Don W-37 Loc: Bangkok, Thailand

Hello again,
UPDATE: So I tried to download the trial version of Luminar for 30 minutes, but no luck. My ESET NOD 32 antivirus kept blocking it. Claims their site poses a threat. I doubt that, but it didn't give me an override option. So I gave up.

Instead, I downloaded Affinity. Subscribed on my little 14" notebook that I use when travelling. Just entered my existing key and it promptly downloaded to my new HP 17" Envy laptop. (I use it as a desktop.) Opens fine. No hassle; no fuss. No antivirus blockage.

I didn't like Affinity on my small laptop because the icons were too small for me. Looks better on this big one. So I'll try it when I have time and let everyone know the results.
Cheers everyone,
Don

Bill_de Loc: US

I agree. With free trials folks should try at least a few options. I also believe that Photoshop is the only way to go for many people. My comment about having blinders on was referring to those who use Photoshop based on being told it is the best, praise it for all its features, even though they will never go beyond cropping and sharpening. I bought every other update to PS from version #3 through CS5. I came to the realization, being honest with myself, that PS had outgrown me. I still use CS5 on occasion, but Elements has progressed over the years that it does most everything I want. Elements+ ($12) which opens up some PS features within Elements brings it even closer.

When I get the urge to play (my photography is all recreational) I turn to On1 and sometimes PaintShop. If something looks new or different I download the trial.

--

DirtFarmer Loc: Escaped from the NYC area, back to MA

"very expensive" is a subjective term. It does not fit my experience with Adobe.

Any hobby costs money (I'm assuming that most of us are not professionals). Some hobbies cost more than others. Yes, you can do photography "on the cheap side" but I believe the results speak for themselves. Having the best tools (my opinion) does not guarantee success, but it makes it easier to attain.

What did you spend on your camera? Lenses?

I spend significantly more on impulse purchases than I spend on the Adobe subscription. In my opinion, I get value from my Adobe subscription, much more than I get from my impulse purchases.

I don't like to spend money on the things that are not important to me. If that's your position, and the software is not important to you, then feel free to continue as is. Adobe contributes to me a portion of the pleasure I derive from photography (although many photographers would probably classify 99% of my photos to be "snapshots"). Everyone is entitled to their own opinion as to value.

AndyH Loc: Massachusetts and New Hampshire

I am a convert to the subscription model, although a reluctant one. $120 per year is about three tanks of gas for my truck, or the cost of three day trips around New England. If it were twice that, I might go back to the old model, but this is a fraction of what we spend on travel, processing, road food, mattes, frames, etc. I waste more than that on many other frivolous or downright stupid purchases, and I've found Lightroom to save me hours of post-processing time.

As always, just my opinion...

Andy

johnbhome2 Loc: Wyoming, Michigan

There will come a day in the not to distant future where arguing and insulting folks on there choices for post processing or not will be moot. If you have used a newer cell phone lately I rest my case. I can make the same choices I make on a DSLR. The only difference being the glass and the sensor size. If the OEM'S don't take the ease of shooting and/or processing photos that phone cameras have they are going to go the way of the DoDo bird. I am sure I have rankled a few purists as well as professional photo shooters but there will always be a need for you. My money will be on the first OEM camera maker to take advantage of the technology that exists and integrates the taking of photos from snapshot to post with archival abilities as well as presets. As a rank amateur the last thing I want to do is come home from a shoot and sit down in front of a computer processing photos. Plus, isn't the most important factor actually going out and shooting photos.

DirtFarmer Loc: Escaped from the NYC area, back to MA

Cell phone cameras are reportedly getting better all the time. I don't believe they will reach the IQ of the DSLR, primarily because of the sensor size. But they have certainly surpassed the DSLR in convenience, and I suspect that's 90% of the game for a lot of people.

I take an occasional photo with my phone but I'm always disappointed with the results when I try to blow it up. Maybe it's because my phone is 2 years old, but I doubt that's the problem. Part of it is me, since I have been known to nitpick at the pixel level occasionally. Part of it is me because I'm a dinosaur. Part of it is me because I like to look at large photos, not 3" photos on my phone screen. But I don't define the needs of the general photographer.

I think there will be a market for DSLRs but it will diminish over time because of the shift in what people will put up with. And the lifetime of peoples photos is decreasing so the quality isn't as important as it once was. How many times does a photo show up on facebook that's more than a day old?

Bill_de Loc: US

Nikon stated not all that long ago as part of their restructuring plan that they were going to concentrate more on higher end cameras. My guess is that they see cell phones beginning to take a bite out of the point and shoot business. Now, instead of arguing whether it is better to rent or buy software, everything will be updated every year or two with a new phone. That is not a segment to be trifled with.

--

DavidPine Loc: Fredericksburg, TX

Must have been in Phoenix. This guy is happy about showing his package.

(Download)

DavidPine Loc: Fredericksburg, TX

I am being sort of misquoted or misunderstood. I did not say that everyone should use anything. I tried to imply that when we are giving advice to newbies do not short-change them. They should learn the ins and outs of the best post-processing software in the friggin world. Just because you've been around or you are in a rut or you are just cheap doesn't mean that you should not give the best possible advice to a new person. If they cannot afford $10 a month to be exposed to and have the opportunity to dance with the processing queen – they will tell you. Some of the poorest advice I have been given is to do something cheaply. It always costs me for the cheap items because I ended up with the proper item. Some of these newbies are sporting a $30,000 motorcycle or $50,000 boat or some-such. Photography is a reasonable hobby/profession and you should start with what you "can afford" and not "what's cheapest." Post processing, today, is an important function in digital photography. It takes a camera kit, a computer, and software — they all play a significant role. Remember, when giving advice to newbies give them the best you can for them. Not what we do. I use 5 or 6 software programs but I darn sure won't tell them to do what I do.

DavidPine Loc: Fredericksburg, TX

Baboons are not always easy to photograph. They turn their backs on you or sport their package when the face you. Their eyes are usually difficult to catch. The Mandrill is my favorite baboon type primate because they are so colorful.

(Download)

Quantus5

Hmmm. I'd rather have the three tanks of gas.

As always MHO. Over a 3 year period that nine tanks of gas -- or around $360. ;-)

AndyH Loc: Massachusetts and New Hampshire

I look at it this way. I used to have(actually STILL have) several thousand dollars invested in darkroom equipment, not including chemistry and paper. If I can do everything I used to do (and more) for ten bucks a month, why wouldn’t I? 😜

Andy

Quantus5

The best we can do for the newbie is let them know there is choice, and plenty of great choices -- and that every choice has their pros and cons, and educate them on those pros and cons.

The newbie is then able to make the optimal choice based on their needs, as everyone has different needs. There is no "best".

Quantus5

The comparison here would be that there are 5 brands of darkroom equipment -- and that one brand (Brand X) is 5 times more expensive than the other 4. (i.e. $360 versus $50 over a 3 year period).

For arguments sake, lets even say that Brand X is slightly better ("Better" being a subjective term, than the four other brands. Do you go with Brand X or not? Maybe, maybe not.

By all means hold onto or buy your darkroom equipment, but why not go with Brand Y or Brand X, and save yourself a lot of money. :-)

Why not pay $2 or $3 a month (over a three year period) instead? i.e. Affinity, Luminar, PaintShop Pro.

Quantus5

Yes -- PSE is a great option.