Photoshop Elements 24 is reduced if bought as an updated Licence (Page 2): Point taken.

Heather Iles Loc: UK, Somerset

terryMc wrote:

Judging by what I see online, I don't think people are leaving Adobe in droves over a $ 10-a-month subscription fee, and Photoshop Elements has never been a part of the subscription model anyway, which is why some people who have an irrational hatred of the subscription but still want Photoshop, buy that instead.

Point taken.

Heather Iles Loc: UK, Somerset

CHG_CANON wrote:

At 10+ years, possibly a worthwhile payment for a 1-time update. But, in the replies, we also see one UHH community member voicing what others do in private: paying more money to Adobe for a crippled software on a regular basis. My reply was to that audience: why? why not just subscribe? More importantly, the RAW shooters in the community are entirely wasting their money on PSE.

Some people who take RAW photos may have the NIK Program. I do. I upgraded when it was sold.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Heather Iles wrote:

Some people who take RAW photos may have the NIK Program. I do. I upgraded when it was sold.

Whenever your software forces you to an 8-bit file, you might as well as have captured the image as JPEG in the camera. Facts are facts. period.

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

Heather Iles wrote:

Some people who take RAW photos may have the NIK Program. I do. I upgraded when it was sold.

Hi Heather, haven't chatted with you in a long time!

You and I and many others love the ease of processing with Elements. That's all that matters for a happy hobbyist

Flowers and Light by Linda Shorey, on Flickr

.

Heather Iles Loc: UK, Somerset

CHG_CANON wrote:

Whenever your software forces you to an 8-bit file, you might as well as have captured the image as JPEG in the camera. Facts are facts. period.

Points taken.

Who am I to argue with a professional and someone who I hold in great esteem and that is a compliment, having followed you for sometime now.

Am I right in saying that present day JPEGS are a lot better now with the improvement in our equipment and the software at our disposal?

It is also said that present day JPEGS can be processed and printed at an acceptable level unless it is going to be printed very large at A3 and above. It would be good to hear your thoughts.

I must stress that I have not printed a JPEG at A3 or more, but have printed an A2 and yes, I am struggling with the processing of it. Camera Club prints are up to an A2.

It is always good to hear your views and to communicate with you.

Heather Iles Loc: UK, Somerset

Linda From Maine wrote:

Hi Heather, haven't chatted with you in a long tim... (show quote)

Ah, how nice! I wondered if you remembered me.

I haven't been on here much in the last year or so, but I do have a look in from time to time when one of my photographic friends Don draws my attention to something that has caught his eye.

I think I was side tracked by my next love which is gardening and got stuck on Facebook, but that is rather time consuming so I am easing off that now and hopefully, I will be popping up more on here in future.

I love your artistry on the flowers. I adore flowers and would like to do something like yours.

Keep well, Linda.

H

UHH has brought me in contact with a few photographic friends. In the days past there were pen pals, now I can them my e-friends.

Heather Iles Loc: UK, Somerset

CHG_CANON wrote:

Whenever your software forces you to an 8-bit file, you might as well as have captured the image as JPEG in the camera. Facts are facts. period.

SECOND REPLY:

What do you think of this adds on that was brought to my attention? I have downloaded it but haven"t used it.

https://elementsplus.net/

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Heather Iles wrote:

Points taken. br br Who am I to argue with a pr... (show quote)

I guess you can say today's JPEGs are better. I'd point to better in-camera noise processing as one primary difference, for the JPEG shooter. Certainly, just more pixels makes a difference, given the near universal 20 to 24MP sensors. Remember, though, nearly every printed image you've ever seen from a digital camera was from a JPEG. Here, the issue is the software creating the output JPEG, well downstream from the camera's sensor.

dpullum Loc: Tampa Florida

The historic true-to-life anti-Photoshop argument is that it is by far too complicated for the beginning photographer to use, and they quit trying to edit, take fewer photographs, and disappear into the shadows. PS phantasmagorical abilities are never used by most, to some having a PS subscription is a status symbol, as were the tail fins on their old Chrome Cadillac.

There are many free programs on that make the beginners' life easy and fun, later they will hunger for more and buy an editing program of which there are many. PSE with Elements-Plus added [$12] is a great combo providing the photographer more than they need. "Elements+ is a handy add-on that lets the hidden PS functions out." Elements Plus opens many of those closed doors still within PSE which is a scaled-down PS program with PS abilities hidden and blocked.
https://elementsplus.net/

Considering that one only needs to update PSE every few years and there is no monthly, the not-wasted "Monthly-Tribute" to Adobe money can be invested in Plugin additions, such as Topaz. New AI plugin can take an early low-resolution high-noise image and make it look new, clean, crisp, and high resolution; money well spent.

Some call themselves Professionals, they shoot RAW and drive PS with its tail fins and chrome, but for most Wanna-Have-Fun people PSE with Elements-Plus and JPEG images are good choices. Remember JPEG variations within the camera are skillfully processed RAW files. Heather made the right choice with PSE and has also purchased a high-end camera, that can phone-home and fits into her pocket, ready for the unplanned-happening photo event.

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

Heather Iles wrote:

...
UHH has brought me in contact with a few photographic friends. In the days past there were pen pals, now I can them my e-friends.

Yes indeed!

.

JohnSwanda Loc: San Francisco

CHG_CANON wrote:

I guess you can say today's JPEGs are better. I'd point to better in-camera noise processing as one primary difference, for the JPEG shooter. Certainly, just more pixels makes a difference, given the near universal 20 to 24MP sensors. Remember, though, nearly every printed image you've ever seen from a digital camera was from a JPEG. Here, the issue is the software creating the output JPEG, well downstream from the camera's sensor.

Every print I've made from a digital camera was from a PS file.

jamesl Loc: Pennsylvania

Heather Iles wrote:

I have just discovered by accident that if you upgrade your Photoshop Elements (I have 11) it is being offered at a reduced price of U$119.99/£70.90 from U$149.99.

I had decided not to purchase a subscription-based program and accidentally clicked on my Elements 11. The advert came up and I have purchased it.

Hopefully, this may be of interest to some members who already don't know and to those that do, please accept my apologies for bothering you.

-------
Check around. I have checked B&H, Amazon and some others and as a result I have never paid more than $44 for Elements. Look for sales. I have used yhid way to purchase Elements 13, 14, 15, 2018 and 2022.

Heather Iles Loc: UK, Somerset

CHG_CANON wrote:

Whenever your software forces you to an 8-bit file, you might as well as have captured the image as JPEG in the camera. Facts are facts. period.

No arguing about that.

As an experiment, I would like you please to have a look at my latest photograph taken with my mobile phone which was an I-phone 12 PRO MAX. I will not attach it here as it will annoy some members. It is posted in the Mobile Phone Photography section for those who are interested.

It was posted there as a challenge to anyone who could show me how to improve the photo before it was entered into a competition. but there weren't many takers.

I will send it to you in a Private Message on here.

Heather Iles Loc: UK, Somerset

Ah, yes, but that price is for Elements 24 which is present. Adobe is smart.

PhotogHobbyist Loc: Bradford, PA

charles brown wrote:

I think you are right. Recent ad here had Elements on sale for $60 Full version, not an upgrade.

I have seen new versions on sale for reduced cost but not for the last two years. I think Adobe got wise to the idea and now call it an upgrade but with a slightly higher price.

Heather Iles wrote:

In the past you have seen upgrades for $59.99 and $69.99, but was it for PSE 2024?

By in the past, I meant past years. My last purchase was for PSE 2019 which brought me up from 2015. I have not seen PSE advertised as an upgrade for less than $79.99. Also, I did not see 2023 for a discounted price at all, that's why I was looking now. I did download a trial of it and it has a very different look from 2015.