Adobe - is breaking up REALLY hard to do?

[landyvlad]

This is primarily directed at Linux users, but some of the programs mentioned have windows / mac versions as well.


If you want to break up WITH Adobe but are having difficulties, go here for counselling:https://itsfoss.com/adobe-alternatives-linux/Many


The comments have even brought an additional one to my attention.It appears that "krita" may be better than Gimp, as krita has support for layers in psd format (a better way of doing things that the Gimp implementation)


And for those who want to do just basic photo editing stuff, without the complexity and learning curve of photoshop complexity, then have a look at photoscape.


Cheers

[bobt]

I have been processing photos for many years, and from time to time I dabble in Adobe's products. However, particularly now that they have gone online rather than as stand-alone products, I have yet to see a compelling reason to stay with Adobe.

Paintshop Pro and ACDSee do pretty much anything that Adobe can do, and IMHO they do it better and more intuitively. The stuff that Adobe might do that's not covered by these two isn't really worth the additional effort.

For me, breaking up isn't an issue .......

[Geoff79]

I would never upgrade to the new one (cc?) but have spent so many years learning how to use cs4 as and cs6 that I couldn't imagine starting from scratch somewhere else now.

Even though I probably know about 1-5% of photoshop's capabilities, it's taken me so long to learn those precious few things that I need to pursue it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[bobt]

Even though I probably know about 1-5% of photoshop's capabilities, it's taken me so long to learn those precious few things that I need to pursue it.

I think that's the whole problem with behemoths like Photoshop. I imagine very few people ever come to grips with all the things it can do, and we spend so much time digging around, trying to find the more useful functions, andwe never achieve either its potential or our own. That's why I like some of the less massive but equally proficient software that doesn't try to soar with eagles because most of its users are turkeys. :D

[feathers]

I use "smart photo editor" very basic, but this turkey is very happy with it:nod::D

[Mark L]

I would never upgrade to the new one (cc?) but have spent so many years learning how to use cs4 as and cs6 that I couldn't imagine starting from scratch somewhere else now.

Even though I probably know about 1-5% of photoshop's capabilities, it's taken me so long to learn those precious few things that I need to pursue it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm with you here. Using CS6 with Windows.
I've learnt how the 1% helps my photos. The end result of what my photos are used for won't change enough to warrant learn new software yet. (although I still learn new things in my PS PPing)

[Plays With Light]

I use "smart photo editor" very basic, but this turkey is very happy with it:nod::D
I would have thought you to be a Photoshop fiend, Richard! You obviously know how to get the best out of the program you do use!

Me, I love Lightroom for most of my images, but I'm pushing myself to learn and use Photoshop more these days.

[Claire M]

It all depends on how much post processing you wish to do with/to your photos to achieve what you are happy with, as far as what software you may use.
I used to be a Photoshop user a few years back, before all this subscription nonsense, and for my art interpretations/creations that are based from photos, I am now a regular user of Affinity Photo (there's both Windows and Apple versions), which is very similar to Photoshop and is much less expensive, and cheaper than Lightroom. It is also an easier software to learn than Photoshop, with many tutorials on the net as well, and you can use Adobe plugins (8bf) and import/export PSD files. Have a browse at this post and also have a read of my thread if you're interested: http://www.ausphotography.net.au/forum/showthread.php?149958-Affinity-Photo-new-kid-on-the-(Windows)block&highlight=Affinity (http://www.ausphotography.net.au/forum/showthread.php?149958-Affinity-Photo-new-kid-on-the-(Windows)block&highlight=Affinity) :D

SPE - Smart Photo Editor, as Andrew (feathers) mentioned is also a good fairly simple editing program with the usual adjustment features, batching, cloning and 'cutting out' options, and more!, and has so many filters (adjustable) you can use to create a photo masterpiece or a spectacular artwork, with many options for frames/borders as well for a one off price (half price special at the mo) of $29.95! I use this software a fair bit too, and highly recommend it. :D

Another basic, but worthy software is FastStone Image Viewer and is FREEWARE!, so no cost involved! :D This has been mentioned in other AP posts as well. :D This program is an image browser, converter and editor that supports all major graphic formats including BMP, JPEG, JPEG 2000, GIF, PNG, PCX, TIFF, WMF, ICO, TGA and camera raw files. It has a nice array of features such as image viewing, management, comparisons, red-eye removal, emailing/sharing, resizing, cropping, colour adjustments, musical slideshow and even more!
Of course there is GIMP - a FREE worthy Photo Editor and Graphic program as well!, and probably more out there too!
Question now is, do we really need ADOBE? :D

[feathers]

I would have thought you to be a Photoshop fiend, Richard! You obviously know how to get the best out of the program you do use!

Me, I love Lightroom for most of my images, but I'm pushing myself to learn and use Photoshop more these days.

I might have another look at it again sometime in the future, now that l'm retired. Looked a bit complicated the first time l looked at it. :)

- - - Updated - - -


It all depends on how much post processing you wish to do with/to your photos to achieve what you are happy with, as far as what software you may use.
I used to be a Photoshop user a few years back, before all this subscription nonsense, and for my art interpretations/creations that are based from photos, I am now a regular user of Affinity Photo (there's both Windows and Apple versions), which is very similar to Photoshop and is much less expensive, and cheaper than Lightroom. It is also an easier software to learn than Photoshop, with many tutorials on the net as well, and you can use Adobe plugins (8bf) and import/export PSD files. Have a browse at this post and also have a read of my thread if you're interested: http://www.ausphotography.net.au/forum/showthread.php?149958-Affinity-Photo-new-kid-on-the-(Windows)block&highlight=Affinity (http://www.ausphotography.net.au/forum/showthread.php?149958-Affinity-Photo-new-kid-on-the-(Windows)block&highlight=Affinity) :D

SPE - Smart Photo Editor, as Andrew (feathers) mentioned is also a good fairly simple editing program with the usual adjustment features, batching, cloning and 'cutting out' options, and more!, and has so many filters (adjustable) you can use to create a photo masterpiece or a spectacular artwork, with many options for frames/borders as well for a one off price (half price special at the mo) of $29.95! I use this software a fair bit too, and highly recommend it. :D

Another basic, but worthy software is FastStone Image Viewer and is FREEWARE!, so no cost involved! :D This has been mentioned in other AP posts as well. :D This program is an image browser, converter and editor that supports all major graphic formats including BMP, JPEG, JPEG 2000, GIF, PNG, PCX, TIFF, WMF, ICO, TGA and camera raw files. It has a nice array of features such as image viewing, management, comparisons, red-eye removal, emailing/sharing, resizing, cropping, colour adjustments, musical slideshow and even more!
Of course there is GIMP - a FREE worthy Photo Editor and Graphic program as well!, and probably more out there too!
Question now is, do we really need ADOBE? :D

That's very interesting Claire:nod: Thankyou, l will check them out.:) Cheers.

[Plays With Light]

Question now is, do we really need ADOBE? :D
Not if Affinity and MacPhun keep doing what they are so successfully achieving! Both have Photoshop beating programs available for Windows and Macs. Now, if only they would come up with a DAM, I'd leap ship right now! :nod:

[paulheath]

too be honest i use adobe product religiously....but this is where the " user error" comes into it.....photoshop isnt really a "photographers" ideal tool..it is however hands down the best for manipulation and any other picture distortion you may require... i use it for photo restoration and couldnt live without it.... now LIGHTROOM... there is a photographers dream program... see people use photoshop instead of lightroom and its not quite the same.... i mean you wouldnt use lightroom to manipulate a photo would you? same as you shouldnt use photoshop for photo editing ( adjustments in contrast, white balance, saturation, tones....you know the rest) photoshop is for.... well photoshopping bits and pieces cloning.. warping... editing with layers of the artistic side.... so lightroom for photographer...photoshop for designer.....

[enseth]

^ What he said 100%

[Claire M]

:o Just a quick apology to Richard, who I called Andrew (for some unknown reason!?) :Doh:in my above post, so Sorry Feathers!

[Tannin]

LIGHTROOM... there is a photographers dream program

Photographer's damn nightmare. Whoever heard of a photo editing program that doesn't even have the ability to perform the very first and most important command an editor of any kind needs - FILE -> OPEN? It is a usability disaster of such monumental, incomprehensible arrogance and stupidity that I have not the words to describe it properly, and if I did I couldn't repeat them here.

[feathers]

:o Just a quick apology to Richard, who I called Andrew (for some unknown reason!?) :Doh:in my above post, so Sorry Feathers!

All good Claire:nod::D The only place you will find perfection, is in a dictionary:) I do that sort of stuff regularly:nod: Cheers.

[Plays With Light]

i mean you wouldnt use lightroom to manipulate a photo would you?
I used to, Paul! This image (http://www.ausphotography.net.au/forum/showthread.php?151003-Christies-Beach-Sunset) was edited in Lightroom only, one day I'm going to retackle it in Photoshop, but I have a lot to learn in that regards, including luminosity masking before I do have a go at it again.

[Mary Anne]

I like Lightroom and PS paid for not CC, it suits me and I am too old to start learning any new stuff.
And if you do need any Help you always seem to get it on here for those two :nod:

[ricktas]

I use Lightroom and CS6. This push to have us pay monthly for everything is going to cause a world of financial pain for a heap of people in the not to distant future when they realise they have signed up for a whole range of these monthly payment things and find that they are paying out more than they earn. How easy is it to go, oh, its only $19.99 a month, click!

Netflix, Stan, Spotify, Photoshop, Lightroom, foxtel... and more. Even charities like Red Cross don't want you cash anymore, they want your credit card and a monthly contract. Suddenly people find themselves paying $hundreds a month in these fees.

The issue will be when those of us using CS6 buy a new camera and find it is not supported by our software, so our RAW files will not open. We will then need to seek out another RAW processor or editing suite.

[torro]

Rick I agree, especially with any new camera purchase.

[Plays With Light]

The issue will be when those of us using CS6 buy a new camera and find it is not supported by our software, so our RAW files will not open. We will then need to seek out another RAW processor or editing suite.
When that happens, I reckon you should look into the Affinity and MacPhun products. For Affinity it costs $80 AU, for MacPhun Luminar Neptune it's $99 AU, and you have a brand new Photoshop equivalent, and it's yours for life, like the old CS6 is.

[JoPho]

Follwed up from ClareM's post and Affinity give a free 2 week trial...downloaded it last night...have no idea what I'm doing...hope 2 weeks is long enough!!!
https://affinity.serif.com/en-us/photo/?gclid=CjwKCAjwjJjOBRBVEiwAfvnvBDK1kVtVpy15-y9X_zpepTEWjnJUKgf1lR0uJEc9eR8936WNKwiJ6RoCIH4QAvD_BwE&trial
Affinity free trial photo editor

[Filter]

The issue will be when those of us using CS6 buy a new camera and find it is not supported by our software, so our RAW files will not open. We will then need to seek out another RAW processor or editing suite.

When I started using .ORF files my LR6 would not recognise that format, luckily I was able to buy an updated version of LR6 & stay away from the CC. I had a quick look at the Affinity program & if I get pushed to where I don't want to go it certainly is a consideration.

[John King]

I use Lightroom and CS6. This push to have us pay monthly for everything is going to cause a world of financial pain for a heap of people in the not to distant future when they realise they have signed up for a whole range of these monthly payment things and find that they are paying out more than they earn. How easy is it to go, oh, its only $19.99 a month, click!

Netflix, Stan, Spotify, Photoshop, Lightroom, foxtel... and more. Even charities like Red Cross don't want you cash anymore, they want your credit card and a monthly contract. Suddenly people find themselves paying $hundreds a month in these fees.

The issue will be when those of us using CS6 buy a new camera and find it is not supported by our software, so our RAW files will not open. We will then need to seek out another RAW processor or editing suite.

Rick, I'm already in that position. CS6 doesn't support my E-M1 MkII. But the MetaRaw plugin does, and works excellently with any version of PS or PSE! Once only payment for a 2 seat licence. Bridge CC is a free download for DAM.

[Filter]

Opps...

[Claire M]

When I started using .ORF files my LR6 would not recognise that format, luckily I was able to buy an updated version of LR6 & stay away from the CC. I had a quick look at the Affinity program & if I get pushed to where I don't want to go it certainly is a consideration.

This is one of the reasons I purchased Affinity Photo as I needed a decent RAW editing program that would accept both ORF and RW2 files as I use both older Olympus (OMD eM5) and Panasonic (FZ200) cameras, and Affinity Photo regularly updates to accept the newer models (and their relevant lenses for lens barrel correction purposes).


Follwed up from ClareM's post and Affinity give a free 2 week trial...downloaded it last night...have no idea what I'm doing...hope 2 weeks is long enough!!!

:D Well yes, Jo you'll need a bit of spare time (I guess you have a bit of recovery time up your sleeve ;)) to practise, practise, practise, but there are shortcuts (and keyboard shortcuts) to help make things easier, so try this link:
https://affinity.serif.com/blog/new-keyboard-cheat-sheets-available-now/ (https://affinity.serif.com/blog/new-keyboard-cheat-sheets-available-now/)
Also many tutorials from basic know-hows to more expertise/more involved, as in videos (so you can follow step by step) as well as written ones.
https://forum.affinity.serif.com/index.php?/topic/10119-official-affinity-photo-desktop-video-tutorials-200/ (https://forum.affinity.serif.com/index.php?/topic/10119-official-affinity-photo-desktop-video-tutorials-200/)
If I can be of any help at all, please msg me :D

[Geoff79]

Will the Adobe DNG converter still be good for RAW files that don't open?

Camera Raw 7.0 won't open my RAW photos from my 70D, but this free Adobe DNG converter does. I touched on this in another thread, but as I understand it the DNG file is a lossless conversion of that RAW file. It's a bit of a pain, but converts really quick and is harmless enough.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[paulheath]

Photographer's damn nightmare. Whoever heard of a photo editing program that doesn't even have the ability to perform the very first and most important command an editor of any kind needs - FILE -> OPEN? It is a usability disaster of such monumental, incomprehensible arrogance and stupidity that I have not the words to describe it properly, and if I did I couldn't repeat them here.

FILE > OPEN....hmmm little bit win98 for a program that actually catalogues your photos...hense FILE > IMPORT...with OPTIONS to IMPORT a SINGLE file or a MULTIPLE catalogue entries.....so the very basics for any editor would be to move with the times......so too speak

[Ross M]

I've been thinking about moving from Lightroom and Photoshop Elements, or perhaps use an alternative for at least some photos. I am now learning to use ON1 Photo RAW 2017.5, which is the current version. I am a Windows user.

The probelm is, it is unstable on my PC. Editing can be slow and that is the clue that a crash might be imminent. This is despite increasing the RAM to 16 GB and installing a basic, but compliant, video card based on a suspician that the motherboard graphics was causing a bottleneck. I do suspect a video driver issue is contributing to the issue. It appears that ON1 need to concentrate on stability before working on new features, which I believe is the focus now. Their previous version was known to be a memory hog.

- - - Updated - - -

I've been thinking about moving from Lightroom and Photoshop Elements, or perhaps use an alternative for at least some photos. I am now learning to use ON1 Photo RAW 2017.5, which is the current version. I am a Windows user.

The probelm is, it is unstable on my PC. Editing can be slow and that is the clue that a crash might be imminent. This is despite increasing the RAM to 16 GB and installing a basic, but compliant, video card based on a suspician that the motherboard graphics was causing a bottleneck. I do suspect a video driver issue is contributing to the issue. It appears that ON1 need to concentrate on stability before working on new features, which I believe is the focus now. Their previous version was known to be a memory hog.

[richtbw]

I have been processing photos for many years, and from time to time I dabble in Adobe's products. However, particularly now that they have gone online rather than as stand-alone products, I have yet to see a compelling reason to stay with Adobe.

Paintshop Pro and ACDSee do pretty much anything that Adobe can do, and IMHO they do it better and more intuitively. The stuff that Adobe might do that's not covered by these two isn't really worth the additional effort.

For me, breaking up isn't an issue .......

I use ACDSEE Pro 10 and ACDSEE Ultimate and occasionally GIMP. The two products from ACDSEE caters for almost all my RAW editing needs.

[Cage]

I just posted this in another thread.


I'm paying around $13.00 per month for Creative Cloud which is for Photoshop CC (2017), Lightroom CC (2015), Bridge CC (2017) and Camera Raw CC.

However today I received an email from Adobe stating the following:

"We hope you enjoyed your trial of Adobe Photoshop Lightroom CC. Keep bringing your ideas to life and upgrade to an Adobe Creative Cloud* Single App or All Apps membership today. Plans from A$28.59/month"

Huh !!! I'll have to look back through their convoluted emails to check that Lightrooom was in fact actually only a trial. If so, it's been running for two years ???

I just clicked on the link in the email and Creative Cloud, including Photoshop, Lightroom and Bridge is now $A14.29 pm. I mean why confuse by calling it a trial when it is actually a new contract. :confused013

The problem I've had with Adobe, other than the gliches with the software, is that they seem to have a problem giving a direct answer. Adobe has more tricks than a barrel of monkeys and was ordered to front the appropriate authority to answer accusations of price gouging.

I'm quite happy with paying $14.29pm to continue with what I sort of know, the whole 1.237% of it.

[Mark L]

The issue will be when those of us using CS6 buy a new camera and find it is not supported by our software, so our RAW files will not open. We will then need to seek out another RAW processor or editing suite.
Well I have this problem. Currently I'm using Adobes DNG converter but will start looking at DPP to convert to TIFF and then play in CS6 as well.
I don't see why I have to pay for Creative Cloud or other software that has been mentioned if CS6 can do what want?

[MissionMan]

I use Lightroom and CS6. This push to have us pay monthly for everything is going to cause a world of financial pain for a heap of people in the not to distant future when they realise they have signed up for a whole range of these monthly payment things and find that they are paying out more than they earn. How easy is it to go, oh, its only $19.99 a month, click!

Netflix, Stan, Spotify, Photoshop, Lightroom, foxtel... and more. Even charities like Red Cross don't want you cash anymore, they want your credit card and a monthly contract. Suddenly people find themselves paying $hundreds a month in these fees.

The issue will be when those of us using CS6 buy a new camera and find it is not supported by our software, so our RAW files will not open. We will then need to seek out another RAW processor or editing suite.

Compared to what they used to charge us in Australia it's still a bargain. We used to pay double the price for creative suit, nearly $3000. It would take 60 months to pay that off based on the current monthly payment with no interest.

I don't have an issue with the monthly's. For them its about revenue consistency. Monthly contracts create annuity revenue. They have to keep the product good or people cancel the service. We've had monthly stuff for ages, foxtel etc. In many respects, some of them are more accessible now. The photographers bundle is the same price as a couple of coffees a month. I think it's like anything, you budget accordingly and you cancel if you don't want to continue.

[bobt]

I use ACDSEE Pro 10 and ACDSEE Ultimate and occasionally GIMP. The two products from ACDSEE caters for almost all my RAW editing needs.

I'm curious .... why do you use both Pro and Ultimate? Doesn't Ultimate do everything that Pro does?

[enseth]

The probelm is, it is unstable on my PC.

Mine too.

[bobt]

Compared to what they used to charge us in Australia it's still a bargain. We used to pay double the price for creative suit, nearly $3000.

Yeah, but that applies to everything. New technology always costs a lot when it's new, but gets cheaper over time. I don't think you can compare current costs with legacy costs.


I don't have an issue with the monthly's. For them its about revenue consistency. Monthly contracts create annuity revenue. They have to keep the product good or people cancel the service. We've had monthly stuff for ages, foxtel etc. In many respects, some of them are more accessible now.

That's all very well if you're looking at it from their POV, but I look at it from my POV !! Their bottom line, revenue consistency etc isn't my concern. My objective is to save my money - their's is to get hold of as much of my money as possible. I'm a firm believe in owning something rather than renting it. All of these things are relatively cheap if looked at in isolation, but cumulatively they become a drain on your finances. You end up with multiple monthly debits sucking your savings away faster than you realise. I think this whole idea of renting software is just another way of draining people's assets. With the exception of my first suit, car and house I have never paid anything off in installments, and I have saved countless thousands over the years following this philosophy.

[MissionMan]

Yeah, but that applies to everything. New technology always costs a lot when it's new, but gets cheaper over time. I don't think you can compare current costs with legacy costs.



That's all very well if you're looking at it from their POV, but I look at it from my POV !! Their bottom line, revenue consistency etc isn't my concern. My objective is to save my money - their's is to get hold of as much of my money as possible. I'm a firm believe in owning something rather than renting it. All of these things are relatively cheap if looked at in isolation, but cumulatively they become a drain on your finances. You end up with multiple monthly debits sucking your savings away faster than you realise. I think this whole idea of renting software is just another way of draining people's assets. With the exception of my first suit, car and house I have never paid anything off in installments, and I have saved countless thousands over the years following this philosophy.

I think it's the same. No software is getting cheaper. The products have to be developed constantly, they have to be re-written on a regular basis (move from 32 bit to 64 bit) to cater for industry changes, RAW file support has to be constantly updated to cater for new cameras coming through, salaries and property costs increase etc.

On the issue of not having purchase options, my suggestion is to look at alternative options like Capture One which is pretty good and offers both monthly and once off options. If Adobe loses enough business to once off purchase customers, they may decide to offer other purchase options.

[swifty]

I'm quite used to this subscription model for software for professional use in my day job. They market themselves as solution providers so its something that's factored into business costs but we expect everything to just work.
For personal use, it's slightly different for me but of course photography may be a business for many people.
I own a standalone LR, 5 I think (can't remember really but its not the current version) and have bought and experimented with Affinity. Don't particularly like the Affinity UI I must say and at least currently it has no DAM functionality.
But I will be re-assessing my software choices with my next computer purchase, which is also factored into my next camera purchase.
Looking at the standalone Capture One or even *gasp* Nikon software.

[Tannin]

I think it's the same. No software is getting cheaper.

Actually, no.

Practically all software is getting cheaper. With just a handful of spectacular exceptions - all of them intimately tied to anti-competitive abuse of monopoly power - the average price of software has consistently trended strongly downwards for the last 50 years or more. (Yes, since before there was even such a thing as a micro-computer - minicomputer packages commonly used to cost hundreds of thousands.)

The price of a typical office utility program - a spreadsheet for example - was around the $600 mark in the 1980s, or about $1600 in today's money. Now a spreadsheet 1000 times more capable costs zero, or a few tens of dollars for one of the minor brands, and just a couple of hundred bucks for the big names. (Note that the biggest name one, Excel, has managed to resist the trend to quite an extent because of Microsoft's market power, but you can still buy even that one for less than $200, or about $60 in 1985 terms - in other words, it costs one-tenth as much as it did to buy the equivalent 30 years ago. A very similar story applies to almost everything else in software - and indeed in computer hardware too.

The one great exception is operating software: via the application of illegal anti-competitive trade practices (not opinion, fact proved multiple times in courts of law) Microsoft attained an effective monopoly from about the middle of the 1990s and maintained it for the best part of a couple of decades. This allowed Microsoft, and Microsoft alone, to stand fast against the market trend. In (for example) 1990, standard operating software cost $150 OEM (i.e., wholesale to the PC maker). Today, it still costs around the same (just a fraction under in dollar terms, or about 40% less after allowing for inflation). Compare with practically everything else in the software market, which has dropped by around 80% over the same time frame.

Photoshop is trying hard to be a second great exception, and Adobe operates using many of the same time-tested tactics that made Microsoft so rich, notably buying out competitors and shutting them down. Every few years we see a wave of promising competitors surface - one seems to be happening right now, as witness several posts above - but so far, they have all failed in the end. (Or been bought out by Corel, which is generally a fate worse than death for decent software.) Perhaps this time, finally, we will see the monopoly power properly broken. Hope springs eternal.

[swifty]

I haven't read the entire thread so forgive me if this has been mentioned.
But an increasingly popular PP software is Snapseed, owned by Google and produced by the excellent Nik software.
I don't use it cos I don't really PP my mobile images but as the mobile platform becomes increasingly popular, this might make in-roads into breaking Adobe's monopoly.
I believe they used to have a desktop version but not anymore. If they brought that back with the emphasis on ease of use and workflow, then you might see a large migration of casual enthusiast, especially if it remains free even with more powerful features added.

[bobt]

I think it's the same. No software is getting cheaper. The products have to be developed constantly, they have to be re-written on a regular basis (move from 32 bit to 64 bit) to cater for industry changes, RAW file support has to be constantly updated to cater for new cameras coming through, salaries and property costs increase etc.

On the issue of not having purchase options, my suggestion is to look at alternative options like Capture One which is pretty good and offers both monthly and once off options. If Adobe loses enough business to once off purchase customers, they may decide to offer other purchase options.

The problem with subscription models is that once you start that ball rolling, it's often hard to stop. You keep spending, but it gets absorbed into your background banking. That's exactly what the seller wants, but not necessarily what's good for the customer. Everything you've said makes sense - for the seller - but wages etc are not the consumer's responsibility. I'm more concerned with the unwitting customer who finds himself with a product that's constantly being upgraded when he/she might not want the upgrade. Windows 10 is like that although at least you don't have to keep paying. Subscription models are a seller's idea, not a consumer's.

However, I do agree that Capture One is a good alternative, as are several other programs mentioned here. At the end of the day most of us don't use a 10th of the power of any of these programs, so to my mind PS is overkill anyway.

[mikew09]

Read through pretty much all the threads I think and am a little surprised about how much negativity there is about Adobe Creative cloud. Now I am not saying I am a great photographer but I do like to try and do some creative work like those in my " Photo Fun Hump day " shots and for me the work flow is LR CC and PS CC. I remember maybe 6 yrs back I purchased the latest version of PSE and suffered continuous frustrations at the time as it didnt support layers for non destructive editing along with a very poor cataloging tool. I believe I paid something like $157 for it at the time. LR I purchased outright also before subscription came along.

Now - being an early subscriber I got in on the beta buy discount which has gone up maybe $3 since the start of subscription offering so I have been with them for some time. I still pay $12 give or take a few cents for my LR CC and PS CC subscription. For that I get the latest software and version updates along with new features added of both LR CC and PS CC.

So in view of yearly cost I am up around $150 AU a yrs which is still less than what I paid for LR and less than what PSE cost me. In fact looking at the thread, at least two of the other products come in only maybe $50 less without free upgrades for new RAW version etc.

So, I dont see warrant in bagging out Adobe for what is - IMHO - and seems a very large Global community of photographers also is an unjust cost for what is a fantastic product.

However, I get it. I do seem the point here in as much as PS can be at times a bit of a learning curve and there maybe many features not for ones using it but to say it is in-superior to many other products and over costly I think is yanking the chain a bit.

So sure - everyone to their own and sure if you find a product suites you better that makes perfect sense to me and a legit argument - however, I cant say I am in line with the Adobe big bad monster theme here :-)

It does sound a little like I have a Canon because Nikon blah blah discussion hear which I have never bother getting caught up in :-)

Happy days team.

Mike

[ricktas]

I haven't read the entire thread so forgive me if this has been mentioned.
But an increasingly popular PP software is Snapseed, owned by Google and produced by the excellent Nik software.
I don't use it cos I don't really PP my mobile images but as the mobile platform becomes increasingly popular, this might make in-roads into breaking Adobe's monopoly.
I believe they used to have a desktop version but not anymore. If they brought that back with the emphasis on ease of use and workflow, then you might see a large migration of casual enthusiast, especially if it remains free even with more powerful features added.

I use snapseed on my mobile, But sadly Nik Software has been discontinued: http://www.ausphotography.net.au/forum/showthread.php?152531

[swifty]

I use snapseed on my mobile, But sadly Nik Software has been discontinued: http://www.ausphotography.net.au/forum/showthread.php?152531

Do you know if its broken up and absorbed by Google or something else? I knew the Nik software suite was discontinued but thought the team were still being tasked with other developments. Maybe I remember incorrectly.
Such a shame, I liked their software and paid for mine without regrets even though Google made it free later on.

[Claire M]

an increasingly popular PP software is Snapseed, owned by Google and produced by the excellent Nik software.

For mobile devices (tablets and smartphones - Android or iphone), particularly when you're travelling and your laptop/desktop is not there with you, then Snapseed is probably one of the best FREE photo apps, along with PicsArt, that's easy to use, has more than basic photo adjustment and retouch options, opens and edits RAW files, has assortment of filters and presets, and great overall for PP (has masking options and layering) for photos taken on these devices, and of course you can share online/bluetooth and save your photos in PNG or JPG format. The biggest bug bearer I have with Snapseed though, is you have limited choice of pixel sizes that you can save to/in. :rolleyes: I have very recently downloaded an image resizer App - Photo & Picture Resizer, which does the job! :)
PicsArt is an amazing App that, apart form the usual editing/adjusting photo options, you can also work in layers/masks, create double exposures, create amazing artworks from your photos using various filters, has other filters you often find in desktop photo software, create collages, add stickers and clipart from their assorted collections, (and even make your own 'sticker' and save for use later), and of course share your pic, or save the end result to a PNG or JPG. A handy, fun little App is this one! :D

You know, speaking generally, it all really comes down to what you want to use Photo software for, and is it for leisure use or professional use, what do you REALLY NEED the software for, and are you prepared to pay for which ever software you choose? Trying out different software first, and free downloads are available for a limited time offer (and normally all features are functional) is the way to go. :D

Now getting back to landyvlad's first post :D. Unfortunately the link didn't work, but I googled and found this page:
https://www.linuxtechi.com/top-12-image-editor-tools-for-linux-desktop/ (https://www.linuxtechi.com/top-12-image-editor-tools-for-linux-desktop/)
which describes a variety of 12 photo and art software options (also covering RAW editing), some free and some you need to pay, for Linux users (no Photoshop mentioned), for those that don't have access to the software mentioned throughout this thread.
Another link that covers a few more worthy programs:
https://www.maketecheasier.com/best-image-editing-software-linux/ (https://www.maketecheasier.com/best-image-editing-software-linux/)

:D Cheers! :beer_mug:

[ricktas]

Do you know if its broken up and absorbed by Google or something else? I knew the Nik software suite was discontinued but thought the team were still being tasked with other developments. Maybe I remember incorrectly.
Such a shame, I liked their software and paid for mine without regrets even though Google made it free later on.

It is still available but will just never see any further releases or future development. What he have now is the end of the line. My guess is that google bought it to get access to the processing engine behind it, and will use some of that code to develop snapseed further with more filters etc, but as a stand alone or plug-in for photoshop etc, Nik is at the end of its upgrade/improvement path.

[Cage]

I have the NIK suite as plug-ins with Lightroom and I really must investigate Define 2 as I do get the odd (?) comment about background noise. :nod:

[mikew09]

I have the NIK suite as plug-ins with Lightroom and I really must investigate Define 2 as I do get the odd (?) comment about background noise. :nod:

I use most of the Topaz plug-ins. Its not that you cannot do most of it with PS CC but with the plug-ins it makes it so much quicker, easier and with presets to help you get the look you are after. I have also found that detail and clarity plug-ins are as good as if not better tooling than PS's and most go to the plug-in rather than camera raw for these two functions.
Some of the Topaz plug-ins are reasonable prices but some not so cheap if you are on a budget and not really for the less serious photographer - but that is just MHO and everyone to their own and budget ;-)

[Mary Anne]

Like Mike ↑ I have Topaz Plug-ins and use DeNoise on many images at present.
Could not live without it as using my 150-600mm lens in the late afternoon shooting Birds in our shady backyard produced heaps of noise.

[Mark L]

I have the NIK suite as plug-ins with Lightroom and I really must investigate Define 2 as I do get the odd (?) comment about background noise. :nod:

Gazza drew my attention to these brief videos that will cover Define2 for you Kev ... https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLp5lYDsQi4gmZgD2fdHHipF5albBgzJRW

[Cage]

Gazza drew my attention to these brief videos that will cover Define2 for you Kev ... https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLp5lYDsQi4gmZgD2fdHHipF5albBgzJRW

Many thanks Mark. Most appreciated.

Kev

[richtbw]

I'm curious .... why do you use both Pro and Ultimate? Doesn't Ultimate do everything that Pro does?

I started with ACDSEE Pro 4 and upgraded contineously up untill, Ultimate became available. My desktop is a 32bit machine while the laptop is 64bit - ultimate is 64bit only. When ultimate became available I got it (but did not check/realise it was 64 bit). Do not do serious editing on the laptop - layers occasionaly. So upgraded from Pro 9 to 10. Sometimes wonder if I should not upgrade the desktop to 64bit and move to latest Ultimate. But oh the schlep of re-installing all software and of course cost.

[bobt]

I started with ACDSEE Pro 4 and upgraded contineously up untill, Ultimate became available. My desktop is a 32bit machine while the laptop is 64bit - ultimate is 64bit only. When ultimate became available I got it (but did not check/realise it was 64 bit). Do not do serious editing on the laptop - layers occasionaly. So upgraded from Pro 9 to 10. Sometimes wonder if I should not upgrade the desktop to 64bit and move to latest Ultimate. But oh the schlep of re-installing all software and of course cost.

Ahhhhh ... that all makes sense now. I've been with ACDSee for a long time too, and it is more powerful and user friendly than other users might realise.

[richtbw]

Ahhhhh ... that all makes sense now. I've been with ACDSee for a long time too, and it is more powerful and user friendly than other users might realise.

Agree. The improvement/development that I have experienced up to now is exceptional, and then of course the price is realistic. Especiallly when upgrading.

[phild]

Just bought Affinity 1.5, glad to give Adobe the flick, IMO they've become too greedy. Hopefully the learning curve is not too steep.

[Tannin]

Sometimes wonder if I should not upgrade the desktop to 64bit and move to latest Ultimate. But oh the schlep of re-installing all software and of course cost.

Your time and trouble aside, the cost to upgrade any Windows version from 32-bit to 64-bit is zero. Repeat: zero. Doesn't matter whether you run 7, 8, 8.1, or 10, doesn't matter if it's OEM or retail, your licence provides you with the right to use either 32-bit or 64-bit Windows, and to swap from one to the other. You have already paid for that right, why not use it?

All you need is 64-bit installation media. In most cases you can download this free from Microsoft, but the procedure is arcane and tedious. It's much easier to simply borrow a DVD from someone and install it using your own valid licence key. Note that the DVD must be the same version you have the rights to - e.g., Windows 8.1 Pro OEM; Windows 7 Home Premium Upgrade. Provided your licence is valid (i.e., you bought Windows in the first place or it came with your machine), that you install the same version you have paid for, and that you use your own product key, this is perfectly legitimate and 100% legal. You are simply using the product that you paid for in the first place.

(PS: They call Windows Ultimate "Ultimate", but that's actually just an abbreviation. The full name of Windows Ultimate is "Windows Some People are so Silly that they will Give us Lots of Extra Money for no Benefit or Advantage Whatsoever, and Possibly Even Feel Good About it Afterwards: this is the Ultimate Marketing Scam and whenever they can stop Laughing Our Accountants Love it to Bits".

[ameerat42]

So that's the "Ultimate" rationale:D

--Hmm! It applies to everything in this Market-driven (read "Profiteering") economy:rolleyes:

[John King]

Your time and trouble aside, the cost to upgrade any Windows version from 32-bit to 64-bit is zero. Repeat: zero. Doesn't matter whether you run 7, 8, 8.1, or 10, doesn't matter if it's OEM or retail, your licence provides you with the right to use either 32-bit or 64-bit Windows, and to swap from one to the other. You have already paid for that right, why not use it?

All you need is 64-bit installation media. In most cases you can download this free from Microsoft, but the procedure is arcane and tedious. It's much easier to simply borrow a DVD from someone and install it using your own valid licence key. Note that the DVD must be the same version you have the rights to - e.g., Windows 8.1 Pro OEM; Windows 7 Home Premium Upgrade. Provided your licence is valid (i.e., you bought Windows in the first place or it came with your machine), that you install the same version you have paid for, and that you use your own product key, this is perfectly legitimate and 100% legal. You are simply using the product that you paid for in the first place.



Thanks for that info, Tony.

I have been vaguely thinking about this with a new box I will be building. I already own 4x Windows 7 Pro licences with 32 Bit installation media. I have just finished downloading the MS 64 bit ISO file, and will burn it to a couple of DVDs shortly. Fortunately I have cable internet (HFC), with download speed of around 115-116 Mbps ... so the download didn't take forever!

I helped my brother in Brisbane convert from ADSL2 to NBN a couple of days ago. He has FTTN, and is about 800m route length from the node. He is getting around 23.56/4.64 Mbps, i.e. better than the Telstra advertised speed of 22/4 Mbps on his tier. Drops a little bit between 7-11 pm (about -15% - nothing to even notice). All went smoothly, considering my brother's technical acumen ... He is a happy camper. His ADSL2 speeds have varied from 2.78/0.5 to 5.8/0.5 Mbps over the last 12 months, mostly around 4/0.5.

[John King]

Rebuilt a PC yesterday and today using the Windows 7 Pro 64 bit I downloaded per Tony's info.

It is quite ancient hardware (nearly 7 y.o.). It has a Core2 Duo E7500, 8GB 1333 MHz RAM, Kingston 240 GB SSD, plus a few spinners. Runs like a dream with PS6. Had 11 RAW files open simultaneously, didn't even blink!

Had to ferret out some 64 bit drivers and s/w. As usual, the video card and monitor caused some problems.

Otherwise all is working well. Will test some 4 GB 1333 MHz RAM chips next week. The m/b is supposed to support up to 16 GB total.

[landyvlad]

Cool.
Thanks for the continued contributions I'm finding many if the comments and ideas interesting.

[John King]

Rebuilt a PC yesterday and today using the Windows 7 Pro 64 bit I downloaded per Tony's info.

It is quite ancient hardware (nearly 7 y.o.). It has a Core2 Duo E7500, 8GB 1333 MHz RAM, Kingston 240 GB SSD, plus a few spinners. Runs like a dream with PS6. Had 11 RAW files open simultaneously, didn't even blink!

Had to ferret out some 64 bit drivers and s/w. As usual, the video card and monitor caused some problems.

Otherwise all is working well. Will test some 4 GB 1333 MHz RAM chips next week. The m/b is supposed to support up to 16 GB total.

The m/b does support 16 GB of RAM. That PC flies, regardless of what's being used, how many browser tabs/windows are open, etc.

Double clicking on a 10 MB JPG file in Bridge opens it in Photoshop CS6 in about 8 seconds after a reboot (nothing cached).

Have upgraded a second PC and installed CS5, Office 2003 and all service packs and updates, printers and stuff. This PC only has 8 GB RAM but same m/b and only 256 MB video card. It is still fast ...

Very good performance out of boxes I specified and supplied back in 2010, and got for nothing from the original client.

Very cheap upgrades, all things considered ... :nod: :D.

Most expensive part is the 16 GB RAM chips ($320). Good quality SSD - $125. PCIe USB3 4 port controller and front panel card reader with USB3 port - Vantec (Renesas) $70. A new box with equivalent quality components costs around $1,500-1,800.

[landyvlad]

A new box with equivalent quality components costs around $1,500-1,800.

Only if you are shopping at Harvey Norman, or similar. If building your own, you'd get a better system than yours for that kind of money mate.


However that's not really related to this thread at all, so perhaps just leave that there..