PeterN
On 11/22/2013 1:02 AM, otter wrote:

otter
On 11/16/2013 9:29 PM, PeterN wrote:

PeterN
On 11/16/2013 3:48 PM, Savageduck wrote:

Savageduck
On 2013-11-16 20:10:51 +0000, PeterN <peter.newnospam@verizon.net>said:

PeterN
On 11/16/2013 2:31 PM, MI wrote:

MI
On 11/16/13 10:49 AM, in article 2013111610494361729-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom, "Savageduck" <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com>wrote:

Savageduck
On 2013-11-16 18:32:59 +0000, "Mayayana" <mayayana@invalid.nospam> said:

Mayayana
| Personally the deal for 12 months is too good for any | Photoshop/Lightroom user to turn down. Whatever happens they will still | have their older copy of CS which qualifies them for the deal.

The whole point of such marketing is to get you hooked. They hope you won't be willing to go back to the old version after the deal is over. Meanwhile, if you found the added cost of $10/month worthwhile then you must already think the rental version is notably better than CS6, which implies that they can probably get away with a price increase at year's end, because you'll be loathe to return to CS6 by then.

Savageduck
Perhaps, perhaps. That said I have my copy of CS6 and while I can certainly live with it now. Having a 12 month promotional "trial" of CC was tempting. I am already thinking in terms of buying an LR5 upgrade to run with CS6 as a form of insurance. So for now I will live with the Adobe ambiguity and make any decision to renew once their intent is a tad clearer.

Mayayana
It's like cable TV promos that promise "only $xx for 6 months" without telling you the real price. Anyone who's not prone to lying to themselves will find out what the real price actually is and decide whether they want the product at *that* price.

(Salesmen rarely cheat outright. They just help one to lie to oneself.)

Savageduck
Yup! However, the big difference for current CS owners is, we will still have our original tools, whereas the cable subscriber who drops service after the promotional period has nothing.

MI
One thing to take into consideration of this "one year trial offer" is will you be able to go back to CS6. I know that you can not go back in Lightroom as one of my fellow students discovered a couple of years ago. The class was using LR2 and he bought LR3. When he took his LR2 work home and installed it on his LR3 version home he discovered (and so did the whole class) that he could no longer work LR3 work on the school's LR2 system.

I would be cautious of assuming that you can go backwards. New stuff shouldn't be a problem but if for some reason you want to work on an older photo you may not be able to.

PeterN
I would think that if you keep your RAW files, that would not be a problem. Especially since you can use non-destructive editing. You can also save as a TIFF, or other backward compatible format.

Savageduck
In LR all adjustments are applied virtually and retained in the application specific cat file. So in LR none of the adjusted virtual copies would be backward compatible. All of the RAW files or DNGs would be movable between versions. The ony files other than originally imorted fies and virtual copies found in LR are image files saved back to LR after using an external editor such as PS, one of the NIK products, OnOne Suite, etc. Any adjusted & finished images exported and saved in the standard file format of choice would be accessible to any image editor.

Storing RAW files using whatever archive system you have devised is always prudent.

PeterN
So it is not saved in an XMP file, as with ACR? I was not aware of that.

otter
You have the option to set it up that way, if you like. It will slow things down if you constantly update the XMP file while you make changes in the develop module, but you do have that option.

You also have the option to export to RAW, which will create/update XMP files in a batch operation. So you can of leave all your edit changes in the catalog for now, and then if you ever feel the need to bail, export all your RAW files. Might take some time to do them all, but it is possible.

If you export DNG RAW files, the metadata is embedded in the DNG file, so you don't need XMP files at all.

And, if you ever feel the need to ditch the CC subscription, you could always outright buy LR5 or upgrade to it, if you really, really, liked the way your library was set up.

PeterN
Right now I have about 1.5T of RAW files, plus about 250 gig of processed files. Tim Grey advises that all LR files be kept on one drive. he also advises that the files be kept on an external drive, and that we not use DNG. Before I even try LR, I want to reorganize my files. I should have that completed by the weekend.