I'm concerned adobe are going to gradually phase out Lightroom in favour of CC and all their other online garbage.

Are there any plans for LR timelapse to become 'capture one time lapse' or similar?

Or even to become a full standalone app that can grade and catalogue images using 'adobe camera raw' as the engine?

I don't think so. Lightroom Classic is still used by the majority of users, even if Adobe might not admit it. Other Raw-Converters currently don't offer the necessary interfaces.
But you can be sure, that I'm monitoring the market very closely and have a couple of new ideas already.

Thanks

Hi Gunther,

I second this concern and am pleased that you are monitoring the situation.

It certainly looks like Adobe are moving more and more towards cloud-centric products & I for one don’t intend professionally to go down that path. I’m gradually moving over to Capture One for editing as it offers significant image quality improvements over Lightroom and many others consider this to be the case. For example I refer to an article on The Luminous Landscape (https://luminous-landscape.com/adobe-why...rsaken-us/).

I appreciate that Lightroom Classic is still used by the majority of users, and I’m currently one of them, especially since LRTimelapse is built around it. However, as a professional user, I would like to see alternatives being developed that allow other options which are not reliant on Adobe Lightroom.

I don't agree to the way that article looks at how Adobe is treating Lightroom Classic. I know, that Adobe is continuing working on it and still Lightroom Classic in my opinion is the best Raw Converter and image management solution on the market. Sometimes it's better to have something mature that just works in comparison to new solution that might or might not survive a hype with new features with every version.
You should not easily switch a digital asset management solution that you are working with since years. Stability and reliability is key for such a software. I'm not an Adobe fan, I hate how they killed Premiere Pro for example. It's the most unstable software I know. But in my opinion the way they treat Lightroom Classic since it's a subscription model is very good and mature: they constantly and massively improved the performance instead of bringing shiny new features as their competitors did.

OK, agreed, Lightroom Classic is a mature, all-round solution and time will tell how Adobe develop things. I’ve used Lightroom almost every day for my work since around 2009 and it is a one stop solution from capture to print.

However, I have tried other packages in parallel; Aperture, Capture NX, ON-1, Luminar, Affinity, DxO. I have also been using Capture One for a while and this has now become my real alternative to LR Classic. Yes, Capture One is a relatively new solution but rather than a hype with shiny new features Capture One processes things completely differently which allows it to give the output it does – I don’t think it is a complete solution for me just yet, but it is getting very close.
I for one can say is not an easy switch, I struggled to get my head around it and originally it did not have some of the key features I wanted. However, I’ve been working with it on and off for a few years now and I’ve been slowly chipping away (but still going back to Lightroom for the bulk of my commercial work because I know it). But from the output I have created using it I know I’ll pass the point of no return at some point, not too far away.

As above, I have been using Adobe software since LR3 and yes there have been some very good improvements and welcome additions over the years but I wouldn’t go so far as to say they have constantly and massively improved performance over the last few years; it has improved, but in my opinion, it’s been a gradual clunky progression in line with available technology and including features seen in other packages.

At the moment, and no doubt like yourself, I am very much reliant on Adobe products and in particular Lightroom Classic. Current reports (not just the Luminous Landscape article) predict that Adobe is focusing on moving us towards the cloud-based version, no doubt maintaining for a while the Classic version, but for how long will that be supported?

The reports maybe all wrong, their assumptions incorrect (and I hope Adobe do take the time to evolve Classic for us) but, my question to you is; if Adobe force us to adjust to CC will LRTimelapse work cloud based (does ‘mature’ mean of retirement age)?
Do I want to store my entire catalogue (many terabytes) in the cloud – NO.
Will I move to another editing package – 99% YES – and I will have to deal with how I produce my timelapse sequence output to suit, hopefully still using LRTimelapse (at the moment I have to say I think there is no better Timelapse solution than yours).

Thanks and Regards

Timelapse editing on the cloud is a no go. And honestly - does anybody really think, professionals will switch to a cloud only solution? Adobe also knows, they won't. Look alone at the privacy issues putting customer data on a cloud. The lack of decent internet when traveling, etc. I know no professional photographer (timelapse and regular) that would go that route. And I hardly believe, that Adobe will risk loosing their pros as customers.
With the cloud stuff they are trying to asses new target groups and that's okay. But that's certainly not the pros, whom they will certainly not risk to loose.

Like I said before - I'm monitoring the situation and I'm also in contact with Adobe. For me and LRTimelapse of course LR Classic is essential. And I'm not going to adapt LRTimelapse to any cloud solution, because it wouldn't make any sense. Should that ever get necessary, I'd rather find another raw converter, that's for sure.

Thank you, that's good to know.