Adobe - is breaking up REALLY hard to do?

[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/pho...QAvD_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!!!

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/
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/
If I can be of any help at all, please msg me

[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.

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.