Cost of Lightroom

I'm still using LR 6.14 but I get Apple messages on restarts that tell me LR will not work on future editions of the operating system.

Fuji had (maybe still has) an offer of a free download of Luminar 3. I downloaded it and played with it but I'm too familiar with LR so I felt lost trying to use it. If LR stops working on my Mac in the future, I'll grit my teeth and subscribe.
 
I resisted the Lightroom subscription model for a long time, after previously using one of the non-subscription versions. I tried Affinity for a bit but did not get along with it. I was very tempted by Capture One. A couple of months ago I decided to return to Lightroom on a trial basis. It's even better than I remember (integrates with my phone for sharing on the go, can even review photos through the Apple TV app).

I can honestly say returning to Lightroom has made my photos better, plus it's very fast.
 
Since my last computer crash I lost my Adobe photoshop. When discovering they want me to pay a monthly fee for something I would only use half a dozen times a year, they can forget it. Some of us who only use this tool as a hobby only need a few hours a year of use.
So I have gone totally black and white wet printing in the last year, no more color film and my digital is good enough for me. Their loss not mine, I refuse to pay an annual fee for small usage of anything.
 
No, you're not alone, Peter!


I’ve balked at all subscription-based software purchases and have been holding the line with Lightroom 6.8 on MacOS Sierra for my image editing and DAM. The feature set is stunning and I'm very happy with all that's available to me with it.

That said, I’m happy to pay for software. I make my living as a developer and appreciate all the hard work that goes into creating and selling these tools. Adobe’s products provide deep and genuine value and they deserve to be paid for them. I oppose subscription-based models for a couple of reasons -

By my personal calculations, the subscription model is simply more expensive over time than the standalone one.

Adobe promises that we'll always have access to the latest features. However, some new features don’t provide enough value to warrant my desire to pay for them. The standalone model provides a choice as to how and on what I wish to spend I money. I strongly prefer that.

Adding new features also comes with the risk of introducing bugs. On top of that, take changes to the underlying OS software, which Adobe doesn’t control, into account and compatibility issues take on a new dimension.

As a result, ongoing maintenance is now an end-user problem. It forces customers to keep abreast of compatibility issues or risk time-consuming support calls and/or re-installs. What a pain!

I look to photography to spark joy in my life. Playing IT every few months to keep my system up and running doesn't fit very well into that. Having tools that just work is my strong preference.


Okay, that's all! <end of rant/>


:)
 
Nope. Its a vital tool for my work, and honestly it is silly for people with thousands of dollars, sometimes tens of thousands of dollars, worth of camera gear to balk at the cost of software.


I have tried nearly everything out there. Affinity, On1, Luminar, Capture One. NONE came close to giving the image quality that Lightroom does, except for Luminar. Luminar is great, but very unintuitive to use. Its user interface is overly complex and it is SLOW compared to Lightroom.


What's wrong with the image quality on the others? Poor detail resolution and noise reduction/sharpening. Especially at high ISO speeds.


To me, my images are everything. I'm not compromising to save a few dollars.
 
I could probably save the $10/month I spend on LR/PS by putting the flow restrictor back in my shower head, but some things are worth paying for.
 
Corran said:
Nothing to do with money, everything to do with ideals. I'm not renting software, period.

LR6 / CS6 is just fine for me, even for editing commercial images.
Click to expand...




Until you buy a new camera that your old version won't support. As for ideals, that's a silly thing to make a moral stand on and you know it. It IS about money; you're just not willing to admit it.
 
I subscribe to the Adobe CC All Apps for $29.99/month (Price has increased to $52.99/month). I just view it as part of the "cost of doing business." I do use quite a few of the apps, not just the photo-related ones.

There is a Photo Plan for $9.99/month, which gives you LR, PS and 20gb of cloud storage.
 
Corran said:
Nothing to do with money, everything to do with ideals. I'm not renting software, period.
.
Click to expand...

What about what everyone spent on dinner last night? That meal was just “rented”.

If it cost $1 a year to “rent”, and the standalone perpetual license version cost $300, would you still be buying the standalone version instead of “renting” constantly improved versions for 200 years at a $100 savings?

If the answer is “no, I’d rent”, or any other scenario where the standalone option would cost someone more than the subscription model, then it actually is “about the money”.

I balked when they went to the subscription model because of my, cough, “ideals”, but went ahead and gave them my credit card number and signed onto the PS/LR CC plan. In hindsight this was one of the best decisions
I ever made, in this area. For me.
And as for the money involved, as others have said, in the overall scheme of how much we spend on all the things that cost us money, for the utility we can get out of this, if we use it a lot, and I do, it just isn’t that expensive.
The tank of gas I rented for my car yesterday was $60. Like many things, I’ll get over it.

And, yes, both PS and LR CC versions are both now at least a little nicer and more capable than the PS6 and LR6 I was using before. Not life or death better, but worth the money better. For me.
 
You nailed it Chris!

You nailed it Chris!

Chriscrawfordphoto said:
Nope. Its a vital tool for my work, and honestly it is silly for people with thousands of dollars, sometimes tens of thousands of dollars, worth of camera gear to balk at the cost of software.


I have tried nearly everything out there. Affinity, On1, Luminar, Capture One. NONE came close to giving the image quality that Lightroom does, except for Luminar. Luminar is great, but very unintuitive to use. Its user interface is overly complex and it is SLOW compared to Lightroom.


What's wrong with the image quality on the others? Poor detail resolution and noise reduction/sharpening. Especially at high ISO speeds.


To me, my images are everything. I'm not compromising to save a few dollars.
Click to expand...


Dear Chris,


At the urging of friends far more experienced and talented than myself I subscribed to CC with Lightroom and Photoshop and a couple of other things 4 years ago for $ 11.59 a month which includes tax here in PA.


I don't always even use it, as I have standalone PSP and Aftershot versions on my computers. But when I do the LAST thing I think about, is "Jeez, this costs too much".


Regards,


Tim Murphy


Harrisburg, PA :)
 
Chriscrawfordphoto said:
Until you buy a new camera that your old version won't support. As for ideals, that's a silly thing to make a moral stand on and you know it. It IS about money; you're just not willing to admit it.
Click to expand...

Wrong, on both counts. I used an old version of LR for quite awhile with my D800 when it came out. Adobe DNG converter made the files usable.

I will not rent software. Full stop.
 
And Larry, your "what-if" scenario is a pointless mental exercise. There are other implications of rented software than just cost. Just take for example the recent issue with a license for a certain effect or whatever it was getting terminated.

Adobe can shove it.
 
The first message I received when accessing Adobe Japan was "Operating System update required to install Lightroom"

Here in Japan it seems that the price is JPY 12,963 per year tax in (approx USD 118.00 / year). I have to drill down to see if Adobe Japan supports the English version (previously for stand alone version, English was not supported).

Currently I run my image processing computers off-line on old OS to accommodate film scanners... no way that's going to change.

What new feature was added in the last 12 months that would justify real time application updates?
 
Corran said:
And Larry, your "what-if" scenario is a pointless mental exercise. There are other implications of rented software than just cost. Just take for example the recent issue with a license for a certain effect or whatever it was getting terminated.

Adobe can shove it.
Click to expand...

It wasn’t pointless, but it was a mental exercise.
But, I’m glad to encounter people who know what they want to do, and do it, regardless.

Meantime, Could you post a list of those “other implications” of rented software, besides cost? Sounds dire. I’d like to make sure there isn’t some damning consideration I have overlooked in my happy acquiescence to the world of software circa 2019.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top