This allows you to make the Photoshop user interface larger so that it is easier to read on high resolution monitors. Camera Shake Reduction to salvage handheld images that should have been shot on a tripod. Real-time healing brush. This offers a fast and accurate live preview of the healing brush. Note that some users especially people retouching skin on portraits may prefer the results of the legacy brush.
GPU acceleration for certain tasks healing brush, sharpening, enlarging. Note that many older computers cannot take advantage of these GPU features. Focus Mask allows you to create a selection based on areas of the image that are in or out of focus.
While I love the concept, this tool creates a hard-edged mask for which I have yet to find a use. Lightroom CC offers the following advantages vs Lightroom 6 : Dehaze to remove or add fog or haze. Boundary Warp to handle irregular edges in stitched panoramas.
Guided Upright to more easily and accurately straighten photos. Local white and black adjustment sliders to control the lightest and darkest parts of the image via brush or gradient tools. Mobile versions of Lightroom for iPhone, iPad and Android. The CC Photography Plan is very popular and unlikely to go away. If you upgrade cameras or decide you want to get new features in the future, you will probably have the same options.
Get another RAW converter and keep using an old version of Photoshop. This is a good option if you value quality and want to save money.
Switch to another editing package. Note that you should investigate whether you will additionally need to buy another RAW conversion program, as many alternatives to Photoshop either do not support RAW or do not offer sufficient quality for RAW conversion. I have dabbled with a few commonly-mentioned options, but I find they fall well short of my needs.
I agree, it's not forced on us, but honestly if you use it for work, forced or not, you need something powerful and learning a new software is very counter productive. But if the idea is that one can walk to work instead of driving 10 miles, yes, just skip dinner and a couple hour of sleep and you get the same result. Photographers are being milked and are cross-financing all the 3D and video tools Adobe has been developing — and all we get are some minor improvements yet pay the same as this new industry with far less users.
Ask yourself why you want to be a fanboy - I rather we, as an industry, ask for a better service or less costs. I would go to Affinity in a blink Also they do not have action scripts and droplets. I don't understand why anyone who doesn't use channels or actions perpetually pays for a license for something that doesn't actually evolve and it is questionable whether it actually needs to evolve much anyway.
The difference is one could buy Adobe software outright. No more payments. Whereas I seriously doubt you are going to buy the utilities companies, buy a cell phone network, and buy an ISP. With that said, I'm not beating up on Adobe too much based on how much CS6 cost.
I don't really mind renting. I like the fact that I can pay a monthly fee and get the latest updates. What I don't like is that Adobe locks me for a year and I only use my camera for 7 or so months per year. It's cheaper to just order a new card lol so Adobe can't charge me for those 5 months I do not edit photos. I'd like to see a proper monthly plan so that you don't have the annual commitment. Sure, it may cost a little more they really want people to commit, and I can't blame them for that but it would be nice to be able to 'shelve' your plan or go to a lower tier when you don't need it, or upgrade to a higher tier when you do on a monthly basis.
I don't mind the subscription as long as my work is generating income, but I do wish that they had an option for a perpetual license, even if it was a couple hundred dollars. For a hobbyist, however, a subscription really blows. Perpetual would be great, but beside controlling effectively the copies of their product, they also fixed the upgrade skip that one could play with in the past.
They would allow one or two version skip, then the user would have to purchase the full license if they missed too many upgrades. There will never be a perpetual license, this thing is way too profitable. As a hobbyist, I don't mind the subscription model at all. To me, it is no different than my monthly Netflix subscription, or the cost of paying for time on a tennis court. I prefer to look at it in context of the total cost of photography as a serious hobby.
Obviously, there are not-so-serious hobbyists who spend less on their equipment e. I would venture to say that most wouldn't. So, does this not make PS and LR more accessible to the hobbyist? In practical terms, all software has a cost in perpetuity. The stuff on FB is usually people doing it on their phones and flinging it online, but I'm talking files with actual cameras can be edited very easily on CC with special features just for that.
Well, that MAY be something that becomes more popular and mainstream as time goes by, but it's really not something that most people are doing, and secondary in the overall use of Photoshop. Also, chances are there are apps out there that are probably better suited for that kind of work as well, and you may actually be better off with them if you do that kind of work regularly. I regularly shoot image stacks, and although I can stack in Photoshop, I use a dedicated program for stacking, because it much better suited to the task Adobe keeps adding all these wiz-bang features to Photoshop to try to make it the be-all end-all image processing app, while ignoring bugs and other dysfunctional aspects of the program.
I'd rather have a stripped-down functonal Photoshop than the bloated bug box it has become. Adobe does not get a cent from me on subscription nonsense! CS6 here, on Windows 10 machine upgraded this year. No issues whatsoever. For what I do, freequency separation et all, it is still amazing. Lightroom 4 also. Don't like the subscription model, either I buy the whole software or it is a no go. It seems like a reasonable cost to learn the industry standard for photo editing.
I've tried two other competitor products that boast not having the subscription. Neither replaced the workflow of LR or the capability of Photoshop. I've stopped being seduced by cheaper alternatives. However, the Photography CC is where I draw the line.
Nor will I buy all of it to get AE. So I understand why some would be put off buying the subscription of Photography CC when something like ON1 does all the editing just fine. I still used CS 6 and will not give Adobe another dime if I don't have to. I own this and see no reason to shell out money to them.
Now of course they do have some pretty cool thing I would like to try but NO I just make it work and I have my old Nik plug in for the start when they were in Southern Cal and that still works so hold on you boots because I will not be milk on this one.
And I'm on an old MacBook Pro and not going to give in. I have good class and pretty nice lights and it works for me. And I do have Capture one 10 and I haven't upgraded to 11 still on the fence on that one. But CS 6 does well for me. And I can still get clients and that the bottom line. I just have this thing about owning something and not renting it. Last night though I purchased a set of actions that when I tested them will no work with CS Home Topics Photoshop.
How many people are still running CS6, or have you upgraded to the cloud? Posted In:. Premium Photography Tutorials Check out the Fstoppers Store for in-depth tutorials from some of the best instructors in the business. Log in or register to post comments. Jen Photographs michaeljin - August 16, It's prohibitive if you're a hobbyist. Deleted Account - August 16, I'm not sure of any repercussions but you can have it installed on more than two computers and when you run it on the third computer, it informs you it's already signed in on two other computers and gives you the option to sign out of the others.
Wasim Ahmad michaeljin - August 16, It could just be the way it handles raw conversion - for instance, with a Canon camera, you get slightly better raw conversion on their Digital Photo Professional software than Adobe, though at the cost of a lot of usability when it comes to the software.
0コメント