Anyone switched from Adobe CC back to LR6?

Minstadave · 13 Jun 2017 at 10:52

My CC subscription has gone up to £10 odd a month. Given I only use Lightroom I'm not sure this is great value as LR6 is £110 so I'd be saving money in under a year.

Is it easy to switch back to LR standalone?

Columbo · 14 Jun 2017 at 08:42

Yes, I had the subscription for a while to trial it but went back to LR6 late last year as I never ever use Photoshop it has no value to me.
Can't say I've missed much at all, just make sure that your presets are backed up as per any change of LR and you'll be good to go.

voidshatter · 14 Jun 2017 at 10:58

Still using Adobe Photoshop CS6, because I cannot accept subscription-only license.

Minstadave · 14 Jun 2017 at 12:25

Thanks guys, seems the way to go.

Razor-BladE · 14 Jun 2017 at 14:23

I'm still on 4.4, and was thinking of going to CC. I'm finding 4.4 really slow in both the library and develop modules, slower than when I was on 3. Is 6 or CC much quicker, and is there much difference from 6 to CC (in terms of LR only).

rodders · 14 Jun 2017 at 20:12

I went back to an older version of LR and the catalogue wasn't compatible. But annoying, but not annoying enough to pay £10 a month

Energize · 16 Jun 2017 at 00:49

Yeah I'm on LR6, the CC sub is poor value for lightroom as lightroom upgrades only ever cost £55 every 2 years or so.

Droolinggimp · 19 Jun 2017 at 19:21

I am thinking of getting LR but what can can't I do in LR that I can in PS?

An Exception · 20 Jun 2017 at 13:58

Droolinggimp said:
I am thinking of getting LR but what can can't I do in LR that I can in PS?

Photoshop is just way more clunky to process pictures in.

You would have to download a trial and test it out for a while. Personally I shudder at the thought of going back to photoshop for large batches of pictures.

An Exception · 20 Jun 2017 at 14:03

However I also resent paying adobe for lightroom. Over the last couple of years it's barely changed. The code is still crap compared to the competition and runs slow comparatively speaking. If you have a 4k or more display it's a real PITA.
All it has is a nice simple user interface and 'enough' tools to get 99% of what you want done.
Still it's my favourite overall raw processor..

mrk · 20 Jun 2017 at 20:21

Droolinggimp said:
I am thinking of getting LR but what can can't I do in LR that I can in PS?

Sleective layering and editing/fine tuning.

For most people, LR will do 95% of image processing tasks with more scope and power due to the non destructive nature of LR, but PS will work with layers and as such, you can do things like fine tune and fine edit images using them, then export back to LR for further processing or archiving/exporting.

I use an old version of PSCS, and the latest standalone version of LR6. I often find I need to edit a LR photo in PS (easily integrated in the right click menu) for tweaking areas of an image, cutting out eyes off people and such).

Raymond Lin · 20 Jun 2017 at 21:06

There are certain cloning technique I can't do in LR, or can't do proper skin fixing like frequency separation.

Not to mention to support the latest cameras, eventually you need the latest LR.