[JJ_SO]

They are developing their app constantly. So either there's no need for the PlugIn because there's already a function available, or they support it sooner or later.

[Rainer]

"I hate Adobe" ...

 

Well, I hate christmas cookies ... at least after the event, after

consulting the scales in the bathroom. I usually stop eating

them for quite a while.

 

This solution works for Adobe-SW as well. If you really and

seriously "hate" Adobe, or the way their SW is developing

(cloud-everything, rent-SW, and the like), then stop using

it now.

 

The point is, if you don't stop using it, if you continue to use

an older version, you never learn the alternatives, because

you never spend enough time with them to work with them

as confident as you do wit Adobe-SW. So, in the long run,

if you require support for a new camera or whatever, you will

feel to stay with Adobe is the way to go.

 

Once you worked with the alternatives (and there are enough)

you will see, that there is a world outside the jail of Adobe.

 

It took two weeks until I could do the same things in the same

speed with "gimp" that I usually do with Adobes PS/PS-E ...

I never really started to use Lightroom, so I'm already using

other raw-converters as a standard. Nevertheless, I assume

another two weeks to get familiar with a raw-converter of your

choice ... and eventually add some more weeks to test different

SW (as there is not onle the one choice).

 

In the long run these four to six weeks are well spent. It is certainly

better than continue "hating" and "using" Adobe.

 

Just my 2cts ... Rainer

[miro]

It took two weeks until I could do the same things in the same

speed with "gimp" that I usually do with Adobes PS/PS-E ...

For me GIMp is least 15..25 years behind Adobe PS.

Essential features like 16bit color channel arrived at 2013 in GIMP  The essence of PS is nondestructive editing. Such primitives barely exist or are ongoing GIMP activity. It is something that PS has for decays.

 

One question – why do you need new camera. Are you reside in canon jail?  :-)

At photographical point of view I’m still happy with my Canon 400D & 50d.

 

The difficult part for me to choose the right balance between new tools/technology and know-how of you tools.

If you change your gear and sw tools you will never make good picture. At the same time if you stick to your old known gears tools techniques and post-process workflow you will miss many opportunity that are available with new technology.

[Rainer]

I saw a comment like that coming.

Sorry, I'm not taking the bait.

[mst]

The point is, if you don't stop using it, if you continue to use

an older version, you never learn the alternatives, because

you never spend enough time with them to work with them

as confident as you do wit Adobe-SW.

Very true.


Personally, however, I never really liked the UI of gimp (and that's also true for photoline). But there are no doubts some really nice alternatives. On OS X, Pixelmator was the first serious one IMO, and Affinity designer looks very promising, indeed.


"Back then" Corel Photopaint was a serious competitor, too, but that's history, unfortunately.


Now, regarding LR and C1: it's not just a new raw converter that I'm looking for (in fact, being an Apple user, I have a RAW converter built into the OS). If that was my main concern, I'd just buy C1 and never look back.


But with Aperture, I will some day loose a really powerful media library. And that's the part that hurts the most.


So far, neither LR nor C1 seem to offer the same feature set that Aperture has in this regard.


Now, one thing were Adobe really has the edge is Creative Cloud. I'm not necessarily a big fan of cloud services, especially for images, but with CC, Adobe gets closest to the multi-device support that Apple used to offer out of the box.


-- Markus

[popo]

I guess my key problem is I don't fit an Adobe defined target. I need more than PSE, but don't want full PS. As it stands, I've settled on PSE.

 

The alternative question has risen before. I did try a few others previously but they didn't quite do it for me. I'm debating Corel Painshop Pro, actually I still use Jasc Paintshop Pro 7 from before the Corel takeover. I like no fuss interfaces, but it does lack some new tricks.

[perezellen]

I too found much drawbacks with adobe.Photoshop is quite expensive since it has so many features. <span>It of course is not as powerful as full Photoshop and lacks many of the effects, filters and some of the tools of full Photoshop.</span>