Don’t Buy The Wrong Version of Lightroom…

Hi Gang, and happy Friday.

Above – that’s a short video I recorded after a photographer at my New York seminar last week came up and asked me a question about switching from Elements to Lightroom and he told me he had figured out which version of Lightroom to buy, and he asked me if I agreed with his logic.

I gave him a perspective he told me he had never considered, and then just today I got an email question from a photographer who already made that decision (he actually sent the question to me via Shutterbug magazine for my “Ask a Pro” Q&A column in each issue), and his question proved my point.

I don’t want you, or someone you know, to wind up buying the wrong version, so I made this short little video (2 min, 33 seconds) you can share.

Hope you find it helpful, and here’s wishing you a fantastic weekend! 🙂

Best,

-Scott

P.S. If you’re into outdoor photography, check out this short little tutorial clip from Dave Black’s new online on creating Light-paintings while including the stars and the Milky Way. It definitely takes things up a notch. So cool! Here’s the link.

Author: Scott Kelby

Scott is the President of KelbyOne, an online educational community for photographers, Photoshop and Lightroom users. He's editor and publisher of Photoshop User Magazine, Editor of "Lightroom magazine"; Conference Technical Chair for the Photoshop World Conference & Expo, and the author of a string of bestselling Photoshop, Lightroom, and photography books. You can learn more about Scott at http://scottkelby.com

Share This Post On

82 Comments

  1. People should know what they are buying. But people shouldn’t panic about having outdated software either. No version of Lightroom is ‘wrong’ if you’re getting the results you want with it.

    Post a Reply
  2. Nice Adobe advert.

    Post a Reply
    • I assume that if it true what it is showing here…than Adobe should get a legal action for selling outdated software. Everybody is buying the latest version …because it is assumed that its is the latest version ( 2017) . Mr. Kelby is telling us that this is 2016 software and even worse. Adobe should consider this when selling these products. I agree that that having a cloud , means that you are stuck and your computer is frozen regardless of how powerful it is. Shame Adobe !!!

      Post a Reply
    • I will not subscribe to LR CC. I do not need Photoshop and refuse to pay for it. As long as Adobe keep Lightroom available to buy outright I will continue to buy upgrades as they appear.

      If LR 7 is not made available for outright purchase I will make do with LR 6 and wait for another developer to produce a Lightroom competitor. It can’t be long!

      I know there are features that have been added to LR 6 CC which I would like to make use of. I believe it is unethical of Adobe to add them only to the CC version.

      Post a Reply
  3. I am 62 years old and have been a loyal Photoshop and Lightroom user since the very beginning; and I have purchased every upgrade. Adobe has rewarded our loyalty with the middle finger by orphaning their standalone versions. It is no surprise that competitors to Adobe are entering the market to satisfy those of us who refuse to incur a perpetual cloud fee! Ultimately, I believe Adobe will suffer loss for this misguided marketing scheme, which Scott Kelby is parroting-back here, and that’s too bad!

    Post a Reply
    • I agree with this
      To get Lightroom cc you have to get photoshop too. It is unweildy, comolicated and really meant for pros. Also, the while package with continuous updates chews up my data storage after which I cannot update or download a damn thing because I am slowed way down by gig limits (Verizon).This is nuts. I will return to Lughtroom 6 and PSE!

      Post a Reply
  4. Adobe are increasing their subscription pricing YET AGAIN in June 2017. Count me in the crowd of being angry at Adobe. I was on the full creative cloud subscription, now I am cancelling and using Lightroom 6 on it’s own. I will find an alternative to Photoshop. I’m fed up with being price gouged and having to pay for the rest of my life to use my photos. It’s quite clear that Adobe are taking advantage now and losing loyal customers.

    Post a Reply
    • I am 62 years old and have been a loyal Photoshop and Lightroom user since the very beginning; and I have purchased every upgrade. Adobe has rewarded our loyalty with the middle finger by orphaning their standalone versions. It is no surprise that competitors to Adobe are entering the market to satisfy those of us who refuse to incur a perpetual cloud fee! Ultimately, I believe Adobe will suffer loss for this misguided marketing scheme, which Scott Kelby is parroting-back here, and that’s too bad!

      Post a Reply
  5. What started out $9.99 after a few years it is now $179, quite a JUMP !!! It is getting out of hand with Adobe !!! soon it will not be affordable with the rates increasing…I am looking for a new program now…The camera companies have joined with adobe to make it impossible to edit photo without adobe !!! I had light room 6 before then it would not work with newer cameras…Shame it is all about money…

    Post a Reply
  6. I remember so well when Adobe first foisted their rental scheme on the creative community. Scott was leading the charge arguing that there was no reason to freak out. “You guys don’t *have* to subscribe,” he said. That choice was eliminated just one product cycle later, if I recall correctly. The cynics were right. Now Scott is shilling for software rental despite five years of evidence that rental fees haven’t done anything to speed the pace of innovation or updates. Adobe released DeHaze about a month after LR6. Hard not to see the move as a middle finger to perpetual licensees. The only people benefiting from the scheme are users who don’t have the cash reserves to buy up front and, of course, shareholders. What a surprise.

    That said, people complaining that the perpetual license version doesn’t get feature updates are totally off base. That’s not the way perpetual licenses work. New features come with new paid upgrades. This is the rationale for the rental scheme. You can’t have your cake and eat it to. Complaining about it will just give Adobe a reason to eliminate the perpetual license altogether. I can hear them now: “The perpetual license version was confusing customers and making them angry so we had no choice to eliminate it.”

    Post a Reply
  7. Thanks Scott for leaving all comments here – I just bought the upgrade from 4 to 6. I don’t regret this reading all this.

    Post a Reply
  8. Hi Scott, all
    Thanks for your opinion – but thanks much more for leaving all the comments on your page
    AND a big thanks again for all commentors here.

    I Just bought the upgrade yesterday from Lightroom 4 to 6 and these comments support my decision fully.
    Don’t get me wrong, I am a big fan of the developers of LR – since version 2.

    Of course the Adobe Marketing and finance guys are doing their job, but very poorly trying to pull the (cloud) gras – it won’t grow any faster, but actually they killed quite some soil. When reading all those comments, one should think reasonable Mgmt in Adobe should draw their conclusions by 2017 and
    a) make cc and standalone parity
    b) think of they way they push (pull the grass)
    c) decide where they focus their efforts – against the competition or against the non-clouders ?

    Post a Reply
  9. I have been using LR for many years now. I have carefully looked at the difference between LR CC and LR6 and see no need to update to LR CC. Dehaze is available as a plugin and any other “improvements” I cannot see as necessary to my workflow. Apart from that I can simulate the dehaze slider with other sliders anyway. I also use Photoshop CS6 now and then (Content aware fill, clone stamp tool, Gaussian blur and brushes for advanced vinetting) and I find I have no need for any other “improvements” found in Photoshop CC. The question is why is the software that I have meeting my needs. I think about what I am going to shoot before I take an image and then only have to spend about 3 minutes doing basic editing with LR and occasionally going into Photoshop. Before CC improvements in the software were only minimal except when a new version was released. Then I would upgrade to the newest version. I see no difference now. If Adobe doesn’t release LR 7 then I will stay with LR 6 and PS 6 and still be happy. My images do very well in International exhibitions without having editing software that is supposed to be better.

    Post a Reply
  10. Yeah I have to say this post by Scott is largely misinformation using very emotive language.

    If you want the CC features like the cloud, get CC. That is indeed not included in LR6 and I’m fine with that because I couldn’t care less about having my LR catalog etc on my phone.

    If you don’t need those features, LR6 will likely be fine for you. What about the features you don’t get? Well, dehaze is accessible using a plugin. And the pano thing I have no need for and don’t miss one little bit. What else is there? Anything? I’m not so sure there is.

    Outdated software? Very misleading, Scott! LR6 is kept up to date regularly. I frequently get a notice to update my copy of LR6, I believe I’m on LR 6.9 now. It has, as far as I can tell, all the most important features of LRCC, without the penalty of being forced to pay for it FOREVER long after the new features prove at all useful to me, and without having to get Photoshop as well, which I have no need for as I’m fine with CS4.

    Post a Reply
      • Any thoughts on LandscapePro? I know it has a plugin for Lightroom6/CC, but what about it by itself as an alternative?

        Post a Reply
  11. Is cc faster than 6 at exporting or rendering?

    Post a Reply
  12. While I too am among those who will not go the subscription route… I am impressed that you have left all the negative postings up (good on you for that). It is not a matter of money. I would rather pay more up front for something I own. I am disappointed with the current options.

    If something better, in terms of quality and/or ownership options, comes along… I suppose I will make the change. Until then I will buy “outdated” non-supported software. I suppose our economy benefits either way.

    Post a Reply
    • Scott, even though I have huge respect for his work, is wrong about Lightroom CC on a number of fronts.
      1 Photoshop is a complexity too far that photographers don’t need.
      2 Lightroom works fine even without dehaze- it’s only a minor feature in most cases and is not anywhere near a deal breaker.
      3 ‘You do the math’ as we say in the UK now- over even a small number of years, the saving when buying LR6 is significant, even taking into account the buying of a major upgrade eg LR5 to LR6
      4 LR6 is the current version, and therefore up to date but minus the marketing gimmick of dehaze – just add some local contrast instead!
      5 The fact that Adobe makes it more difficult to buy LR6 as opposed to LR CC tells you everything you need to know- = more profit! Don’t be fooled!
      6 Ignore Scott on this one- he’s obviously got more money than sense – or a nice backhander!

      Post a Reply
  13. The way you describe this makes me sick. You say the user is buying outdated software, how can that be right, they shouldn’t be allowed to sell it then if outdated.

    You sound like you work for adobe.

    Post a Reply
    • He is sponsored by Adobe so thats that. can’t bla,e him though, I would do the same thing if I was in his shoes but buyer beware.

      Post a Reply
  14. Adobe is (implicitly) targeting LR 6 and LR CC at obviously two different user groups:

    – LR 6: to those (likely “amateurs”) who are satisfied with using LR only for their image processing.

    – LR CC: to those (likely “professionals”) who additionally have the need to use the vast set of Photoshop functionality for a more elaborate work on their images.

    Both products can’t be compared; and trying to motivate users to switch to CC makes no sense, if the additional functionality of Photoshop is not needed at all.

    My wish list to Adobe is the following:

    – Continue to sell LR CC as today to those with the need as mentioned above. One incentive of this model is that this user group from time to time automatically receives additional functions as part of their monthly subscription (the monthly fee is IMHO reasonable compared to the previous price for PS).

    – Continue to also sell LR as a stand-alone product (with updates) as previously. Those updates should then include the full “roll-up” of those additional functions which have already been delivered with LR CC. Users could then still decide on a case by case basis whether they want to upgrade.

    Post a Reply
  15. This whole move to software as a service model is pants. Pay us forever and never own anything and “hey as you are obviously a bit of a mug lets charge you more for it as well”! I for one will not ever subscribe to this overpriced model unless it drops in price substantially.

    Post a Reply
  16. Street drug pushers, gym memberships, Adobe, it’s all the same. It’s we who play their game who are to blame. Kelby is just making a living. One could question ethics here, but why bother.

    Post a Reply
  17. sorry Scott, but i forgot to mention, Photoshop is irrelevant for me – because i have never, ever used it. why? because i can’t d/l a standalone version of it to check out. it’s only available in the CC version, and as i said before, there is no exit strategy that will leave one with working copies of their current versions, so i’m not interested in going there. i use GIMP for anything that Lr cannot handle.

    FWIW, using your logic, Capture One Pro is also “outdated” but, it allows one to use their finger on a touch screen to create a mask (local adjustments). i was able to do that in Lr 5.x but ‘dobe nixxed that in version 6. clearly, that function isn’t coming back. realistically, nobody does serious editing on a tablet, so the whole “sync to mobile” thing is just a gimmick. but i do agree with your basic argument “if you gotta have the latest thing, go for for CC.” just remember that when you decide to leave, you’re left with a drive full of .dng files that don’t play well with other solutions, so i would not convert your camera’s native RAW files to .dng (i learned that the hard way).

    Post a Reply
  18. the deal-breaker for me is, after paying for Lightroom CC, month after month, year after year, you never reach a point where you actually own it. quitting the CC program does not leave you with a working copy of the software, no matter how much you’ve paid over the years.

    Post a Reply
    • You mean like, making all of your house payments on time and then getting kicked out of your home when the mortgage has been paid off?

      I also take exception when referred to as “amateur” (vs pro) when one can’t afford the latest and greatest the minute something is released.

      Post a Reply
    • I’ve had it with Adobe everything, I’ve moved on to Affinity Photo, it leaves all things Adobe for dead, you buy it, you own it, no subscriptions, it just works.

      Post a Reply
    • This is the one comment I have been looking for all over the interweb! I have been trying to find out if I will be left with a working copy of Lightroom on my computer if for example I was to sign up and then quit 2-3 years later.. I couldn’t find a clear answer, now I have. This makes my decision for me. Ultimately I need to know that if I pay for a software for a few years on a subscription that I will at least have a version of it to use even if I stop subscribing. (Naturally I understand that this wouldn’t make financial sense for Adobe, to give people a full bundle of software if they cancel their subscriptions within a couple of years).. Anyhow: thank you.

      Post a Reply
  19. Having read through many of the comments, people are upset about a number of different aspects from the need to subscribe to not getting certain aspects in their older versions compared to the newer versions linked to the cloud based systems. However, the biggest issue that a person with a good reputation as a photographer and a user of a photo storage / image adjustment program should be giving is the various options based on his/her reader base.

    For professional photographers who probably need all the latest functionality of Lightroom CC and have the means with which to pay for it then this is probably the best software for them to use – whether the author is linked to or sponsored by Adobe is immaterial – the advice should be relevant to those seeking advice.

    For the others that fall into the amateur grouping, there are again different levels of amateur from the absolute beginner to those who haven’t taken the last step to professional.

    Advice should cover the various options, give concise and clear details on the advantages and disadvantages of buying or choosing to opt for either the most recent (and advanced) version or going for one of the lesser versions that will still meet the needs of the relevant groups of users based on their levels and needs.

    That there are also other companies that provide software that achieve the same aims should also be incorporated with reasons so that the readers feel that they received an informed unbiased report that encompasses their needs and therefore gives them a clearer path to take when deciding which piece of software they should buy.

    Readers can also look at other sites and photographers who recommend software so they have a comparative view on what is best to buy before actually spending the money. As with updates, it is nice when a company chooses to give updates for a long period of time but expecting it to do it indefinitely is just not going to happen in this competitive world that we live in and there will always be one version that has features that were never part of previous versions.

    We the purchasers can choose to stay with the current versions that we have, decide if we want to be linked to an online cloud based site or remain stand-alone. Just because there is a newer, better version, it doesn’t mean that you actually have to go out and buy it, if what you currently have meets all your needs and does exactly what you need it to do then stick with what you have.

    Identify whether we need the latest methods of doing something or have either read about or discovered personally work arounds that though more time consuming achieve the same thing that these new commands do in the latest versions.

    For new buyers who are entering the market for the first time, asking for advice is good, asking in only one place isn’t. Each version of the software and each company will have features that you never considered, some that you may not use for a long time to come or perhaps never will, it all comes down to how much photography you do along with how much post processing you want or have time to do.

    Post a Reply
  20. LR6 is cripleware that can be unlocked by switching to CC. I’m perfectly fine with Adobe offering both options because clearly some people like CC. Gien their greedy business practices, I’m surprised they have not yet thought about charging $80 for stand-alone LR and then slowly releasing a series of features that can be “added on” for $20 a pop. But I guess there’s no need for that since CC is a more profitable way to milk their customers.

    There was a house with an elevator and a staircase that lead to the first floor. The elevator offered convenience but cost money to operate, the stairs were free to use. Now the building’s owner has removed the front door, so the choice is elevator or climbing the exterior walls to the first floor windows. I wonder why the elevator is looking like popular option, all of the sudden. oh, I hear the windows will be boarded up soon.

    Post a Reply
  21. Thank you for the advice Scott… The only problem is that you are working very close to Adobe (You may be paid by them) so your advise is pro adobe ! The CC version is more expensive than the box version. Adobe does not care about the user thezy only want to make cash and shaw financial results according to theyre forecast.

    Post a Reply
    • Another great post. Adobe really blew this, and really doesnt care about the people using it…either pro or amature. I will never have a subscription!

      Post a Reply
  22. Thanks for the advice, but this is just not for me.

    I’ve used Lightroom 3.3 since 2010 and it’s served me very well over the years. I haven’t felt a need to upgrade, and the idea of a monthly subscription is really off-putting.

    Now that I’ve got a new camera, I’m forced to upgrade to support the latest RAW formats. I researched my options and I’m glad that there’s still an option for a non-cloud version of Lightroom.

    Another helpful website revealed that there is a (well concealed) upgrade option for ~USD 80.00. That’s a much better deal than the 120+ annually that “Creative Cloud” would cost. Had I opted for the cloud version in 2010, I would be out over $600.
    I’m sure I’ll enjoy the new features, but the basic developing and organization tools are what I’m really looking for.

    I just wanted to share this with anyone else who’s on the fence, especially anyone with an existing license to Lightroom.

    Post a Reply
    • Do not go for the upgrade….. if you have any issues with the serial numbers of the old version, you will have too deal with the chat line to india to HELL.

      INCOMPETENT IMBECILES …… TOTALY INCOMPATENT
      You will spend hours with no resolution…..

      Do not buy software online….get a dvd with a box and serial number.
      they will take your money first and you will be in hell forever

      4 days of frustation

      Post a Reply
  23. I hope, it’s not too hard to understand, that there are people like me, which never ever will connect the DIP-PC to the internet.
    It is a stand-online PC and it will remain a stand-alone PC. All possible trouble with online PCs together with important data is not a part of my agenda.

    I’m working with LR6 and yes, I’m using dehaze as well! There are a lot of descriptions available, how to integrate this feature within “Develop Presets”.

    Post a Reply
    • Thank you, and yes, that’s the point… don’t connect to the Internet, and do not get trapped in a cloud / online subsciption. Yes, there ARE people who do NOT want to subscribe, but rather be independent.

      Post a Reply
  24. The biggest problem with a subscription base is what incentive does Adobe have for incorporating any new and awesome features with a subscription base? In the past they had to be innovative and work and release a much better product the likes of which make people want to pay for the upgrade. Examples include content aware fill in Photoshop CS6, and face detection in Lightroom 6. With just a subscription base what incentive do they have of releasing innovative new features? I would argue that if they hadn’t invented content aware fill and face detection BEFORE the subscription base we still wouldn’t have it today because it requires a high development cost and would affect new subscriptions minimally. So, in the past a new feature = more revenue from upgrades & purchases = incorporate it vs. now a new innovative feature won’t affect new subscription bases = loser financially = not incorporated. I bet if you did a new feature comparison of the adobe products over the last 10 years then did a feature comparison of new features added since the subscription model you’ll see the product has stalled. Instead of something so amazing such as content aware fill, you’ll get spellchecking for keywords *yawn*. Instead of face detection, you’ll get the ability to change interface colors *yawn*. Time will tell, but financially now there’s no reason for being innovative with a subscription base and since it will reduce profits it will no longer be approved so what you get now is pretty much what you’re going to have in 10 years whereas previously the difference between a 10 year old Adobe Product and new was massive.

    Post a Reply
    • I will say it currently makes sense to put new features into the subscription base now to try to convert people to it… but once they feel they’ve tempted all they can there isn’t any reason why they should make massive improvements to their product anymore. Instead as a business, you get rid of most of the development team and hire analysts who tell you what’s just enough new features to keep people content you don’t EVER want to release a new powerful feature unnecessarily you wait until these analysts tell you they’ve determined the subscription people aren’t content anymore with the minuscule improvements and that’s when you release it… then you’re good for another probably 8 years before you need the next.

      Post a Reply
  25. In reply to Scott’s answer to David K. (on Croatia) I’m totally upset. How can one write reply with such a meaningless answer?

    “It wouldn’t be fair that you had that beautiful of a country AND the photographer’s bundle. It’s just too much at once. ”

    I’ve considered Scott for professionality and has been a fan of you up until this moment.

    The CC model is forced and thank you, I also do not want to be part of it – just doesn’t worth for me, plus it is a pure rip off by Adobe. The prices of the licenses and the subscription are just not comparable, plus that non-pros would just not need them that often.

    I would be happy to join a FB group if we started to advise Adobe strongly that their model is not waht we want.
    Adobe is experiencing a hard time in their softwares. Should they have a burden with Lightroom, that would be a financial hit also for the company.
    Let’s go for it!

    Post a Reply
  26. A lot has been said but the bottom line is that Adobe has implemented this subscription system because benefits them financially; profits increases proves it and at the expense of us their clients. They have now an unlimited and continue revenue stream, could not be better.
    For us amateur or enthusiastic photographers that do not need to update every year is an abusive strategy. If I buy a stand alone software or any other product I should own it for life no for a year.
    Unfortunately, we the users are at the mercy of the corporations that their only objective is generating a profit, nothing else and they proudly advertising it as a major achievement.

    Post a Reply
  27. Not sure why everyone is arguing something that seems very clear to me.

    If anyone is getting ‘Blackmailed’ it’s Adobe. Some customers on this blog post are expecting Adobe to continue to support and update and upgrade their product indefinitely. Try asking that from your car dealer the next time you buy a car.

    You got what you paid for and you should be really happy and grateful and privileged to own a copy of a software that works so great for so many people around the world and is marvelous tool for photographers.

    Instead most of you are crying because you want to squeeze Adobe for more and more. That’s just ridiculous. You were never loyal to begin with and now you’re showing your true colors.

    Stand your ground Adobe and keep up the great work. LR and CC are truly amazing and I appreciate the contribution your people have made to the photographic community for so many years. On behalf of me and those that agree with me I want say thank you and I will be happy to pay the monthly fee to use your products.

    I also think the Scott Kelby should not belittled for giving his opinion. You should take it or leave it. If you don’t agree then you should just explain why logically and leave the innuendo’s out of it.

    Post a Reply
  28. Don’t buy the wrong version of Lightroom …

    or better yet, don’t buy Lightroom at all.

    Post a Reply
  29. Scott, what advice do you have for someone like me that already owned Photoshop and bought LR 6 the day it came out and have since decided to give in to Adobe’s subscription model? I’m having a tough time paying a subscription for the same software I already own less the updates and I’ve been holding out for LR 7 to subscribe but I’m starting to wonder if there is ever going to be a LR 7.

    Post a Reply
  30. Hi Scott,

    My 1st year of CC has ended and I am not renewing because as an amateur photographer I don’t feel the subscription is worth it for me. I’ve upgraded to LR 6 from an older version, and am considering PSE 14 as the a go-to tool for occasional layer work or dehazing.

    I am very surprized that no one is pushing for LR6 + PSE14 as an alternative to CC. It seems to me that PSE now has nearly everything a photographer needs from PS.
    Is there a reason you would not recommend this ?

    Regards
    Jean-Chris

    Post a Reply
    • Hi everyone,

      Jean-Chris:

      IMHO a better alternative is LR6 + PSE14 + the ‘Elements XXL’ plugin for this latter. Since I heard about it, my PSE never again was the same creature. 🙂

      Regards,

      Fernando

      Post a Reply
    • Hi Scott,

      You are selling a particular and controversial Adobe product to your mostly amateur budding photographers, if Adobe are not oiling your wheels then they should, a lot of people listen to you and your opinion.

      On that note, you should think a little more about you clients/followers/fan base, what is right for you probably isn’t for the majority of them. And by standing by Adobe and even defending them, when they have been truly awful to their loyal customers makes many of us question your wisdom.

      Yes Adobe can do what they like but to do it in such an underhand manner is shocking.
      We have the right to be able to work on our images offline and not be monitored by a large corporation that has recently been hacked and had customers sensitive data stolen.

      How comfortable are you Scott by following Adobes strategy with your customers..?
      It would be like saying ‘ come to my seminars once a year and get free access to all my paid tutorials.. But if you don’t come, for a fixed price, you get those same tutorials too….

      Except you don’t, you don’t get the new tutorials or any sample images to practice on… Or any of the discount….

      I and many others look forward to your considered reply Scott…

      Post a Reply
  31. All things must pass.

    LR-6 Standalone will be my last LR product, so long as the subscription model is being pushed. I refuse to link my photography to an internet connection and a software rental company.

    Adobe may do as they like, so shall I. There are alternatives and always will be. I could care less how profitable Adobe is.

    Post a Reply
    • Gary – it’s not at all about how profitable Adobe is. It was about the guy’s comment saying people were leaving Lightroom in droves, but that’s just a totally made up statistic. In reality, more people are using Lightroom than in any time in history and Adobe’s Creative Cloud added 866,000+ subscribers in just the last quarter. As for alternatives; if there was something out there that was better, you’d probably already be using it.

      Post a Reply
      • Once they realised they are being milked they will leaved.

        Post a Reply
    • I agree Gary Gray. I refuse to pay a subscription fee. I use both Lightroom with Affinity. My suggestion is be creative and work with the tools you have because there is always a way you can pull of visual effects if you learn your tools. Adobe lost me when they went to the subscription model. Every now and then I will pull out my AE or Photoshop 5 to certain things but now with new software coming out there is hardly any need. Creative thinking is the way to go not just to get plugins effects.. I actually like creating my own effects any way.

      Post a Reply
  32. “Outdated”? Really Scot? You’re being too cute by half.

    Is the performance of LR CC sooo much better than LR6? Not having a couple of features make LR 6 obsolete? Which you imply. Customers should know the difference between the two so they can make the best choice for them.

    I’m glad Adobe is still giving us that choice. Do you know for a fact there will never be a LR 7? Or is this a wink wink; nod nod; Bob’s your Uncle kind of info?

    Should Adobe make LR available only by subscription, it will lose me as a customer.

    Post a Reply
    • Dear Tim. First, there are two “t’s” in Scott. 😉

      OK, first I’m responding to lots of feedback from people who are literally angry – up in arms, that their Lightroom 6 isn’t getting features that they’re seeing released in the latest version of Lightroom. I hear a non-stop steady stream of it, and I’ve heard more than once that if they knew it in advance, they wouldn’t have bought LR 6 (btw: you know how hard we tried here LRKT to make this super clear when LR 6 shipped). Last summer, Lightroom CC got a big update and Lightroom 6 got nothing, nor will it. If they release another big update this summer, LR 6 will still get nothing moving it even farther behind. I don’t think it’s a good idea to, nor would I recommend to anyone, to buy ANY outdated software that doesn’t have the current features, and will never have another new feature added ever – plain and simple.

      Now, onto your question: I do not know for a fact whether there will ever be a Lightroom 7, so this isn’t any kind of wink, nod of any kind – I’m just responding to people’s anger when they realize they don’t have some features in their version of Lightroom that other people do in theirs.

      Post a Reply
      • You seem to think that amateur photographers have an endless budget to pay for things including your classes and guides. You are out of touch. $360 for 3 years for CC vs. the $79 upgrade that most lightroom standalone users pay is a big difference. That’s why people are angry. They are angry that the current version of their software doesn’t have the same things as the current version of CC.

        If Lightroom 7 comes out then sure, you can’t expect the same features as CC if you have 6 but we are talking about a current version. How much is Adobe paying you? By the way, Capture One is just as good if not better than Lightroom.

        Post a Reply
  33. In the running for worst advice ever. Someone else has already pointed out the financial aspects of the decision aren’t remotely in the user’s favor. Add to that that Adobe intentionally held dehaze until right after LR6 had been released, so they could emphasize the supposed “value” of LR/PS CC.

    I’ve used LR since LR2, and in general I like it. But on top of Adobe’s deceptive and user-hostile business practices, the program has become a bloated mess the last two versions. I would throw it over in a heartbeat if there were a worthy alternative. (And because of all that, there will be a worthy alternative, it’s just a matter of time.)

    Post a Reply
    • Exactly. Dehaze came out a week or two after CC was released. Anybody with half a brain knows that this was in development for months so it’s all artificially limited.

      Post a Reply
  34. Scott,

    I think, in certain cases your suggestion is not appropriate.
    According to my calculations, personally I don’t need and don’t like LR CC version.
    Thus, some other people might find it not necessary too.
    Let us assume that Adobe will be releasing full versions of LR each year or maybe even two.
    1) Price (Upgrade): 75Eur for LR6 vs. 145Eur for LR CC for 12 months and that is assuming yearly release cycle. Usually Adobe would release LR full version each 2 years, so the price difference would be not 70Eur, but 215Eur.
    Of course, photographers bundle includes Photoshop CC, but I’m happy with Photoshop CS6 and LR6 is such a good tool that actually, I don’t remember, when was the last time, when I used Photoshop.
    2) Dehaze is technically available in LR6
    3) I don’t like LR Mobile in many ways:
    – Requires internet connectivity
    – Transfers photos between LR and device via remote servers and that is at the speed of the internet
    – Uses cloud to store photos, which I may not always agree with
    I wouldn’t even think to try to use it somewhere in Tanzania or any other place with poor internet connection.
    While Mylio (or if editing on mobile device is not a priority, then simple bittorrent sync) does the job in a much better way.
    It doesn’t try to upload photos to internets, nor does it require internet for accessing, editing, etc.
    Those can transfer pictures between devices at the speed of local network.
    In addition to that, one can use Mylio/BitTorrent Sync to synchronize photos (including originals) to multiple devices/locations for backup and disaster recovery procedures.
    (A little side note: Mylio can use cloud option, but it is not required)
    So, I’m a LR 6 user and I like LR a lot. It is a good piece of software (except, when it crashes, but that is another story 🙂 ).
    I somewhat like LR Mobile UI and editing capabilities, but in the end of the day, FOR ME, it is not worth extra 70 (or 215 Eur if the release cycle will be 2 years as usual) just for the UI.
    So, unless cloud-less sync will appear on LR mobile, I will not even consider it.

    So, for me, a non-professional hobbyist that loves to take pictures (maybe event a wedding or two) – LR6 is more than enough, and thanks, but NO, LR CC is not for me.

    BR,
    R.S.

    Post a Reply
  35. I would switch programs before using subscription software. But even more, I have it on my work computer and the services, updates, scheduled tasks, bloated temp files created take over my machine. More than once (MORE than once) I have had to remove and reinstall all the apps as Adobe had errors in updates that caused it all not to work.

    If 6 is my last, then it is my last.

    One of the rare times I could not agree less with Scott.

    Post a Reply
  36. This is the exact reason that many people are leaving Lightroom and Adobe. And Scott Kelby is a paid shill for Adobe, so he obviously supports the subscription model of renting software. Adobe makes customers choose between buying an outdated, crippled product or permanently paying monthly blackmail.

    Post a Reply
    • Rick: Thought you might find this article helpful since you’re just making up facts, it’s titled “Adobe Doubles Profits Thanks to Growth in Creative Cloud Subscribers” and they noted in the article that Lightroom CC is the fastest growing app of them all. Here’s the link: http://petapixel.com/2015/12/15/adobe-doubles-profits-thanks-to-growth-in-creative-cloud-subscribers/

      Secondly, you have some proof I was paid to say this, right? I mean, you wouldn’t publicly make a claim like that without having some concrete proof, right?

      Post a Reply
      • The title of the article (doubles profits) seems to support the claim that people are FORCED into the online CC and that is is overpriced. Count me in with the very angry crowd.
        Now looking for alternative software.

        Post a Reply
      • Why would we care about Adobe’s short term profits? It’s a longterm game buddy.

        Post a Reply
      • Scott, with all due respect, you’ve never stated that you do NOT receive compensation from Adobe. Your response of “you have some proof?” seems disingenuous, at best.

        Do you receive any type of compensation (financial or otherwise) from Adobe?

        Post a Reply
      • Thanks Scott for the nice comparison but there ONE single compelling reason for NOT subscribing to the CC version: Adobe’s sloppy billing system and totally disrespectful financial department. I’m using Lightroom since version 2 and teaching it. Since I’ve subscribed the CC version it’s been a headache. I had two credit cards cancelled due to suspicious transactions from Adobe (I had to pay 75€ for each card re-issue), then I’ve changed to PayPal and they started to bill me twice a month. Worst of all: I’ve spent hours chatting with multiple support teams, sent multiple proofs of billing errors and… They never did anything to solve it. It has become so frustrating that I’m giving up on Lightroom and I’m migrating my workflow to Phase One Capture Pro and helping my students to do the same.

        Post a Reply
  37. Honestly it all boils down to what features are really worth it for you. Sure, as a bundle it has incredible value, but you can still waste your money on something that has great value (in fact, that’s exactly what the whole trend of selling software as a service is about: companies hope people are not realizing that the plan probably costs more than what they need/what they would have paid).
    See, I don’t care about Photoshop, and I currently feel that the one or two interesting additional features I’d actually use are not worth paying $200 over 20 months. I’d rather pay $80 for an upgrade over that same period of time.

    Even better, I skipped LR 5 completely and I never felt like I was missing on something, and I could still use LR 4 to its full potential without spending more money. That’s impossible with LR CC, and to me, LR CC would be the wrong version.

    Post a Reply
  38. Good advice made necessary by an unfortunate business practice. Lightroom 6 and CC should have feature parity.

    Post a Reply
    • You sure are right! That’s what makes me turn my nose up to the whole thing. Will there ever be a Lightroom 7 CD… I doubt that. There really shouldn’t be feature parity… there shouldn’t be both. Fortunately there are a lot of software companies out there that are catching up quickly to Lightroom.

      Post a Reply
    • Exactly! I’m already shopping outside Adobe and will change my loyalty unless this disparity ceases.

      Post a Reply
  39. If you’re like me in Croatia where you cannot get the Photography plan (Adobe does not offer it), Lightroom 6 is the only legit way to go…

    Post a Reply
    • That does stink, but it’s made up for quite a bit by the fact that Croatia is such a beautiful country. It wouldn’t be fair that you had that beautiful of a country AND the photographer’s bundle. It’s just too much at once. 🙂

      Post a Reply

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. Photo Links #2 | Helderberg Photographic Society - […] Don’t Buy The Wrong Version of Lightroom… – Lightroom Killer Tips […]
  2. Don’t Buy The Wrong Version of Lightroom… – dPico PHOTOS - […] post Don’t Buy The Wrong Version of Lightroom… appeared first on Lightroom Killer […]

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *