Adobe Photoshop versus ?

I've been using Adobe products for quite a few years now and although I don't really make a dent in the overall capabilities I've generally been happy with the product line ... until this past week when it refused to recognize me as a licensed user after I did a series of updates to Bridge, PS and Camera Raw.  After an hour with an Adobe rep online the issue was resolved but it left me wondering what other people think of the Cloud version and if they don't use Adobe what are they using?  It might also be interesting to hear any comments on a particular tool you discovered that had escaped your notice before.

Hi Malcolm. Just to say I've also used Adobe for some years too. Not doing a plug for Adobe as I have no interest whatsoever in them other than I when I want to process an image I can and can get on with it. Probably went through the same process last year myself as I suddenly found I couldn't open Z7 raw files so the auto updates hadn't worked and I believe I was stuck on the older Bridge version. Got it fixed, but had to do the online contact which took over an hour. 1st world problems.... First time I had a problem for some years but nearly threw the rattle out of the pram on that and did look at other options. (didn't because I realised quite quickly what a fag it would be to go through a new program before I could be satisfied it was functional for me).

Lots use lightroom. ON1 etc. lots to learn again, and some will swear by it. That's fine. Me, fixing the devil I know was far better than going through the hassle of learning a new software suite. Bottom line, I firmly believe is that whatever software you use, you will have problems whenever some ditty little item has changed that will drive you mad.

Hopefully, you will have plenty of replies, with lots of balanced, and useful info.

I will never give Adobe another cent, ever, unless they radically change their business model and customer orientation.  Since their current way of business is being heavily supported by Wall Street, they have absolutely no incentive to change. Like I said in another thread, it simply boggles my mind that the majority of photographers have just succumbed to their awful practices.  But then again, so many things boggle my mind these days...

There are so many alternatives out there these days, many better, from companies that do not prey on their customers like Adobe does just to please Wall Street.  There is a great series called "Life After Adobe - Cutting the Cord" on YouTube that goes through Adobe Alternatives for almost all of their products...
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLUrdf7hvHC2JExdtlPIVHtH1hFC4MKQqJ

I agree with E.J.'s rant.
My solution which admittedly has been influenced by E.J. is this:
Capture One - RAW processing and about 85-90% of my PP
Topaz Studio 2 - and some of their AI tools
PTGui - for pano stitching
Affinity Photo if I felt the need of Photoshop (which I haven't) as I never depended on PS before I left Adobe.  I left because of the way they screwed Lightroom 6 users who upgraded from LR 5.   They never included any of the new features subscription users had in the cloud, they ONLY included new camera models).  NO new tools never informing buyers prior to purchase that they were buying LR 5 with some additional cameras and yet charging a full upgrade price.

I'm afraid that all the major companies sooner or later will force the users into cloud based business models because they thus can hook and milk the customers. It's just a matter of time , I think  See also Netflix, Sky TV for sports, Spotify etc - who is still buying CDs for music nowadays ? I wouldn't be surprised either if Microsoft will change their "Windows as a service" model into a Windows as subscription" model some time in the future or charge you for their updates, at least. Apple and Google surely would follow or even work on rental models. As for photography, there are still alternatives to Adobe as of today, such as DxO, CaptureOne, Affinity etc., of course. But I doubt that they will maintain their stand alone offers in the long run no matter what they tell today. Capture One for example offers both a stand alone and subscription model - maybe that's a first indication of a transition. As a side effect of the cloud based applications, the companies are trying to track and profile the users to make money by combining and selling their personal data or to target ads, at least. But people don't care about all that anymore since they "have nothing to hide" and love to post all their daily activities on FB and other social media, too. It's the new modern world we live in.

Wolfgang

I always have to chuckle when this topic comes up. Always about the same responses happen. If we refused to use a product, any product, because the company behind it is trying to make money we would literally be living in caves and scavenging for food and water.

bradmangas wrote:I always have to chuckle when this topic comes up. Always about the same responses happen. If we refused to use a product, any product, because the company behind it is trying to make money we would literally be living in caves and scavenging for food and water.

It's not the wanting to make money that's the issue for me, it's the absolutely unethical behavior over many years that bothers me - making promises and then breaking them, over and over and over again.  I'd be glad to give them money if they behaved ethically with a business model that gave even a single iota about it's customer base but since they locked so many in and know they would be screwed if they ever dropped them, they know they can do whatever they please...

Fortunately there are many good choices these days that cost less, are often easier to use, less buggy, and work very well.  You just have to be willing to "cut the cord" and deal with the short transition period.

E.J. Peiker wrote:

bradmangas wrote:I always have to chuckle when this topic comes up. Always about the same responses happen. If we refused to use a product, any product, because the company behind it is trying to make money we would literally be living in caves and scavenging for food and water.

It's not the wanting to make money that's the issue for me, it's the absolutely unethical behavior over many years that bothers me - making promises and then breaking them, over and over and over again.  I'd be glad to give them money if they behaved ethically with a business model that gave even a single iota about it's customer base but since they locked so many in and know they would be screwed if they ever dropped them, they know they can do whatever they please...

Fortunately there are many good choices these days that cost less, are often easier to use, less buggy, and work very well.  You just have to be willing to "cut the cord" and deal with the short transition period.

EJ, do you (or anyone else) use Affinity or know how the luminosity masking is in Affinity?

WJaekel wrote:I'm afraid that all the major companies sooner or later will force the users into cloud based business models because they thus can hook and milk the customers. 

I couldn't agree more.  As excited as I am that Topaz has obviously received some funding from some source and are starting to create some great products I am afraid the next step will be in that direction.  I am crossing my fingers that they see market opportunity by not being subscription based but I doubt that is the case. 

DOglesby wrote:

E.J. Peiker wrote:

bradmangas wrote:I always have to chuckle when this topic comes up. Always about the same responses happen. If we refused to use a product, any product, because the company behind it is trying to make money we would literally be living in caves and scavenging for food and water.

It's not the wanting to make money that's the issue for me, it's the absolutely unethical behavior over many years that bothers me - making promises and then breaking them, over and over and over again.  I'd be glad to give them money if they behaved ethically with a business model that gave even a single iota about it's customer base but since they locked so many in and know they would be screwed if they ever dropped them, they know they can do whatever they please...

Fortunately there are many good choices these days that cost less, are often easier to use, less buggy, and work very well.  You just have to be willing to "cut the cord" and deal with the short transition period.

EJ, do you (or anyone else) use Affinity or know how the luminosity masking is in Affinity?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d0rXKW5b9qM
https://lenscraft.co.uk/photo-editing-tutorials/creating-affinity-photo-luminosity-masks/

I do my luma masking work prior to RAW conversion in Capture One which probably has the most intuitive way of creating them that I have seen.

bradmangas wrote:I always have to chuckle when this topic comes up. Always about the same responses happen. If we refused to use a product, any product, because the company behind it is trying to make money we would literally be living in caves and scavenging for food and water.

I guess that's aimed at my comment and I think that's the typical reasoning of the proponents of the new business world. I don't see that you have to live in a cave if you don't want to submit yourself to the strategy of being locked into an unethical subscription and cloud model for your lifetime - once the presently existing alternatives disappear or go the same route, at least. People had no problem to pay for software licenses and applications in the past without "scavenging for food and water" and everybody has accepted that the companies want to make money of it, of course. I yet have to see a real need to change the past business model Adobe, Microsoft and other companies have made a lot of money of and making them among the most profitable and powerful companies in the world. I see no real advantage for the users either other than the companies' intention of milking the customers even more in the long run after hooking them and collecting their data. BTW, as for privacy, I don't know if in the analogue age you'd send all your personal data, preferences, health and financial data etc on a postcard to unknown recipients around the world who build a profile of you and try to make money of it - without your knowledge and agreement, of course. You're free to think that all this is necessary in the digital world for not living in a cave.

Wolfgang

WJaekel wrote:

bradmangas wrote:I always have to chuckle when this topic comes up. Always about the same responses happen. If we refused to use a product, any product, because the company behind it is trying to make money we would literally be living in caves and scavenging for food and water.

I guess that's aimed at my comment and I think that's the typical reasoning of the proponents of the new business world. I don't see that you have to live in a cave if you don't want to submit yourself to the strategy of being locked into an unethical subscription and cloud model for your lifetime - once the presently existing alternatives disappear or go the same route, at least. People had no problem to pay for software licenses and applications in the past without "scavenging for food and water" and everybody has accepted that the companies want to make money of it, of course. I yet have to see a real need to change the past business model Adobe, Microsoft and other companies have made a lot of money of and making them among the most profitable and powerful companies in the world. I see no real advantage for the users either other than the companies' intention of milking the customers even more in the long run after hooking them and collecting their data. BTW, as for privacy, I don't know if in the analogue age you'd send all your personal data, preferences, health and financial data etc on a postcard to unknown recipients around the world who build a profile of you and try to make money of it - without your knowledge and agreement, of course. You're free to think that all this is necessary in the digital world for not living in a cave.

Wolfgang

No Wolfgang my brief comment was not aimed at your previous comment. It's hard to tell for certain what your main point is. As for "submitting yourself to the strategy of being locked into an unethical subscription and cloud model for your lifetime", that is not the case even if a person is a current subscriber now. The only thing I know of that a person is "forced" to purchase is healthcare (U.S. residents anyway). There was no mention of anything being necessary in the digital age. And as for the "analogue age", there is no mention of what anything is referenced to. 

E.J. Peiker wrote:I will never give Adobe another cent, ever, unless they radically change their business model and customer orientation.  Since their current way of business is being heavily supported by Wall Street, they have absolutely no incentive to change. Like I said in another thread, it simply boggles my mind that the majority of photographers have just succumbed to their awful practices.  But then again, so many things boggle my mind these days...

There are so many alternatives out there these days, many better, from companies that do not prey on their customers like Adobe does just to please Wall Street.  There is a great series called "Life After Adobe - Cutting the Cord" on YouTube that goes through Adobe Alternatives for almost all of their products...
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLUrdf7hvHC2JExdtlPIVHtH1hFC4MKQqJ

Couldn't agree more, my mind is constantly boggling at what people will accept or even vote for.  Adobe is not getting anymore out of me and there are plenty of other questionable business models out there that need to be boycotted!

So....I'm in that "can't get bridge to work with upgrade" category. (Actually it seems to be working now with Mojave). Maybe it's time to switch, but what happens to all my PSD files? Yes, I save most things as PSD, having used photoshop for....probably 20+ years? As as David points out, learning a new system at this point is mind-boggling. And I don't want to convert a gazillion files to whatever (tiff?) if that's what I have to do the get out of Adobe. Yes, they've got me hooked, and I don't like it, but I'm probably going to swallow the bait anyway. Gotta wonder if any file format is safe forever...or at least for the next 20 years, should I be so lucky as to still be kicking and able to hold a camera. .

Thank you all for the responses, I suppose I shouldn't have been surprised that it turned out so binary ... hate 'em or tolerate 'em. I don't personally have a comment on LR or any issues with Adobe's management of the product as I've never used it beyond a quick look see when it first arrived. As for their product suite in general, I wish it wasn't Cloud based but I understand the economics of that decision and they are far from the first to go down that path. I have kept CS6 installed in case I ever decide to opt out of the subscription model or it screws up or the internet goes down for a protracted period. And I readily admit that while I'm not a neanderthal on the tech side, as I've gotten older I'm becoming less and less interested in chasing that rabbit. I will keep at least one eye on some of the other tools mentioned however ... just in case. Thanks again, cheers.

Cynthia Crawford wrote:So....I'm in that "can't get bridge to work with upgrade" category.  (Actually it seems to be working now with Mojave).  Maybe it's time to switch, but what happens to all my PSD files?  Yes, I save most things as PSD, having used photoshop for....probably 20+ years? As as David points out, learning a new system at this point is mind-boggling. And I don't want to convert a gazillion files to whatever (tiff?) if that's what I have to do the get out of Adobe. Yes, they've got me hooked, and I don't like it, but I'm probably going to swallow the bait anyway.  Gotta wonder if any file format is safe forever...or at least for the next 20 years, should I be so lucky as to still be kicking and able to hold a camera. .

Virtually every piece of photo software out there supports PSD files.  But, it's no big deal just to start saving stuff as TIF files instead going forward if you are worried.  It would also be very easy to bulk convert all the PSD files to TIF if you don't want to have dual formats.