Difference between LR CC and LR Classic - Rendering

[Tp2000]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'll start this with "it may just be me, but...."

 

Had a M10-P for nearly a year and love it. Lightroom CC has been my primary tool for processing and workflow, which I love, especially the ease with which I can edit in the go on the iPad too. 

However, as I start to get to the upper reaches of my current space in Adobe Cloud, I've started playing around with Lightroom Classic and thinking perhaps I'd be better off with a more hybrid approach and a more structured archiving solution. 

My one bug bear has always been a very yellow hue to photos when using the M10 Profile in Lightroom CC. To the point where I have hardly used it. But on starting to look at workflow etc again in LR Classic, I'm seeing a couple of differences in how files are handled.

 

1. The M10 profile is much less yellow in LR Classic vs CC

2. The LR CC file, when processed with identical settings, is more saturated and contrasty. Similarly with monochrome, I see the same (contrasty....clearly not a saturation difference). 

 

I have tried searching on here, but couldn't find anything around this specific issue. 

 

Is this something that folks are aware of (and I'm only just realising)? Or....is it just me?

 

 

[jaapv]

The solution is to make your own profile and use that in both LR versions. Alternately, take an  "ideal" file, process it to your liking and as identically as you can get in both versions, and save as new default settings.

[LocalHero1953]

I used the original Lightroom since v3, then switched to LR CC a few years ago, moving all my catalogue to the cloud. Six months ago I switched back and now use LR Classic, with my catalogue stored locally (backed up to the cloud with a non-Adobe service), but smart previews in Adobe CC.

I haven't noticed any particular difference in colour and rendering between LR CC and LR Classic. My cameras are the CL and SL, and my M240 was sold a year or more ago. So I can't confirm your observations.

I became disillusioned with LR CC; at the start I was willing to put up with its deficiencies (no print module, clumsy interface with PS and Nik, no batch renaming, no external publish service......) for the benefits of access to my images from anywhere in the world, and the ability easily to share originals with other people. But as Adobe made no attempt to make any significant upgrade to LR CC functionality, I chose to abandon it in favour of the far more comprehensive LR Classic. I suspect the uptake of LR CC has been far less than Adobe expected, and they've decided it's not worth investing in further.