Non-Subscription Alternative to Photoshop Elements?

[William Baroo]

One second you have the full image on-screen, then you click a toolbar and lose one-third of the screen, click the close-button at the right-hand-side and go back to your image .... time and time and time again! The image changes size as it jumps around--it really is a damn nuisance and PS-E (for me) is soon going into the bin

This amazed me, too. You get a tiny little spot where you can edit things. And I keep getting little nag screens. "Did you know this?" "Did you know that?" SHUT UP.

 

[smoke665]

Subscription models are sneaky and vastly profitable for the issuer. It's like compound interest. Years ago, AT&T probably started it all by charging around $2 a month to rent their home phone instrument hanging on the wall. People never paid attention until AT&T was broken apart by the US government because it was a monopoly. Then everyone noticed that their $2 a month equaled $480 after twenty years of use. $480 for an old, decrepit, non-descript black, dial phone hanging on the wall. So, $10 a month for Adobe subscription for ten years equals $1200 about what a nice new digital camera costs. That's what I was paying Comcast for their internet line modem/router per month. Returned it to them and bought my own and saved $800 over the last ten years since I moved here.

Apples and Oranges, Alan. Pre-subscription model, just Photoshop would cost you $800 to $1000, with upgrades running in the $200 plus range. The pricing put it out of range of most hobby or causal photographers. In your phone example you're paying for the same thing indefinitely. In the Adobe model, your getting a continuously updated new model. I get continuous updates to my product for $120/yr, that's less than the cost of the updates used to be, and I get LR, Bridge and online storage with it.

Most professional grade software now is on a subscription model, or they only sell you a one year license so it stops working without an update. The days of buying a license and using the software forever are over.

 

[Rickbb]

Most professional grade software now is on a subscription model, or they only sell you a one year license so it stops working without an update. The days of buying a license and using the software forever are over.

Which has been a bonanza for open-source developers. Now if they could just make a simple UI instead of what is out there now. The free open source works great, but you need a PHD in engineering to figure out the interface.

 

[smoke665]

The free open source works great, but you need a PHD in engineering to figure out the interface.

Because it necessitates two vastly different skill sets. One to code and one to explain everything so a non geek can use it.

 

[Ozzie_Traveller]

....... Most professional grade software now is on a subscription model, or they only sell you a one year license so it stops working without an update. The days of buying a license and using the software forever are over.

I have other mates using Affinity as a pro-level PP product ... I have not investigated but believe it's a no-subscription product that has all the PS features and more

Personally I am investigating FastStone viewer and editor as replacements for PS-E

Phil

 

[smoke665]

have not investigated but believe it's a no-subscription product that has all the PS features and more

It mimics several PS features but doesn't have all the features like the latest AI features, neural filters, and constant updates ( at no additional cost). Had I not gone with Adobe, my second choice was Capture One. However the advantage of Adobe is the Creative Cloud Suite. My workflow utilizes all the best features of Bridge, LR and PS, which is far superior to any low end photo editing software.

 

[AlanKlein]

Apples and Oranges, Alan. Pre-subscription model, just Photoshop would cost you $800 to $1000, with upgrades running in the $200 plus range. The pricing put it out of range of most hobby or causal photographers. In your phone example you're paying for the same thing indefinitely. In the Adobe model, your getting a continuously updated new model. I get continuous updates to my product for $120/yr, that's less than the cost of the updates used to be, and I get LR, Bridge and online storage with it.

Most professional grade software now is on a subscription model, or they only sell you a one year license so it stops working without an update. The days of buying a license and using the software forever are over.

The fact Adobe multiplied their profits by 4x or 5x after starting the subscription models, tells me that customers overall are paying much more for their products. Everyone else has jumped on the bandwagon realizing subscriptions are the way to multiply profits for them too. People are hesitant to write a check for $300 but will charge $10 a month forever.

 

[smoke665]

The fact Adobe multiplied their profits by 4x or 5x after starting the subscription models, tells me that customers overall are paying much more for their products. Everyone else has jumped on the bandwagon realizing subscriptions are the way to multiply profits for them too. People are hesitant to write a check for $300 but will charge $10 a month forever.

Either your memory is failing or you've never owned a license to an Adobe product. In 2012 the license for LR4 was $149.95 which was actually a significant reduction. In 2010 the stand alone price for CS5 was $700, the extended version was $1000. Considering past history most updates for a software in that price range would run $200-$400.The reason Adobe's revenue and profits increased is because they expanded their customer base by making the product available to the masses.

Software is a unique product that took awhile for companies to understand. Consumers never really understood the License, they automatically assumed they were buying a product. Unlike consumer products there's no built in obsolescence, so software companies were constantly searching for new customers, and thier efforts to update were stymied by slow sales of updates. Coming from a business environment that required several specialized software with multi user license expense being major line expenses the subscription model was a godsend for our cash flow.

Rather than bashing Adobe who's kept the monthly subscription price stable. Look at Capture One, their price is $21.95 and doesn't offer as much ad Adobe. Then you have companies like my accounting software that sell you a one yr license that quits working if you don't buy the update.

My advice to the OP on software is consider carefully your ongoing photography requirements. If the occasional shot with minimal editing is all you think you'll ever do, then there are several lower cost alternatives. However, bear in mind, you will also possibly encounter compatibility issues if you try to upgrade to better software. Another thing to consider is each software has a learning curve, that knowledge may not transfer to an upgraded software.

 

[pez]

I've tried all the free software that I've seen, and yeah, a lot of it works well. But I have no problem paying good $$$ for an Adobe subscription because I consider it to be the best and most convenient go-to solution for the use of my limited editing time.

 

[AlanKlein]

Apples and Oranges, Alan. Pre-subscription model, just Photoshop would cost you $800 to $1000, with upgrades running in the $200 plus range. The pricing put it out of range of most hobby or causal photographers. In your phone example you're paying for the same thing indefinitely. In the Adobe model, your getting a continuously updated new model. I get continuous updates to my product for $120/yr, that's less than the cost of the updates used to be, and I get LR, Bridge and online storage with it.

Most professional grade software now is on a subscription model, or they only sell you a one year license so it stops working without an update. The days of buying a license and using the software forever are over.

Pricing for software was much, much higher originally. Then they dropped substantially as competition arrived. So, comparing subscription pricing to old time buying prices isn't valid.

Photo editing software is a mature product. Unless you're a pro, older software not upgraded works fine. The subscription model forces people who don't need those bells and whistles to keep paying and paying. Adobe found the golden pot and others are following suit.

 

[smoke665]

Photo editing software is a mature product. Unless you're a pro, older software not upgraded works fine

Not true. New features are coming rapidly, especially in AI, new cameras, new operating systems and hardware requirements, without upgrades you'll be forced out regardless.

No one is forcing you to purchase Adobe products. Buy/use what you want, but the endless Adobe bashing is growing old, and serves no purpose in response to the OP.

 

[SquarePeg]

I tried Affinity and really liked it but eventually gave in and switched to LR/PS subscription. When I was learning how to edit it was a handicap not to have adobe. I’m very happy with the decision. It’s a good value if you edit your photos and there’s so many free tutorials available on YouTube to learn to use.

 

[AlanKlein]

Not true. New features are coming rapidly, especially in AI, new cameras, new operating systems and hardware requirements, without upgrades you'll be forced out regardless.

No one is forcing you to purchase Adobe products. Buy/use what you want, but the endless Adobe bashing is growing old, and serves no purpose in response to the OP.

The endless Adobe apologizing is growing old. Why is it OK for you to endlessly support the subscription model but object when others take an opposing view? In any case, the title of this thread is as follows. Why are you even suggesting subscriptions which serves no purpose to the topic?

Non-Subscription Alternative to Photoshop Elements?​

 

[smoke665]

Why is it OK for you to endlessly support the subscription model but object when others take an opposing

Maybe you need to re-read my posts and stop pulling stuff out of context, to feed your hate. I've never advocated anyone go to Adobe. If you go back to my first post #13 I suggested Affinity and Corel Paintshop. I stated I've been on the Adobe subscription model and was happy with it, but no where did I say they should run out and buy it over anything else. You immediately followed with you tirade about Att phones and how Adobe was getting rich on subscriptions at the expense of poor custmers. In post #21 I said Capture One would've been my second choice had I not gone with Adobe. In post #23 I advised the OP "My advice to the OP on software is consider carefully your ongoing photography requirements. If the occasional shot with minimal editing is all you think you'll ever do, then there are several lower cost alternatives. However, bear in mind, you will also possibly encounter compatibility issues if you try to upgrade to better software. Another thing to consider is each software has a learning curve, that knowledge may not transfer to an upgraded software."

In any case, the title of this thread is as follows. Why are you even suggesting subscriptions which serves no purpose to the topic?

The only "suggestion" you've given is to add Elements video, the rest have been nothing but Adobe bashing. Do you even own/use or have you tried any editing software that gives you any knowledge that you can share on how they work? I didn't just land with Adobe out of the gate, it was a research/trial/error process of available software. I might also add that I'm not the only one who came to that same conclusion, check out post #24 and 27 above, according to you they're wrong as well. Strange you didn't find the need to find fault with them on their comments?

 

[cgw]

Subscription models are sneaky and vastly profitable for the issuer. It's like compound interest. Years ago, AT&T probably started it all by charging around $2 a month to rent their home phone instrument hanging on the wall. People never paid attention until AT&T was broken apart by the US government because it was a monopoly. Then everyone noticed that their $2 a month equaled $480 after twenty years of use. $480 for an old, decrepit, non-descript black, dial phone hanging on the wall. So, $10 a month for Adobe subscription for ten years equals $1200 about what a nice new digital camera costs. That's what I was paying Comcast for their internet line modem/router per month. Returned it to them and bought my own and saved $800 over the last ten years since I moved here.

Try this perspective. In 2023 at current film material and processing prices, $10/month would vanish in a blink if I still shot a fraction of the film I did earlier this century. Personally never had much luck finding free lunches.YMMV, as always.