Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Rangefinder Forum > Image Processing: Darkroom / Lightroom / Film > Photo Software

Photo Software Discussions of all the photo software - except scanning software which is in the forum with scanners.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Lightroom Stand Alone Dies
Old 10-18-2017   #1
MaxElmar
Registered User
 
MaxElmar's Avatar
 
MaxElmar is offline
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Central New Jersey
Posts: 588
Lightroom Stand Alone Dies

Adobe Max news: We are very close to "game over" for traditional Lightroom. "There will be no Lightroom 7" - not without a subscription, anyway....

Thom has the scoop.

http://www.dslrbodies.com/accessorie...raphy-softwar/
__________________
Chris L.

Still Photographically Uncool
https://www.flickr.com/photos/xenotar/


  Reply With Quote

Old 10-18-2017   #2
froyd
Registered User
 
froyd's Avatar
 
froyd is offline
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,113
Too bad, but the writing has been on the wall for wa while.

I like LR. I don't like the subscription plan.

I figure I have a couple of years before I have to make a decision (I'm on 6 and I usually pdate every two versions) to either subscribe to CC or jump ship. Hopefully there will be some solid alternatives in 2019.

Right now, I fear that some of the programs that would like to grab some of the LR marketshare are not too well established and might fade away in a few years, forcing their users to migrate to other platforms. Still, happy to take names and hear suggestions of good catalog management and editing software that approximate LR usefulness.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-18-2017   #3
Mudman
Registered User
 
Mudman's Avatar
 
Mudman is offline
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Saratoga Springs
Posts: 1,136
At least I can write the expense off on my taxes. I hate having to add another bill to my month but really $10 a month for Photoshop and Lightroom isn't terrible.
__________________
"Dodging and burning are steps to take care of mistakes God made in establishing tonal relationships."
~Ansel Adams
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-18-2017   #4
shawn
Registered User
 
shawn is offline
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,179
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaxElmar View Post
Adobe Max news: We are very close to "game over" for traditional Lightroom. "There will be no Lightroom 7" - not without a subscription, anyway....

Thom has the scoop.

http://www.dslrbodies.com/accessorie...raphy-softwar/
This was stated by Adobe a long time ago. I remember reading it when I purchased my v6 license when it was released. What wasn't stated at the time is the lack of feature parity between v6 and the CC version.

Shawn
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-18-2017   #5
shawn
Registered User
 
shawn is offline
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,179
Quote:
Originally Posted by froyd View Post

Right now, I fear that some of the programs that would like to grab some of the LR marketshare are not too well established and might fade away in a few years, forcing their users to migrate to other platforms. Still, happy to take names and hear suggestions of good catalog management and editing software that approximate LR usefulness.
Affinity Photo is pretty strong for a PS replacement and at $50 it is a steal. Makers of Affinity are working on a cataloging program but it isn't ready yet.

Capture One has many fans too.

Photo Mechanic is supposed to be a very strong catalog system that is built to integrate with other editing programs.

Shawn
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-18-2017   #6
Scapevision
Registered User
 
Scapevision is offline
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Toronto
Posts: 469
There's Adobe Lightroom Classic CC, which is essentially non cloud based version with full features from 6, with a bunch added.
__________________
Flickr
scapevision.ca
Instagram
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-18-2017   #7
Scapevision
Registered User
 
Scapevision is offline
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Toronto
Posts: 469
Quote:
Originally Posted by shawn View Post
Affinity Photo is pretty strong for a PS replacement and at $50 it is a steal. Makers of Affinity are working on a cataloging program but it isn't ready yet.
Shawn
I'd even go as far as stating it's much more user-friendly and functional than PS.
__________________
Flickr
scapevision.ca
Instagram
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-18-2017   #8
Ronald M
Registered User
 
Ronald M is offline
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 4,512
I DON`T WANT A CATALOG PROGRAM 11

Say this 100 times.

I have PS/Bridge/Lr CC and tried to like LR many times and see no advantage. It all can be done in Bridge and ACR. All that is there is complications and trouble.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-18-2017   #9
froyd
Registered User
 
froyd's Avatar
 
froyd is offline
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,113
As far as I know, there's no software that can currently take LR sidecar info and apply the edits to the base image in a way that ccurately replicates the LR endering.

So, does the exit plan involve exporting high-resolution versions of all the virtual copies in my LR collection? Then in my Windows file folder system, as well as potentially the catalog of an alternative photo progarm, I would have several versions of the same image saved as un-related files: Original Scan, Original Scan + baked in LR edits, + various alternate versions (BW, cropped, etc). That could triple the amount of images in my storage overnight!
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-18-2017   #10
nightfly
Registered User
 
nightfly is online now
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,912
I've been using Lightroom 4 for years. No desire for a subscription version.

Should probably try and snag the standalone version 6 while I still can. I found the last non-subscription version of Photoshop 6 somewhere and will use that till it doesn't work anymore.

I have no desire to rent software, especially software where it already does anything I could possibly want it to do and more.

As far as Lightroom goes, I'd probably jump to Capture One as it handles my files a little better and I can buy the latest version outright.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-18-2017   #11
peterm1
Registered User
 
peterm1's Avatar
 
peterm1 is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 5,559
That's a shame. I have been using Lightroom for a while now because I run it in conjunction with Corel Paintshop Pro and Nik plugins. The user is able to link the latter two programs to Lightroom and this allows me drop out of Lightroom anytime I feel the need to use one of the other editing programs to do something Lightroom can't handle (Lightroom is good at basic edits but cant do more complex stuff like layers and so on). I will continue to use my desktop version of Lightroom for as long as I can then go back to using Paintshop Pro directly with Nik Plugins under it although given Google has abandoned Nik I am not sure how long that will be eihter.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-18-2017   #12
michaelwj
----------------
 
michaelwj's Avatar
 
michaelwj is offline
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Brisbane AUS
Posts: 2,106
I'm still on LR5, and have no intention of paying every month. On the plus side, I don't need raw capabilities as I'm only importing scans anyway.

When it finally comes time to move, all I need is a good healing brush for dust and scratch removal and the basic contrast/exposure moves.
__________________
Cheers,
Michael
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-18-2017   #13
Godfrey
somewhat colored
 
Godfrey's Avatar
 
Godfrey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 9,137
Eh. This has been coming a long while.

All of my 'finished' renderings are output as TIFFs anyway, with all changes and edits baked in. The other stuff ... is just raw material. If I have to move, I move.

But by and large, the subscription licensing works and is cheaper. So now, with several years of use having worked out most of the bugs, there really is no point to not doing it if you want to keep going with Lightroom.

G
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-19-2017   #14
willie_901
Registered User
 
willie_901's Avatar
 
willie_901 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,319
Adobe's finances have prospered since the subscription model appeared. It was $34 in October 2012 and closed at $171 today.

Obviously, many customers prefer the subscription-license model.

Adobe has not been hurt. and will not be hurt, by the minority of customers who refuse to use the subscription-license model.

There is zero incentive for Adobe to change.
__________________
Basically, I mean, ah—well, let’s say that for me anyway when a photograph is interesting, it’s interesting because of the kind of photographic problem it states—which has to do with the . . . contest between content and form.
Garry Winogrand
williamchuttonjr.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-19-2017   #15
robert blu
quiet photographer
 
robert blu's Avatar
 
robert blu is online now
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Italy
Age: 70
Posts: 5,906
I'm a satisfied user of LR and PS and find simple and useful the subscription model. Software is always updated without problems.
It cost more or less like one or two rolls of 35mm film a month.
I'm always surprised how people who spend thousand of EUR or $ for cameras and bodies refuse to pay a few coins for the subscription model.
But to each his own...
robert
__________________
Remember: today is the Day !
from Ruth Bernhard recipe for a long and happy life

my quiet photographer's blog

My RFF photos and my albums on RFF
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-20-2017   #16
jarski
Registered User
 
jarski's Avatar
 
jarski is offline
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,567
Time to start transition to C1 for me. Am keeping my LR catalog in Classic, it should still have many years ahead.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-20-2017   #17
johannielscom
Ich bin ein Barnacker
 
johannielscom's Avatar
 
johannielscom is offline
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Universitas Terre Threntiae
Posts: 7,366
Quote:
Originally Posted by willie_901 View Post
Adobe's finances have prospered since the subscription model appeared. It was $34 in October 2012 and closed at $171 today.

Obviously, many customers prefer the subscription-license model.

Adobe has not been hurt. and will not be hurt, by the minority of customers who refuse to use the subscription-license model.

There is zero incentive for Adobe to change.
Which is why Adobe cannot be bothered to make the subscription system available to those who want to pay for it, but by using bank payments or PayPal...

Many people outside the US don't use credit cards but bank debit cards. The customer support guy I spoke to wasn't remotely interested in supporting customers that could not meet Adobe's US-orientated payment standards.
Only credit card (which is what the CC in Adobe's naming convention stands for as far as I'm concerned, Adobe Lightroom Credit Card)


I'll keep running the classic stand alone version indefinitely. I regularly meet other photographers in my home town who still are on machines like a Mac G5 Pros or Windows XP and Photoshop CS and their results are great. Never change a winning workflow!
__________________
Gegroet,
Johan Niels

I write vintage gear reviews on www.johanniels.com |

flickr | instagram |
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-20-2017   #18
gavinlg
Registered User
 
gavinlg's Avatar
 
gavinlg is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Wellington NZ
Posts: 5,078
Not sure if anyones tried CC yet, but it's a piece of crap. Adobe just copied apple photos. The syncing of RAW files to the cloud is excruciatingly slow, and the controls are all dumbed down.
__________________
NO PRAISE
@gavinlagrange
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-20-2017   #19
Peter_S
Registered User
 
Peter_S is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Narvik (Norway); Tbilisi (Georgia)
Posts: 748
Just made the switch to C1 10; and do not regret it at all. More options inside the program without having to use external NIK editors, nice catalogue/sessions layout. Better RAW conversion (subjectively, but its notable across M8/M9/MM files) on top.
Not cheap initially, however (I find the CC suscription not all that bad).
__________________
Contax T3
Leica Monochrom + VL lenses
Sigma DP2 Merrill
--------------------------
www.ps-photo.net
On instagram
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-20-2017   #20
nightfly
Registered User
 
nightfly is online now
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,912
I'm not sure why you say "obviously, many customers prefer the subscription-license model", they don't really have a choice with most of their products. Lightroom was the last holdout.

From Adobe's perspective it's a great model, steady, predictable revenue and cash flow. The market loves that.

From a users perspective there is nothing that I need that Photoshop and Lightroom didn't do several generations ago. Much like they could have stopped developing Microsoft Word around version 5, Photoshop CS 5 or 6 is plenty and I havent' run into anything that Lightroom 4 couldn't do that I required.

They basically have to invent new features to make people perceive value.

Quote:
Originally Posted by willie_901 View Post
Adobe's finances have prospered since the subscription model appeared. It was $34 in October 2012 and closed at $171 today.

Obviously, many customers prefer the subscription-license model.

Adobe has not been hurt. and will not be hurt, by the minority of customers who refuse to use the subscription-license model.

There is zero incentive for Adobe to change.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-20-2017   #21
Luke_Miller
Registered User
 
Luke_Miller's Avatar
 
Luke_Miller is offline
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Rural Virginia
Posts: 130
Quote:
Originally Posted by jarski View Post
Time to start transition to C1 for me. Am keeping my LR catalog in Classic, it should still have many years ahead.
C1 has a subscription option. No guarantee a perpetual licence version will always be available.
__________________
http://lukemiller.photos
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-20-2017   #22
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 46
Posts: 19,952
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scapevision View Post
There's Adobe Lightroom Classic CC, which is essentially non cloud based version with full features from 6, with a bunch added.
This is the route I'll go once I have to. I'll use 6 for now... but if I start using an unsupported camera, I'll go with this option. They used to update LR every year anyway... so instead of $99 upgrade, it will be like $120 a year IIRC.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-20-2017   #23
willie_901
Registered User
 
willie_901's Avatar
 
willie_901 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,319
Quote:
Originally Posted by johannielscom View Post
Which is why Adobe cannot be bothered to make the subscription system available to those who want to pay for it, but by using bank payments or PayPal...

Many people outside the US don't use credit cards but bank debit cards. The customer support guy I spoke to wasn't remotely interested in supporting customers that could not meet Adobe's US-orientated payment standards.
Only credit card (which is what the CC in Adobe's naming convention stands for as far as I'm concerned, Adobe Lightroom Credit Card)


...[/b]
I was unaware of Adobe's US-centric payment policies. Shame on them for not being more flexible.

I pay all my bills automatically using a credit card. Card activity is automatically monitored in real time by via text message from the bank. It is also monitored manually by me using the Mint app. I monitor individual invoicing as well via email or postal mail.

All of this takes less time and effort than a decade ago when I mailed checks on a monthly basis.

Credit card fraud and over-charges are rare but either the bank or I caught them. I have always been promptly protected for any losses. I realize laws in other countries might increase customer risk. In the US, debit cards are riskier than credit cards in terms of fraud protection.
__________________
Basically, I mean, ah—well, let’s say that for me anyway when a photograph is interesting, it’s interesting because of the kind of photographic problem it states—which has to do with the . . . contest between content and form.
Garry Winogrand
williamchuttonjr.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-20-2017   #24
willie_901
Registered User
 
willie_901's Avatar
 
willie_901 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,319
Quote:
Originally Posted by nightfly View Post
I'm not sure why you say "obviously, many customers prefer the subscription-license model", they don't really have a choice with most of their products. Lightroom was the last holdout.

...
People and businesses vote with their pocketbooks. If the subscription model did not add value, Adobe's earnings would have declined and so would their stock price.

Of course, we have a choice. We can stop using Adobe products. Many excellent alternatives exist and many photographers use them. People switch computer operating systems. They switch smartphone platforms. These can be more disruptive than switching post-production workflow.

Decades ago I spent more on hobby-related magazine subscriptions than I do on Adobe CC for photographers. I honestly prefer the subscription model because I always upgraded LR versions anyway.
__________________
Basically, I mean, ah—well, let’s say that for me anyway when a photograph is interesting, it’s interesting because of the kind of photographic problem it states—which has to do with the . . . contest between content and form.
Garry Winogrand
williamchuttonjr.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-20-2017   #25
Godfrey
somewhat colored
 
Godfrey's Avatar
 
Godfrey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 9,137
Quote:
Originally Posted by willie_901 View Post
I was unaware of Adobe's US-centric payment policies. Shame on them for not being more flexible.

I pay all my bills automatically using a credit card. Card activity is automatically monitored in real time by via text message from the bank. It is also monitored manually by me using the Mint app. I monitor individual invoicing as well via email or postal mail.

All of this takes less time and effort than a decade ago when I mailed checks on a monthly basis.

Credit card fraud and over-charges are rare but either the bank or I caught them. I have always been promptly protected for any losses. I realize laws in other countries might increase customer risk. In the US, debit cards are riskier than credit cards in terms of fraud protection.
I use a debit card almost exclusively. I have a credit card but use it ONLY for renting cars when I travel, since the automobile rental world makes using anything else (including cash!) nearly impossible. My debit card is on file with other companies for their monthly subscription services. I've paid for all my Adobe products with it too. So whatever Adobe's policy differences might be for other parts of the world I don't know, but at least for me here in the USA my debit card works just fine.

I have absolutely zero interest in buying a new camera of any kind that would require me to upgrade Lightroom because of camera compatibility. There are no features that I need beyond what I already have either. On that basis, I could use my perpetual license LR6 from now to the end of time on my current Mac mini and MacBook Air systems.

And if I did, well, I've arranged my entire image processing system around the principle that it serves me, not I serve it. If the next version of Lightroom isn't to my liking, I can choose anything else and just swap to it without any pain. I've been organizing my data and workflow with this concept in mind since 2006, when I first moved to Lightroom from Photoshop.

So there's absolutely nothing that Adobe has or will do that will bother me, or surprise me. They're in it for their own good, like every business is or ought to be, and if they make a lot of people happy along the way, well, good on them. They've made me happy most of the time and pissed me off at others; they've always made their profit so they're a success as far as I'm concerned.

In truth, the way the laws of ownership work, the fact that you pay for CC in monthly installments changes very little. You always only rented the software anyway, it was simply a matter of whether it had a fixed total lump sum price for the privilege of using it or whether that price was extracted from you in small monthly injections continuously. Happily, they're giving additional services back for that monthly injection, so it's not entirely a bad thing. If I need/want it.

G
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-20-2017   #26
froyd
Registered User
 
froyd's Avatar
 
froyd is offline
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,113
Quote:
Originally Posted by Godfrey View Post

In truth, the way the laws of ownership work, the fact that you pay for CC in monthly installments changes very little. You always only rented the software anyway, it was simply a matter of whether it had a fixed total lump sum price for the privilege of using it or whether that price was extracted from you in small monthly injections continuously. Happily, they're giving additional services back for that monthly injection, so it's not entirely a bad thing. If I need/want it.

G
But isn't it true that with the subscriptions system, paying the lump sum of $120 still only gets you one year of use? I went from LR4 to 6 only recently. I used it for slightly over 3 years, that's $360 in the current price scheme.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-20-2017   #27
ptpdprinter
Registered User
 
ptpdprinter is offline
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 1,680
Quote:
Originally Posted by Godfrey View Post
All of my 'finished' renderings are output as TIFFs anyway, with all changes and edits baked in. The other stuff ... is just raw material. If I have to move, I move.
I organize my work in a similar manner. I output the images I deem worthy of printing as tifs in designated folders by portfolio so if LR or PS were discontinued or I decided to shift to other software, I wouldn't have a problem. I was initially upset with Adobe's subscription model, but quickly got over it and see its benefits. The monthly subscription fee is the equivalent of a couple of cups of coffee, so not worth worrying about. If you don't like Adobe's business practices, don't use their products. It's that simple. Lots of alternatives out there. Whining about it won't make you a better photographer.
__________________
ambientlightcollection.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-20-2017   #28
MaxElmar
Registered User
 
MaxElmar's Avatar
 
MaxElmar is offline
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Central New Jersey
Posts: 588
Quote:
Originally Posted by willie_901 View Post
Adobe's finances have prospered since the subscription model appeared. It was $34 in October 2012 and closed at $171 today.

Obviously, many customers prefer the subscription-license model.

Adobe has not been hurt. and will not be hurt, by the minority of customers who refuse to use the subscription-license model.

There is zero incentive for Adobe to change.

Agree with most of this except "Obviously, many customers prefer the subscription-license model." It's equally possible - perhaps more likely - that a smaller body of customers is paying substantially more for the use of Adobe's software. And I think that is by design.

Along the same lines - I do not believe Godfrey's assertion that the subscription model is "cheaper." I think for most customers it was a massive price increase - disguised as small change in payment method.

I believe this because I know my employer - a massive Adobe customer with perhaps a thousand or more Adobe licenses - refused to purchase licenses under the subscription model until Adobe relented on pricing back to something a lot closer to the old model. It took about 2.5 years - and I'm pretty sure it wasn't my employer who blinked.

None of this is intended to cast any aspersions on Adobe or their business model. They are absolutely free to charge whatever they like for their product. And make whatever payment arrangements they wish. More profits? Good for them. I think it was a good business decision - fewer customers - skewed towards professionals - that pay a lot more for the product.
__________________
Chris L.

Still Photographically Uncool
https://www.flickr.com/photos/xenotar/


  Reply With Quote

Old 10-20-2017   #29
nightfly
Registered User
 
nightfly is online now
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,912
You are discounting that for much of Adobe's market, professional graphic designers, there really isn't a substitute and that there is a network effect, if your clients and vendors use Adobe, you sorta have to also.

Professional Users aren't jumping to Paintshop Pro or Corel Draw (although Sketch has kicked Adobe's ass, I don't know anyone using XD).

As a hobbyist you can use whatever you want, as a business you have to use what everyone else is using (see Microsoft) even if you don't really like the product or way it is sold.

Adobe makes very good software, but I think it's a mistake to think that people have voted with their pocket books that they like subscription models for software.

Technically there is a choice but practically not so much.

Quote:
Originally Posted by willie_901 View Post
People and businesses vote with their pocketbooks. If the subscription model did not add value, Adobe's earnings would have declined and so would their stock price.

Of course, we have a choice. We can stop using Adobe products. Many excellent alternatives exist and many photographers use them. People switch computer operating systems. They switch smartphone platforms. These can be more disruptive than switching post-production workflow.

Decades ago I spent more on hobby-related magazine subscriptions than I do on Adobe CC for photographers. I honestly prefer the subscription model because I always upgraded LR versions anyway.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-20-2017   #30
Godfrey
somewhat colored
 
Godfrey's Avatar
 
Godfrey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 9,137
Quote:
Originally Posted by froyd View Post
But isn't it true that with the subscriptions system, paying the lump sum of $120 still only gets you one year of use? I went from LR4 to 6 only recently. I used it for slightly over 3 years, that's $360 in the current price scheme.
Yes, absolutely true. Subscription payments presume both ongoing ongoing need and use of the software, ongoing desire for updates and improvement. That's why it's worth buying a subscription if you are actually using the software on an ongoing basis, and not worth it if you don't.

Let's say you were in a heavy period of use and subscribed to LR CC. You incorporated and rendered ten thousand photos over the course of a year, while all that time you had all of LR and Photoshop at your disposal to facilitate that effort. Your finished, rendered works ... however many projects or clients that might be ... cost you a total of $120 in subscription fees.

Now, your work turns a different direction and you stop paying for the subscription. IF you've exported all your finished work to fully finished, baked in image files, well, you don't need Lightroom or Photoshop to display and view those photos. There are dozens of free tools that do that, and most come with any computer you're likely to use today. So you save your LR catalog and your original file repository and put it aside, you view, organize, and share your photos in your choice of image viewing tools.

However, if your photography work picks up again, you just re-up with your subscription, reactivate your LR and PS installation, download the latest updated LR and PS additions, and keep going with the work. Whatever you get through doing that has been updated for whatever OS changes, etc, have happened during your hiatus.

There's not much of a downside to it, in my view. It might cost a little more if you only use the software once in a while.

G
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-20-2017   #31
PKR
Registered User
 
PKR is offline
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 2,489
In the past few years, I've been at small events where Adobe executives were present and sometimes responsible for the event (I was working).

In listening to conversations with Adobe people voicing their opinion of their customers: They want control of all media rights (photos, videos) to anything that enters their web system. They aren't there yet. They want to own/control any techniques that customers have (invented) for using their products, and monetize these in the future.

In short, they are no different than Mark Zuckerberg when he said:
https://www.tomsguide.com/us/Faceboo...news-6794.html

(Edit: After thinking about this, I remembered another of their business plans: To get experienced PS LR users to provide "unpaid" customer support for their products via the "web community model". Experienced users, often pros, would be put into "talk groups" where they would exchange techniques for using various PS LR tools. After this grouping became a successful meeting place, unexperienced members would be given access (paid) to the archived knowledge base. In development of this plan, the experienced user group would be leveraged into providing (unknowingly?) customer support for new users who paid to have access to the pro user group. It's just business.)

After being exposed to these people and their view of the "idiots who trust us", I've quit updating any Adobe products, except Adobe Reader, which is free and necessary for my work.

Just my two cents.
pkr
__________________
The camera is an instrument that teaches people how to see without a camera. Dorothea Lange
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-20-2017   #32
MaxElmar
Registered User
 
MaxElmar's Avatar
 
MaxElmar is offline
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Central New Jersey
Posts: 588
It is true now, maybe you could save a few dollars with the "insy-outsy" - but it won't be very long before Adobe decides any interruption in its cash flow is unacceptable. Cable companies figured this game out a long time ago. Disincentives will follow. Soon the $9.95 special rate will be "for new subscribers only." Soon the push (special pricing) will be only towards the online version - where your work will truly be captive. If you think my cable company analogy is excessive, you're not really paying attention to the 21st century. PKR is right on the money. We've seen this movie before...
__________________
Chris L.

Still Photographically Uncool
https://www.flickr.com/photos/xenotar/


  Reply With Quote

Old 10-20-2017   #33
bobbyrab
Registered User
 
bobbyrab is offline
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Glasgow
Posts: 675
Quote:
Originally Posted by PKR View Post
In listening to conversations with Adobe people voicing their opinion of their customers: They want control of all media rights (photos, videos) to anything that enters their web system. They aren't there yet. They want to own/control any techniques that customers have (invented) for using their products, and monetize these in the future.

pkr
Did they cackle and mention stealing your first born?
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-20-2017   #34
ptpdprinter
Registered User
 
ptpdprinter is offline
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 1,680
The sky is falling, the sky is falling. Seriously, given the alternatives available, I am sure everyone can find a solution that best fits his needs.
__________________
ambientlightcollection.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-20-2017   #35
PKR
Registered User
 
PKR is offline
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 2,489
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobbyrab View Post
Did they cackle and mention stealing your first born?
These are business people who care about money and their stockholders .. simple. I've worked with cut throat bankers (annual report photography) who had more interest in their customers than the Adobe Execs. I met. Others in these events, were Execs. from Apple, MS, Fed-x, UPS, EBay, Sales Force, a bunch of international bankers, etc. The only people, more openly greedy and less caring about their customers than the Adobe people (in my opinion), were the people from EBay.

It seems your experience in the business world is much different than mine?


Citation:

"Adobe, you promised: “future versions of Lightroom will be made available via traditional perpetual licenses indefinitely”

Read more: https://photorumors.com/2017/10/18/a...#ixzz4w5d2xx5q

x
__________________
The camera is an instrument that teaches people how to see without a camera. Dorothea Lange
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-20-2017   #36
Godfrey
somewhat colored
 
Godfrey's Avatar
 
Godfrey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 9,137
Quote:
Originally Posted by ptpdprinter View Post
The sky is falling, the sky is falling.

Seriously, given the alternatives available, I am sure everyone can find a solution that best fits his needs.
Thumbs up. :-)

G
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-20-2017   #37
PKR
Registered User
 
PKR is offline
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 2,489
Quote:
Originally Posted by Godfrey View Post
Thumbs up. :-)

G
Lots, C1, Photo Mechanic, etc. The Knoll bros can't be happy with what their company became.

Edit: I'm wrong, Tom says it's cool.
https://spectrum.ieee.org/view-from-...r-of-photoshop
__________________
The camera is an instrument that teaches people how to see without a camera. Dorothea Lange
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-20-2017   #38
Bob Michaels
nobody special
 
Bob Michaels's Avatar
 
Bob Michaels is offline
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Apopka FL (USA)
Age: 75
Posts: 3,764
There is a easy way to love Adobe as a company while using their products. Simply become an investor in Adobe by buying some of the stock along with paying for their products, either buying or renting. Adobe stock is up 654% in the last eight years. Don't stand on the side and gripe about Adobe only being interested in making profits for their shareholders. Be one of them.

As a user, I am not happy at all with their subscription based pricing model.

As someone who owns a tiny tiny piece of Adobe, I love their new subscription based pricing model.
__________________
http://www.bobmichaels.org
internet forums appear to have an abundance of anonymous midgets prancing on stilts
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-20-2017   #39
stompyq
Registered User
 
stompyq is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: NYC
Posts: 1,572
I moved to capture one from adobe earlier this year anticipating this. No regrets. The DAM side is not as refined as lightroom but the raw development is better (at least for me). No regrets
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-21-2017   #40
willie_901
Registered User
 
willie_901's Avatar
 
willie_901 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,319
Quote:
Originally Posted by nightfly View Post
You are discounting that for much of Adobe's market, professional graphic designers, there really isn't a substitute and that there is a network effect, if your clients and vendors use Adobe, you sorta have to also.

Professional Users aren't jumping to Paintshop Pro or Corel Draw (although Sketch has kicked Adobe's ass, I don't know anyone using XD).

...
What you describe is an aspect of value-added product pricing. If working with clients and collaborators pays the bills and enables you to grow your business, there is value. You pay a premium for that value.

For hobbyists, the value proposition primarily involves personal convenience rather than compatibility with others. Hobbies are supposed to be fun. Switching to a new post-production platform is not fun.

Photoshop CC adds values too. If one is a skilled PS user then the role of LR could be different compared to somebody like me who only uses PD under severe duress.
__________________
Basically, I mean, ah—well, let’s say that for me anyway when a photograph is interesting, it’s interesting because of the kind of photographic problem it states—which has to do with the . . . contest between content and form.
Garry Winogrand
williamchuttonjr.com
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 09:42.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.