junglejim1949 Loc: Sacramento,CA

I am not a fan of a
subscription model or cloud based.
I have looked at Luminar Neo and ON1.
Does anyone had experience with either software?

montephoto

Did you do a search for either one of these on Ugly Hedgehog?
There is limited discussion for Luminar Neo and lots of discussion for ON1.

junglejim1949 Loc: Sacramento,CA

Thanks I will check it out.

Mike D. Loc: Crowley County, CO.

That makes two of us Jim.

I have Luminar AI and NEO. Like most things they have their strenghts and weaknesses but if you don't do heavy editing, NEO should suffice.

My biggest issue is that I am running these programs on a laptop that is roughly 6 years old. The short of it is that said computer has an i5 processor with only 2 gb of RAM which is on the bottom of the Luminar barrel. To make a long story short, I don't do a lot of editing because the computer is simply not up to the task.

If you had at least an i7 with 8-16 gb of RAM and a graphics card with its own memory, then you would have no problems.

You could always download the trial version and then buy the key if you like it.

Guzser02

I have experience with On1. Once you are comfortable with global editing, you'll turn your attention to local editing, and here you'll see how important masking is to that process. In my opimion, On1 is unparalleled when it comes to masking.
On1 is a parametric editor that (to use your words) stand(s) alone.

JBGLADSTONE Loc: Oregon

I am using ON1 2023.5 as a stand alone editor. You can download a 14 day free trial to see if the layout makes sense to you. Give ON1 a try.

My editing started with PS10 and eventually moved to PS15. Plus, I was using the free Canon DPP4.

I started with ON1 about 4-5 years ago. I am slow to learn and remember, however, ON1 has made it much easier for me to use the lay out. It just flows. { I really recommend you find the YouTube Video from ON1 for getting started. A few major setups will make you life easier when editing. } . Another thing I like is monthly or more live webinars. Each of these really spotlights features and techniques. { I have taken a number of editing techniques and use them when taking my photographs. Yes, ON1 is helping me to become better }

Another way I use ON1, I do not log my pictures into a database. Yes, I should but I am lazy. ON1 has a great method. I would advise you to use it. I just have my pictures on an SD card. I then copy and paste to my Desktop Folder " 2023/Month/Date/ Ready to Print". I then copy and paste to my external HD

ON1 can be as simple "auto editor". By that I mean you can 1] load a picture and select Edit, 2] Crop, 3] Select Develop/Tone Color, 4] AI Auto, 5] Maybe open Effects and select Dynamics Contrast, Then press Export, Name and you are done. The list just took me 45 seconds from start to finish.
Oh for sure, you can spend minutes up to hours editing a Photograph. Either trying new effects or changing Effects or Filters. I guess what I am saying; "ON1 grows with you and always leaves you with more capabilities to learn".

My camera is a Canon 80D, crop sensor and my Canon lens are very good they are not Professional level.
This where ON1 really helps me with 2 features to help my camera system provide quality images.
"NoNoise AI" for reducing noise and helps with sharpness.
"Resize" for printing my final photographs, really makes sure my enlargements retain quality.

Klickitatdave Loc: Seattle Washington

I have tried both and have continued to use Luminar Neo because it is much easier to navigate within the program. At least for my needs it did. It is considerably more reliant upon AI than ON1 which is both an asset and at times a liability. It really depends on what level of photoprocessing you are wanting because ON1 from my perspective is aimed more at professionals than is Neo. That is not to say that Neo is not professionally capable because some professionals do use it. As far as stand-alone programs I really like Affinity Photo. Sophisticated enough that it compares favorably with PS but is also more intuitive than the former. You pay once and it is yours. Luminar Neo on the other pushes addons and has recently moved towards a hybrid subscription model. Hopefully, this helps you decide because like you I am very extremely tired and frustrated with subscription software.

junglejim1949 Loc: Sacramento,CA

Totally agree Dave and thanks for you input, The subscription and cloud based programs are mainly based on how to make more money. I believe someone should be paid and make a profit but the new models are just examples of scr**ing the consumer. AI will be big in future updates but it can get carried away.

Mike D. Loc: Crowley County, CO.

If you have to have a Photoshop-like clone, there is an open-source option called GIMP.

I had that once upon a time as well but figured that if I was going to invest that kind of time in software, I was going for the real deal, so I bought a copy of Photoshop CS6 and a book called Understanding Photoshop CS6...

When the authentication code didn't work, I contacted Adobe and they told me that I had not purchased the program from an authorized reseller and that there was nothing they could do. Not long after that the marketing geniuses rolled out the subscription service.

It was a revenue generating idea of the highest magnitude but not for this guy either.

The point of the diatribe is that there are options, and ones that won't lighten your bank account on a monthly basis.

philmurfin Loc: Bakewell, Derbyshire UK

If you want something close to Photoshop but to own it outfight at a low cost then see Serif Affinity.

Dennis833 Loc: Australia

I have experience with both plus Capture One and Affinity Photo. I'm a landscape photographer and IMO Luminar Neo is the best all round editor for my type of work. But because I came from Photoshop I prefer to do a lot of my base editing within Affinity Photo and to make things more confusing I sometimes use On1 Effects as a plugin within Affinity Photo.

Drbobcameraguy Loc: Eaton Ohio

I have Neo and affinity photo. Neo for quick and dirty affinity for anything else.

Mike D. Loc: Crowley County, CO.

GIMP is free...

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

I disagree.

Of course that could be the path taken by some software companies, but the quality programs that are subscription based (e.g. Adobe LR/PS) are saving money for some users.

If you are a casual user of editing software and don't care about the latest and greatest stuff, you can get away with using a piece of software for many years, until you update your computer and it no longer supports that software. But even if you don't care about the latest and greatest stuff, improved software comes along fairly regularly that make things that were difficult into things that are easy.

When I first started using Lightroom it cost me a couple hundred dollars. Updates came along every 12-18 months and they extracted another $50-75 for them, more if you skipped an update or two in between. Photoshop was another few hundred dollars for the same sort of schedule. When Adobe started the subscription model I was skeptical at first but finally realized that by paying ~$120 a year I got more regular updates and the total cost of LR and PS was less than I had been paying.

The subscription benefits Adobe, no disagreement there. They can predict their cash flow. The money comes in on a regular basis so they can budget for R&D. Because of that we get regular updates (included in the subscription price). For those reasons I believe the subscription model benefits the user as well.

To any hobby worth its salt, there is a cost. Fishing. Golf. They may not require regular payments but they cost money. Photography is no exception. You have to buy a camera and lenses. You need a computer to store, view, and distribute your photos. The Adobe photography plan is probably the least cost and most cost effective expenditure for many of us.

Before I retired I was a New England farmer. Known for being cheap thrifty. But for the Adobe subscription provides me with value for my money, more so than the myriad impulse purchases I make. Postprocessing is not essential to my life, but it is essential to my enjoyment of photography. I could probably use IrfanView to edit my photos* but (1) they probably wouldn't look as good; (2) would take me longer; and (3) I wouldn't have the organization that allows me to find photos that I even forgot I took.



* I do use IrfanView on my Windows machine but not for editing (other than occasionally cropping or transmogrifying to another image format).

Mike D. Loc: Crowley County, CO.

I am just throwing out options here folks.

At the end of the day, the OP will have to take these choices out for a road test and see what works best for his workflow.

Personally, I would LOVE to GIRITC, aka get it right in the camera, but the realist knows that this is rarely the case. Just ask Justin Bieber. Someone thought that his package wasn't big enough for that underwear ad so a few seconds in PS made it all better.

Anyway, good luck on your search.