PDA

View Full Version : Worth continuing with PS and LR subscription?



Barry Kirsten
5-Apr-2016, 00:49
I've had a subscription to Photoshop and Lightroom for nearly 12 months and it's due for renewal soon. I'm wondering what people think about the benefits of continuing the subscription, given that I don't use the cloud feature, nor any of the bells and whistles that seem to come out with upgrades.

I figure that as both programs do all that I require (and more) as-is, and many members of this forum use older versions of PS, I should manage quite well for some time to come without the cost of an ongoing subscription. The only fly in the ointment I can see is the possibility that the software may lock in the event of subscription cancellation, but I have no evidence for this. I'd be glad of others' thoughts. Many thanks.

alkklab
5-Apr-2016, 03:14
The software will look to see if the subscription is active every 30 days or so. If you cancel, it will not work beyond that time period.

j.e.simmons
5-Apr-2016, 05:14
Look at Corel Paint Shop Pro and see if it will work for you. There's a free trial download.

Greg
5-Apr-2016, 05:59
I just use the older versions of PS & LR. I use both on a daily basis, and have yet to come across any reason for using the latest versions of each.

bob carnie
5-Apr-2016, 06:00
I used cS3 until it got locked up,(which was a huge pain in ass as I also at that time had to upgrade my computer to handle the CC.
one computer is working with CS5 another has Cs6 on it and my personal is CC .

I will move the all to CC as time moves on and purchase a multiple computer plan.

Willie
5-Apr-2016, 06:17
Buy CS6 or another program and forget the extortionate rental plan.

mdarnton
5-Apr-2016, 06:29
I've been using an older version for years. I think one of my computers still runs version 6! For me, Photoshop does a couple of things that I absolutely need to do, and no other program will do those things, but the newer versions don't offer me any advantages. I think you really need to figure out what YOU need to decide this question. If you're not using Photoshop-specific things, you don't need it. On and off I have tried a couple of alternate programs and they didn't work for me, but that's just me.

If you are just looking for a good simple editing program, when I don't want to open PS, I often use Faststone Image Viewer. It's FREE! There's a lot of functionality hidden there, it's got a very clean screen, and it handles sharpening and jpg compression both extremely well. You have to figure out how to get to things, though, because they're not in front of you. It has many of the basic adjustments that PS has, working just as they do in PS, but no layers. Where it lags, and this is what hurts me the most, is in its selection abilities. Select > Feather > Adjust don't exist in any form. :-(

Kirk Gittings
5-Apr-2016, 06:33
Since I make my living with LR and PS, and time is money, every new or updated tool they bring onboard makes my work quicker or better and my time more productive and profitable. As faculty at SAIC I get a subscription free but I bought one anyway. I won't teach at SAIC forever (19 years right now) and Adobe has promised to stick with the introductory price-maybe not with future subscribers. Roll the dice.

jnanian
5-Apr-2016, 07:31
10$ a month is almost free. when i get bored of using my old fashioned cs2,
i'll pony up the cash without a second though.
actually, 10$ / months will be free ... i switched my phone service from vonage to ooma a few months
ago and saved more than 30 months worth of "adobe-months" just since the early fall ...

Ken Lee
5-Apr-2016, 07:31
* Eventually your hardware and operating system will become obsolete and you won't be able to run old versions.

* Consider the total cost of all your equipment and materials. Some of us will freely spend on travel and lodging but cringe when we have to pay the equivalent of one tank of fuel for a box of film or paper.

* ...and wait for the 16-bit version of GIMP (http://www.gimp.org)to arrive on popular platforms :cool: With a subscription-based model, you can cancel a subscription when you stop using the software.

Alan9940
5-Apr-2016, 08:28
Since I've found that I'm shooting more and more film lately and working in the darkroom, I recently let my subscription go. I have CS6, if I really need PS; and I have a program called PhotoLine that I'm growing to like quite well. In many ways, PL is more powerful and let's me do things that I can't even in PS.

bob carnie
5-Apr-2016, 09:59
Hi Alan

for me the exact opposite. Lightroom cannot do all the things I can do in PS and I doubt it ever will.
I am thinking advanced channel blending and sharpening, LAB colour corrections, Film Separation for alternative printing to name a few.

Bob

Since I've found that I'm shooting more and more film lately and working in the darkroom, I recently let my subscription go. I have CS6, if I really need PS; and I have a program called PhotoLine that I'm growing to like quite well. In many ways, PL is more powerful and let's me do things that I can't even in PS.

Bill_1856
5-Apr-2016, 10:14
I spent the big bucks for PS7, but found that PS Elements does everything I want (and a lot more than I can figure out how to use), and upgrade it every few 3 years. The real cost is in the books to explain it.

Alan9940
5-Apr-2016, 12:58
Hi Alan

for me the exact opposite. Lightroom cannot do all the things I can do in PS and I doubt it ever will.
I am thinking advanced channel blending and sharpening, LAB colour corrections, Film Separation for alternative printing to name a few.

Bob

Hi Bob,

Yeah, I was a LR user since the very beginning; as a matter of fact, I got my first license for free because I was a RawShooter Premium user. Anybody remember that software? Over the years, I found that I just don't shoot enough digital to need a DAM product like LR. Some of the new features in PS CC 2015 were attractive to me, but not enough to maintain that monthly stipend! :)

Not sure what you're exactly referring to when you say "LAB colour corrections", but in PhotoLine I can perform LAB corrections (like with curves, for example) as an adjustment layer! No switching back-n-forth between modes, etc; just a single example of why I like PL better than PS. Wanna talk about brushes? In PL, I can set a curve that defines that nature of the brush! Try doing that in PS... Well, not here to be a fanboy of any particular software...we all use what works for each of us...and, that's the way it should be. :)

bob carnie
5-Apr-2016, 13:04
I have never heard of Photoline so that shows you how much I know.

I am getting too old to learn a complete new software- so don't tell me more about it… I need to concentrate on what I already know.

I like lightroom but really never got into it like PS.

Hi Bob,

Yeah, I was a LR user since the very beginning; as a matter of fact, I got my first license for free because I was a RawShooter Premium user. Anybody remember that software? Over the years, I found that I just don't shoot enough digital to need a DAM product like LR. Some of the new features in PS CC 2015 were attractive to me, but not enough to maintain that monthly stipend! :)

Not sure what you're exactly referring to when you say "LAB colour corrections", but in PhotoLine I can perform LAB corrections (like with curves, for example) as an adjustment layer! No switching back-n-forth between modes, etc; just a single example of why I like PL better than PS. Wanna talk about brushes? In PL, I can set a curve that defines that nature of the brush! Try doing that in PS... Well, not here to be a fanboy of any particular software...we all use what works for each of us...and, that's the way it should be. :)

jp
5-Apr-2016, 13:14
* ...and wait for the 16-bit version of GIMP (http://www.gimp.org)to arrive on popular platforms :cool:

I got tired of waiting for that. It's been a few years. I think highly of Gimp, but it's not a replacement for PS.

It's always worth trying the various alternative software options before settling on something or buying something expensive.

I could almost live with lightroom if I were all digital, but the content aware eraser/healer thing in PS is worth the $10/mo for cleaning up dust from scans. Works much nicer than the clone tool of yore. The general speed of PS is tremendous with it's GPU enabled processing. I'd need a crazy computer to keep up with other software.

Randy Moe
5-Apr-2016, 13:17
I know a few 'film' makers who jump in and out of Full Adobe CC when they need it and obviously when they don't. Part time filmmakers.

CC is 'activated' or 'deactivated' and doesn't 'have' to be deleted. Use it for a 2 month project, deactivate and return next year.

https://helpx.adobe.com/creative-cloud/help/renew-restart-extend-membership.html

Yes, that refers to full CC suite, but it also can be done on the Photo Suite of PS & LR.

Another trick is to share the cost with one other person, however only one user it at a time. 2 computers are allowed to load the Suites, call your buddy.

Don't forget to get your Apps. http://www.adobe.com/creativecloud/catalog/mobile.html

I use it all, don't share. No I won't...

Barry Kirsten
5-Apr-2016, 16:33
Thanks everyone for the helpful comments. I had an idea that the software would lock if the subscription was cancelled, but wasn't certain. Although I have a real darkroom at long last (number 6 in my nomadic history), I think I'll still keep the subscription going, for the odd digital work I'll do... even though Adobe has increased the cost to AU$11.99 per month.

Willie
5-Apr-2016, 19:22
Be aware that slow connections can make for problems with the cloud version at times.

Randy Moe
5-Apr-2016, 19:31
Not true.


Be aware that slow connections can make for problems with the cloud version at times.

profvandegraf
5-Apr-2016, 19:38
Interesting thoughts in this coversation. I have been thinking about this for some time now. Still use PS3 at home, work pays for CC so no problems there. I have Affinity Photo, it works quite well but after 20+ years of doing things the Adobe way, it is hard to change my habits. I have also dabbled with GIMP, and Darktable, but don't use them enough to get good with them.

T

Kirk Gittings
5-Apr-2016, 20:03
Be aware that slow connections can make for problems with the cloud version at times.
Slow connection? It might be true if you keep your images on the cloud, but no one I know does. IMHO such would be foolish. Otherwise the only time your connection matters is when you are downloading updates.

Alan9940
5-Apr-2016, 21:27
I have Affinity Photo, it works quite well...

Not so well with some of the major plugin players out there; and, the plugin developers don't seem all that interested in supporting AP. I guess the HUGE Adobe user base has something to do with that...

Willie
6-Apr-2016, 00:33
Not true.

You have a dial up connection, do you?

Randy Moe
6-Apr-2016, 02:41
Once downloaded Adobe software operates entirely locally on your computer and does not need the Internet. If you pay monthly it needs once a month online verification that you paid. If you pay yearly it is 99 days.







You have a dial up connection, do you?

Fr. Mark
6-Apr-2016, 08:59
I paid $15 for pixelmator and have yet to find the time or the need to use it to the fullest, in fact, my 16 y.o. uses it to mash together ipod snaps of bmx stuff more than I use it. Has anyone compared it to PS? I've never used PS.

Randy Moe
6-Apr-2016, 09:14
Nothing compares to PS and I will not waste any time learning alternatives, that may become vaporware.

Tried GIMP. It's a bad joke.

ymmv

jnanian
6-Apr-2016, 09:54
I have Affinity Photo, it works quite well but after 20+ years of doing things the Adobe way, it is hard to change my habits.
T


i downloaded the afinety trial. the software seems very nice.
if it is just contrast levels and sizing and retouching seems like a worthwhile investment ... but some stuff might not be as easy or intuitive.
i only really use PS for a few things including "saving for the web" and using "color channels" for making tri chromes .....
the trial lasted 10 days. i fiddled around for hours to see what the deal was. middle of the road stuff seemed fine ... BUT
for me to "save for the web" which is 1 step in PS ( even elements ? ) it was a painful 6-7 step process ... { i never save large uncompressed jpgs for the web )
and i was never able to figure out how to drag and drop images into color channels ( not sure if you can do this with elements ? ) with PS it was a simple 1 step process
it isn't set up the same with afffinety, there are more steps, more channels, files, rasterization, and other things to deal with ( read a PITA ).
while they have a HUGE tutorial video selection which is great and even one for making fake technicolor images from a digital file ( sort of like making tri chromes but different ) it was useless.
i couldnt' make the leap, 20 year PS habits are hard to break free from.
i went to their forum ( there is no pre-sales and no tech support ) it took 3 days for my questions to
appear in the forum ( supposed to take 2 hours ? ) moderators and admin don't respond to messages for 12-14+ days, and as murphy's law suggests, no one was able to help / post suggestions until 1 day after my 10 trial expired. ....
contacting customer support ( 1-800 # ) was anything but a useful experience, they were not the most helpful or friendly bunch. just the experience of trying to deal with support has made it worth
me spending my $$ elsewhere.
YMMV

Alan9940
6-Apr-2016, 12:00
I paid $15 for pixelmator and have yet to find the time or the need to use it to the fullest, in fact, my 16 y.o. uses it to mash together ipod snaps of bmx stuff more than I use it. Has anyone compared it to PS? I've never used PS.

IMO Pixelmator is more akin to Photoshop Elements than full fledged Photoshop. I've tried just about every piece of image editing software out there over the last 16 years and nothing, except, maybe, PhotoLine, comes even close to PS.

Fr. Mark
6-Apr-2016, 21:01
Well, I despair of ever getting where I want to go in the darkroom. If I ever get a scanner (or a macro lens and learn to stitch images) and printer capable of what I want to do with the LF photos and update my computer, I will have to keep PS seriously in mind. If nothing else, if I could really get from 4x5 or 5x7 to enormous enlarged negatives, I might finally put my ULF dreams to the side. Problem is, I like making things as much or more than the really hard part of finding an image and tweaking it into something special, so I can pretend I'm doing artwork while building cameras...so I might build the ULF camera anyway.

koraks
7-Apr-2016, 03:11
Tried GIMP. It's a bad joke.

ymmv
I agree even though I wish it wasn't so. In principle it's great. On paper, it seems fully functional. Whenever I try to use it, it takes me 4 times as long to get even the simplest tasks done and I wouldn't even try to do the kind of editing I do all the time in PS. It has made me realize that the unique selling point of PS is not so much what it can do, but its user interface, which just works and efficiently at that. I'm sure it has something to do with knowing the software, but having used GIMP for occasional light editing for about 7 years, I still think it doesn't make sense.

JaZ99
7-Apr-2016, 04:05
I'm using LR5 on my old ThinkPad T61p and MacBook all the time with scanned TIFFs (~150MB each). I love the speed and easiness of processing. The only thing the LR is lacking is the support for C41 negatives (well, I can invert negative image into positive one using curves, but then all sliders work backwards).

I've tried PS demo once, but I see no point of using it instead of Lightroom. Am I missing something?

JaZ

Ken Lee
7-Apr-2016, 04:22
I've tried PS demo once... Am I missing something?

Are you joking ? :)

There are countless features provided by Photoshop which are helpful, even with simple B&W images.

As a sample taken at random, here's a photo where we have applied a contrast curve as a layer above the original - along a gradient (the contrast increases gradually from left to right). We could do the same with any adjustment like burning/ dodging, sharpening/blurring, color balance, etc.

Photoshop has so many tools which can be combined, you can't learn them all.

http://www.kenleegallery.com/images/forum/layer.jpg

Here's another layer-related technique you might find interesting: Sharpening the Mid-Tones Only (http://www.kennethleegallery.com/html/tech/index.php#Sharpening).

JaZ99
7-Apr-2016, 06:01
No, I'm not joking :) I'm just not a graphic designer professional.

What you did can be done in LR. Just apply Graduated filter tool, then move the contrast slider.

Sharpening mid-tones is interesting, though.

Ken Lee
7-Apr-2016, 06:10
I'm an amateur.

With layers, the effect can be saved and later discarded without making a separate version of the image. Even GIMP supports layers.

I can't provide an exhaustive list of differences: that one was chosen at random. Perhaps there is a web page which lists all the differences somewhere.

All that being said, if our tools are adequate for our purposes, we should be content: we can all respect that.

koraks
7-Apr-2016, 07:05
Not being able to work with layers would be a huge handicap for me. I would never even consider investing time into learning an imagine editing program that doesn't support layers. The use of layers with the option of selective masking was in my opinion the most fundamental innovation in digital image processing.

JaZ99
7-Apr-2016, 08:21
Not being able to work with layers would be a huge handicap for me. I would never even consider investing time into learning an imagine editing program that doesn't support layers. The use of layers with the option of selective masking was in my opinion the most fundamental innovation in digital image processing.

I second that. That's why I love LR so much. Each tool is a separate layer that can be turned on/off at will. Only if Adobe choose to support color invertion....

Ken Lee
7-Apr-2016, 08:25
With Lightroom, are the layers saved independently - or are they collapsed and disappear when you save the image ? The last time I looked, there was no support for layers at all.

Kirk Gittings
7-Apr-2016, 08:43
With Lightroom, are the layers saved independently - or are they collapsed and disappear when you save the image ? The last time I looked, there was no support for layers at all.

Not really layers, very limited compared to layers. In LR these edits are automatically saved including the edit history unlike PS (a big advantage). If you take the LR image to PS and back the image is exported effectively and edits are cemented in but it is saved back to LR as a new file and doesn't overwrite the original. You don't lose the original ever and all LR edits are non-destructive edits until you export.

I don't personally know a working professional who doesn't use both. LR for all the basic edits and cataloging and PS for more advanced work. I take about 3/4 of my commercial edits into PS. I know I could get by without LR but I'm a lot more efficient and better organised with both. Adobe has structured them so you need both. But for $11 bucks a month it's a hell of a deal. I thought I would hate CC but I don't at all.

I just spent a day in a workshop with Mac Holbert, a LR/PS guru and one of the inventors of digital FA printing. He is going around the country doing these one day things with ASMP. It is well worth the $20 if you have a chance to go in your area.

JaZ99
7-Apr-2016, 08:58
There is an official YT Adobe Channel with ton of useful stuff: https://www.youtube.com/user/AdobeLightroom

Randy Moe
7-Apr-2016, 09:41
There is an official YT Adobe Channel with ton of useful stuff: https://www.youtube.com/user/AdobeLightroom

Why doesn't Adobe tell us of this!

Thanks!

seezee
7-Apr-2016, 10:51
I don't personally know a working professional who doesn't use both. LR for all the basic edits and cataloging and PS for more advanced work. I take about 3/4 of my commercial edits into PS. I know I could get by without LR but I'm a lot more efficient and better organised with both. Adobe has structured them so you need both. But for $11 bucks a month it's a hell of a deal. I thought I would hate CC but I don't at all.

+1

I rarely fire up PS these days except for photo-illustration for a client. But I live and die by LR. Nonetheless, I need both occasionally I need to do something that LR won't do (HDR, anyone?), and that's when PS comes in.

Peter De Smidt
7-Apr-2016, 11:49
Light room does HDR. See, for instance: http://lightroomkillertips.com/lightrooms-hidden-hdr-advantage/

Plus Google's Nik plugins, including their HDR one, is now free. It works with Lightroom.

Randy Moe
7-Apr-2016, 11:58
Light room does HDR. See, for instance: http://lightroomkillertips.com/lightrooms-hidden-hdr-advantage/

Plus Google's Nik plugins, including their HDR one, is now free. It works with Lightroom.

Well NOT April Fools. Scott's shadow demo does it for me.

Learned something. Thanks Peter!

Kirk Gittings
7-Apr-2016, 14:47
Light room does HDR. See, for instance: http://lightroomkillertips.com/lightrooms-hidden-hdr-advantage/

Plus Google's Nik plugins, including their HDR one, is now free. It works with Lightroom.

Technically............technically doing work in a plugin is not doing work in LR. LR does not do HDR. Just being picky I guess. For example I use LR/Infuse for a believable HDR. But that means taking the images into LR/Infuse (which means exporting them) blending them and then saving that back into LR. They were not in LR when the files were HDR merged. Same with the NIK plugins.

seezee
7-Apr-2016, 14:58
Light room does HDR. See, for instance: http://lightroomkillertips.com/lightrooms-hidden-hdr-advantage/

Plus Google's Nik plugins, including their HDR one, is now free. It works with Lightroom.

I actually installed NIK a few hours ago. :-)

Randy Moe
7-Apr-2016, 15:44
i actually installed nik a few hours ago. :-)

ok! :)

bdkphoto
7-Apr-2016, 17:42
Technically............technically doing work in a plugin is not doing work in LR. LR does not do HDR. Just being picky I guess. For example I use LR/Infuse for a believable HDR. But that means taking the images into LR/Infuse (which means exporting them) blending them and then saving that back into LR. They were not in LR when the files were HDR merged. Same with the NIK plugins.


LR does HDR-- Photo>Photomerge>HDR> the blended output is a raw file to boot..a DNG.

JaZ99
7-Apr-2016, 23:57
LR does HDR-- Photo>Photomerge>HDR> the blended output is a raw file to boot..a DNG.

It is a new feature of LR6 (along with Panorama stitching).

Armin Seeholzer
8-Apr-2016, 11:25
I still use PS 6 and if it gives me troubles some day I will switch to Affinity which can do almost every thing what PS can do!

Amen Adobe!

Kirk Gittings
8-Apr-2016, 11:29
LR does HDR-- Photo>Photomerge>HDR> the blended output is a raw file to boot..a DNG.

Thank you I missed that!!!!!

HMG
8-Apr-2016, 19:08
Light room does HDR. See, for instance: http://lightroomkillertips.com/lightrooms-hidden-hdr-advantage/

Plus Google's Nik plugins, including their HDR one, is now free. It works with Lightroom.

And many - but not all - of the Nik plugins will also work with Photoshop Elements.

Kodachrome25
16-Apr-2016, 14:24
I don't personally know a working professional who doesn't use both.

I don't use both, I have Lightroom but I just don't like it as a data asset manager, too much going on so I just don't use it. I import and catalog using Capture One Media Pro which used to be iView Media Pro. I then edit ( select the images to be used ) in Photo Mechanic. I then deal with raw files using either Bridge or Photoshop proper which is CS6, not interested in the subscription stuff for the most part ( see last point ).

The jist of it is that I don't really do all that much post processing and I have been using photoshop since 1992, hardly ever use layers and just nail it in camera like I always have. Some cameras are better than others in that regard. For example my D750 and D810 need the most post processing while my Leica M240 and Hasselblad CFV50c back are bang on right out of the camera.


LR does HDR-- Photo>Photomerge>HDR> the blended output is a raw file to boot..a DNG.

This is the only reason I am considering the new Lightroom, the fact I could output a stitched file to a raw file is seriously clutch!