traderjohn Loc: New York City

Adobe offers 3-4 programs for $120.00 a year. How is that not keeping cost down?

Ysarex Loc: St. Louis

Planning to use any major editor is, surely, photographers recognizing the inadequacies of the camera's processing software and insisting on a level of quality that rejects the compromises those inadequacies require.

Joe

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

Nobody in its own mind will deny that Photoshop is the standard editing program. Affinity Photo is reasonably priced and once learned it can do a great job and more.
Today it is my secondary program behind manufacturer's editors.

Ysarex Loc: St. Louis

I'm going to agree with Adobe on this and acknowledge that, for photographers, Lightroom is the standard editing program. For photographers, Photoshop has been dethroned and the company that dethroned Photoshop is Adobe.

Joe

Fotoartist Loc: Detroit, Michigan

I will agree with you. LR is the standard program for photographers. PS is the all inclusive program for photographers, videographers, and graphic artists.

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

I wouldn't call it the standard, although it could easily be used more than Photoshop by most photographers. Of course not everyone needs the depth of Photoshop and can make do with cropping and some basic color functions. Most of my images stop at Lightroom and only about 10% go through Photoshop (then back to Lightroom).

(and I note that "quote reply" isn't working at present. I had to manually add the quote reference above. EDIT: the problem seems to be limited to that post).

hassighedgehog Loc: Corona, CA

It is a moot argument to me. I have yet to exhaust the abilities of Photoshop Elements (on 15 now, started on original).

Joecosentino Loc: Whitesboro, New York

For everyday photography there is only a hand full of tools to use in photoshop. Some people try to save a photo that is dead on arrival. Once dead all the photoshop in the world is not going to bring it back.

You can doo about 98% of your editing in LR. I use photoshop as an expensive clone and spot removal tool. M6 guess is that is a feature that will never transfer to LR. So we subscribers both

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

Not sure how you define "everyday photography", but it is true that a lot of the Photoshop tools involve things that most people don't consider, like adding, removing, or replacing elements of the image. As far as cloning and spot removal, LR has that available, albeit in a simpler way than PS.

You can just subscribe to Lightroom and not Photoshop if you pick one of the plans that has a lot of cloud storage attached, or even if you go for the individual program, but it's really cost effective to get the Photography Package which includes LR and PS. So you might as well use PS since it's in the package.

Brucej67 Loc: Cary, NC

I agree with you (I have both plus a few more editors), the only benefit, besides the price that I see is the ability of Affinity to open PSD files, so in case you give up or lose Photoshop you can still edit your PSD files.

bwana Loc: Bergen, Alberta, Canada

I use both. Each has its pros and cons BUT Affinity Photo as a ways to go before it dethrones Photoshop!

bwa

Delderby Loc: Derby UK

Affinity is already the proprietary editor providing what the majority of photographers need at an amazing price. There are pro photogs who need the different philosophies provided by Photoshop. There is room for both.

Paul Diamond Loc: Atlanta, GA, USA

Photoshop vs. ....... only Affinity? What about all the other capable contenders? All have been discussed here in the past. Whatever tool is better/easier to use to achieve the results you want is the winner. The end result is the #1 determinant.

I use many packages, more to learn about each of them to qualify my opinion for UHH users. My PS goes back to the 90's. Bad experience with Adobe online service, will never go back. I have CS6 on my computers and no link to Adobe online. My files are mine, not as hostage in the Adobe cloud.

If enough software developers come out with competitive packages to Photoshop, they will carve out a market for themselves and continue to work on their software in the future. I'm a firm believer in the power of competition to encourage all players in the game, any game.

Jwshelton Loc: Denver,CO

We got it the first three times you said it!

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

Not sure how you determine what the majority of photographers need. I would expect that to be kind of a low bar, since there are a lot of photographers who just take photos for social media (displayed on 2" screens).

The price is not really an issue. LR/PS is available at an amazing price. Particularly compared to what it used to cost. $10/month is in the noise for a lot of people.

I agreee that if we're discussing LR/PS alternatives, Affinity is not the only contender.

CS6 is historical software. Will not get updates. I prefer the current software, which has nice features not available in those days. And my files are on my computer, not in the cloud. Creative Cloud is a terrible name. It implies something that is not true: that you will be working in the cloud. That is available, but is not the case for LR Classic.

Competition is healthy. It will push Adobe to keep ahead of everyone else. They have a good head start. Hopefully they will keep at it.

Still, my money is on Adobe. Partly from inertia. I'm getting too old to spend a lot of time trying new software just because it's there. LR/PS does what I need it to do. If it didn't, or if it ceases to do so in the future I will deal with it then.