MicrostockGroup

Microstock Photography Forum - General => Software => Photoshop Discussion => Topic started by: BaldricksTrousers on July 15, 2017, 23:27

Title: Soaring cost
Post by: BaldricksTrousers on July 15, 2017, 23:27
Creative cloud cost up 250% in Oz in four years.
https://www.gizmodo.com.au/2017/05/creative-cloud-keeps-getting-more-expensive-in-australia/ (https://www.gizmodo.com.au/2017/05/creative-cloud-keeps-getting-more-expensive-in-australia/)

I need a new computer. I guess I'll be using Gimp and Darktable from now on, though switching to Linux involves a nasty learning curve.

I didn't mind the one-off cost for CS4 but I'm out of licenses for new machines with that (and who knows how long it will continue to work with Windows?). I've been using Gimp and Darkroom my son installed on a notebook and they're as good for what I want as PS, but the notebook is dying.

The way microstock is going, it makes no sense to spend $600 a year on PS/CC.
Title: Re: Soaring cost
Post by: Pauws99 on July 16, 2017, 00:28
I'm only paying 10 UK a month for LR/PS....am I going to see a big hike when the "honeymoon" runs out? Only had it three months.
Title: Re: Soaring cost
Post by: ShadySue on July 16, 2017, 04:16
I'm only paying 10 UK a month for LR/PS....am I going to see a big hike when the "honeymoon" runs out? Only had it three months.
I've been on it almost (PS/LR only*) since the beginning of subs, and no hike, but who knows what will happen in the future.
It looks like that article is talking about the whole of the CC 'suite'.

It is a tax expense, though, which helps.

* and every time we get an Adobe survey, which is often, I ask for a PS only option as I never use LR. But ...  :(
Title: Re: Soaring cost
Post by: SpaceStockFootage on July 16, 2017, 04:28
Wish I could pay $695.88 a year! It's 50.57 a month here, so 606.84 a year. In AUS, that works out to be $1014.49
Title: Re: Soaring cost
Post by: BaldricksTrousers on July 16, 2017, 04:54
The main point, I think, is that it is costing a lot of people a lot of money when similar programs are available free. I see now that Gimp and Darktable are available to run on Windows and Mac, too, so you don't need to do the whole linux thing.
It's worth giving them a go if you want to save money while staying legal. The interface is quite similar to PS and LR.
Title: Re: Soaring cost
Post by: Pauws99 on July 16, 2017, 05:04
I'm only paying 10 UK a month for LR/PS....am I going to see a big hike when the "honeymoon" runs out? Only had it three months.
I've been on it almost (PS/LR only*) since the beginning of subs, and no hike, but who knows what will happen in the future.
It looks like that article is talking about the whole of the CC 'suite'.

It is a tax expense, though, which helps.

* and every time we get an Adobe survey, which is often, I ask for a PS only option as I never use LR. But ...  :(
Personally I use LR all the time and rarely PS goes to show different strokes.....
Title: Re: Soaring cost
Post by: ShadySue on July 16, 2017, 05:22
I'm only paying 10 UK a month for LR/PS....am I going to see a big hike when the "honeymoon" runs out? Only had it three months.
I've been on it almost (PS/LR only*) since the beginning of subs, and no hike, but who knows what will happen in the future.
It looks like that article is talking about the whole of the CC 'suite'.

It is a tax expense, though, which helps.

* and every time we get an Adobe survey, which is often, I ask for a PS only option as I never use LR. But ...  :(
Personally I use LR all the time and rarely PS goes to show different strokes.....

Absolutely, I know a lot of people love LR, but the interface is so very differerent from PS it's like using another prog for me, even though I stuck with a few Lynda tutorials on LR, and I havent found anything I need to do which LR does and PS doesn't, though the vice is versa.

Is the standalone LR not being updated?
Title: Re: Soaring cost
Post by: Pauws99 on July 16, 2017, 05:36
I'm only paying 10 UK a month for LR/PS....am I going to see a big hike when the "honeymoon" runs out? Only had it three months.
I've been on it almost (PS/LR only*) since the beginning of subs, and no hike, but who knows what will happen in the future.
It looks like that article is talking about the whole of the CC 'suite'.

It is a tax expense, though, which helps.

* and every time we get an Adobe survey, which is often, I ask for a PS only option as I never use LR. But ...  :(
Personally I use LR all the time and rarely PS goes to show different strokes.....

Absolutely, I know a lot of people love LR, but the interface is so very differerent from PS it's like using another prog for me, even though I stuck with a few Lynda tutorials on LR, and I havent found anything I need to do which LR does and PS doesn't, though the vice is versa.

Is the standalone LR not beiong updated?
I don't know I'm happy at thye current price point to keep both for occasional PS tweaking....I intend to learn a bit more about doing the fancy stuff in PS when I get round to it. But more as my "hobby" side of photography.....I doub't many pics generate the sales that hours of sophisticated Photoshopping would warrant.
Title: Re: Soaring cost
Post by: rockerstocker on July 16, 2017, 06:00
I use the old Photoshop CS6 which is still good enough and bought Affinity Photo, same quality as Photoshop, much cheaper and no monthly returning costs..... Works with apple and pc.
I never ever want to pay every month for no matter what program.
Title: Re: Soaring cost
Post by: increasingdifficulty on July 16, 2017, 06:01
I don't know I'm happy at thye current price point to keep both for occasional PS tweaking....I intend to learn a bit more about doing the fancy stuff in PS when I get round to it. But more as my "hobby" side of photography.....I doub't many pics generate the sales that hours of sophisticated Photoshopping would warrant.

I would say that most stock photo best-sellers involve heavy and (more or less) sophisticated Photoshop work. It's just (usually) well done so you don't think about it.

Many of the all-time famous conceptual photos are actually composites of photos taken at completely different locations.

This one for example: https://petapixel.com/2015/09/24/the-iceberg-stock-photo-that-has-earned-over-900k/ (https://petapixel.com/2015/09/24/the-iceberg-stock-photo-that-has-earned-over-900k/)

And I can guarantee it's not the only one.

These are both top 20 Rome photos at Shutterstock:

https://www.shutterstock.com/sv/image-photo/colosseum-sunset-rome-italy-261029783?src=60hPqdqFuxxFY8GxCiJPhw-1-17 (https://www.shutterstock.com/sv/image-photo/colosseum-sunset-rome-italy-261029783?src=60hPqdqFuxxFY8GxCiJPhw-1-17)
https://www.shutterstock.com/sv/image-photo/roman-ruins-rome-italy-316881665?src=60hPqdqFuxxFY8GxCiJPhw-1-21 (https://www.shutterstock.com/sv/image-photo/roman-ruins-rome-italy-316881665?src=60hPqdqFuxxFY8GxCiJPhw-1-21)

Not sure I would call it "sophisticated" Photoshop work but those leaves are of course added in post.

Every "perfect" model photo requires lots of post work. Every perfect studio product shot. Etc. etc.

Many of the nice backlit photos have a fake sun/fake sunlight in them, or if there's a real one, it's always enhanced.
Title: Re: Soaring cost
Post by: Pauws99 on July 16, 2017, 06:09
I don't know I'm happy at thye current price point to keep both for occasional PS tweaking....I intend to learn a bit more about doing the fancy stuff in PS when I get round to it. But more as my "hobby" side of photography.....I doub't many pics generate the sales that hours of sophisticated Photoshopping would warrant.

I would say that most stock photo best-sellers involves heavy and sophisticated Photoshop work. It's just really well done so you don't think about it.

Many of the all-time famous conceptual photos are actually composites of photos takes at completely different locations.

This one for example: https://petapixel.com/2015/09/24/the-iceberg-stock-photo-that-has-earned-over-900k/

And I can guarantee it's not the only one.

Every "perfect" model photo requires lots of post work. Every perfect studio product shot. Etc. etc.

Many of the nice backlit photos have a fake sun in them, or if there's a real one, it's always enhanced.
Fair point...I really meant for the type of work I do which is not really staged Mstock...not great return I know but I enjoy doing it. But I probably could do with honing my skills and being more patient.
Title: Re: Soaring cost
Post by: Bad Company on July 16, 2017, 08:29
and to make matters worse- our revenue is going down! Thus less profit for us each year!  :'(

Title: Re: Soaring cost
Post by: rockerstocker on July 16, 2017, 08:41
Could also have been done in Affinity
Title: Re: Soaring cost
Post by: sharpshot on July 16, 2017, 11:12
There's so many cheap or free alternatives to photoshop, I have no idea why people pay so much for it?  I can understand the high earners and those that are professional photoshop users but it seems unnecessary for most people that do microstock.  If people don't want to learn new software, Photoshop elements and a few plugins should be good enough.
Title: Re: Soaring cost
Post by: cathyslife on July 16, 2017, 15:06
I use the old Photoshop CS6 which is still good enough and bought Affinity Photo, same quality as Photoshop, much cheaper and no monthly returning costs..... Works with apple and pc.
I never ever want to pay every month for no matter what program.


Yeah. No subscriptions for me. I am using CS5. It works. I am happy with that.
Title: Re: Soaring cost
Post by: Brightontl on July 17, 2017, 02:50
I'm only paying 10 UK a month for LR/PS....am I going to see a big hike when the "honeymoon" runs out? Only had it three months.
I've been on it almost (PS/LR only*) since the beginning of subs, and no hike, but who knows what will happen in the future.
It looks like that article is talking about the whole of the CC 'suite'.

It is a tax expense, though, which helps.

* and every time we get an Adobe survey, which is often, I ask for a PS only option as I never use LR. But ...  :(
Personally I use LR all the time and rarely PS goes to show different strokes.....

Absolutely, I know a lot of people love LR, but the interface is so very differerent from PS it's like using another prog for me, even though I stuck with a few Lynda tutorials on LR, and I havent found anything I need to do which LR does and PS doesn't, though the vice is versa.

Is the standalone LR not being updated?
PS contains Camera Raw and Bridge which have nearly all functionality of LR.
So for someone starting with PS and mastering it, LR is not necessary, although I use both and much prefer the interface of LR, especially for image management (the Bridge part).
LR is meant for photographers starting out: it is much cheaper and much easier to use than PS and it is powerful enough for a good percentage of photographer.
Personally I use LR and After Effects a lot and occasionally PS and Premiere
Title: Re: Soaring cost
Post by: Pauws99 on July 17, 2017, 03:18
I'm only paying 10 UK a month for LR/PS....am I going to see a big hike when the "honeymoon" runs out? Only had it three months.
I've been on it almost (PS/LR only*) since the beginning of subs, and no hike, but who knows what will happen in the future.
It looks like that article is talking about the whole of the CC 'suite'.

It is a tax expense, though, which helps.

* and every time we get an Adobe survey, which is often, I ask for a PS only option as I never use LR. But ...  :(
Personally I use LR all the time and rarely PS goes to show different strokes.....

Absolutely, I know a lot of people love LR, but the interface is so very differerent from PS it's like using another prog for me, even though I stuck with a few Lynda tutorials on LR, and I havent found anything I need to do which LR does and PS doesn't, though the vice is versa.

Is the standalone LR not being updated?
PS contains Camera Raw and Bridge which have nearly all functionality of LR.
So for someone starting with PS and mastering it, LR is not necessary, although I use both and much prefer the interface of LR, especially for image management (the Bridge part).
LR is meant for photographers starting out: it is much cheaper and much easier to use than PS and it is powerful enough for a good percentage of photographer.
Personally I use LR and After Effects a lot and occasionally PS and Premiere
Not really LR is for those working with large batches of photos and sorting/cataloguing Elements would be the one for more "casual" users....
Title: Re: Soaring cost
Post by: polar on July 17, 2017, 09:07
I switched from Photoshop Elements to Affinity Photo over a year ago and have never looked back. Affinity is a great program that offers a wide variety of features from basic to sophisticated. They also have a Designer program.

Affinity Photo is available for both Mac and PC. The regular price is about USD $50 or the equivalent in other currencies, although sometimes there are discounts. They're still on Version 1 with several incremental upgrades; I'm on V1.5 and V1.6 is supposed to be out soon. These upgrades were free, but they've indicated they do intend to charge a fee for full-version upgrades (e.g. V1 to V2). 

I'm not affiliated with them in any way - just a satisfied customer.
Title: Re: Soaring cost
Post by: Jo Ann Snover on July 17, 2017, 10:18
I'm another holdout from subscriptions. So far, PS and AI at CS6 versions and Lightroom 6.10 (that's still sold as a regular license) work well for what I need to do.

I'm switching over to Capture One Pro 10 (LR is so slow when you use all its best features that it was driving me nuts; they've said performance is their top priority (https://blogs.adobe.com/lightroomjournal/2017/07/on-lightroom-performance.html), so they may invest in fixing and improving it, which would be nice)

I own Affinity Photo, which is really good for a small company competing with a behemoth like Photoshop, but I use Photoshop as I'm so familiar with it and it does what I need it to.

I do more and more work on images in Lightroom/Capture One but every stock image ends up in Photoshop. The big problem will come when an OS upgrade (I'm on Mac OS 10.12) leaves CS6 behind. I live in hope that the bean counters that now own Adobe will come to their senses once the subscription model feels established enough to them and resume offering what they call "perpetual" licenses again. At the beginning, they were trying to get their rental program off the ground by forcing people. Now the program has lots of subscribers, perhaps they will be concerned about the money they're leaving on the table by not selling licenses - or about putting Affinity Photo out of business.
Title: Re: Soaring cost
Post by: polar on July 17, 2017, 10:29
At the beginning, they were trying to get their rental program off the ground by forcing people. Now the program has lots of subscribers, perhaps they will be concerned about the money they're leaving on the table by not selling licenses - or about putting Affinity Photo out of business.

I sure hope they don't try to go after AP. I really detested PSE when I was using it and I wouldn't go back to it even as a stand-alone program, much less a subscription. AP is much, much better.
Title: Re: Soaring cost
Post by: wds on July 17, 2017, 10:41
I switched from Photoshop Elements to Affinity Photo over a year ago and have never looked back. Affinity is a great program that offers a wide variety of features from basic to sophisticated. They also have a Designer program.

Affinity Photo is available for both Mac and PC. The regular price is about USD $50 or the equivalent in other currencies, although sometimes there are discounts. They're still on Version 1 with several incremental upgrades; I'm on V1.5 and V1.6 is supposed to be out soon. These upgrades were free, but they've indicated they do intend to charge a fee for full-version upgrades (e.g. V1 to V2). 

I'm not affiliated with them in any way - just a satisfied customer.

What would be interesting is if/when Affinity photo develops features that are clearly beyond what PS can do....then things will get very interesting from a competitive standpoint.
Title: Re: Soaring cost
Post by: PigsInSpace on July 17, 2017, 15:02
At the beginning, they were trying to get their rental program off the ground by forcing people. Now the program has lots of subscribers, perhaps they will be concerned about the money they're leaving on the table by not selling licenses - or about putting Affinity Photo out of business.

I sure hope they don't try to go after AP. I really detested PSE when I was using it and I wouldn't go back to it even as a stand-alone program, much less a subscription. AP is much, much better.

I'll admit I do my work in Elements and am largely satisfied. It doesn't have CMYK or the basic vector tools full Photoshop has, but for regular photos it competes above its paygrade, at least for me. One thing that is a challenge is using both Elements and full Photoshop. For some strange reason some of the keyboard shortcuts and menus are in different places...
Title: Re: Soaring cost
Post by: polar on July 17, 2017, 15:32
At the beginning, they were trying to get their rental program off the ground by forcing people. Now the program has lots of subscribers, perhaps they will be concerned about the money they're leaving on the table by not selling licenses - or about putting Affinity Photo out of business.

I sure hope they don't try to go after AP. I really detested PSE when I was using it and I wouldn't go back to it even as a stand-alone program, much less a subscription. AP is much, much better.

I'll admit I do my work in Elements and am largely satisfied. It doesn't have CMYK or the basic vector tools full Photoshop has, but for regular photos it competes above its paygrade, at least for me. One thing that is a challenge is using both Elements and full Photoshop. For some strange reason some of the keyboard shortcuts and menus are in different places...

I did use Elements for many years and it was sufficient for the level of processing I do. But I was afraid it would eventually be moved to subscription too and I didn't want to go there. I wasn't sure I'd have a choice but when I saw what AP could do, it wasn't hard to make the switch.

From reading the Affinity forums, it seems a lot of people were motivated by a desire to get away from the PS subscription model. I haven't paid any attention to what's been happening with Elements for more than a year now, but I was under the impression that it has already been migrated to subscription.
Title: Re: Soaring cost
Post by: pancaketom on July 17, 2017, 16:46
I think it will be a camera upgrade that will force me to leave the PS universe. I refuse to go to subscription software. Until then an older version does more than I need it to, although I am sure there are some upgrades that would be nice.
Title: Re: Soaring cost
Post by: sharpshot on July 17, 2017, 17:30
At the beginning, they were trying to get their rental program off the ground by forcing people. Now the program has lots of subscribers, perhaps they will be concerned about the money they're leaving on the table by not selling licenses - or about putting Affinity Photo out of business.

I sure hope they don't try to go after AP. I really detested PSE when I was using it and I wouldn't go back to it even as a stand-alone program, much less a subscription. AP is much, much better.

I'll admit I do my work in Elements and am largely satisfied. It doesn't have CMYK or the basic vector tools full Photoshop has, but for regular photos it competes above its paygrade, at least for me. One thing that is a challenge is using both Elements and full Photoshop. For some strange reason some of the keyboard shortcuts and menus are in different places...

I did use Elements for many years and it was sufficient for the level of processing I do. But I was afraid it would eventually be moved to subscription too and I didn't want to go there. I wasn't sure I'd have a choice but when I saw what AP could do, it wasn't hard to make the switch.

From reading the Affinity forums, it seems a lot of people were motivated by a desire to get away from the PS subscription model. I haven't paid any attention to what's been happening with Elements for more than a year now, but I was under the impression that it has already been migrated to subscription.
Elements isn't subscription and I would be surprised if it ever was because it's for people who don't want to spend much.  Adobe probably use Elements to draw people in to the full version.
Title: Re: Soaring cost
Post by: Bad Company on July 17, 2017, 17:57
Wouldn't it be nice if Adobe gave us a deep discount on their products (especially PS and Premier)  if we are a contributor to Adobe Stock?   8)

Title: Re: Soaring cost
Post by: Hildegarde on July 17, 2017, 18:05
I hated Elements.  I do no like LR and ye it mostly for watermarking.

I was forced into the subscription when I sent my computer into HP for warranty repair and they removed all software in process of repair.  Suddenly my license number did not work when I reinstalled it from my CD.  I am so mad at HP-- that free warranty repair cost me a fortune. 

I think I would try another program if they keep raising price. 

It seems to me that PS puts a lot of noise into images when one uses the slightest changes in much of anything.

Title: Re: Soaring cost
Post by: polar on July 17, 2017, 21:59
At the beginning, they were trying to get their rental program off the ground by forcing people. Now the program has lots of subscribers, perhaps they will be concerned about the money they're leaving on the table by not selling licenses - or about putting Affinity Photo out of business.

I sure hope they don't try to go after AP. I really detested PSE when I was using it and I wouldn't go back to it even as a stand-alone program, much less a subscription. AP is much, much better.

I'll admit I do my work in Elements and am largely satisfied. It doesn't have CMYK or the basic vector tools full Photoshop has, but for regular photos it competes above its paygrade, at least for me. One thing that is a challenge is using both Elements and full Photoshop. For some strange reason some of the keyboard shortcuts and menus are in different places...

I did use Elements for many years and it was sufficient for the level of processing I do. But I was afraid it would eventually be moved to subscription too and I didn't want to go there. I wasn't sure I'd have a choice but when I saw what AP could do, it wasn't hard to make the switch.

From reading the Affinity forums, it seems a lot of people were motivated by a desire to get away from the PS subscription model. I haven't paid any attention to what's been happening with Elements for more than a year now, but I was under the impression that it has already been migrated to subscription.
Elements isn't subscription and I would be surprised if it ever was because it's for people who don't want to spend much.  Adobe probably use Elements to draw people in to the full version.

I actually went looking for a replacement for Elements when an OS upgrade forced me to upgrade the version of PSE I'd been using. The older version had worked pretty well but the newer one was slow and buggy.

That was around the time when the whole Creative Cloud thing started to hit in a big way and there was a lot of chatter that Elements would follow suit. I guess that never came to pass, at least, so far -- but I'm really glad it led me to find Affinity Photo instead.
Title: Re: Soaring cost
Post by: k_t_g on July 17, 2017, 22:36
I hated Elements.  I do no like LR and ye it mostly for watermarking.

I was forced into the subscription when I sent my computer into HP for warranty repair and they removed all software in process of repair.  Suddenly my license number did not work when I reinstalled it from my CD.  I am so mad at HP-- that free warranty repair cost me a fortune. 

I think I would try another program if they keep raising price. 

It seems to me that PS puts a lot of noise into images when one uses the slightest changes in much of anything.

For that PS license, I have heard that in order for it to work again you have to deactivate and then reactivate the license.
Here's a thread with some info regarding a similar issue. Hope it helps.  :)
https://forums.adobe.com/thread/1315428 (https://forums.adobe.com/thread/1315428)
Title: Re: Soaring cost
Post by: sharpshot on July 18, 2017, 06:21
I hated Elements.  I do no like LR and ye it mostly for watermarking.

I was forced into the subscription when I sent my computer into HP for warranty repair and they removed all software in process of repair.  Suddenly my license number did not work when I reinstalled it from my CD.  I am so mad at HP-- that free warranty repair cost me a fortune. 

I think I would try another program if they keep raising price. 

It seems to me that PS puts a lot of noise into images when one uses the slightest changes in much of anything.

For that PS license, I have heard that in order for it to work again you have to deactivate and then reactivate the license.
Here's a thread with some info regarding a similar issue. Hope it helps.  :)
https://forums.adobe.com/thread/1315428 (https://forums.adobe.com/thread/1315428)
I had a similar situation and I just called Adobe and they deactivated my old version, enabling me to use the license number.
Title: Re: Soaring cost
Post by: Tryingmybest on July 20, 2017, 13:01
Big hustle. Big scam. I'm still using Photoshop CS5 and Illustrator CS3 on OSX 10.6.8.
Title: Re: Soaring cost
Post by: stockastic on July 20, 2017, 13:09
I moved from Lightroom to Capture One a year ago and never looked back.