[Durf]

It's more like a rental than a subscription. Just my opinion.

I agree, Adobe is a rental; not a subscription. Once you stop paying you are evicted from the program......completely.

I'm using ON1 now and it does most everything I want/need it to do, I get free updates until the release of the next version and then have a choice to "pay" for the next version or just keep using the 2018 version. Not paying for the new version does not get me evicted from the program I am currently using.

If ON1's next version has cool new features I know I'd love to use I will probably pay for it; if not, I still have the program I am currently using without the fear of being "evicted" from it.

Adobe is awesome though and I know if I was a pro and processing 100's or perhaps thousands of images a month it is what I'd be using for sure.

Just in the last few years though so many good new RAW processing programs have come on to the scene, I'm not sure if Adobes "rental" model was the wisest thing for them to do in the long run.....

[emalvick]

Oh yes, if I was a pro, I'd probably use LR too. I honestly think other software is better for processing raw images, especially on an image by image basis. But if I was making money at the business and wanted to streamline things, LR is the way to go, especially with the added benefit of Photoshop for the monthly fee. The workflow is where LR shines as few other software really get that part completely down. I'm close with the catalog software I use and DxO or On1, but if I was trying to kick out photo shoots be it weddings, portraits, or other very specific situations, I might fall onto LR for speed with recognition and adjustment for the limitations I find in the software.

And, that is why Adobe can get away with this. It's hard for software to get a foot in the door. It's happening here and there. CO looks to be superior, but it is definitely geared towards professionals. I find DxO great because I can get better than LR results on individual photos quite quickly, but workflow lacks a bit. On1 needs refinement. Affinity Photo is a great Photoshop alternative. And, even if Adobe's model isn't the smartest in the long run, they could walk it back if they desire and go to something more conventional.

[Tas]

The workflow is where LR shines as few other software really get that part completely down.

I know you've said you're not a pro, but I was wondering what you considered to be the elements needed for a pro workflow that LR has and how it works compared to the On1 workflow?

[Fcsnt54]

Actually it is... Only Adobe sets up a subscription so that the software is crippled at the end. In the other cases, I am paying about $100 a year for small incremental updates with the only benefit over Adobe that I do get to keep the software.



BTW, Adobe's model is like having a magazine subscription that when it's run out, you're only allowed to look at the cover and perhaps the table of contents. Real subscriptions would let you freeze where you stop and keep the whole magazine. It's more like a rental than a subscription. Just my opinion.



Really, I should stop with all the little upgrades and bite the bullet and get CO, and perhaps I will save up for that route. DxO is quite good and will hold me over for a few more years (should DxO close up shop) at which point I could buy CO and move on.

Actually it isnt... a subscription definition is paying for use of a product or service. Yes you can twist that definition as you please, but essentially thats where the difference is between adobe and other programs. With adobe you are paying to use there product and service. Product as in program and service as far as updates. Doesnt matter on how minor they make it. You dont want to pay for their product and services they take back their program.

On the other hand, nothing is free and companies need to make money. On1 sells you a product, you are not forced to update/upgrade it, and will continue to work as it should(no matter how pour it ight be). In ways to fund product development and make money, They sell a new product, might still be the same product with a different name, but its a new product with different features.




---------- Post added 06-22-18 at 08:40 PM ----------

I agree, Adobe is a rental; not a subscription. Once you stop paying you are evicted from the program......completely.

I'm using ON1 now and it does most everything I want/need it to do, I get free updates until the release of the next version and then have a choice to "pay" for the next version or just keep using the 2018 version. Not paying for the new version does not get me evicted from the program I am currently using.

If ON1's next version has cool new features I know I'd love to use I will probably pay for it; if not, I still have the program I am currently using without the fear of being "evicted" from it.

Adobe is awesome though and I know if I was a pro and processing 100's or perhaps thousands of images a month it is what I'd be using for sure.

Just in the last few years though so many good new RAW processing programs have come on to the scene, I'm not sure if Adobes "rental" model was the wisest thing for them to do in the long run.....

Welcome to the modern age. When talking about renting an item and subscribing to an item, yu are talking about the same thing. Only difference is in the matter of what happens in that period. A rental you arent recieving anything other then the program. No updates, no improvements, when the rental period is over you are forced to give it back. Subscription on the other hand you are paying for the product until term ends or you dont want the service anymore. In reallity you can say well i subscribe to a magazine, but there is differences in the application. Adobe is more like other services such as dry cleaning, security, tv, internet; while On1 is more like a camera company where you get firmware updates for that model, but you want the new model you have to buy a new one(best part the old one still functions).

[Tas]

Welcome to the modern age.

There's nothing new about why they went to a subscription model: Adobe reports record revenue (yes, again) | Photo Rumors


Interestingly whilst the decision to adopt a subscription model is clearly a good business decision it is also what makes products like On1 attractive to many.

[Mikesul]

There's nothing new about why they went to a subscription model: Adobe reports record revenue (yes, again) | Photo Rumors


Interestingly whilst the decision to adopt a subscription model is clearly a good business decision it is also what makes products like On1 attractive to many.

So everybody wins?

[Winder]

So everybody wins?

I have been using LR for years now and while I don't like the new model, they have definitely made big improvements to the software since going over to it. The improved profitability might be resulting in more resources being used to improve it. Its faster and they have added several new features. It had gotten painfully slow.

[emalvick]

I know you've said you're not a pro, but I was wondering what you considered to be the elements needed for a pro workflow that LR has and how it works compared to the On1 workflow?

I think the integrated catalog/DAM feature is a pro-step, and while I don't think LR is the best at a DAM, I do think it works well enough. I also think they have a lot of nice workflow features that are quite smooth for working within shoots and processing a lot of photos quickly.

While On1 may be on the way, I just find it missing on the ability to quickly copy develop settings or sync develop settings or even work with something analogous to collections and so forth.

I do realize On1 is trying to get there, and most commercial software can work fine for pros to some regard.

I actually rely more on DxO, and it is fantastic for my limited amount of processing. But it is a bit clunky when trying to work through a shoot of similar photos. It isn't like it can't be done, but I occasionally miss the sync features in LR.

---------- Post added 06-28-2018 at 08:22 PM ----------

Actually it isnt... a subscription definition is paying for use of a product or service. Yes you can twist that definition as you please, but essentially thats where the difference is between adobe and other programs. With adobe you are paying to use there product and service. Product as in program and service as far as updates. Doesnt matter on how minor they make it. You dont want to pay for their product and services they take back their program.

On the other hand, nothing is free and companies need to make money. On1 sells you a product, you are not forced to update/upgrade it, and will continue to work as it should(no matter how pour it ight be). In ways to fund product development and make money, They sell a new product, might still be the same product with a different name, but its a new product with different features.

Your definition for subscription seems awfully like a purchase. i.e. any purchase is the payment for a good or service. A subscription implies a continuing payment for a good or service on some regular basis. Most times when you subscribe to a product you get to keep the product. In cases where you don't, it really does become a rental.

Regardless, you are right, nothing is free, and I never said it should be. Just because I don't want to pay for LR's model doesn't mean I want it for free. Hell, if LR had a means for the user to keep the version of LR the user is at when ending a subscription, I might be willing to pay with this model. Granted, that shouldn't mean the user gets to quit at one month, but I choose not to rent my software; that's all. My money goes to other companies instead. No big deal.

This method really should help the On1's and other software that will hopefully creep in on LR in terms of market share and software capability.

[Tas]

While On1 may be on the way, I just find it missing on the ability to quickly copy develop settings or sync develop settings or even work with something analogous to collections and so forth.

That's odd, I find working on an image then syncing across a range of other shots even simpler than LR, it's just a matter of being in browse, selecting the image you've processed and those you want to sync, select those too and press the sync button. All done.

You could do it by presets too, but I see that approach as a way of capturing a style that you may want to use again, or where you've got the basis to work on a range of images but need to dial in some different masks or fine tune the PP more. Both techniques are very similar to LR.

Of course you find what works for you and crack on I reckon.