Giving up Adobe Subscription

[wattsy]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 minute ago, andybarton said:

So long as the CC versions keep on working, the ones that I paid actual money for a few years ago, then I’m ok with that. 

CC versions are subscription versions. Maybe I'm missing something?

[Jeff S]

The Photographers’ Plan (in US) is $9.99 per month for full current LR and PS.  I use LR Classic (no longer with CC designation), which has the same interface as the standalone version, but with many more up to date features and support.

I don’t use or pay for cloud storage, and would quit Adobe if forced to use it.  Currently it’s just an option. Storage is cheap these days, and I feel much more secure with my own disk storage and back-up approach.  
 

Simple, complete (for me), and inexpensive (10 bucks a month).

Jeff

 

[Advertisement]

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

[andybarton]

24 minutes ago, wattsy said:

CC versions are subscription versions. Maybe I'm missing something?

I meant the Classic ones. Sorry.

[LocalHero1953]

1 hour ago, wattsy said:

I'm not sure I understand, Paul. The Photography plan comes with LR Classic CC.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Sorry, it would have taken longer than it was worth to explain what I did. Several years ago, after many years of using LR Classic, I extended my Adobe subscription to include 2Tb storage, intending to store, edit and manage everything in the cloud using LR CC. After a few initial hiccups, I found it was too risky* to use LR CC and LR Classic CC at the same time, so just used LR CC to edit and manage all my photos in the cloud, expecting LR CC functionality to catch up with LR Classic CC. When it became clear, after several years, that LR CC was being left underdeveloped (still no print module, for example) I chose to save some money, move all my images back to local storage and start using LR Classic CC again - paying £10/month instead of £30/month.

I still use LR CC on my laptop to ingest photos and transfer them via the cloud to my LR Classic CC catalogue, which runs on my desktop.

 

* LR Classic CC and LR CC couldn't agree about who was managing my catalogue - it would have been OK if they both thought they were, but they each thought the other was, and I lost some photos - fortunately I still had backups.

Edited February 25, 2021 by LocalHero1953

[Jeff S]

19 minutes ago, LocalHero1953 said:

Sorry, it would have taken longer than it was worth to explain what I did. Several years ago, after many years of using LR Classic, I extended my Adobe subscription to include 2Tb storage, intending to store, edit and manage everything in the cloud using LR CC. After a few initial hiccups, I found it was too risky* to use LR CC and LR Classic CC at the same time, so just used LR CC to edit and manage all my photos in the cloud, expecting LR CC functionality to catch up with LR Classic CC. When it became clear, after several years, that LR CC was being left underdeveloped (still no print module, for example) I chose to save some money, move all my images back to local storage and start using LR Classic CC again - paying £10/month instead of £30/month.

I still use LR CC on my laptop to ingest photos and transfer them via the cloud to my LR Classic CC catalogue, which runs on my desktop.

 

* LR Classic CC and LR CC couldn't agree about who was managing my catalogue - it would have been OK if they both thought they were, but they each thought the other was, and I lost some photos - fortunately I still had backups.

It’s no longer called LR Classic CC, just LR Classic.  Lots of confusion created by the CC designation, especially since cloud storage is optional.  LR CC is the dumbed down version, at least for now. I have no interest in it.
 

Jeff

[LocalHero1953]

12 minutes ago, Jeff S said:

It’s no longer called LR Classic CC, just LR Classic.  Lots of confusion created by the CC designation, especially since cloud storage is optional.  LR CC is the dumbed down version, at least for now. I have no interest in it.
 

Jeff

Indeed, totally confusing. I called it LR Classic CC to imply the subscription version rather than the old single payment standalone version.

[Anbaric]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

34 minutes ago, andybarton said:

I meant the Classic ones. Sorry.

For Photoshop, CS4-CS6 can still be activated and used. CS-CS3 can still be used but can no longer be re-installed and activated, unless you have the magic installers and serial numbers that Adobe made available when they killed the activation servers (these are no longer available). LR6 can still be activated and re-installed (not sure about all the previous versions). At some point, Adobe will probably kill the activation servers for everything before CC. Unless some more activation-free versions are made available, that will just leave those activation-free versions of CS2 and CS3 (if you have them), old pre-CS versions of PS like PS 7.0 that never needed online activation, and anything you have installed now (until your computer dies).

[wattsy]

All is now clear.

I'd still suggest that CC is good value in that you have access to the latest versions of PS at any time. Not so much for the features but just for compatibility with the latest operating systems and hardware.

[Anbaric]

Just now, wattsy said:

All is now clear.

I'd still suggest that CC is good value in that you have access to the latest versions of PS at any time. Not so much for the features but just for compatibility with the latest operating systems and hardware.

My copy of Photoshop 7.0 from 2002 still works under the latest version of Windows 10 on current hardware. It's different in the Mac world, though.

[wattsy]

1 minute ago, Anbaric said:

My copy of Photoshop 7.0 from 2002 still works under the latest version of Windows 10 on current hardware. It's different in the Mac world, though.

That's great but, as you say, it's different on a Mac. Besides which I don't think it is too decadent to spend a tenner a month to avoid the various pitfalls of running older software. For example, does PS 7 work with the latest (or a fairly recent) version of ACR?

[Guest Nowhereman]

^ A "tenner"? I grew up when a "fiver" meant something. Early 60's a night in NYC: we're lined up outside the Peppermint lounge — the Twist was big — and I ask the bouncer how long a wait to get in. He responds, "Five quid per person will get you in now". I ask how much in dollars and he said, "25 bucks" (about $250 in today's dollars): he wasn't British but was using the the pre-war 5$/£ exchange rather than the current one then of $2.80/£.
_______________________
Frog Leaping photobook 

Edited February 25, 2021 by Nowhereman

[Jeff S]

Interesting priorities here.  We spend thousands (if not tens of thousands) on Leica and other gear, and some balk at ten bucks a month for the ability to fully edit and manage those pics.  I used to spend far more than 10 bucks a month on film alone, not counting darkroom supplies, and those processing tools were far less flexible, convenient, and capable than what’s available today. For the cost of a nice dinner and drinks, my basic annual PP expenses are covered.  Different strokes for different folks.

Jeff 

[andybarton]

But, if you are not getting any benefit from the £20 per month, why keep lining Adobe's pockets unnecessarily.

I have been going on a big spring-clean economy drive, kicking out any of my "service providers" who do not add value to my life. Unfortunately for Adobe, they are one of them.

[Jeff S]

And why are you spending double the cost of LR and PS to start?

Jeff

[andybarton]

3 hours ago, LocalHero1953 said:

backup via Backblaze instead

That is $60 per year for unlimited cloud storage backup.

Which is an amazing price. It's a pity that I have never heard of them.

 

Apple do 2TB iCloud for £6.99 per month. I have heard of them.

[Anbaric]

19 minutes ago, wattsy said:

That's great but, as you say, it's different on a Mac. Besides which I don't think it is too decadent to spend a tenner a month to avoid the various pitfalls of running older software. For example, does PS 7 work with the latest (or a fairly recent) version of ACR?

No, ACR was at that time an extra plugin you had to buy separately, and PS7 isn't compatible with the CSx versions. But I generally prefer other raw converters, even when I have a compatible version of ACR (as with my Nikons and CS6). PS I just use as an editor.

[jaapv]

8 minutes ago, Jeff S said:

Interesting priorities here.  We spend thousands (if not tens of thousands) on Leica and other gear, and some balk at ten bucks a month for the ability to fully edit and manage those pics.  I used to spend far more than 10 bucks a month on film alone, not counting darkroom supplies, and those processing tools were far less flexible, convenient, and capable than what’s available today. For the cost of a nice dinner and drinks, my basic annual PP expenses are covered.  Different strokes for different folks.

Jeff 

I think that some folks are  not used to subscription software. In the professional world it is quite normal. For instance my Dental practice software including my X-Ray editing and filing (and off-site backup) costs about 2500 Euro a year.

[andybarton]

3 minutes ago, jaapv said:

I think that some folks are  not used to subscription software

It's not that necessarily, it's whether that subscription offers value for money.

For £20/month Adobe rent you two major bits of software, neither of which are better than the desktop versions, and 1TB of cloud storage pus a load of other software that most people wouldn't use. In today's world, that is poor value for money.

[Jeff S]

1 minute ago, jaapv said:

I think that some folks are  not used to subscription software. In the professional world it is quite normal. For instance my Dental practice software including my X-Ray editing and filing (and off-site backup) costs about 2500 Euro a year.

My life is full of monthly ‘subscriptions’... phone bills, utility bills, insurance costs, food, etc.  The $120/yr for LR and PS isn’t much different than I used to spend buying and upgrading the standalone versions on a regular basis. And the programs are far more capable now.

Jeff

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Jeff S]

3 minutes ago, andybarton said:

It's not that necessarily, it's whether that subscription offers value for money.

For £20/month Adobe rent you two major bits of software, neither of which are better than the desktop versions, and 1TB of cloud storage. In today's world, that is poor value for money.

Ten bucks a month for essentially same as desktop (former standalone) versions. Backup options are plentiful and not expensive.  Presumably you’ll need to buy replacement software, right?  
 

Jeff