they'll have
> to start moving images back to their home storage.
> Adobe may fine tune LR CC as they get user input, but the above are
> some conditions that I feel deserve comment. Not criticism, but
> *Well, there is "Synch", but it synchs the image with the cloud
> storage file.
There is much in your observations I can agree with. Like you I can’t see
changing my workflow to accomodate new LR CC, and I can’t see serious
subscribers of the CC Photography plan making the leap. I have formed my
opinion, and it is not for me.