[AstroDave]

Skylum, maker of Luminare Neo image editor, has what looks like a good sale at the moment.

They are offering a lifetime license (as opposed to their subscrition version) for $99 (about 1/3 normal).

I don't do a lot of processing, but it's nice to have various software available. I currently have (and sometimes use ) older versions of PhotoShop Elements, and DxO Photolab.

Any Neo users here? If so, how do you like it? What does it do best (or better than some other options)? Does it work (well enough) on jpgs, or do I need RAW? Anything else?

Thanks.

[pepperberry farm]

Skylum, maker of Luminare Neo image editor, has what looks like a good sale at the moment.

They are offering a lifetime license (as opposed to their subscrition version) for $99 (about 1/3 normal).

I don't do a lot of processing, but it's nice to have various software available. I currently have (and sometimes use ) older versions of PhotoShop Elements, and DxO Photolab.

Any Neo users here? If so, how do you like it? What does it do best (or better than some other options)? Does it work (well enough) on jpgs, or do I need RAW? Anything else?

Thanks.

I used Luminar for a while, but found the photo editor from ON1 was more to my liking...

Photo Editing Software | Discover Photography & Picture Editing Software - ON1

[StiffLegged]

By coincidence I came across this article on software pricing this week.

https://bythom.com/newsviews/has-anything-really-changed.html

I have no axe to grind, my own processing software is more than a decade old…

[interested_observer]

I haven't used Luminare or ON1, but can say having access to more than a single raw processor is an excellent way to go. On the K1 there is a well-reported white dot noise problem - that is prevalent on Adobe (Lightroom and PhotoShop) in very low light conditions (AstroLandscapes). However, Capture One does not have the "problem" at all. The raw images are crystal clean upon being loaded into C1. Also Raw Tharepee has noise processing for impact noise that also removes the problem.

The bottom line is that different raw processors have different effects on the resulting loaded image. It's not really a Pentax problem per se, but more of an Adobe problem. The Nikon D800/810 had the same problem (white dots), but Nikon apparently tweaked the raw output of their camera bodies (image processing chain) to solve the "problem". Sony also used the same sensor in one of their A7 models. However, when comparing the raw outputs across these three bodies, the Pentax images stand out as a better overall image.

[johngs]

I have Luminar Neo, as well as On1 Photo Raw and DXO Photolab.
I find Luminar the easiest one to use, it's fun too. Yes, it works well with jpgs as well as Raws.
Downsides.. they keep trying to up sell it with optional addons and "extensions", some of which are good, and others just average.
I find On1 and DXO are better for noise removal and sharpening.
You could get their free trial and see if you like it.

[Fdooch]

I bought it at the pre-release stage. But they revoked my license, thereby stealing my money. Now I sometimes use the pirated version.
As for the software itself, it is intended for beginners or lazy. When used, the feeling of playfulness does not leave. But there is a certain wow effect. On my far from weak computer, the use of artificial intelligence tools slows down significantly. Almost a year has passed since the release, but the program's errors have not been fixed. They earn money by selling presets.

[btnapa]

Any Neo users here?

I bought the original Luminar and upgraded to NEO recently. I also bought the ON1 for its No Noise feature. I am still using a paid version of Photoshop as my primary RAW processor. I have access to Lightroom too but I never used Lightroom. They are all powerful softwares. It is just a matter of what you need and how much time you are willing to dedicate to learning what you purchase.

---------- Post added 12-25-22 at 08:05 AM ----------

They earn money by selling presets.

You are absolutely correct. I am being bombarded by Luminar and now ON1 on a daily basis pushing their presets and addons. It is becoming very annoying. I also bought the original Luminar and recently bought the NEO. I cannot located my NEO purchase info as they never sent me a conformation. It looks like I wasted my money on NEO. This is the last time Luminar is getting a penny from me. I am a landscape photographer and spend countless hour and days to get perfect skies. Luminar and all the others pushing their sky replacement gimmicky feature is an insult to photographers who try to get it in the real world. AI is nice for certain things (noise reduction, etc.), sky replacement is not one of them.

[Fdooch]

I bought the original Luminar and upgraded to NEO recently. I also bought the ON1 for its No Noise feature. I am still using a paid version of Photoshop as my primary RAW processor. I have access to Lightroom too but I never used Lightroom. They are all powerful softwares. It is just a matter of what you need and how much time you are willing to dedicate to learning what you purchase.

---------- Post added 12-25-22 at 08:05 AM ----------



You are absolutely correct. I am being bombarded by Luminar and now ON1 on a daily basis pushing their presets and addons. It is becoming very annoying. I also bought the original Luminar and recently bought the NEO. I cannot located my NEO purchase info as they never sent me a conformation. It looks like I wasted my money on NEO. This is the last time Luminar is getting a penny from me. I am a landscape photographer and spend countless hour and days to get perfect skies. Luminar and all the others pushing their sky replacement gimmicky feature is an insult to photographers who try to get it in the real world. AI is nice for certain things (noise reduction, etc.), sky replacement is not one of them.

I fully support your philosophy about replacing the sky. I bought it myself only because of the advertised function of removing wires and dust. And if the second one works adequately, then everything is not so clear with the wires. NEO developers from Ukraine. When I demanded a refund announced by them if the program did not like it, then on the basis that I was Russian, I was robbed. Well, I won't be impoverished) I don 't want to denigrate anyone or say anything against them . Just to warn you that you need to think 10 times about the need to buy NEO. What shortcomings of the program are you willing to put up with.

[btnapa]

When I demanded a refund announced by them if the program did not like it, then on the basis that I was Russian, I was robbed

Very classy of them. I got robbed too in a way and I am not even Russian!! Realistically, NEO, ON1, Topaz, DXO all came to market to compete with Adobe and take market share from the 900 lbs. gorilla of image processing. What they ended up doing was free R&D for Adobe. Adobe has slowly "incorporated'" all the innovations these other companies have managed to come up with. At the end Photoshop will have all of these innovative features incorporated into PS and LR and there won't be any need for all the others. And we all will pay the $10 monthly ransom (surly to go up at some point) for the rest of our lives for the privilege of using PS or LR!!!

[Fdooch]

Very classy of them. I got robbed too in a way and I am not even Russian!! Realistically, NEO, ON1, Topaz, DXO all came to market to compete with Adobe and take market share from the 900 lbs. gorilla of image processing. What they ended up doing was free R&D for Adobe. Adobe has slowly "incorporated'" all the innovations these other companies have managed to come up with. At the end Photoshop will have all of these innovative features incorporated into PS and LR and there won't be any need for all the others. And we all will pay the $10 monthly ransom (surly to go up at some point) for the rest of our lives for the privilege of using PS or LR!!!

Adobe products are a very powerful tool. In this regard, you always understand what you are paying for. On the other hand, you need to learn to use them. And competitors, with some exceptions, are narrowly focused and for those who do not want to understand the processes. Where do you have the masterpiece button)))

[fri98]

I have Luminar Neo, and although is simple, it is very good for some things, and very bad for others. I bought the extension pack as well and I can say I'm not in love with it. I come from Ps and Lr but had enough paying a monthly fee. So a friend from this forum recommended Luminar and I bought it instantly (I got it in the last day of black friday offer), and also purchased Affinity Photo (which I'm just started to learn).

I like Luminar is really easy to use, coming from Lr having a catalog (file management... kinda) to work with is a plus (something Affinity is lacking), but it is still buggy. I have an AMD Ryzen 7 5700 16gm and SSD computer that worked without problems in Ps and Lr, and when using Luminar's AI extensions (noise removal, super sharpness, etc.) it turns my computer into a Commodore 64, even moving the mouse is lagging on the screen, it turns it totally unusable until it finishes the process. I normally work my files from an external HD, and after reading Luminar's forums (which have several posts about this same issue), they recommend storing the files in your computer's main disk, which I did, and it didn't solve the problem, so for me this is a very big issue, especially when I feel that its super sharpness extension is way off if you compared to the results you get from Topaz's Sharpen AI (which I also have).

One thing I do like from Luminar is that it is a non-destructive software, just like Lr, meaning that all improvements you make to your files, are stored inside the software, leaving the original file as it was originally stored in your computer, so you can go back and make several versions of the same photo without needing to have several copies of the original file. This is something that Affinity just implemented, but is not there yet, they have their own way to get this, but it limits some parts of the workflow if you take this way.

As other's said before, it is sad that you'll be bombarded with advertisement (via email and the software itself) to buy presets, LUTs and whatever they feel entitled to.

So, as you can see, it does have its pros and cons like every software, to me the important question is what do you need it for? to me, if itis for personal use (family photos, pets, etc.) where I will not be doing heavy post process (including super sharpness), I now use Luminar Neo, and for serious work, I started to use Affinity, as it is a more professional tool, in combination with Topaz.

[btnapa]

I started to use Affinity, as it is a more professional tool,

I bought Affinity and Design when they first came out. I never really warmed up to the interface as I was used to Photoshop. I did not even use Lightroom for its quirks (cataloging, etc.). I upgraded from Luminar to Neo too but ended up using ON1 for noise reduction. I bought NEO specifically for portrait touchups and ON1 for noise reduction. Otherwise PS Photo RAW is still my main RAW processing software.