Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Is there a non-cloud based Lightroom?
- Thread starter rocknpop
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Hmm... so we're screwed... we have to fork out at least $2-$3 grand over the lifespan of owning the app... ridiculous
This forum lists lots of alternatives to Lr's photo plan, if you search. Perhaps the free Photos meets your needs better, since you might not need a more complex program like Lr (and Photoshop, which is the more historically expensive part of the photo plan). Or Capture One, or Skylum's offerings, or Corel's, or Mylio's, or open source options. And others.
Buy Lightroom 6. It's a perpetual license software so you won't have to worry about monthly subscriptions
Yes, but it no longer offers updates, so if ever the OP gets a new camera, he is out of luck.
True, but there will probably be people out there creating profiles for new cameras as they come to market.
Thanks for the info. I forgot about that part especially now that Canon has a new CR3 RAW format
Those profiles won't help if you can't open the raw files in the app.
As others have stated, Lightroom is not cloud based but does have cloud options from storage space to team coordinate usage, neither of which I have used. After more than a decade with Adobe, including the more recent subscription (full CC $49/mo) program, I am officially dumping them this month which is my year anniversary month. Little understood on the subscription system, once you meet your first year obligation as it auto-renews, you are locked in for another year. It never goes month to month. If it doesn't work out, I know I can come back to the $9.99/mo Photoshop/Lightroom as I have other alternative for the other programs in CC. But thus far have been impressed.
For a Lightroom substitute, switching to Capture One (for Sony). Don't know which camera you use but all others would require the full package which is a bit pricey and don't know if I would get it. While getting use to it, have been impressed. While it has catalogs like Lightroom, it also give choice of Sessions which is really nice compared to catalogs. All files for a session (photo shoot) stay in the designated directory and you can copy the entire directory/folders to another machine with no problem. While Lightroom is cataloging, rating, organization with moderately heavy editing capability, Photoshop is the big guns. As a Photoshop substitute, there are far fewer alternatives and looks like settling on Affinity Photo. It will also cover my non-Sony files. The other one, which I have used for decades is Corel Paint Shop Pro but it is PC only. Considering it was originally one of the original "must have" shareware programs in the 80's and a thorn in Photoshop's side since it was created in 1987. I have owned it as shareware and through corporate ownership with JASC and Corel but sadly has never been converted over to Mac.
One Lightroom substitute program substitute that may be worth the 30 day trial is Paint Shop's sister program AfterShot Pro v3, as it is both PC and Mac. I tried an earlier version and wasn't up to Lightroom level, but they have added a lot with version 3
For a Lightroom substitute, switching to Capture One (for Sony). Don't know which camera you use but all others would require the full package which is a bit pricey and don't know if I would get it. While getting use to it, have been impressed. While it has catalogs like Lightroom, it also give choice of Sessions which is really nice compared to catalogs. All files for a session (photo shoot) stay in the designated directory and you can copy the entire directory/folders to another machine with no problem. While Lightroom is cataloging, rating, organization with moderately heavy editing capability, Photoshop is the big guns. As a Photoshop substitute, there are far fewer alternatives and looks like settling on Affinity Photo. It will also cover my non-Sony files. The other one, which I have used for decades is Corel Paint Shop Pro but it is PC only. Considering it was originally one of the original "must have" shareware programs in the 80's and a thorn in Photoshop's side since it was created in 1987. I have owned it as shareware and through corporate ownership with JASC and Corel but sadly has never been converted over to Mac.
One Lightroom substitute program substitute that may be worth the 30 day trial is Paint Shop's sister program AfterShot Pro v3, as it is both PC and Mac. I tried an earlier version and wasn't up to Lightroom level, but they have added a lot with version 3
I thought about that too... Then I thought when I get another camera or PC I can still just use the software that comes with my camera.
I wonder if you can buy the physical disc for LR? And will it still work. I see a lot of them in electronic stores. When will Adobe say that you can no longer purchase it.
Yes you can. Just checked BB online and they list the $149 Lightroom for either physical disk package or Serial # download...your choice. This is, of course, Version 6 which Adobe no longer provides support nor plans for a future stand alone version replacing it. While discussion has focused on no future camera/lens profile updates, I looked at System Requirements. The box lists OS-X 10.9 Mavericks (or Windows 8.1) as the active OS when developed. While presumably future OS will be backwards compatible, that is not guaranteed and we have see that occur in the past with the 32bit/64bit issue for example.
Given it reflect the 2015 creation date, suggest checking Adobe's site for when the last/final update occurred. If you have a newer camera/lens introduced after that date, it may not have a profile with no profile coming.
If the OP opts to go with the old Lr6, one possible solution for RAW profile updates for newer cameras is to use the Adobe DNG Converter. This is free and regularly updated. It can convert the camera's original RAW into a RAW DNG that the older versions of Lr can handle. It's a somewhat annoying extra step, but free and gets the job done. It can also be used with most other image editors that support DNG.
Another option for a Lr replacement that is frequently updated for new cameras and is a perpetual license is Adobe's Photoshop Elements. It is a melding of a simplified Ps (RGB only, no Lab or CMYK) and a simplified Lr that uses the same RAW processing engine as Ps and Lr.
Another option for a Lr replacement that is frequently updated for new cameras and is a perpetual license is Adobe's Photoshop Elements. It is a melding of a simplified Ps (RGB only, no Lab or CMYK) and a simplified Lr that uses the same RAW processing engine as Ps and Lr.
I’m a little confused on where you arrive at the $2-3 grand for a lifetime. At $10/mo, you are looking at $120/year. I guess you mean over the course of 20 years? If so, there’s no guarantee where we’ll be in 10. Maybe all these infernal subscription models will go away by then. I am not of fan of the concept, and I think Adobe shot themselves in the foot by driving customers to one-time purchase solutions. Their subscription model is probably great for pros who upgrade software regularly, but a casual shooter like me has a hard time buying in to that model.
I’ll throw in a vote for Affinity. I’ve yet to use it on the desktop, but I’ve been using the iPad version and find it pretty capable.
Heh...shooting oneself in the foot apparently is great for biz, as Adobe's switch to subscription has been a big hit: http://fortune.com/2018/06/15/data-sheet-adobe-turnaround-cloud/
And https://www.forbes.com/sites/christ...minate-the-subscription-economy/#256ad37252e8
It doesn’t surprise me really, as we are in the thick of this subscription economy model. MS did the same with Office365 with great success too. Maybe I’m just hopeful we will eventually get away from it, as I think it favors the corporation more than the customer, especially when the customer is tied up in the ecosystem. If adobe makes an unpopular change, what insulation does the customer have?
Last edited:
This. More than once the Lightroom "update" changed my workflow as they re-arranged everything. Most recent example was in the Develop menu, moving "Dehaze" from the Effects submenu to the Basic submenu. Rather than placing it at the bottom, some genius decided that we want it between Clarity and Vibrance. My workflow was to drop down making adjustments, looking only at the photo - not the menu - and took a couple of jobs before I realized the vibrance wasn't responding as expected and saw what they did to me. GRRRRRR!
While the subscription plan is catching on and supports business over consumer...it ultimately supports the major business, not the little guys which is the way Adobe and Microsoft want it. The consumer only has so much for a subscription budget and eventually makes choices.
Finally, $9.99 sounds reasonable...but is it realistic, and for how long? If you only need Photoshop and Lightroom, GREAT! But eventually, you will need one more and it goes to the full CC at $49.99. Oh wait, did I say $49.99? Adobe just introduced a price hike to $52.99 touting first in 4 years and all the great goodies, blah, blah, blah. When they calculate the attrition from that price hike, how long before they apply it to the $9.99 rate.
Thanks I have LR installed. I was wondering if that option is available for the OP. I see it also at B&H Photo too. Good to know. I know that mine will occasionally opt me to do the Cloud thing. I don't need my stuff accessible online. I will they would just allow you to buy and like every 2-3yrs give you an update vs monthly service.
I wonder if the concept is a big hit, or if they (Adobe and MS) own so much of the market that they can dictate what happens. It certainly works for them, but I know I don't like it for myself.
We’ve been seeing this push for years on media like software, music, and movies—subscriptions can give you access to more content for less up-front money, but the user has nothing to show for it unless they keep paying. I’m a budgeter, so I like to pay once and be done with it. I think MS and Adobe know that their incremental improvements aren’t enough for many to upgrade annually anymore, so the subscription model fixes this nicely. By claiming this is also in the name of security, how can we refuse?
I have the same complaint with Office 365 on my work PC. Updates can be such a crapshoot. Right now, if I open an external file in Excel in protected mode, it ramps my CPU up. I actually have to disable that setting to make my PC responsive again. I didn’t have this issue a month ago, but this is what constant upgrades can do to you. I don’t need constant feature updates for my job, but I get them anyway with evergreen software. At some point, this “benefit” is a stumbling block to productivity. I’d rather make such adjustments on my timetable, not on MS’s or Adobe’s arbitrary rollout day.
Last edited:
I don't "subscribe" to software, period.
$10 a month for say, 5 years -- you've just pony'ed up $600, in 10 years, $1,200.
That may be ok for folks who are in business and can write off the costs of software and hardware, but for non-professional "just folks"... it's highway robbery.
I'd look for something else or use the perpetual version...
$10 a month for say, 5 years -- you've just pony'ed up $600, in 10 years, $1,200.
That may be ok for folks who are in business and can write off the costs of software and hardware, but for non-professional "just folks"... it's highway robbery.
I'd look for something else or use the perpetual version...
This...
As a Realtor, other agents saw my listing photos and suggested I turn pro. I created a real estate photography business and sold to other Realtors while I also remained a Realtor. I have enjoyed the tax write off not only for subscription software but also for equipment including changing from Nikon to Sony. But I am getting ready to retire and won't be able to maintain the client base as I shift more to travel/landscape. Being away is really hard on a local client base. That is why I am shifting to perpetual as I can then decide when want to upgrade every two or three versions. That said, while the projected income will be decreased, there will be some with stock sales or projects so may keep the LLC for the tax deductions - but not the subscription software.
One thing I am thinking about doing during retirement is converting popular photos to oil paint (Corel Painter) and making giclée prints. The eagle I posted in the Sept Daily Photo thread on Sept 13th will probably be my first attempt. But with something like that, I don't need a high end camera as it is only the base for the painting. With the way stock photos have come under negative pricing pressure, giclée prints bring 3 to 4 times as much.
Last edited:
Hyperbole much? Lightroom hasn't even existed for 16 years, and even if it had I guarantee that LR v1.0 wouldn't do squat with RAW files from current cameras.
v6.14 is the last update, and it came out in December 2017.
http://blogs.adobe.com/lightroomjou...lable-last-perpetual-update-of-lightroom.html
Someone doesn't remember how much Adobe Photoshop used to cost -- either initial or upgrade...
(hint - $600-700 to buy the software, then $200 for an upgrade every year and a half or so)
Then there's the lightroom upgrades -- $80 a pop every year and a half or so as well.
So yeah, unless you stuck with your old cameras and didn't upgrade you could get by... but staying current cost money just in a more irregular fashion.
Again it becomes a question of whether you stand still or whether you move forward. CaptureOne costs $300. Unsure of upgrade costs. DxO costs $199 and an upgrade from prior version is $89.
Plus remember "write off" just means a discount, effectively. Doesn't make it free. Simplistically, you don't pay taxes on the amount of income equivalent to what you spent. You've still spent the money.
Anyway, hobbies cost money.
I hate the Adobe subscription model as well but expect I'll end up jumping aboard reluctantly.
What do you use for your DAM? Do you think Skylum will actually pull it off in 2018?
https://community.skylum.com/hc/en-us/community/posts/360015807632-DAM-PROGRESS?page=6#comments
(though with annual versions and upgrade prices of $40-50 each for Luminar & Aurora, that doesn't put them all that different from LR+PS subscription model pricing...)
Last edited:
I’m only what you would class as a casual photographer, but even then I feel the £10 a month is not really noticeable in the scheme of things.
Considerably less than what I expect we spend on other ‘luxuries’ each month!
Biggest thing for me to stick with LR is its support for presets.
Love or loathe them, nothing else comes close for this.
Having said that, I also have DXO Photolab which as an editor is very good. It does seems to bring out more in images than LR, although perhaps needs a bit more of a learning curve sometimes to get the best.
Considerably less than what I expect we spend on other ‘luxuries’ each month!
Biggest thing for me to stick with LR is its support for presets.
Love or loathe them, nothing else comes close for this.
Having said that, I also have DXO Photolab which as an editor is very good. It does seems to bring out more in images than LR, although perhaps needs a bit more of a learning curve sometimes to get the best.