To Adobe CC or not to CC

[Geoff79]

I've been on the verge for months, even years, but am still very hesitant to take the plunge.

But I'm curious. How many people use Photoshop / Lightroom CC?

And further to this, if yes, do you earn any sort of income at all from photography?

I'm still using CS6 and desperately want CC, mostly for the local adjustment features in Lightroom. I currently use an old version of Camera Raw for a lot of my editing, but it is pretty much all global adjustments (bar the gradient tool) and it means I process a lot of photos in a manner of "it'll have to do" because I don't bother opening each and every single photo in Photoshop to perform localised adjustments.

For my landscape shots, I do open them in Photoshop and try to utilise smart objects for local adjustments while still using RAW files, but it can be a bit of a pain. I watch bits on Youtube and see what you can do with Lightroom and it makes me salivate. I feel like I would end up editing over 70-80% of my photos in Lightroom alone if I owned it - landscape shots included.

But how can one justify the cost if one will never make any money from one's photography? I just think, I've spent that much on the gear and I spend so, so much time processing photos... is that enough justification in itself? Just not sure.

I see they offer a free trial, which I'd love to try, but that means upgrading my Mac OS, losing use of CS6 and thus creating a heap of irreversible hassles. So I feel like if I take the plunge it's permanent.

Curious how others here operate.

Do you use Abobe CC and earn money from photography?
Or do you use it purely for your hobby?
Or do you not use it as you cannot justify the cost?

[J.davis]

I use Lightroom, have done for years. Does everything I want as I dont alter images, only enhance.
Made a Bird Book once but thats all for earnings.

[Tannin]

The more I use it the more respect I develop for DxO Photolab. I still pay for Photoshop every month - that's the thing with Adobe products, they stick you for more money every single month - but am finding that Photolab, together with the excellent Nik tools, does almost everything I want, and does it with a lot less mucking about. There are a handful of things I still need Photoshop for (not very often now). Slowly, one by one, I am discovering that DxO has the ability to do one or another of these things (often in a simpler, more effective way) and my Photoshop requirement shrinks a little bit more. I'm looking forward to not needing it at all before too long.

DxO is different and there is a learning curve (of course) but it is not difficult to get the hang of and it is much nicer to use than any of the Adobe products.

https://support.dxo.com/hc/en-us/articles/4409120188817-System-requirements-for-DxO-PhotoLab

https://www.dxo.com/dxo-photolab/

There is a fully functional free trial which won't mess up your system and it runs of a pretty broad range of hardware. Note that you only have to pay for it once. None of this bleed a little bit more every month caper.

[Geoff79]

The more I use it the more respect I develop for DxO Photolab. I still pay for Photoshop every month - that's the thing with Adobe products, they stick you for more money every single month - but am finding that Photolab, together with the excellent Nik tools, does almost everything I want, and does it with a lot less mucking about. There are a handful of things I still need Photoshop for (not very often now). Slowly, one by one, I am discovering that DxO has the ability to do one or another of these things (often in a simpler, more effective way) and my Photoshop requirement shrinks a little bit more. I'm looking forward to not needing it at all before too long.

DxO is different and there is a learning curve (of course) but it is not difficult to get the hang of and it is much nicer to use than any of the Adobe products.

https://support.dxo.com/hc/en-us/articles/4409120188817-System-requirements-for-DxO-PhotoLab

https://www.dxo.com/dxo-photolab/

There is a fully functional free trial which won't mess up your system and it runs of a pretty broad range of hardware. Note that you only have to pay for it once. None of this bleed a little bit more every month caper.

Thanks Tony. Had a quick look and also at some Youtube tutorials. Looks interesting and I'd be tempted by the free trial but sadly it requires the same OS upgrade as Lightroom for my Mac. To explain, I'm currently using High Sierra as that's the last compatible Mac OS I can use with Photoshop CS6. All OS afterwards no longer support CS6.

PS CC and DxO both require at least Catalina. If I upgrade to Catalina, sadly, I lose my ability to use CS6 - frustratingly - which means I can't go back and will then have to proceed forth with either CC or an alternative, like DxO. To be totally honest, though, after looking at a quick tutorial, I think if I was taking the plunge I'd probably have to go all in with Photoshop/Lightroom CC. The masking stuff looks solid in DxO, but seems a fair way off where Lightroom is at, especially after the latest update. Also, I have been using Photoshop and ACR so long and I would hate to dump everything I've learned and start anew with another program.

Thanks for an alternative, though.

[ameerat42]

...
...
I'm still using CS6 and desperately want CC, mostly for the local adjustment features in Lightroom. I currently use an old version of Camera Raw for a lot of my editing, but it is pretty much all global adjustments (bar the gradient tool) and it means I process a lot of photos in a manner of "it'll have to do" because I don't bother opening each and every single photo in Photoshop to perform localised adjustments.

...

I see they offer a free trial, which I'd love to try, but that means upgrading my Mac OS, losing use of CS6 and thus creating a heap of irreversible hassles. So I feel like if I take the plunge it's permanent.

Curious how others here operate.

Do you use Abobe CC and earn money from photography?
Or do you use it purely for your hobby?
Or do you not use it as you cannot justify the cost?

You lucky thing! - I'm still using CS2 :o (< not really, as it does me quite well).

From the rest of that paragraph, your conflict (the desperate want) seems to stem from a dissuasion to then open a
2nd program for more refinements on your pics. I would say that you would have to be pretty sure that the change
would work for you. You might streamline [part of] your process, but would it "do all" for you? If so, why do Adobe
market both LR and Pshop? Basic photography has not changed over the years between CS6 (or 2) and CC; but your
processing has (+vely). I'd say partly because you have learnt to get the most out of your present PP.

What do you do with your old system?

Now to your Qs...
1~3) No, no, and no.

Reasons: I use a different raw converter bcz I have to, and then use P'shop CS2.
The main tonal and color (US spelling bcz program is from there) changes are done
in that raw converter; tweaks, geometry, etc in CS2.

Good luck with your dec:umm:ion.

[junqbox]

I use most of the suite of CC for various things, I'm a Building Designer (draftsman) and graphic designer so Illustrator and InDesign are also useful to me.
Have also used Premiere a few times for editing music videos for my wife's band.

[Mary Anne]

Would be lost without CC to me well worth the small amount of money every month and its upgraded often.
If you have to upgrade your Mac computer I can understand, that alone is a big step.
My desktop running Windows 10 now, will be 9 years old next January and I have no problems with CC.
I have bought other editing software over the years which I could not understand as well, then have to pay more money every year for the upgrade.
Also get lots of photobooks printed for gifts for my family and special friends and No I do not sell my books it's a hobby for me that I enjoy.

[Geoff79]

Thanks Junqbox and Mary Anne.

So, tonight I tore my computer apart and took the plunge. First look at Lightroom and the interface looks like nothing I've ever seen anywhere in tutorials, lol, and I can see no sign of PS or ACR, which didn't seem to be part of the downloading process - only LR. Anyway, I'm going to give it all a go even though I've wasted two days and counting of the trial period, but I am getting up ridiculously early tomorrow morning for either more photos or a surf, or both (hopefully) so I will set it aside for tonight and have a look tomorrow.

A lot of what you said resonates with me too, Mary Anne. I think whatever I do, I need to stick with Adobe as I have invested literal years of time into learning and getting used to it, so it wouldn't make sense to me to start afresh somewhere else... considering how in-depth these types of programs are. And although it is a hobby, it is one I invest 90% of my "spare time" in and one I love dearly, so the cost shouldn't be too big a factor. I recently bought a tonne of new (second hand) gear with some good fortune (thank you footy tipping and NRL Fantasy), but also with a lot of money I've made from selling old crap from the shed. If I put some time into it, I can absolutely sell enough rubbish from the shed on ebay to cover this cost, with ease... so I'll look at it that way. Turning old interests and hobbies into my "new" hobby.

If it turns out it's not all it's cracked up to be, I'll factory reset my laptop and go back to CS6, with a massive degree of difficulty and complication, no doubt. ;)

[fillum]

Hi Geoff,

Lightroom and Photoshop are individual applications so you'll need to download them separately. Lightroom basically IS ACR with an enhanced user interface and an organisational component ("Library"), plus some other bits and pieces. The download of Photoshop should include the latest version of ACR with it (you shouldn't need to download ACR separately).

There have been new versions of LR and PS released in the past couple of days so that might explain why the interface looks different to what you were expecting.

I've found that Lightroom is able to do most of the post-processing I need, and I only venture into Photoshop on rare occasions (to replace a background for example). LR can be somewhat formidable but it's worth getting a good understanding of it because it can save you a lot of time and effort in the long run.



Cheers.

[Brian500au]

I have been using LR since version 1, so have always stuck by it. I have tried other programs but I alway gravitate back to LR. I have been subscribing to Adobe for a few years now, and as with Microsoft Office, I like the fact with a subscription model the software is constantly upgraded to include new features. I found when I bought software in the past I always had to pay for an upgrade every few years to get the latest enhanced features. I don't consider the cost of the monthly subscription a burden as it is the cost of my hobby, no different than the insurance and rego costs of the bikes I have in my garage, or the cost of paying for Netflix etc. It is an new era and monthly payments for all services seem to be the go now.

[Journeyman]

Good day Geoff, I use Adobe PS and Lightroom. The most annoying part is the almost compulsory use of cloud storage, it seems expensive. I am working around it at the moment.

Other than that it works for me and I am very new to the idea of actually editing photos (other than cropping). There seems to be a lot to master, although all of the experienced users certainly make it work. Like everyone else, to me the monthly rental is costly.

To be fair to Adobe, if a good trip training module was available it would make a huge difference.
The monthly rental would then be worthwhile.
Kind regards, Journeyman

[nardes]

Good day Geoff, I use Adobe PS and Lightroom. The most annoying part is the almost compulsory use of cloud storage, it seems expensive. I am working around it at the moment.

>snip.
Kind regards, Journeyman

Hi Dennis

I use PS CC and LR Classic and do not use the Adobe LR Cloud Version - everything is stored locally in LR Classic on my Win 10 Desktop PC.

The CC Subscription comes with 20GB Cloud Storage, "free" as part of the bundle, and I use LR Collections in LR Classic to share my photos with friends and family in the LR Classic Cloud . Other than that, I am Cloud free.

Are you using LR Classic or the Cloud based version?

Cheers

Dennis

[jim]

I'm still using CS6 which is easily good enough for me, though it means I can't update my OS beyond Mojave (which came out in 2018) because anything newer will break Photoshop.
Obviously this isn't tenable in the long term, but we're hanging in there for now. Eventually Photoshop will be gone, which I'm not looking forward to, but realistically nearly all my processing is done in DXO Photolab anyway.
Photoshop is very nice to have, but I don't find it essential software any more.
I have no use for Lightroom.

[Journeyman]

Good day Dennis,
I have both and probably avoid LR because of the storage. I finished up with CC and Photoshop as it was the most economic method.

I believe if I convinced myself that understanding the edit suites is not necessarily that complicated, productive times would be ahead. Functionality is a mental hurdle for me. I am always surprised at the wonderful results we see in the forum.

Getting my act together applies here as time begins to be a very finite resource.
Thanks and regards,
Dennis

Aim should be the ability to remove the barriers of complication in cameras and photos.

[nardes]

Good day Dennis,
>snip
...probably avoid LR because of the storage. I finished up with CC and Photoshop as it was the most economic method.

>snip



Hi Dennis

I have the Adobe CC Subscription which gives me:

PS CC
LR Classic
Bridge
Camera Raw

and the option to install LR in the Cloud, which I have not implemented, as I prefer storing my photos on my Win 10 desktop PC.

I upload all my photos to my local Win 10 PC, as hard drives are relatively cheap, so all my photos are saved and stored locally on my PC. I have approx. 60,000 images in my Image Repository that LR Classic "points to" and generates thumbnails, views and other meta data, but even with all of that, the LR Catalogue overhead is only about 600MB (note that this is on top of the actual HDD space required to store the original photo files), so the LR specific data is a relatively small percentage of my overall disc usage.

Cheers

Dennis

[Geoff79]

You lucky thing! - I'm still using CS2 :o (< not really, as it does me quite well).

From the rest of that paragraph, your conflict (the desperate want) seems to stem from a dissuasion to then open a
2nd program for more refinements on your pics. I would say that you would have to be pretty sure that the change
would work for you. You might streamline [part of] your process, but would it "do all" for you? If so, why do Adobe
market both LR and Pshop? Basic photography has not changed over the years between CS6 (or 2) and CC; but your
processing has (+vely). I'd say partly because you have learnt to get the most out of your present PP.

What do you do with your old system?

Now to your Qs...
1~3) No, no, and no.

Reasons: I use a different raw converter bcz I have to, and then use P'shop CS2.
The main tonal and color (US spelling bcz program is from there) changes are done
in that raw converter; tweaks, geometry, etc in CS2.

Good luck with your dec:umm:ion.

Thanks Am, sorry didn't reply to this one. Yes, the desire is to process as many photos as possible without going into Photoshop. This seems to be achievable for all but my landscape photographs. Which is a lot. I take a lot of photos of the kidlets, and even some macro, and being able to process those quickly is a delight. I can process a lot of landscape shots this way too, if I don't think they're worth working on further in PS, which happens plenty enough.

The old system? I have a copy on an external drive, but otherwise discarded it.

I have to say, using the new PS, doing the same functions I did with CS6 (for example, luminosity masks) seems a hell of a lot more effective on the new version of PS. I'm not sure if this is a reality, as I use the same LM program in Raya Pro, which essentially is still creating the same masks, I guess, as it did with CS6, but it just seems more effective. But there may not even be much need for this into the future with the HDR blending options in ACR. It does a much better job than I ever got with luminosity masks, lol.

My biggest regret in photography is becoming aware of, and using focus stacking. It is the biggest pain in the buttocks and there's just no easy workaround and adds so much unnecessary stress on the editing process. I avoid it where at all possible, but since I became aware of it there's just certain photos I can't take without utilising it, just because I can. :(


Hi Geoff,

Lightroom and Photoshop are individual applications so you'll need to download them separately. Lightroom basically IS ACR with an enhanced user interface and an organisational component ("Library"), plus some other bits and pieces. The download of Photoshop should include the latest version of ACR with it (you shouldn't need to download ACR separately).

There have been new versions of LR and PS released in the past couple of days so that might explain why the interface looks different to what you were expecting.

I've found that Lightroom is able to do most of the post-processing I need, and I only venture into Photoshop on rare occasions (to replace a background for example). LR can be somewhat formidable but it's worth getting a good understanding of it because it can save you a lot of time and effort in the long run.



Cheers.

Thanks Phil. Yeah, probably shouldn't have commented on the night I downloaded it, lol. Only took a few minutes to figure it all out the day after. I have to say, after using for a couple of weeks now, I don't really see myself maybe ever using Lightroom. I've used Lightroom CC but learned that for my purposes, Classic might be the better option. If I use either. To be honest, I think ACR and PS probably cover all my needs. I'm used to (a much older version of) ACR and am very comfortable using it, and as far as I can tell it does every single thing LR does? Will see how I go. :)


I have been using LR since version 1, so have always stuck by it. I have tried other programs but I alway gravitate back to LR. I have been subscribing to Adobe for a few years now, and as with Microsoft Office, I like the fact with a subscription model the software is constantly upgraded to include new features. I found when I bought software in the past I always had to pay for an upgrade every few years to get the latest enhanced features. I don't consider the cost of the monthly subscription a burden as it is the cost of my hobby, no different than the insurance and rego costs of the bikes I have in my garage, or the cost of paying for Netflix etc. It is an new era and monthly payments for all services seem to be the go now.

Thanks Brian. Yeah, I have to admit I always knew it was a bit silly to use what I suspected was infinitely inferior for my processing, when I knew there was something much better out there but I didn't want to spend the extra cash. Like you say, it's just a part of the cost of an already expensive hobby, lol. But since getting a new camera and really getting a lot more into photography in general, it seems inevitable that I should utilise what can assist me in getting best results. :)


Good day Geoff, I use Adobe PS and Lightroom. The most annoying part is the almost compulsory use of cloud storage, it seems expensive. I am working around it at the moment.

Other than that it works for me and I am very new to the idea of actually editing photos (other than cropping). There seems to be a lot to master, although all of the experienced users certainly make it work. Like everyone else, to me the monthly rental is costly.

To be fair to Adobe, if a good trip training module was available it would make a huge difference.
The monthly rental would then be worthwhile.
Kind regards, Journeyman

Yeah I haven't figured out yet what to do about the cloud storage. I don't think I'll use Lightroom CC as I don't like how it's all cloud based. If I can figure out how to just load my most prized photos to the cloud I'll do that, but haven't looked into it yet. I definitely do no just want every single photo I upload into LR to process to take up cloud space.


I'm still using CS6 which is easily good enough for me, though it means I can't update my OS beyond Mojave (which came out in 2018) because anything newer will break Photoshop.
Obviously this isn't tenable in the long term, but we're hanging in there for now. Eventually Photoshop will be gone, which I'm not looking forward to, but realistically nearly all my processing is done in DXO Photolab anyway.
Photoshop is very nice to have, but I don't find it essential software any more.
I have no use for Lightroom.

Yeah, this is exactly where I was at. I felt imprisoned having to keep the older OS just to keep CS6, and had to do the biggest muck-around ever to get iMovie installed with the old OS, as that no longer worked either. And I use that a lot too.

I thought CS6 was enough for me too, but not going to lie, there's a lot of stuff I have already used in the new versions of PS/ACR that I never knew I needed. :) But yes, LR also seems unnecessary to me, with ACR doing all it does anyway.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Anyway, thanks for all the replies. As per above, I did take the plunge and just a little update for those interested after a couple of weeks with the new gear.

1. The programs are huge and using them takes a lot out of an old computer. I have a 2015 Macbook Pro which has worked excellently since I had it, but jeez it's slowed up now. I also have to constantly delete and move things to make sure there's enough space to allow PS and ACR to operate. The amount of times I've got messages that I can't do something because "scratch disks are full" is making me sad. But I'll get used to it. Just got to keep on top of keeping free space on my latop, I guess.

2. As above, I'm starting to think I might not need Lightroom, and that all I would do in there I can do in ACR, which I am already familiar with and enjoy using.

3. The new masking features in ACR/Lightroom are nothing short of brilliant. For experienced Luminosity Maskers, I assume they can still do better in PS, but for my skill level, they are awesome. Cut so much time and effort out of a workflow being able to do this stuff in ACR/LR.

And that's about it. Still getting used to it, but in terms of general use and capabilities, I do have to say that the upgrade from CS6 to the latest version of PS is pretty significant. Will it be worth the money? Honestly don't know, but it's certainly a pleasure to use.

[Gazza]

"scratch disks are full"

Not sure if this'd work? You could plug an SSD into your laptop while working and assign that as the scratch disk.

[Geoff79]

"scratch disks are full"

Not sure if this'd work? You could plug an SSD into your laptop while working and assign that as the scratch disk.

Interesting idea. I don't have one, but perhaps I could get one and try. Would it work the same with a normal external drive?

[ameerat42]

^Yes, plug an external SSD into a USB3 port for any decent speed. Run a few tests to see what the
typical read and write times are. An absolute min of 100MB(ytes)/sec write should do, but a good bit
higher would be better. Unsuitable external drives can slow down P'shop in some cases. If the P'shop
operations are done without needing scratch disks - ie, using only RAM - they'll be faster than if using
them.

Enclosed external SSDs are usually dearer than the ones designed for internal usage. I use the latter
types in an external USB3 (dual bay) dock. The cost is a bit of extra bulk on the desk. For my :old
version of P'shop, the scratch disks are on the internal C: and D: drives and so far have not filled up.
The external drives are for storage. But read this Adobe article (https://helpx.adobe.com/photoshop/using/scratch-disks-preferences.html) about scratch disks.

In your older system (they had 2 types, but I assume yours had the 15" screen) the standard internal
(SSD) drives were quite modest in size, so your slowing down problem was inevitable.

During P'shop operation, and if it's not critical to maintain, you can purge all the memory that is being
used, like History, Cache, etc. It used to be by selecting Edit - Purge -... This happens anyway for a
given image when you close it, so if you do purge, it'll clear all history for all open images.

Good :bbird: with your solutions.

[tandeejay]

I use ACDsee Photo Studio Ultimate. works well for me. although you may find the same issue with OS versions :D

A free option is Darktable. It has a fairly steep learning curve, but seems to have a lot of functionality.

[Geoff79]

I use ACDsee Photo Studio Ultimate. works well for me. although you may find the same issue with OS versions :D

A free option is Darktable. It has a fairly steep learning curve, but seems to have a lot of functionality.

Yeah, I tried both of them after various recommendations along the way. Wasn't a fan of either, personally.

I think I said elsewhere, but to invest as much time as I have in PS and to give it up would seem a bit obscene to me. ;)

[Glenda]

Firstly in regard to upgrading your iMac. I recently did this and am being forced to use an older version of Photoshop CC, ie 2021, because of the M1 chip on the mac. It's also preventing the use of some of the plugins I use, although companies are updating their software. With time this should be sorted out, but frustrating at present. However, 2021 CC is still a huge upgrade from Ps6.

Have you ever tried Affinity Photo? I haven't personally tried it but know some who use it and they are very pleased with its capabilities. It's apparently very similar to Photoshop and if I remember correctly was originally developed for Macs. I think I also read somewhere that it will recognise PSD files and allow you to work on them, but not 100% sure. The only thing which turned me off getting it was that my Topaz plugins wouldn't be able to be used.

[Geoff79]

Firstly in regard to upgrading your iMac. I recently did this and am being forced to use an older version of Photoshop CC, ie 2021, because of the M1 chip on the mac. It's also preventing the use of some of the plugins I use, although companies are updating their software. With time this should be sorted out, but frustrating at present. However, 2021 CC is still a huge upgrade from Ps6.

Have you ever tried Affinity Photo? I haven't personally tried it but know some who use it and they are very pleased with its capabilities. It's apparently very similar to Photoshop and if I remember correctly was originally developed for Macs. I think I also read somewhere that it will recognise PSD files and allow you to work on them, but not 100% sure. The only thing which turned me off getting it was that my Topaz plugins wouldn't be able to be used.

Yeah, I did have Affinity, I think. It's really good for HDR stuff, I think, isn't it? I used it a few times for really hard blends, but in the end always went back to PS.

Interesting what you say about your Mac and PS. How old is the Mac? I have a few glitches, mostly in Bridge, but generally speaking, my laptop has been okay with the new CC. It's slowed the computer down, but for the most part it's pretty decent. Far as I know I get all the functions I need from the new CC?

[Glenda]

The issues with mine are mostly with plugins which is frustrating, although thankfully Topaz Denoise AI now works. I upgraded to a new desktop a few months ago, mainly because my old one was so slow with Photoshop as it kept upgrading. The old one was about 11 years old by memory. I think you may be thinking of Aurora which is a Skylum software package for HDR.

[Hawthy]

Late to the conversation, but for what it's worth, I have used Adobe CC for at least 12 years. So at $14 per month I have paid over $2,000 in total. That sounds a lot but if you split a $16 bottle of wine four times a week with your spouse, that would have cost $40K over 12 years, so it's all relative. I just see it as a cost of my hobby.
I use Bridge to import photos from the camera and then use only Photoshop. I really like the flexibility that layers provide in terms of adjusting opacity on your adjustments. Lightroom just seems a bit...well...light, I suppose. Photoshop is as complex as you want it to be, or as simple as you want it to be.
There are so many online tutorials on every aspect of Photoshop that it is mind boggling.
As for system needs, I am using a PC that I bought on eBay in 2008. It has 8GB of RAM and an Intel i3 processor with four cores (I think). The best thing that I did was put Windows and other programs on an internal Solid State Drive and kept my old hard drive for file storage. For a couple of hundred bucks it really improved start-up time and overall performance.