# Adobe Subscription rates!!!



## Raw photographer (Jun 4, 2019)

Hi

Does anyone else here think Adobe might be loosing out of customers/businesses because there rates are high and they only offer a subscription plan, you can't even buy the thing outright. If i want to use Lightroom for the next 10 years lets say, thats like $1200.00 for the basic plan of Lightroom, thats insane in my opinion when i can go use Darktable or any other free editing software right now for free for probably how ever long i want. I think it's turning the beginners of, only the professionals can afford to use it in my opinion. 

Anyway just want to hear your thoughts on that.


----------



## Original katomi (Jun 4, 2019)

Short term they will make money. In the long term and it’s already happening, other companies will target the small non pro user who has got fed up with adobe. With luck they will see that no everyone wants to pay a subscription and go back to the old way where if you wanted the latest you could pay for the upgrade
Perhaps companies like adobe should come to places like this site and ask those who use their products what they think/want 
I don’t know just how many,maybe we could do a count here, non pros there to pros there are but I suspect that more people do photography as a hobby than as a main/part time income


----------



## Soocom1 (Jun 4, 2019)

Cloud based subscription is the modern version of the software designed for revenue and piracy prevention. 
Pirated software cost them billions over the years and if you don't have an actual physical copy, pirating it becomes nearly impossible. 
At least viable. 

The revinue however also means they have total control over the product. Third party extensions have to go through them rather than an open or hacked source code. 
This is true with all CAD programs, ESRI, Microsoft products and nearly every commercial/gov. software platforms now. 

In fact, most enterprise systems are now cloud based. There are also practical reasons for this, but just like anything else, when total control of a product exists, the control of the pricing is at the mercy of those who produce it. 
In all honesty, if you don't like it, then look elsewhere. The big guys right now hold the market, but disruptions are the normal right now and I suspect that eventually they will loose share.


----------



## Jeff15 (Jun 4, 2019)

Save lots of money and buy Adobe Photoshop Elements 18 or 19.....


----------



## Original katomi (Jun 4, 2019)

Now someone has explained why it kind of makes sense,  I  have PSE 9 andcanonsown raw editing software.
Unless I make major changes to my equipment then this will do me at my current level of skill and kit.


----------



## texxter (Jun 4, 2019)

I am still on older versions of Photoshop and Lightroom that are not subscription based, and I am glad for that.  Unfortunately they will not support raw files from new cameras, but they support my D800, x100t fine.  At some point I will have to transition to their subscription model or to an alternative like Capture One, which doesn't force a subscription model on customers.


----------



## smoke665 (Jun 4, 2019)

This is a horse that's been flogged to death. The subscription model is being adopted by just about everyone now. I had two financial software apps switch this year. Office 360 went to it a tear or so ago.


----------



## Fujidave (Jun 4, 2019)

I use to have the Adobe Photography Plan, then I got the LR6 Standalone as jumped from Canon to Fuji so stopped the plan.  Then I upgraded my Fuji kit and thought new cameras so new editing software and I now use Capture one Pro 12 and Affinity Photo and don`t have to worry about paying out.


----------



## Derrel (Jun 4, 2019)

Adobe has made its bed. They can lie in it.  Still using a standalone version of Lightroom, with the Adobe DNG converter for my raw files.


----------



## RVT1K (Jun 4, 2019)

Being a rank amateur, I only have a fairly old version (7?) of Elements that I bought years ago. It works fine for what I do.


----------



## Derrel (Jun 4, 2019)

Anxious to see how the future plays out. My hunch is that years ago, Adobe took its first step toward killing the goose that lays the golden eggs.


----------



## Raw photographer (Jun 4, 2019)

Derrel said:


> Anxious to see how the future plays out. My hunch is that years ago, Adobe took its first step toward killing the goose that lays the golden eggs.


Yes i agree 100% with that.


----------



## smoke665 (Jun 4, 2019)

IRS guidelines define the useful life of internally used software as 2 years. I've found over the years I could stretch it to 3 in some cases. The problem is not just the software itself, but compatibility with the current operating system. Case in point I had a license remaining on a corporate version of a security software that included lifetime library updates. When the Windows Creator edition came out it was no longer compatible. No choice but to update.

@Derrel if Adobe kills the goose, then they won't be alone. The vast number of business software out there (other then proprietary corporate software) is now on the subscription model, as are most of the more popular consumer software.

For a long time people viewed computers and the software that makes them work as assets with residual value. Over the last several years it's shifted to a disposable asset, to be used over a period of time. I mean seriously how many still use a computer in excess of 5 years, can you expect software to be diferent?

@Raw photographer is $1200 over 10 years excessive? If you play golf once a week at a public course over 10 years you're looking at close to $30k depending on the course. How about a Starbucks Grande 5 times a week, you'll drop over $5k in 10 years. If you eat a Big Mac, Fries and drink twice a month you'll spend over $2k in 10 years. So the question is excessive compared to what?


----------



## Soocom1 (Jun 4, 2019)

The sad thing is that Adobe along with Microhard, Gloogle, Fakebook, Twister and others all sold everyone on this kumbiya, ride the white horse, cant we all get along, one world horse tookie. 
The platforms were all about lets all live as one BS. 

Well, $$$$ took over and the original powerbrokers of the mega silicon minds are all retired and living in the Hamptons, Bahamas or wherever eating lobster and steak on a beach, while we all get to dance around net blackouts and Fakebook censoring. 

The reality is once again. FOLLOW THE DOLLAR! 


So whatever is being done is being done in the same vein as making money for the smallest amount. Remember, IPO's means that the people who started the companies no longer own them. The investors do and they want their return, regardless if it screws you up.


----------



## Derrel (Jun 4, 2019)

$1,200 for 10 years versus $199 and $99 upgrades...

" IRS guidelines define the useful life of internally used software as 2 years."

Whaaaaaaaaaat?


----------



## Derrel (Jun 4, 2019)

The cost is not the only drawback...the constant need for an internet connection, to be pinged by Adobe servers, to allow the SW to work,is something a percentage of traveling users have mentioned. Not really a factor for me, but requiring internet connectivity so that one's leased SW works? I guess if one works at Adobe HQ, the idea of consistent, reliable 24/7/52/365 connectivity is a given.

A big hurricane or tornado, or a storm of some type, (snow, ice, wind, fire) that hits a major metro area and knocks out internet service for a few days could prove to be damaging.


----------



## texxter (Jun 4, 2019)

smoke665 said:


> For a long time people viewed computers and the software that makes them work as assets with residual value. Over the last several years it's shifted to a disposable asset, to be used over a period of time. I mean seriously how many still use a computer in excess of 5 years, can you expect software to be diferent?



This is true.  Manufacturers of hardware and software have been moving to the "as-a-service" model where a subscription replaces a depreciable asset.  At the same time software is being accessed from the cloud (my teenagers don't use Microsoft Office, only Google Docs, Sheets, etc) - this trend is unstoppable because it is good for the business.  It's not always good for consumers.

I may be a minority, but I bought my iMac with software in mid 2010.  I added some RAM and an SSD over time and it runs very well.  The software, Photoshop CS4, LR 5, work well with my existing cameras.  I am 100% satisfied with this setup, but Mac OSX is changing and creating application incompatibilities, to your point, so I will need to stop upgrading OSX as well at some point.  In a year or two my setup will be frozen in time.   If/when my camera fails or I have reasons to replace it, I will need to stand on my head to process those files, and I will probably be forced to replace the entire post-processing equipment, and that'll be painful, even with a subscription model.  Alternatively I could replace a failed camera with a used unit of the same model and keep on going with my obsolete equipment trying to make good images.

I totally get the industry trend.  Film cameras used to last a lifetime and now a camera lasts less than 5 years because new models provide so much more capabilities.  Same with computers, software, storage,....  Still, I think there is something to be said about just owning a computer system that works for years with cameras that work for years, fully depreciated, with the focus being 100% on image making, not on equipment upgrades.  I know it' not realistic, but one can dream.


----------



## Derrel (Jun 4, 2019)

One of the biggest diffrerence berween Windoze and Mac users...the length of time they, on average, use hardware.

While Windoze boxes are now seen by many as disposables, many Mac users tend to keep their hardware much longer. And we have a different attitude about our devices. Right now, I am using a 2011 iMac.... still works, still runs the current Mac OS...I do not view my computers as throwaways...erm "disposable". I payed $1299 or $1499 for this computer in the summer of 2011...*seven full years ago...*


----------



## smoke665 (Jun 4, 2019)

@Derrel IRs provides guidelines for depreciating/expensing software and computer hardware. Currently on software under 50k it's 2 years and over 50k, 5 years same as hardware. That's another reason why the subscription model is more attractive for business in that it doesn't tie up large sums of cash and can be fully expensed in the year paid.

I know Mac has a reputation for longevity, but in the business world that isn't as important as cutting edge technology. We don't get attached to computers or equipment.

One thing I find disturbing is the constant chatter about how bad Adobe is. I've never been a big Adobe fan over the years but Lr and PS do what I want them to do, and I'm comfortable with what I pay for the service. If I wasn't I'd use one of the other alternatives out there, but I wouldn't bash Adobe because of their business model. It's a free market.


----------



## JBPhotog (Jun 4, 2019)

smoke665 said:


> IRS guidelines define the useful life of internally used software as 2 years.



If this is the same as it is in Canada that only refers to how soon a business can write it off as an expense not the useful life of the software.

Thankfully there are alternatives such as Capture One where you have an option of a full purchase with future proof updates or subscription models. Older versions of PhotoShop can easily handle tiff files generated by other Raw converters, Adobe doesn't have the be all end all in that domain.


----------



## Derrel (Jun 4, 2019)

Adobe could become the next Kodak. Or the next Sears, or JC Penny. Or Circuit City. Or AMC. Or Pontiac.


----------



## Derrel (Jun 4, 2019)

"_We don't get attached to computers or equipment. "-- _

I would wager that nearly half of Adobe's revenue comes from the amateur/hobby market.

Let's see if Adobe is too big to fail.

Kodak was too big to fail. Sears was too big to fail, as were JC Penny, American Motors, Circuit City, and Pontiac. Once leaders, they are now merely shells of their former glory, or gone, and out of business entirely.

Adobe is acting like Kodak...once a world-wide, undisputed leader, they are now starting to be blind to the changes in their industry, and are starting to take it for granted that their customers will accept any amount of s**+ they attempt to force-feed them.  At one time, Photoshop was the leading pixel editor in a market that they dominated with no real competition, no alternatives. That is not the case now... as it stands, for many consumers, the  image editing available for free in phones has made huge strides in the last few years,and as we advance, I forsee the need for Photoshop to decline among the rank and file public.


----------



## vintagesnaps (Jun 4, 2019)

How much is a Big Mac?? lol guess I don't have Big Mac attacks often enough to know.

Film cameras last more than a lifetime, I have cameras from someone else's lifetime. Our AMC Gremlin is long gone! but Derrel didn't you hear that Sears is coming back?!!

I don't subscribe to Photoshop. People said it was subscription only, but it wasn't. That seemed to have been a misconception at the time, and maybe still is. Did a quick search and Elements came up as available at a local store where I can go pick it up.

I will say it wasn't so easy to find on the Adobe website, had to scroll to the bottom under Products (so they aren't exactly promoting it) but it looks like I could buy an upgrade for just under $80 (which I think is what I did last time). I guess beyond Elements the options might be subscriptions; if people don't want that and buy Elements maybe Adobe would start offering different purchase options. Guess it's a matter of buying the basics or having to subscribe if you want more/different products and want to spend the money on it.


----------



## Soocom1 (Jun 4, 2019)

ESRI is the 900 lbs guerrilla in the GIS-Mapping world. 

right now they are pushing ArcGIS pro which is totally web based and has told ALL users that concurrent licensing will be available for Desktop up to 2023. 

ArcPro is NOT the best program, and moreover with the net shutdowns, blackouts and the like as a GOVERNMENT entity if the net goes down like when Amazon did in 2017, the system starts to slowly shut down. This is a licensing feature to "prevent"  piracy. 

The problem is that if that starts to systematically shut down. EMS looses its ability to see the data they rely on to do their job. 

For us specifically, the LACK of internet connection in many parts of the county makes field collection still in the paper-pencil days. 

The concept of web based and the IoT is a pie int he sky kumbya type thinking that has the Borg-ish One world collectivist mentality running amok. 
The concept of a disconnected world is still very much with us and regardless of the mentality, will bite us hard if we don't have an analog backup. 

I do not want to hear this blather that we need to "look forward". We did and were still having the issues that were present in the late 1980's. 

Give a first class Carrington event and you might as well pull out the slide rules.


----------



## smoke665 (Jun 4, 2019)

JBPhotog said:


> smoke665 said:
> 
> 
> > IRS guidelines define the useful life of internally used software as 2 years.
> ...



Granted it is the ability to expense the cost, but the reality is that the software itself has certain built in obsolescence as technology advances. I can't remember when it started, but it's been a long time, that software companies at 3 years post purchase started sending out notices that they were discontinuing support. Again you could still use the software for a period of time, but eventually the functionality of it became useless.

Capture One is an alternative that I looked at and may at some point go to if the arrangement with Adobe becomes untenable. However, let's talk about Capture One, the price to buy unless you get the stripped down version, is pricey, mostly out of the reach of the hobbyist, and the subscription price the last time I checked was almost twice that of Adobe, and didn't offer as much for the buck. Yet no one seems upset with them for their business model.

_Adobe doesn't have the be all end _of course not, but I'd expand this to read "No software has to be the end all"


----------



## Derrel (Jun 4, 2019)

'_Again you could still use the software for a period of time, but eventually the functionality of it became useless.'
_
I have a legacy PowerMac G 4/450 that I use now ONLY for my old SCSI-connect Minolta 35mm film scanner...running OS 9.0.1 and Photoshop 4.0...still works...22 years or more "out of date"...

old hardware..old software...still works


----------



## smoke665 (Jun 4, 2019)

Derrel said:


> Adobe could become the next Kodak. Or the next Sears, or JC Penny. Or Circuit City. Or AMC. Or Pontiac.



I'd say the numbers don't bear this out. According to Statista, Creative Cloud subscribers rose from 1.44 million in 2013 to 12 million in 2017 and are projected to rise to 19.74 million in 2024. As of today, almost 90% of their income is recurring, with no sign of slowing. If you have a downturn in the economy which sale do you think will suffer first the guy trying to sell a $500 software package, or the guy selling a $9.99/month subscription.

I would advise you to check out the financial markets. Total revenue for Adobe is up 25.11% over a year ago, net income up 15.6% over a year ago. Think about this, if you had invested about $6500 in Adobe stock back then, you could have sold that investment for $26,871.00 today, a net gain of 313%. Even despite a slight decline in net earnings, Adobe still remains a darling of the hedge funds.  I don't currently have Adobe in my portfolio, but over the years I've made enough on their business model, I don't begrudge them the $9.99/month.



Derrel said:


> I have a legacy PowerMac G 4/450 that I use now ONLY for my old SCSI-connect Minolta 35mm film scanner...running OS 9.0.1 and Photoshop 4.0...still works...22 years or more "out of date"..



And I bet I could find a few articles of clothing in your closet from the same period as well.I can top that I have a Commadore 64, an external 51/4 floppy drive, and several software disks. I'm not certain, but I suspect that it would also fire up if I wanted. The point on "functionality" is will it work in "today's" environment. Like my financial software, maintaining  secure connections to my banks, brokerage, etc., are highly important. Sure I could go back to the old days of entering transactions, hand writing checks, doing manual transfers and entries, but why? One click operations allow me the ability to do things that would take me all day otherwise.


----------



## Soocom1 (Jun 4, 2019)

smoke665 said:


> And I bet I could find a few articles of clothing in your closet from the same period as well.*I can top that I have a Commadore 64, an external 51/4 floppy drive, and several software disks. *I'm not certain, but I suspect that it would also fire up if I wanted. The point on "functionality" is will it work in "today's" environment. Like my financial software, maintaining secure connections to my banks, brokerage, etc., are highly important. Sure I could go back to the old days of entering transactions, hand writing checks, doing manual transfers and entries, but why? One click operations allow me the ability to do things that would take me all day otherwise.



Dont laugh. 
That may be what saves the world! 

56K is the way to go man. 
Right On!


----------



## smoke665 (Jun 4, 2019)

Soocom1 said:


> Dont laugh.
> That may be what saves the world!



I hope you're talking about the Commodore and not the clothes. There's some things from way back when that need to stay back there.


----------



## Soocom1 (Jun 4, 2019)

smoke665 said:


> Soocom1 said:
> 
> 
> > Dont laugh.
> ...


Man.. Dr Buzzkill to the rescue!!!


----------



## JonFZ300 (Jun 4, 2019)

I started back in the day with Elements 7 and I loved it. I stayed with Elements up until it got to 14 and I still use it. As time went on, I started using Camera Raw pretty much exclusively because I like the interface so much more than other programs. I've tried darktable, RawTherapee, Gimp, etc and they are all very clunky to me. You open a module, find a slider, have too many options, etc. ACR has the tools I want to use more or less in the order that I want to use them. 

With the stripped-down version that ACR that you get with Elements, you can't do localized editing in Camera Raw. There's no adjustment brush, no saturation of individual color channels, etc. These are things that I want. I would have to get it as close as I could, then open them in Elements and use the various selections tools to make those edits. Not that much of a hassle but not that great either. 

About a month ago, I got the free trial week of LR/PS/ACR and tried it out. In the past I was adamant about never doing a subscription. After trying it and seeing how much more powerful it is than the "lite" version in Elements, I have joined the subscription model dark side. I don't use Lightroom at all and I only use Photoshop for the spot healing brush and the occasional HDR or panorama. Almost everything I want to do I can do with ACR. Yes, over time it adds up to what seems like a lot of money, but I'm in a position where $11 a month is really not a big deal at all and as other have said, compared with many other hobbies, it's a bargain. 

I get that it's not for everybody, I used to rant about the subscription model, even just a couple months ago.


----------



## Derrel (Jun 4, 2019)

At one time Eastman Kodak was one of the largest companies in North America, and one of the worlds most famous and legendary brands. At one time it cost more to make the box that contains a roll of 35 mm film than it cost to produce the film That was sold in that box. At one time Kodak held a stranglehold on the world market for film, photographic paper, and photographic chemicals. Today? some Kodak machinery is busy filling jars of spaghetti sauce. Kodak is now a laughing stock.

At one time ,Kodak assumed that the position it held was unassailable. That is the hubris of market-leading, too big to fail Kodak.

  I am not surprised to see that Adobe has increased its number of subscribers.  Your 2013 figure was, if I am not mistaken,the first year that the subscription model was offered and they had 1.44 million customers.  it's not too surprising that in the intervening few years they have greatly increased their number of monthly subscribers as people give up and just decided to bend over And take the monthly tithe.

  Let's compare capture one with Photoshop. A full version,the most expensive version of Capture One,is about $497, while another version,  a pro version is $397, and the basic full version is $98. Or one can pay $20 a month. Compare that with a $1,299 full version of Photoshop: by my math that makes Adobe approximately 66 percent more expensive, top version for top version.  So to be clear at one time not too long ago Adobe felt that charging customers $1299 for their top product was a fair price. It was at this time that they declared that $50 a month would be the monthly rental fee for just Photoshop. After millions of people cried out Adobe wisely reduce the monthly fee to $10 over a 12 month user agreement, and added  Lightroom  to the mix..let's be clear here, since you have upgraded to the subscription model, you have personally encountered more glitches and screw-ups than I have with my various full version copies of Photoshop for the past 20+ years. let's be clear: under the subscription model adobe's updates and upgrades have been few and of very little consequence  to the vast majority of its subscribers.  Let's be clear: A few years ago there was little competition in the image editing field for Photoshop, but today there is more competition.

Regarding the Power Mac g-4-450 that runs the film scanner. At the time of its introduction it was considered the fastest production computer in the world and it was illegal to sell the computer to a number of enemies of the state of the United States of America, and it was sometimes used10 to 20 units ganged together, to create in effect a very powerful supercomputer, equivalent to the  Cray,and it is and was a far cry above a Commodore 64. Your analogy or comparison is ridiculous,similar to comparing an early Model T Ford to a late 1990s Corvette.

As I pointed out the old Power Mac can still scan film and still run a useful device, which is probably a lot more than the old Commodore you have can do.
And no, I no longer have any clothes from the 1990s.


----------



## snowbear (Jun 4, 2019)

texxter said:


> I am still on older versions of Photoshop and Lightroom that are not subscription based, and I am glad for that.  Unfortunately they will not support raw files from new cameras, but they support my D800, x100t fine.  At some point I will have to transition to their subscription model or to an alternative like Capture One, which doesn't force a subscription model on customers.


I had to migrate to LR-CC (or something else) when I upgraded to the D750 for just this reason - raw files were no longer supported on LR3.  My short term was to use the Nikon software, convert raw to TIF, then bring those into LR - not a horrible thing to do, since I am not doing production work, but it gets bothersome.



Soocom1 said:


> ESRI is the 900 lbs guerrilla in the GIS-Mapping world.
> 
> right now they are pushing ArcGIS pro which is totally web based and has told ALL users that concurrent licensing will be available for Desktop up to 2023.
> 
> ArcPro is NOT the best program, and moreover with the net shutdowns, blackouts and the like as a GOVERNMENT entity if the net goes down like when Amazon did in 2017, the system starts to slowly shut down. This is a licensing feature to "prevent"  piracy.


To add my perspective - Pro is a WIP and I've seen a number of improvements in the current version (2.3.3, IIRC) as opposed to 1.x.  A _LOT_ of people apparently wanted 64-bit and 3D so I guess this was the way to do it instead of trying to uplift Desktop/ArcMap.

I still roll to Desktop for some things (Network Analyst, publishing services on REST, some Python) but I've really gotten used to Pro.  Pro does work in offline mode, but I think you lose the multiple machine capability - it seems to me it will only authenticate on one per license.

Edit: Commodore!  I had a COBOL compiler for my C-128 (CP/M mode)!


----------



## Soocom1 (Jun 4, 2019)

snowbear said:


> texxter said:
> 
> 
> > I am still on older versions of Photoshop and Lightroom that are not subscription based, and I am glad for that.  Unfortunately they will not support raw files from new cameras, but they support my D800, x100t fine.  At some point I will have to transition to their subscription model or to an alternative like Capture One, which doesn't force a subscription model on customers.
> ...




Which is something that is not very viable for us. 
Without going into detail (about 10,000 words worth) to NOT have versioning and having things based on a web system (they are still toying with flat client) would be a mistake. 
I get that Pro has its capabilities, but we simply cannot play the patch-catchup game constantly.


----------



## JBPhotog (Jun 4, 2019)

smoke665 said:


> Granted it is the ability to expense the cost, but the reality is that the software itself has certain built in obsolescence as technology advances. I can't remember when it started, but it's been a long time, that software companies at 3 years post purchase started sending out notices that they were discontinuing support. Again you could still use the software for a period of time, but eventually the functionality of it became useless.
> 
> Capture One is an alternative that I looked at and may at some point go to if the arrangement with Adobe becomes untenable. However, let's talk about Capture One, the price to buy unless you get the stripped down version, is pricey, mostly out of the reach of the hobbyist, and the subscription price the last time I checked was almost twice that of Adobe, and didn't offer as much for the buck. Yet no one seems upset with them for their business model.



I agree that eventually software does become obsolete. The argument is, are there alternatives to Adobe and by all means there is. It really depends on the customer and their needs.

Have you ever tethered to Lightroom, there is no comparison, Capture One is by far superior.

I have been buying software for a few decades and certainly the subscription model is attractive for those who want the functionality but aren't needing it professionally. If you recall PhotoShop used to sell for $999US if you didn't own it, with upgrades coming in at @$200 every 18 months of so. What has changed is, the development curve has started to flatten out and many new features are viewed by many as unnecessary and even frivolous in some cases. Adobe's announcement that the Photographer package was going to double in monthly subscription price had many upset and rightfully so I would argue. As a darling of the stock market so you say, their hubris has spurred a number of startup competitors who will take a bite out of their market share, maybe this is _the_ reason price increases were announced? Any company with the arrogance of believing they own the market has lost sight of how quickly it can all be lost, Derrel cited many companies who fell into this mindset. Future success is never confirmed, it all balances on what companies do to and with their customers now that impacts this. I for one never jumped on the Lightroom bandwagon and never regretted it, the future of PhotoShop may not be in question. . . . . yet, but one day it may be.


----------



## vintagesnaps (Jun 4, 2019)

It doesn't have to be all one or the other. I write checks for things like the grass cutting/snow removal, local services/businesses. I check my balance etc. online. I have an old 8 track player loitering in the basement that may work but I don't use it, but then I collect and use vintage cameras, shoot film and digital, do alt. processes - then scan them in. 

I guess I'm hybrid. People can use what works for them without knocking it when someone has a different way of doing something. You can use old floppies as coasters... but the Gremlin ain't comin' back - I hope! But never say never, plenty of things come back, like vinyl - and bell bottoms!! they already came back, went, stayed.

I don't like subscriptions in general. I've gotten out of a couple not photography related and got fed up with them pretty fast. I'll just pay for what I want or will use thankyouverymuch.


----------



## smoke665 (Jun 4, 2019)

Derrel said:


> Let's compare capture one with Photoshop. A full version the most expensive version the capture one is about $497, well another version a pro version is $397, and the basic full version is $98. Or one can pay $20 a month. Compare that with a $1299 full version of Photoshop: by my math that makes Adobe approximately 66 percent more expensive top version for top version,



No disagreement on cost of stand alone versions. If I were to compare the two for purchase I'd likely go Capture One so long as I hadn't upgraded to the Pentax 645z, they don't play well together. However comparing the subscription plan with Adobe you get Lightroom, Photoshop and Bridge. With Capture One that's all you get, so with the subscription I'd see the advantage swing to Adobe.

_Compare that with a $1299 full version of Photoshop _Prior to the subscription model, this would have been a hard sell to most amateurs, so it's no surprise that from 2015 revenues of 4.8 billion just about doubled to 9.03 billion in 2018. It had to be the swarm of amateurs, that suddenly found it within reach. Phase One by comparison still follows the old Adobe model with marketing leaning toward the professional and their revenue reflects it. I couldn't find much on them, other then they are a Danish company 60% owned by a UK private equity firm, Silver Fleet Capital, and they had revenue of 413 million in 2015. We both know the professional photography market is declining. That may be why they suddenly dropped their monthly subscription from $20/month to $8/month for Fuji and Sony, in hopes of attracting more amateurs that have swung over to the mirroless side.

Again I'm not promoting Adobe, just saying that all of the hate threads on here directed at Adobe over their subscription model isn't warranted, as they aren't the only company to use the model, and with all the options available no one has to use them. For those 12 plus million users like myself, it works, for others it doesn't, no right or wrong just different opinions on need/value/preference.


----------



## smoke665 (Jun 4, 2019)

@JBPhotog  I've tethered to Lr, on occasion, but by and large don't like to do it. Tethering  just feels distracting, one more thing to look at instead of the subject, like chimping after every shot.

I think there was a period where the development flattened out, but over the last 6 months there's been a flurry of updates, primarily in Lr, that are pretty awesome. AI and Profiles was a big step up, the addition of the texture slider, another. Not so sure there's been much improvement in Ps.


----------



## JonFZ300 (Jun 4, 2019)

smoke665 said:


> Again I'm not promoting Adobe, just saying that all of the hate threads on here directed at Adobe over their subscription model isn't warranted, as they aren't the only company to use the model, and with all the options available no one has to use them. For those 12 plus million users like myself, it works, for others it doesn't, no right or wrong just different opinions on need/value/preference.



I totally agree. However, I will say that the moment somebody comes out with an open source version of ACR, I will ditch Adobe in a second. 

All the open source raw editors now are LR clones with the gray/black interface and copious modules and more sliders than I would ever need. 

Camera Raw is so powerful and simple to use. I wish somebody would take the time to clone it like they do Lightroom for us intermediate level editors. Something more powerful than Elements but not so complicated you need to watch a tutorial to do anything like darktable.


----------



## JBPhotog (Jun 4, 2019)

Professionally, tethering is _the_ go to especially when the client is hovering, lol. It also lets you apply presets and overlays as they are imported, indispensable for ad work when copy is included in the layout. 

The angst over Adobe could be also be that at one point in time they announced Lightroom would never be subscription. As the saying goes, never say never.  Hey, I'm a capitalist so Adobe can do what ever they want, customers are free to do the same.


----------



## JBPhotog (Jun 4, 2019)

JonFZ300 said:


> All the open source raw editors now are LR clones with the gray/black interface and copious modules and more sliders than I would ever need.
> 
> Camera Raw is so powerful and simple to use. I wish somebody would take the time to clone it like they do Lightroom for us intermediate level editors. Something more powerful than Elements but not so complicated you need to watch a tutorial to do anything like darktable.



What camera do you own, many brands provide a free Raw converter and FWIW, they may be even better at resolving the file.


----------



## JonFZ300 (Jun 5, 2019)

JBPhotog said:


> What camera do you own, many brands provide a free Raw converter and FWIW, they may be even better at resolving the file.



I have a Panasonic FZ300. The free software is SILKYPIX which is the worst of all the different software I've tried. I've been using the lite version of CR so long in Elements that it's a natural progression to step up to the full version. I'd love an open source clone of it though.


----------



## smoke665 (Jun 5, 2019)

JonFZ300 said:


> . However, I will say that the moment somebody comes out with an open source version of ACR, I will ditch Adobe in a second.



Don't hold your breath on that one. With billions at stake the battle would be huge.

I'm surprised at your dislike for Silkypix. Until a few years ago that was what was packaged with Pentax. I always found it fairly easy to use and okay for what I used it for. Pentax now supplies their own DCU5 which is a PITA. The only time I use it is with Pixel Shift images.


----------



## snowbear (Jun 5, 2019)

Soocom1 said:


> snowbear said:
> 
> 
> > texxter said:
> ...


Yeah, should be an offline conversation, or at least a different thread.


----------



## Derrel (Jun 5, 2019)

_The free software is SILKYPIX which is the worst of all the different software I've tried_

I had a full, payed version of that in the mid-2000's, and occasionally, it would produce a gorgeous conversion from a Raw file. At that time, I was testing out ACR, Nikon Capture, and Canon's DPP, and SilkyPix, with the NikonD2x and Canon 5D, sending an entire day's shooting for batch conversion, and as I said,occasionally, SilkPix full version would produce a simply lovely rendering.

Nikon Capture could not handle Canon's .CR2 files, and Canon DPP could not handle Nikon's .NEF files. It has been 12 years or so since I used SilkyPix, but at one time, before Lightroom, converting raw files was "different" than it is now.


----------



## JonFZ300 (Jun 5, 2019)

smoke665 said:


> JonFZ300 said:
> 
> 
> > . However, I will say that the moment somebody comes out with an open source version of ACR, I will ditch Adobe in a second.
> ...



I agree about cloning Camera Raw. I guess I'm not talking about the engine itself, but the way the interface looks and works.

Silkypix is just not intuitive to me after using ACR. I really don't like everything being in a collapsible tab. Open/expand tab>move sliders>close/collapse tab, repeat. I want all the related sliders under one tab like the basic tab in ACR, not spread out individually. I like the ACR menu structure so much better. I liked darktable but I don't like how it automatically applies settings to every image and you have to go turn them off to start from zero. If I could have darktable set up to open without these auto "fixes" and the menus to look like ACR, I would absolutely switch. 

I guess this is well off-topic now... Sorry to OP.


----------



## bhop (Jun 6, 2019)

A lot of the photo sites have been pushing affinity photo. It supports raw and only costs around $40 for the full version.. one time cost. I haven't used it personally, I pay for the adobe suite since I use it professionally for graphic design. I pretty much feel like I get my money's worth out of it..  but having watched a lot of review videos and read up on it, Affinity looks like it could be a good option.

Affinity Photo - Professional image editing software for desktop and iPad


----------



## Derrel (Jun 6, 2019)

Why Adobe Doesn't Want You Using Older Versions of CC


----------

