Adobe Subscription rates!!!

[JonFZ300]

I started back in the day with Elements 7 and I loved it. I stayed with Elements up until it got to 14 and I still use it. As time went on, I started using Camera Raw pretty much exclusively because I like the interface so much more than other programs. I've tried darktable, RawTherapee, Gimp, etc and they are all very clunky to me. You open a module, find a slider, have too many options, etc. ACR has the tools I want to use more or less in the order that I want to use them.

With the stripped-down version that ACR that you get with Elements, you can't do localized editing in Camera Raw. There's no adjustment brush, no saturation of individual color channels, etc. These are things that I want. I would have to get it as close as I could, then open them in Elements and use the various selections tools to make those edits. Not that much of a hassle but not that great either.

About a month ago, I got the free trial week of LR/PS/ACR and tried it out. In the past I was adamant about never doing a subscription. After trying it and seeing how much more powerful it is than the "lite" version in Elements, I have joined the subscription model dark side. I don't use Lightroom at all and I only use Photoshop for the spot healing brush and the occasional HDR or panorama. Almost everything I want to do I can do with ACR. Yes, over time it adds up to what seems like a lot of money, but I'm in a position where $11 a month is really not a big deal at all and as other have said, compared with many other hobbies, it's a bargain.

I get that it's not for everybody, I used to rant about the subscription model, even just a couple months ago.

 

[Derrel]

At one time Eastman Kodak was one of the largest companies in North America, and one of the worlds most famous and legendary brands. At one time it cost more to make the box that contains a roll of 35 mm film than it cost to produce the film That was sold in that box. At one time Kodak held a stranglehold on the world market for film, photographic paper, and photographic chemicals. Today? some Kodak machinery is busy filling jars of spaghetti sauce. Kodak is now a laughing stock.

At one time ,Kodak assumed that the position it held was unassailable. That is the hubris of market-leading, too big to fail Kodak.

I am not surprised to see that Adobe has increased its number of subscribers. Your 2013 figure was, if I am not mistaken,the first year that the subscription model was offered and they had 1.44 million customers. it's not too surprising that in the intervening few years they have greatly increased their number of monthly subscribers as people give up and just decided to bend over And take the monthly tithe.

Let's compare capture one with Photoshop. A full version,the most expensive version of Capture One,is about $497, while another version, a pro version is $397, and the basic full version is $98. Or one can pay $20 a month. Compare that with a $1,299 full version of Photoshop: by my math that makes Adobe approximately 66 percent more expensive, top version for top version. So to be clear at one time not too long ago Adobe felt that charging customers $1299 for their top product was a fair price. It was at this time that they declared that $50 a month would be the monthly rental fee for just Photoshop. After millions of people cried out Adobe wisely reduce the monthly fee to $10 over a 12 month user agreement, and added Lightroom to the mix..let's be clear here, since you have upgraded to the subscription model, you have personally encountered more glitches and screw-ups than I have with my various full version copies of Photoshop for the past 20+ years. let's be clear: under the subscription model adobe's updates and upgrades have been few and of very little consequence to the vast majority of its subscribers. Let's be clear: A few years ago there was little competition in the image editing field for Photoshop, but today there is more competition.

Regarding the Power Mac g-4-450 that runs the film scanner. At the time of its introduction it was considered the fastest production computer in the world and it was illegal to sell the computer to a number of enemies of the state of the United States of America, and it was sometimes used10 to 20 units ganged together, to create in effect a very powerful supercomputer, equivalent to the Cray,and it is and was a far cry above a Commodore 64. Your analogy or comparison is ridiculous,similar to comparing an early Model T Ford to a late 1990s Corvette.

As I pointed out the old Power Mac can still scan film and still run a useful device, which is probably a lot more than the old Commodore you have can do.
And no, I no longer have any clothes from the 1990s.

 

[snowbear]

I am still on older versions of Photoshop and Lightroom that are not subscription based, and I am glad for that. Unfortunately they will not support raw files from new cameras, but they support my D800, x100t fine. At some point I will have to transition to their subscription model or to an alternative like Capture One, which doesn't force a subscription model on customers.

I had to migrate to LR-CC (or something else) when I upgraded to the D750 for just this reason - raw files were no longer supported on LR3. My short term was to use the Nikon software, convert raw to TIF, then bring those into LR - not a horrible thing to do, since I am not doing production work, but it gets bothersome.

ESRI is the 900 lbs guerrilla in the GIS-Mapping world.

right now they are pushing ArcGIS pro which is totally web based and has told ALL users that concurrent licensing will be available for Desktop up to 2023.

ArcPro is NOT the best program, and moreover with the net shutdowns, blackouts and the like as a GOVERNMENT entity if the net goes down like when Amazon did in 2017, the system starts to slowly shut down. This is a licensing feature to "prevent" piracy.

To add my perspective - Pro is a WIP and I've seen a number of improvements in the current version (2.3.3, IIRC) as opposed to 1.x. A LOT of people apparently wanted 64-bit and 3D so I guess this was the way to do it instead of trying to uplift Desktop/ArcMap.

I still roll to Desktop for some things (Network Analyst, publishing services on REST, some Python) but I've really gotten used to Pro. Pro does work in offline mode, but I think you lose the multiple machine capability - it seems to me it will only authenticate on one per license.

Edit: Commodore! I had a COBOL compiler for my C-128 (CP/M mode)!

 

[Soocom1]

I am still on older versions of Photoshop and Lightroom that are not subscription based, and I am glad for that. Unfortunately they will not support raw files from new cameras, but they support my D800, x100t fine. At some point I will have to transition to their subscription model or to an alternative like Capture One, which doesn't force a subscription model on customers.

I had to migrate to LR-CC (or something else) when I upgraded to the D750 for just this reason - raw files were no longer supported on LR3. My short term was to use the Nikon software, convert raw to TIF, then bring those into LR - not a horrible thing to do, since I am not doing production work, but it gets bothersome.

ESRI is the 900 lbs guerrilla in the GIS-Mapping world.

right now they are pushing ArcGIS pro which is totally web based and has told ALL users that concurrent licensing will be available for Desktop up to 2023.

ArcPro is NOT the best program, and moreover with the net shutdowns, blackouts and the like as a GOVERNMENT entity if the net goes down like when Amazon did in 2017, the system starts to slowly shut down. This is a licensing feature to "prevent" piracy.

To add my perspective - Pro is a WIP and I've seen a number of improvements in the current version (2.3.3, IIRC) as opposed to 1.x. A LOT of people apparently wanted 64-bit and 3D so I guess this was the way to do it instead of trying to uplift Desktop/ArcMap.

I still roll to Desktop for some things (Network Analyst, publishing services on REST, some Python) but I've really gotten used to Pro. Pro does work in offline mode, but I think you lose the multiple machine capability - it seems to me it will only authenticate on one per license.

Edit: Commodore! I had a COBOL compiler for my C-128 (CP/M mode)!

Which is something that is not very viable for us.
Without going into detail (about 10,000 words worth) to NOT have versioning and having things based on a web system (they are still toying with flat client) would be a mistake.
I get that Pro has its capabilities, but we simply cannot play the patch-catchup game constantly.

 

[JBPhotog]

Granted it is the ability to expense the cost, but the reality is that the software itself has certain built in obsolescence as technology advances. I can't remember when it started, but it's been a long time, that software companies at 3 years post purchase started sending out notices that they were discontinuing support. Again you could still use the software for a period of time, but eventually the functionality of it became useless.

Capture One is an alternative that I looked at and may at some point go to if the arrangement with Adobe becomes untenable. However, let's talk about Capture One, the price to buy unless you get the stripped down version, is pricey, mostly out of the reach of the hobbyist, and the subscription price the last time I checked was almost twice that of Adobe, and didn't offer as much for the buck. Yet no one seems upset with them for their business model.

I agree that eventually software does become obsolete. The argument is, are there alternatives to Adobe and by all means there is. It really depends on the customer and their needs.

Have you ever tethered to Lightroom, there is no comparison, Capture One is by far superior.

I have been buying software for a few decades and certainly the subscription model is attractive for those who want the functionality but aren't needing it professionally. If you recall PhotoShop used to sell for $999US if you didn't own it, with upgrades coming in at @$200 every 18 months of so. What has changed is, the development curve has started to flatten out and many new features are viewed by many as unnecessary and even frivolous in some cases. Adobe's announcement that the Photographer package was going to double in monthly subscription price had many upset and rightfully so I would argue. As a darling of the stock market so you say, their hubris has spurred a number of startup competitors who will take a bite out of their market share, maybe this is the reason price increases were announced? Any company with the arrogance of believing they own the market has lost sight of how quickly it can all be lost, Derrel cited many companies who fell into this mindset. Future success is never confirmed, it all balances on what companies do to and with their customers now that impacts this. I for one never jumped on the Lightroom bandwagon and never regretted it, the future of PhotoShop may not be in question. . . . . yet, but one day it may be.

 

[vintagesnaps]

It doesn't have to be all one or the other. I write checks for things like the grass cutting/snow removal, local services/businesses. I check my balance etc. online. I have an old 8 track player loitering in the basement that may work but I don't use it, but then I collect and use vintage cameras, shoot film and digital, do alt. processes - then scan them in.

I guess I'm hybrid. People can use what works for them without knocking it when someone has a different way of doing something. You can use old floppies as coasters... but the Gremlin ain't comin' back - I hope! But never say never, plenty of things come back, like vinyl - and bell bottoms!! they already came back, went, stayed.

I don't like subscriptions in general. I've gotten out of a couple not photography related and got fed up with them pretty fast. I'll just pay for what I want or will use thankyouverymuch.

 

[smoke665]

Let's compare capture one with Photoshop. A full version the most expensive version the capture one is about $497, well another version a pro version is $397, and the basic full version is $98. Or one can pay $20 a month. Compare that with a $1299 full version of Photoshop: by my math that makes Adobe approximately 66 percent more expensive top version for top version,

No disagreement on cost of stand alone versions. If I were to compare the two for purchase I'd likely go Capture One so long as I hadn't upgraded to the Pentax 645z, they don't play well together. However comparing the subscription plan with Adobe you get Lightroom, Photoshop and Bridge. With Capture One that's all you get, so with the subscription I'd see the advantage swing to Adobe.

Compare that with a $1299 full version of Photoshop Prior to the subscription model, this would have been a hard sell to most amateurs, so it's no surprise that from 2015 revenues of 4.8 billion just about doubled to 9.03 billion in 2018. It had to be the swarm of amateurs, that suddenly found it within reach. Phase One by comparison still follows the old Adobe model with marketing leaning toward the professional and their revenue reflects it. I couldn't find much on them, other then they are a Danish company 60% owned by a UK private equity firm, Silver Fleet Capital, and they had revenue of 413 million in 2015. We both know the professional photography market is declining. That may be why they suddenly dropped their monthly subscription from $20/month to $8/month for Fuji and Sony, in hopes of attracting more amateurs that have swung over to the mirroless side.

Again I'm not promoting Adobe, just saying that all of the hate threads on here directed at Adobe over their subscription model isn't warranted, as they aren't the only company to use the model, and with all the options available no one has to use them. For those 12 plus million users like myself, it works, for others it doesn't, no right or wrong just different opinions on need/value/preference.

 

[smoke665]

@JBPhotog I've tethered to Lr, on occasion, but by and large don't like to do it. Tethering just feels distracting, one more thing to look at instead of the subject, like chimping after every shot.

I think there was a period where the development flattened out, but over the last 6 months there's been a flurry of updates, primarily in Lr, that are pretty awesome. AI and Profiles was a big step up, the addition of the texture slider, another. Not so sure there's been much improvement in Ps.

 

[JonFZ300]

Again I'm not promoting Adobe, just saying that all of the hate threads on here directed at Adobe over their subscription model isn't warranted, as they aren't the only company to use the model, and with all the options available no one has to use them. For those 12 plus million users like myself, it works, for others it doesn't, no right or wrong just different opinions on need/value/preference.

I totally agree. However, I will say that the moment somebody comes out with an open source version of ACR, I will ditch Adobe in a second.

All the open source raw editors now are LR clones with the gray/black interface and copious modules and more sliders than I would ever need.

Camera Raw is so powerful and simple to use. I wish somebody would take the time to clone it like they do Lightroom for us intermediate level editors. Something more powerful than Elements but not so complicated you need to watch a tutorial to do anything like darktable.

 

[JBPhotog]

Professionally, tethering is the go to especially when the client is hovering, lol. It also lets you apply presets and overlays as they are imported, indispensable for ad work when copy is included in the layout.

The angst over Adobe could be also be that at one point in time they announced Lightroom would never be subscription. As the saying goes, never say never. Hey, I'm a capitalist so Adobe can do what ever they want, customers are free to do the same.

 

[JBPhotog]

All the open source raw editors now are LR clones with the gray/black interface and copious modules and more sliders than I would ever need.

Camera Raw is so powerful and simple to use. I wish somebody would take the time to clone it like they do Lightroom for us intermediate level editors. Something more powerful than Elements but not so complicated you need to watch a tutorial to do anything like darktable.

What camera do you own, many brands provide a free Raw converter and FWIW, they may be even better at resolving the file.

 

[JonFZ300]

What camera do you own, many brands provide a free Raw converter and FWIW, they may be even better at resolving the file.

I have a Panasonic FZ300. The free software is SILKYPIX which is the worst of all the different software I've tried. I've been using the lite version of CR so long in Elements that it's a natural progression to step up to the full version. I'd love an open source clone of it though.

 

[smoke665]

. However, I will say that the moment somebody comes out with an open source version of ACR, I will ditch Adobe in a second.

Don't hold your breath on that one. With billions at stake the battle would be huge.

I'm surprised at your dislike for Silkypix. Until a few years ago that was what was packaged with Pentax. I always found it fairly easy to use and okay for what I used it for. Pentax now supplies their own DCU5 which is a PITA. The only time I use it is with Pixel Shift images.

 

[snowbear]

I am still on older versions of Photoshop and Lightroom that are not subscription based, and I am glad for that. Unfortunately they will not support raw files from new cameras, but they support my D800, x100t fine. At some point I will have to transition to their subscription model or to an alternative like Capture One, which doesn't force a subscription model on customers.

I had to migrate to LR-CC (or something else) when I upgraded to the D750 for just this reason - raw files were no longer supported on LR3. My short term was to use the Nikon software, convert raw to TIF, then bring those into LR - not a horrible thing to do, since I am not doing production work, but it gets bothersome.

ESRI is the 900 lbs guerrilla in the GIS-Mapping world.

right now they are pushing ArcGIS pro which is totally web based and has told ALL users that concurrent licensing will be available for Desktop up to 2023.

ArcPro is NOT the best program, and moreover with the net shutdowns, blackouts and the like as a GOVERNMENT entity if the net goes down like when Amazon did in 2017, the system starts to slowly shut down. This is a licensing feature to "prevent" piracy.

To add my perspective - Pro is a WIP and I've seen a number of improvements in the current version (2.3.3, IIRC) as opposed to 1.x. A LOT of people apparently wanted 64-bit and 3D so I guess this was the way to do it instead of trying to uplift Desktop/ArcMap.

I still roll to Desktop for some things (Network Analyst, publishing services on REST, some Python) but I've really gotten used to Pro. Pro does work in offline mode, but I think you lose the multiple machine capability - it seems to me it will only authenticate on one per license.

Edit: Commodore! I had a COBOL compiler for my C-128 (CP/M mode)!

Which is something that is not very viable for us.
Without going into detail (about 10,000 words worth) to NOT have versioning and having things based on a web system (they are still toying with flat client) would be a mistake.
I get that Pro has its capabilities, but we simply cannot play the patch-catchup game constantly.

Yeah, should be an offline conversation, or at least a different thread.

 

[Derrel]

The free software is SILKYPIX which is the worst of all the different software I've tried

I had a full, payed version of that in the mid-2000's, and occasionally, it would produce a gorgeous conversion from a Raw file. At that time, I was testing out ACR, Nikon Capture, and Canon's DPP, and SilkyPix, with the NikonD2x and Canon 5D, sending an entire day's shooting for batch conversion, and as I said,occasionally, SilkPix full version would produce a simply lovely rendering.

Nikon Capture could not handle Canon's .CR2 files, and Canon DPP could not handle Nikon's .NEF files. It has been 12 years or so since I used SilkyPix, but at one time, before Lightroom, converting raw files was "different" than it is now.