Ugly Hedgehog® - Photography Forum
Photo editing software - not subscription based
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 13 next>>
Dec 1, 2019 14:26:05   #
jbmauser Loc: Roanoke, VA
 
I think Affinity is a replacement for Photoshop. I use lightroom as my primary processing and catalog and I export to Affinity and Nik for the tools they have when I want tools outside of Lightroom then the images are brought back into LR5 for storage location and export Works well to replace Adobe suite.

| Reply
Dec 1, 2019 15:18:53   #
Blenheim Orange Loc: Michigan
 
Ysarex wrote:
If you have a lot of images some type of database management can be very helpful (yes, sorting and labeling etc.). I made mention of Affinity's lack of that ability because it was mentioned as a replacement for LR. LR is as much about image database management as it is about image editing. As such that makes Affinity and most of what other's recommend for LR replacement as replacing something with nothing.

Joe


Thanks.

Mike

| Reply
Dec 1, 2019 18:21:33   #
CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City
 
The Devil wouldn't buy our empty soul. He sets up a subscription.

| Reply
Dec 1, 2019 19:14:17   #
AndyH Loc: Massachusetts and New Hampshire
 
bsprague wrote:
It's the "principle" of it, not the cost of it. It's a big, even giant, multinational corporation that invented a way to steal from you monthly. If enough people make it painful on the world wide web, the burglars will go back to the old way.

It's like Amazon. I (should) refuse to buy from them because it is their fault that the local retailer with the high list prices and weak inventory went out of business.


I fail to see the analogy. Like any software, you are renting the use (licensing) of a product that has taken thousands of person-hours to develop, and thousands more to keep up to date. It's just like any other service you purchase. If you "buy" a license and expect perpetual support, I think you are the one expecting something for nothing. It's not Amazon's "fault" that local retailers are struggling - it is the nature of the free market and inventiveness. By the same logic, it's Henry Ford's fault that the local buggy whip maker is out of business, and Canikonsonysonic's that you can't buy any current high quality film cameras. I'd rather have a P-51 than an F-35, but I don't expect my country to start purchasing Mustangs for national defense.

If you don't want to rent your software, then use freeware or learn to code and spend a few thousand hours creating your own.

I do understand some people's objecting to this method of selling, but in the long run it is far better for both users and developers, and nets the customer better and more up to date software at a lower price. That's why nearly all software companies are switching to this model. It's the future, no matter whether we like it or not, and companies that don't move to this model will eventually not be able to keep up with those who do. The freeware or shareware developers just can't keep up with the firms that have a regular and predictable income stream, and the price for less capable "perpetual license" software seems to be increasing.

I'd say Capture One or similar are your only current choices, and you should get it now, because the price is sure to rise.

Sorry, but that's the reality of the marketplace these days.

Andy

| Reply
Dec 1, 2019 19:35:21   #
Blenheim Orange Loc: Michigan
 
AndyH wrote:
Like any software, you are renting the use (licensing) of a product that has taken thousands of person-hours to develop, and thousands more to keep up to date.


That is not true with most software. Success in the software business involves developing a monopoly and then using that to establish an ongoing predictable passive revenue stream which can then be leveraged in various ways. That works against innovation. The person-hours are for sales and marketing, for developing cute gimmicks, and for protecting the monopoly through various means.

A graduate student at the University of Michigan wrote Photoshop in his spare time in 1987. I met him at the time and knew some of the first people to use the original versions. I trust that Adobe took good care of him, but nevertheless, as is the case with PDF, Adobe's talent lies in creating monopolies, controlling software that others created, and holding all of us hostage.

The popular "keeping up to date" ruse is part of an ongoing effort on the part of there assorted sharks in the industry to gain more control over the users. It also allows the software vendor to turn us all into involuntary beta testers.

Mike

| Reply
Dec 1, 2019 20:28:15   #
bsprague Loc: Near Tacoma, WA, USA
 
Blenheim Orange wrote:
Wow. Amen.




Mike

Mike,

I was being facetious. If I'm going to be solemn and serious I think the Adobe photography $10/month bundle is one of the all time best bargains in photography. How much did you spend to shoot film?

Bill

| Reply
Dec 1, 2019 20:38:45   #
bsprague Loc: Near Tacoma, WA, USA
 
AndyH wrote:
I fail to see the analogy. Like any software, you are renting the use (licensing) of a product that has taken thousands of person-hours to develop, and thousands more to keep up to date. It's just like any other service you purchase. If you "buy" a license and expect perpetual support, I think you are the one expecting something for nothing. It's not Amazon's "fault" that local retailers are struggling - it is the nature of the free market and inventiveness. By the same logic, it's Henry Ford's fault that the local buggy whip maker is out of business, and Canikonsonysonic's that you can't buy any current high quality film cameras. I'd rather have a P-51 than an F-35, but I don't expect my country to start purchasing Mustangs for national defense.

If you don't want to rent your software, then use freeware or learn to code and spend a few thousand hours creating your own.

I do understand some people's objecting to this method of selling, but in the long run it is far better for both users and developers, and nets the customer better and more up to date software at a lower price. That's why nearly all software companies are switching to this model. It's the future, no matter whether we like it or not, and companies that don't move to this model will eventually not be able to keep up with those who do. The freeware or shareware developers just can't keep up with the firms that have a regular and predictable income stream, and the price for less capable "perpetual license" software seems to be increasing.

I'd say Capture One or similar are your only current choices, and you should get it now, because the price is sure to rise.

Sorry, but that's the reality of the marketplace these days.

Andy
I fail to see the analogy. Like any software, you ... (show quote)

"I fail to see the analogy." Me too. I was trying to be funny. The reality of the marketplace is that the Photographer's plan with five versions of Lightroom, Photoshop and a personal website thrown it is one hell of a bargain. Nobody seems to know for sure, but there are reports in business journals of up to 10 MILLION paying subscribers.

Look in my signature. I am an "Adobe Community Professional". It is a fun, invitation only, unpaid job where about 300 of us worldwide answer questions on Adobe's help forum. This morning I helped a German figure something out. Yesterday it was a Frenchman.

I confess to being an Adobe fanboy.

Bill

| Reply
Dec 1, 2019 20:59:45   #
Blenheim Orange Loc: Michigan
 
bsprague wrote:
Mike,

I was being facetious. If I'm going to be solemn and serious I think the Adobe photography $10/month bundle is one of the all time best bargains in photography. How much did you spend to shoot film?

Bill


I spent as much as I wanted to spend, whenever I wanted to spend it, and the film company did not have access to my camera.

Back in the day in Detroit businesses paid a very modest monthly fee for "protection." It was one of the best bargains around.

Mike

| Reply
Dec 1, 2019 22:41:19   #
mwsilvers Loc: Central New Jersey
 
buzzyd wrote:
So, let's have it, what would you recommend that is not subscription based - so no LR, PS, CC for example.

Just a bit of detail -- I shoot mostly raw (Nikon DLSR both DX and FX). I also shoot IR, so support for those kinds of editing would be useful as well.

Thanks for the recommendations!


If you shoot mostly raw, want the best raw conversions, no longer want to use Lightroom, and are not deterred by the expense, the two best choices are Phase One's Capture One Pro 12 and DXO's PhotoLab 3 Elite. If you want something inexpensive that will allow you to emulate PhotoShop, and are willing to compromise on the raw promising module, then Affinity is your best choice. However, as a 100% raw shooter myself, Affinity's Develop persona, used for editing raw files, has too many serious limitations compared to all the better raw converters/processors available. If top of the line raw processing is not a priority for you, then Affinity may be your best bet.

| Reply
Dec 1, 2019 23:08:56   #
jbmauser Loc: Roanoke, VA
 
Andy, can you consider the fact that the subscription pricing structure that Adobe put in place was implemented because they had achieved a position of market supremacy and all all commercial art and publishing as well as serious and professional photographers had no where else to go to maintain the quality of their work. Do you think they could turn to Gimp? They had the world by the balls so they implemented a parasitic pricing structure. Yes, I said Parasitic as in sucking off the host as long as it lives. This has created a market for completion and innovation for those who do not make their living using PS or LR. If you make your living requiring a late model car you lease it, if not you buy it maintain it and drive it till you need to replace it. If you make your living with CSS then you lease it if not you buy a program and use it till you need something else. One more point. Adobe has no pressure to innovate do they? They have a locked in income stream. They may add features but there is no desperation to roll out new products and features to make their numbers each quarter do they? They do not have to make it each day.

| Reply
Dec 2, 2019 00:17:51   #
Leitz Loc: West of London
 
buzzyd wrote:
So, let's have it, what would you recommend that is not subscription based - so no LR, PS, CC for example.
Just a bit of detail -- I shoot mostly raw (Nikon DLSR both DX and FX). I also shoot IR, so support for those kinds of editing would be useful as well. Thanks for the recommendations!

There is a listing of free software in the Post Processing Digital Images section:
https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/s-116-1.html

| Reply
Dec 2, 2019 00:54:05   #
Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)
 
bsprague wrote:
It's the "principle" of it, not the cost of it. It's a big, even giant, multinational corporation that invented a way to steal from you monthly. If enough people make it painful on the world wide web, the burglars will go back to the old way.

It's like Amazon. I (should) refuse to buy from them because it is their fault that the local retailer with the high list prices and weak inventory went out of business.


I boil it down to practicalities.

1. Is it good software?
2. Is it properly maintained by the publishers?
3. Does it cost considerably more than other software?
4. Is it stable on my computer?
5. Does it work for me?
6. Is there a better tool to do what I need to do?

My answers are y, y, n, y, y, n. So do I really care about how they've decided to have me pay for the license? Absolutely not? And any nonsense about "principles" is horse manure, especially when you characterize Adobe as a thief - which is defined as "one that steals especially stealthily or secretly also : one who commits theft or larceny." I see absolutely no justification for your cynicism. I do not feel like I am being taken advantage of, I do feel that I am getting my money's worth, and Adobe is 100% in the open - no stealth here. I don't fall for the conspiracy theory you are promoting.

If you are thinking that one day Adobe will "see the light" and return to a permanent license model, I would not hold my breath. Adobe software has become so much cheaper and better with the subscription model. CS6 Extended cost $1000, and if you were upgrading from the previous version it was $400. I am over the moon on the current pricing, I have saved $100s ever since they went subscription.

I seriously doubt they are going to go back to permanent license just to satisfy the tiny number of Luddites, and risk losing millions of subscribers. BTW, there are close to 10,000,000 subscribers to Adobe software. That would put you clearly in the minority.

I would love to see how you would address the "principle" theory with your cable company, gas company, mortgage lender, magazines and newspapers that you get in the mail or delivered on a regular basis, etc etc etc. Subscriptions for software have proven to be extremely efficient business models that absolutely work for all three stakeholders - the enduser, company and its shareholders. Everyone wins. At the end of the day it's all about principle - and company policies that increase revenue AND benefit the enduser are good business.

Now, if you are of the sort that just doesn't recognize the costs involved in delivering and maintaining software, preferring to use "free" software or using software that must be paid for without paying for it - then that is another conversation about principles. After seeing the subscription models for Adobe and MS software, I wish all companies would move to that model.

| Reply
Dec 2, 2019 01:04:45   #
Blenheim Orange Loc: Michigan
 
Gene51 wrote:
I boil it down to practicalities.

1. Is it good software?
2. Is it properly maintained by the publishers?
3. Does it cost considerably more than other software?
4. Is it stable on my computer?
5. Does it work for me?
6. Is there a better tool to do what I need to do?

My answers are y, y, n, y, y, n. So do I really care about how they've decided to have me pay for the license? Absolutely not? And any nonsense about "principles" is horse manure, especially when you characterize Adobe as a thief - which is defined as "one that steals especially stealthily or secretly also : one who commits theft or larceny." I see absolutely no justification for your cynicism. I do not feel like I am being taken advantage of, I do feel that I am getting my money's worth, and Adobe is 100% in the open - no stealth here. I don't fall for the conspiracy theory you are promoting.

If you are thinking that one day Adobe will "see the light" and return to a permanent license model, I would not hold my breath. Adobe software has become so much cheaper and better with the subscription model. CS6 Extended cost $1000, and if you were upgrading from the previous version it was $400. I am over the moon on the current pricing, I have saved $100s ever since they went subscription.

I seriously doubt they are going to go back to permanent license just to satisfy the tiny number of Luddites, and risk losing millions of subscribers. BTW, there are close to 10,000,000 subscribers to Adobe software. That would put you clearly in the minority.

I would love to see how you would address the "principle" theory with your cable company, gas company, mortgage lender, magazines and newspapers that you get in the mail or delivered on a regular basis, etc etc etc. Subscriptions for software have proven to be extremely efficient business models that absolutely work for all three stakeholders - the enduser, company and its shareholders. Everyone wins. At the end of the day it's all about principle - and company policies that increase revenue AND benefit the enduser are good business.

Now, if you are of the sort that just doesn't recognize the costs involved in delivering and maintaining software, preferring to use "free" software or using software that must be paid for without paying for it - then that is another conversation about principles. After seeing the subscription models for Adobe and MS software, I wish all companies would move to that model.
I boil it down to practicalities. br br 1. Is it... (show quote)


We disagree on this one.

Mike

| Reply
Dec 2, 2019 05:59:59   #
billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont
 
buzzyd wrote:
So, let's have it, what would you recommend that is not subscription based - so no LR, PS, CC for example.

Just a bit of detail -- I shoot mostly raw (Nikon DLSR both DX and FX). I also shoot IR, so support for those kinds of editing would be useful as well.

Thanks for the recommendations!


I have intel core 13 on my computer and comes with a their version of processing. Free and effective, below is a shot processed through the computers free photo editing software. Most of the computers I have used come with this free editing software.



| Reply
Dec 2, 2019 06:07:45   #
johneccles Loc: Leyland UK
 
bsprague wrote:
First hit on a google search:

"So, let's take a look at some of the best photo editing software available online.

Adobe Lightroom. Adobe is truly the gold-standard when it comes to image editing software. ...
Skylum Luminar. ...
Adobe Photoshop. ...
Capture One. ...
ON1 Photo RAW. ...
Corel PaintShop Pro. ...
ACDSee Photo Studio Ultimate. ...
Gimp."


You have forgotten one the best "Zoner Photo Studio)

| Reply
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 13 next>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2020 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.