update photoshop without CC fees

[wparsonsgisnet]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I just upgraded the OS on my mbp to 10.15.7 (Catalina) and my copy of PS CS5 needs to be upgraded.  I don't want to go to CC and pay rent each month.  What PS version can I buy for a one-time or reasonable annual fee that will work?

Many thanks,  Bill

[mmradman]

Apparently latest Mac OS is now called Big Sur, I was avoiding Catalina and still sticking with Mojave as it works OK with CC, support probably stops towards end of 2021.

Monthly subscription, at least in UK, to Adobe that includes ACR, Photoshop, Bridge and LR is less than a packet of cigarettes, I stopped smoking over 10 years ago but still view cost of a pack of cigarettes as a yard stick for out of pocket expense, by that metrics Adobe CC  is really cheap and healthier alternative to unsupported software.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[Jeff S]

Bill, you say you don’t want subscription, but are open to a reasonable annual fee, which is the subscription concept.  I buy the photographer’s plan from Adobe, which costs 10 bucks a month ($120/yr), and includes the latest Photoshop and Lightroom.  I primarily use LR Classic, and don’t use cloud storage, which is optional. I consider it a bargain, without any more upgrading costs or hassles, but YMMV.

Adobe stopped supporting CS6 in 2017, and I believe that it doesn’t run on Catalina (only up to Mojave). 
 

Jeff

Edited November 23, 2020 by Jeff S

[Anbaric]

3 hours ago, wparsonsgisnet said:

I just upgraded the OS on my mbp to 10.15.7 (Catalina) and my copy of PS CS5 needs to be upgraded.  I don't want to go to CC and pay rent each month.  What PS version can I buy for a one-time or reasonable annual fee that will work?

Many thanks,  Bill

Nothing is now available from Adobe for a one-time fee except Elements. The best editor you can buy with a perpetual licence is probably Affinity Photo. It's worth looking out for Black Friday deals on this, or on the CC plan if you decide to go that route.

[250swb]

CC isn't rented, you don't pay a deposit and if/when you stop using it Adobe don't check to make sure you've not scratched or pranged it.

The CC thing is a leap, and sometimes I don't use it for a month which took some getting over at the start, but it's cheaper than the purchased updates used to be, and pretty seamless being able to pick and choose how you want to work and when you want any new features. It's one packet of cigarettes for some, two less drinks down the pub for others.

Edited November 24, 2020 by 250swb

[pgk]

The problem that I have is that I am quite happy with CS6 but have to pay £10 or £20 a month in order to run the equivalent under the latest OS. The 'plans' have add ons which I neither need nor want, aren't at all clear - £10/month  for LR (I don't want it), PS (I do) and cloud storage (I don't want), or £20/month for PS (???). And I then have to deal with Adobe's inconsistent and flaky systems which I have never found very good. I've been using Photoshop since v.4 and really don't want to change because I'm so used to it that I find it quick and easy, but as a customer I'm far from impressed with their costs and plans. I understand that there are development costs associated with new camera RAW converters and ensuring smooth running and security on new OSs, but I question the relative high cost of this given what I want and need. Certainly Adobe are not customer orientated.

[wattsy]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

20 minutes ago, pgk said:

Certainly Adobe are not customer orientated.

Because they don't offer a subscription for Photoshop cheaper than £10 per month just to suit you? As has already been pointed out numerous times, it's the price of a packet of fags, a Netflix subscription or three coffees from Nero's. Considering the utility value of the software, it is doesn't require much use to get your money's worth each month and it's a lot healthier than the fags, coffees or Netflix options. I remember when the Adobe software was standalone and it used to be an expensive process keeping it up-to-date in terms of OS architecture and hardware changes (68k to Power PC, OS9 to OSX, G4 to Intel, etc.). Now you pay a modest subscription and update as and when required or desired.

[pgk]

52 minutes ago, wattsy said:

Because they don't offer a subscription for Photoshop cheaper than £10 per month just to suit you?

But I pay out a minimum of £120/year to achieve nothing other that being able to use a newer OS. To me this is iniquitous regardless of the cost.

[wattsy]

1 hour ago, pgk said:

But I pay out a minimum of £120/year to achieve nothing other that being able to use a newer OS. To me this is iniquitous regardless of the cost.

Surely that's your problem and, in any case, how on earth is it iniquitous? Are you suggesting that Adobe are obliged to support your standalone version 6 in perpetuity. Presumably the software still works fine for the OS that was current when 6 was released? You could argue, I think, that Adobe ought to support it if there is an operating system change within a year or so of original release but you can hardly expect them to keep the software compatible with all future OS releases – especially when there are are changes to hardware and OS architecture like the move to 64-bit only and, now, the new Apple Silicon. 

The cost of software is part of the cost of being in business (I believe that you are a professional) and a tenner a month is not much.

Edited November 24, 2020 by wattsy

[pgk]

Its not the money, its the packaging. I don't need or want much of what's on offer - storage or Lightroom. I simply object to being offered no alternative other than a package that I neither need nor want. Why can I not simply buy/lease/whatever, just Photoshop?

Perhaps Leica should adopt a similar marketing strategy and only offer body/lens/memory cards only, with no options to buy bodies on their own. I can imagine the reaction here, but apparently Adobe can do just this and everyone accepts it.

Edited November 24, 2020 by pgk

[wattsy]

9 minutes ago, pgk said:

Its not the money, its the packaging. I don't need or want much of what's on offer - storage or Lightroom. I simply object to being offered no alternative other than a package that I neither need nor want. Why can I not simply buy/lease/whatever, just Photoshop?

You can subscribe to only Photoshop – it's about £20 per month or whatever the single app price is – but that would be an odd thing to do when the same software is available as part of a package for Photographers for half the price. There is no obligation to download LR. (Bridge is free anyway.) The Photographer package price is essentially a special price aimed at capturing the amateur/hobby market but is still valid for professional use. Adobe aren't going to offer Photoshop cheaper than that, however you feel about it.

I guess I don't really understand what you are objecting to. It seems like you are cutting your nose off to spite your face or something like that.

[Jeff S]

13 minutes ago, pgk said:

Its not the money, its the packaging. I don't need or want much of what's on offer - storage or Lightroom. I simply object to being offered no alternative other than a package that I neither need nor want. Why can I not simply buy/lease/whatever, just Photoshop?

Perhaps Leica should adopt a similar marketing strategy and only offer body/lens/memory cards only, with no options to buy bodies on their own. I can imagine the reaction here, but apparently Adobe can do just this and everyone accepts it.

So don’t use LR and don’t use cloud storage (it’s optional).  Then your only beef is the price, which to me is less than former standalone upgrades, despite the added packages.  
 

Leica packages features in their cameras that some don’t use, including live view, video (some models), etc.  Users here complain all the time about unwanted, and wanted, features. And even when Leica has pared down features on some models, e.g., no rear screen, the price has remained roughly the same.

Jeff

[pgk]

32 minutes ago, wattsy said:

I guess I don't really understand what you are objecting to.

Why can we not have simply, straightforward pricing? I feel that we are constantly being sold things in ways which have ulterior motives somewhere along the line. Natural cynicism probably.

[plasticman]

42 minutes ago, Jeff S said:

So don’t use LR and don’t use cloud storage (it’s optional).  Then your only beef is the price, which to me is less than former standalone upgrades, despite the added packages.  

I think it's a more nuanced problem than you're allowing for: it's not the actual price, it's a feeling that the ability to own software has been taken away from the user. 

There are a few different problems as well:

• Adobe have accidentally deleted user's images on their own devices when updating CC. This is the sort of problem that can happen when software companies shift in their concept of ownership of software and the resources associated with it.
• the package price for Photoshop and LR have been kept low because of the competition in this market. If you need even one single extra application from Adobe, the monthly price skyrockets immediately. (So you better hope the competition for Ps and LR doesn't disappear).
• in the case of these relatively recent legacy applications - both Ps and LR would run fine on everything including the latest Apple Silicon machines (until Rosetta is phased-out). It's the installers that Adobe have decided not to update - which would probably be a trivial programming update, but one they've chosen not to do.

There's a lot more that can be said about stuff like lock-in into an application (with proprietary formats and so on), which make it more and more difficult to exit Adobe's system. 

And one thing that I particularly hate is the constant surveillance (Adobe have several different applications that run in the background and 'phone home' at regular intervals - some of these are even memory hogs that can slow down your whole machine).

Over the years I've spent many thousands of pounds buying Adobe software (Photoshop, Lightroom, After Effects, Illustrator and many others). Right now I can't use any of them (my personal Ps + LR subscription lapsed while I used my previous company's applications), so I have to say it would hurt to need to spend maybe 100 quid a month to rent those apps, that I've bought and already own, but can't use.
 

[wattsy]

2 minutes ago, plasticman said:

Over the years I've spent many thousands of pounds buying Adobe software (Photoshop, Lightroom, After Effects, Illustrator and many others). Right now I can't use any of them (my personal Ps + LR subscription lapsed while I used my previous company's applications), so I have to say it would hurt to need to spend maybe 100 quid a month to rent those apps, that I've bought and already own, but can't use.

I'm not in the business of defending Adobe (and I take your point about the transient nature of software subscription versus ownership) but can you not run those applications on an older version of the OS?

Like you I've bought the various Adobe creative suites and upgrades numerous times over the years and it has been an expensive and tedious exercise at times. I just find it easier (and better for cashflow) to pay for the full CC subscription. You get every Adobe application (most I don't download or use) for about £40 per month. Is it really £100 in Sweden for the equivalent?

[Jeff S]

8 minutes ago, plasticman said:

I think it's a more nuanced problem than you're allowing for: it's not the actual price, it's a feeling that the ability to own software has been taken away from the user. 

There are a few different problems as well:

• Adobe have accidentally deleted user's images on their own devices when updating CC. This is the sort of problem that can happen when software companies shift in their concept of ownership of software and the resources associated with it.
• the package price for Photoshop and LR have been kept low because of the competition in this market. If you need even one single extra application from Adobe, the monthly price skyrockets immediately. (So you better hope the competition for Ps and LR doesn't disappear).
• in the case of these relatively recent legacy applications - both Ps and LR would run fine on everything including the latest Apple Silicon machines (until Rosetta is phased-out). It's the installers that Adobe have decided not to update - which would probably be a trivial programming update, but one they've chosen not to do.

There's a lot more that can be said about stuff like lock-in into an application (with proprietary formats and so on), which make it more and more difficult to exit Adobe's system. 

And one thing that I particularly hate is the constant surveillance (Adobe have several different applications that run in the background and 'phone home' at regular intervals - some of these are even memory hogs that can slow down your whole machine).

Over the years I've spent many thousands of pounds buying Adobe software (Photoshop, Lightroom, After Effects, Illustrator and many others). Right now I can't use any of them (my personal Ps + LR subscription lapsed while I used my previous company's applications), so I have to say it would hurt to need to spend maybe 100 quid a month to rent those apps, that I've bought and already own, but can't use.
 

As always, individual circumstances vary and each person will have a different take.  I haven’t personally experienced any of these issues, but I am wary enough to keep my options open and to keep abreast of potential alternatives.  I’m not blindly loyal to any company, and Adobe has provided enough reasons over the years for me to remain vigilant.  But, for now, for me, it serves very well, and at a good price. Others certainly have other perspectives and experiences.  The good news is that there are some decent alternatives, at least in combination. None, however, prompt me to switch at this point. 
 

Jeff

[wattsy]

It was a shame that Adobe were allowed to buy Macromedia. At a stroke, it removed a major competitor from the marketplace. I remember having the Macromedia suite at one point and – with Freehand, Dreamweaver and xRes (and, later I think, Fireworks) – it was a very decent alternative to the Adobe apps of the time.

Edited November 24, 2020 by wattsy

[plasticman]

2 minutes ago, wattsy said:

 Is it really £100 in Sweden for the equivalent?

You caught me exaggerating, Ian. It's £78,58 per month - if paid monthly. Paying a year upfront brings it down to around £56 - but iirc there's a 3-month penalty if you ever want to cancel that before the term is up.

I have to run the latest OS on two of the laptops at home. I have another for scanning, but even that one doesn't have a CD insert - so I'd somehow need to get the installers from Adobe - which I know they are extremely reluctant to do. I cannot be arsed with it, to be frank.

[Bobitybob]

5 hours ago, wattsy said:

Surely that's your problem and, in any case, how on earth is it iniquitous? Are you suggesting that Adobe are obliged to support your standalone version 6 in perpetuity. Presumably the software still works fine for the OS that was current when 6 was released? You could argue, I think, that Adobe ought to support it if there is an operating system change within a year or so of original release but you can hardly expect them to keep the software compatible with all future OS releases – especially when there are are changes to hardware and OS architecture like the move to 64-bit only and, now, the new Apple Silicon. 

The cost of software is part of the cost of being in business (I believe that you are a professional) and a tenner a month is not much.

The last stand alone version of LR, Version 6 is a 64 bit application, but the installer is 32 bit so the app will run on a 64 bit OS.  Curiously, so was LR 5 and that has a 64 bit installer and will still install and run on Big Sur.  I'll leave it to others to decide why Abobe changed the installer architecture to effectively render perfectly good software useless because it won't install on newer 64bit macOS.

I'm not sure of the differences between CS5 and CS6 but If I was the OP and had a version of CS5, or could get a copy to try I'd give it ago as if it's like the stand alone version of LR5 it may well have a 64 bit installer.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[wparsonsgisnet]

Thanks, everyone.  What a great response to a cry for help.  I am not a subscription guy.  I was maintaining a website that was build in DreamWeaver and had a CC subscription for that at several 100 bucks a year.  I rewrote the site in WIX and killed CC.  Don't wanna go back to those guys.

So, I bought elements, and also the video companiion with the black friday discount.  I don't use PS much.  I am a Capture One user since the M8 arrived and am very happy with it;  I do some repairs in PS, so just wanted an inexpensive version.

I have a so-far-unused freeby for Lightroom, courtesy of a Leica body purchase.  Nice to have in the pocket.

Thanks again, everyone.  Happy Thanksgiving and stay safe,  Bill