Because of a fire I lost all my software (and 5000+ images). I previously used Photoshop CS5.
Now I see that Adobe no longer sells stand-alone Photoshop but rents Photoshop Creative Cloud. What has been the experience with Photoshop CC? Is it as good as stand-alone Photoshop?
But I see that Adobe does sell stand-alone Lightroom, which I never used previously. Is it as good as Photoshop?
I really liked Adobe Bridge. Does it come with Photoshop CC or with Lightroom?
I have great reservations about renting software because of the long term cost, prefer stand-alone software. The software industry seems to be getting greedy. And renting (or even automatic updating of stand-alone software, like Windows) exposes the user to software bugs such as the now infamous Photoshop CC log-in problem.
On another note, consider using a backup service like Carbonite for your computer. That way if a fire or other disaster strikes again you can get everything back. The cost of these services is pretty cheap. There are several companies that offer this.
Sorry about your loss of all that work.
Can you contact Adobe and see if they have a record of your CS5 purchase ? If they can verify that surely they have the ability to push the program to you electronically due to your circumstances. Good luck.
Posted by Dennis Plank on May 12, 2014 at 12:26 PM
Patrick:
If you registered CS5 when you bought it, they should still have a record of it at Adobe and I think you can probably download it again. I've done it with older Adobe software when I've purchased a new machine. As for your question, LR5 has some decent editing capabilities, but it's not really designed as an editor. It's real purpose is organization and file management. That said, a lot of people do most of their work in it. Since it's designed for file management itself, it does not incorporate Bridge. Given the way Adobe is going, I doubt that they'll keep it stand alone past this iteration, but you never know.
Patrick,
Sorry about your loss. It is a good lesson as to why one needs off-site backup.
I too was on CS5 but with a new camera found that ACR would not convert the files. So I bought CS6 about a month ago. It was still available from B&H and is still under support.
You COULD buy CS6 and "own it" but it will never get updated to support security fixes nor new camera models. My suggestion is (and it's just that, many may not agree) to forge ahead with Photoshop CC Photographer's Plan for 10 bucks a month, you will get two installs of PS CC, Bridge CC & Lightroom, plus 20GB of Cloud storage and a free Behance website portfolio. I know subscription software seems annoying but it's where everyone is going with it. Adobe just happened to be the first. But there are a couple benefits That are worth it IMO. First, for me, it's cheaper. I used to upgrade PS every 18 months for $200. Now it costs me $180 technically with the subscription. Obviously that's only a benefit to those that upgrade every version, although they have taken the big hit with the first version purchased. I don't plan on NOT using Photoshop and I absolutely want the latest versions, and with the subscription I always get that. I know bugs can get introduced but the improvements are 10x that number, little things they constantly fix under the hood. But even moreso, always having the latest version means you are always on the version with the latest security updates. if you are never ever on the internet then that's not an issue, but who isn't? (btw, the fix for the login issue is here). Things have changed a lot in 5 years and the latest Heartbleed issue is a good example of why we need to run our world with blast shields up at all times.
There is a feature in Photoshop CC that I would not live without at this point, and that's the ACR Filter. That seals it 100% for me. I do a lot of processing in ACR before images hit Photoshop, but to be able to bring up ACR as a filter later (especially for local edits with the brush) is killer. And if you apply it as a Smart Filter it's all non-destructive, although that's not a huge issue when you have layers at your disposal.
As far as Lightroom goes, you as a longtime PS user who likes Bridge will NOT do well with Lightroom IMO (LR users, hold your fire for a sec!). I think you and I work the same way, we have our files organized on our drives the way we like it and we use Bridge and all of it's hyper-amazing features to manage our world. You give that up in LR, because you have to import your images into Catalogs which is something I just can't stand. I know where my files are and I access them directly, so this import into catalog thing doesn't cut it for me personally. And Catalogs can go corrupt sometimes according to posts I've seen about that subject. But the bigger issue is giving up all of the Photoshop features. Lightroom is basically a supercharged ACR, and all of your edits are not applied to the image just like with ACR, which is nice. But your editing power is restrained to exactly that: non-destructive ACR-style edits. I think if you start with Lightroom as a photographer you'll love it immensely and many do. But if you've been entrenched in Photoshop's Layers and Blending Modes and working with Masks and Alpha Channels to hold selections, plus the obvious ability to use it as a graphics tool for text, art, video edits, not to mention all of the Actions & Plugins you may already have, switching off Photoshop and onto LR might not make you completely happy. Maybe there's something else I'm missing regarding LR, but to give up layers and masking and modes and paths and all of the other power just doesn't cut it for me. If you don't use any layers or any of that stuff and never do other types of artwork such as working with text and images, then LR may a better choice. It has arguably surpassed Photoshop in its printing capability, although Adobe closed the Gap with PS CC in that area.
Just some thoughts/$.02/etc... Please understand that I'm coming at this being a Photoshop Addict, even crazy enough to put myself through the certification exams for CS5, CS6 and CC, so I admit I am totally completely biased, lol! If you do the subscription model, you do get Lightroom too, and if you fall in love with it, you will have a year subscription to reorg your world with PS CC on hand along with LR so you can get all of your past work ready to do a full switch to LR from that point on.
Light Room is pretty decent for organizing and cataloging images, but I have an alternative that I've found to be very powerful. It's called PhotoSupreme from IDImager systems.
The program allows you to add labels, (which are compatible with Lightroom), allows some editing, you can create virtual 'portfolios' and manage all your image files and folders. It also has built-in support for uploading to Flickr, Facebook, etc.. The program is available for Mac and Windows, and there is a PostgreSQL and MSSQL version for multi-users on a network. It's well worth the money, and far more powerful than Bridge.
It's worth a look, and there is 30 day free trial.
EDIT: I was typing when Paul posted his ideas on the subject.
First, I am still using CS6. I don't use Lightroom. However, at some point I may go the subscription route for the reasons Paul indicated--updates and security fixes. I'm not happy that Adobe is not providing the same updates for CS6, though.
Second, if you are a inveterate Photoshop user (I am--I do all my processing in CS6, aside from using ACR to convert my NEF files) Lightroom may be a step backward for you: It is simply not powerful enough. Also, Lightroom does not support Tony Kuyper's Luminosity masks or his other actions. I find TK's actions to be indispensable.
---
I've heard good things about CrashPlan for cloud storage. I don't use it, but it appears to be pretty good.
There are some clear misconceptions about what LightRoom is, and what is is not.
If you have all of your images organized in a directory structure on your hard drive the way you want them and have been using Bridge, you can import ALL of that structure directly into Lightroom using the Import function of LightRoom. The option you would choose is "Add" which simply Adds all of the information to the Lightroom catalog and DOES NOT move or change any of the physical image files on disk. Once that is completed, you should only use LightRoom for data management functions. That includes moving, renaming, deleting, copying files. LightRoom makes all of that easy with either simple commands to delete files, or drag and drop to move. Where people get into trouble with LightRoom is falling back to old habits and doing things outside of LightRoom. I could go on for a long time about the benefits of managing images in Lightroom versus a file management system only like Bridge. There IS a reason Lightroom has become so popular and powerful in the photographic community.
Lightroom's Develop module provides ALL of the functionality provided by Adobe Camera Raw. It is EXACTLY the same underlying code base. The difference is the user interface in LightRoom is different, and in my opinion, far superior to the user interface in Adobe Camera Raw. As far as LightRoom not supporting TK's masks, layers, etc, it was never intended to. That's why you have Photoshop. The interface/interaction between LightRoom and Photoshop is completely seemless. Once an image has been process in the Develop module, you simply choose the option to "Edit In Photoshop". All of the RAW processing instructions are passed to Photoshop (exactly the same thing that happens with ACR), the image opens in Photoshop, you do all of your layer work, TK masking, whatever you want, then simply choose File / Save. That creates a PSD (or Tiff based on preferences) that is physically saved in the same directory as the original RAW file. It is also added to the LightRoom catalog.
If I were you, I would NOT buy CS6. You are buying into a product that you are certain will see end of life sooner rather than later as Adobe is clearly moving to CC and the subscription model. For $10/month as a CS5 owner you will have access to Photoshop CC and LR.
I am with Paul and Keith, especially with the ability to use ACR as a filter.
A small caveat—it is possible to get a faulty upgrade through CC. Recently, the upgrade before this last one dropped the use of the backspace delete button to remove wandering points on the magnetic selection and polygonal selection. This was obviously a programming error. Much screaming by many people, including myself produced no Adobe action. They weathered the storm and corrected the error along with some upgrade improvements (including the ACR used as a filter). I can understand the action as a business decision, but they handled it poorly, turning a massive Adobe stonewall to the complaints. To my way of thinking, it could have been handled better and more honestly.
Keith has many good tips I find LR as a great cataloging system and a good to great developing system with PS as a additional processer when you need more such as layers and adjustments
I wouldn't call it a clear misconception, I have tried Lightroom 3, 4 and now 5 and each time I remind myself that it doesn't fit my workflow because of what it is. Actually I totally agree with Keith as far as LR's ability to manage your digital world, and when he said "you should only use LightRoom for data management functions", etc, I felt sharp pain in my head, lol! kidding... The fact is, that if you want to commit to LR's user interface, go forth and conquer, I do understand how it works and it's a great tool for that as evidenced by the millions that use it, literally. I probably should have stressed that I only meant for ME, that it's the absolute last thing I want to do because I already fly around my PC with Explorer, and Bridge works like Explorer, simply shows you what's there. After doing years of corporate software blah blah blah I know Windows like my refrigerator, so I have no desire to have an added layer to organize files. But for those considering using it, please don't let my biased cranky opinion confuse anyone who's thinking about Lightroom, it's a uber-popular tool, and fantastic images get processed with it every second on earth. As Keith said, it wasn't designed for Kuyper actions, etc... but I do think that seasoned Photoshop users probably wouldn't be pleased giving it up for what Lightroom is. Hope that makes sense.
As Keith said, it wasn't designed for Kuyper actions, etc... but I do think that seasoned Photoshop users probably wouldn't be pleased giving it up for what Lightroom is.
I understand Paul that LR just isn't for you which is certainly fine. I don't want people left with the impression that it is a choice between either LightRoom or Photoshop. It is clearly an "And/Both". LR brings it's strengths to the party and PS brings it strengths to the party. For me, both are an integral part of the workflow.
I don't want people left with the impression that it is a choice between either LightRoom or Photoshop. It is clearly an "And/Both".
Same here. I hope my post didn't come off as 'either/or'. I don't use Lightroom because I use PhotoSupreme for image management and CS6 for processing. It's become a fairly seamless workflow for me.
I think what Keith is getting at is if a user has both Lightroom and Photoshop, they have a closely integrated pair of programs that makes their workflow fairly seamless. In the interest of efficiency when dealing with large numbers of images, this gives a nice return on investment.
Like Paul, I use CS6 and Bridge exclusively as it can do everything that LR can, and the same is not even close to being true vice versa.
However, if you choose the CC package, then LR is included anyway so that comparison may be moot.
In the Mac universe, Aperture is still probably the better tool. I've evaluated each version of Lightroom, and while its photo adjustment tools are a little better than Aperture's, neither is primarily a photo adjustment program; both are photo management applications that offer some adjustment tools. Both link quite effectively to Photoshop, allowing you to manipulate a copy of the photo. I think that Aperture's workflow – more precisely, unstructured workflow – is a better fit for a lot of avian photographers. But YMMV.
Took the plunge this afternoon, signed up for the $9.99/month Photoshop/Lightroom deal. Still nervous about on-line rental. Strange things, like failure to validate each month, can happen. Though convenient for software developers, push technology isn't all that great (or safe) for users. Also, I expect Adobe to raise the price. How soon remains to be seen. The whole software industry is moving in the direction of what is most convenient and profitable for developers but to disadvantage or risk of users. Ask anyone who installed a faulty Windows update. Or had a bank make a mistake during bank-initiated (rather than user-initiated) "automatic" bill payment. I installed only Photoshop CC and Bridge, both of which seem to work fine including recognition of D7100 NEF files by ACR. Not sure whether I will ever install Lightroom. Paul DeCesare described my file organization aptly. Like others, Photoshop with ACR and Bridge seems to meet all my needs. Question for me is what additional "strengths" Lightroom brings to the party.
Like Paul, I use CS6 and Bridge exclusively as it can do everything that LR can, and the same is not even close to being true vice versa.
While that statement is true, it is not useful because is is comparing the power of Photoshop with the power of Lightroom. Why do people continue comparing Lightroom to Photoshop? The product that Lightroom replaces in the workflow is Bridge. Feel free to google comparisons between Bridge and Lightroom. A more useful statement would be to compare what can be accomplished with CS6 and Bridge with what can be accomplished with CS6 and Lightroom. If folks are happy with bridge, that's great, but let's stop comparing Lightroom to Photoshop. They are not intended to fulfill the same needs any more than Bridge is intended to do the job Photoshop does.
Discussion
18 repliesNow I see that Adobe no longer sells stand-alone Photoshop but rents Photoshop Creative Cloud. What has been the experience with Photoshop CC? Is it as good as stand-alone Photoshop?
But I see that Adobe does sell stand-alone Lightroom, which I never used previously. Is it as good as Photoshop?
I really liked Adobe Bridge. Does it come with Photoshop CC or with Lightroom?
I have great reservations about renting software because of the long term cost, prefer stand-alone software. The software industry seems to be getting greedy. And renting (or even automatic updating of stand-alone software, like Windows) exposes the user to software bugs such as the now infamous Photoshop CC log-in problem.
Patrick Nixon
Sorry about your loss of all that work.
Can you contact Adobe and see if they have a record of your CS5 purchase ? If they can verify that surely they have the ability to push the program to you electronically due to your circumstances. Good luck.
If you registered CS5 when you bought it, they should still have a record of it at Adobe and I think you can probably download it again. I've done it with older Adobe software when I've purchased a new machine. As for your question, LR5 has some decent editing capabilities, but it's not really designed as an editor. It's real purpose is organization and file management. That said, a lot of people do most of their work in it. Since it's designed for file management itself, it does not incorporate Bridge. Given the way Adobe is going, I doubt that they'll keep it stand alone past this iteration, but you never know.
Good luck,
Sorry about your loss. It is a good lesson as to why one needs off-site backup.
I too was on CS5 but with a new camera found that ACR would not convert the files. So I bought CS6 about a month ago. It was still available from B&H and is still under support.
Roger
You COULD buy CS6 and "own it" but it will never get updated to support security fixes nor new camera models. My suggestion is (and it's just that, many may not agree) to forge ahead with Photoshop CC Photographer's Plan for 10 bucks a month, you will get two installs of PS CC, Bridge CC & Lightroom, plus 20GB of Cloud storage and a free Behance website portfolio. I know subscription software seems annoying but it's where everyone is going with it. Adobe just happened to be the first. But there are a couple benefits That are worth it IMO. First, for me, it's cheaper. I used to upgrade PS every 18 months for $200. Now it costs me $180 technically with the subscription. Obviously that's only a benefit to those that upgrade every version, although they have taken the big hit with the first version purchased. I don't plan on NOT using Photoshop and I absolutely want the latest versions, and with the subscription I always get that. I know bugs can get introduced but the improvements are 10x that number, little things they constantly fix under the hood. But even moreso, always having the latest version means you are always on the version with the latest security updates. if you are never ever on the internet then that's not an issue, but who isn't? (btw, the fix for the login issue is here). Things have changed a lot in 5 years and the latest Heartbleed issue is a good example of why we need to run our world with blast shields up at all times.
There is a feature in Photoshop CC that I would not live without at this point, and that's the ACR Filter. That seals it 100% for me. I do a lot of processing in ACR before images hit Photoshop, but to be able to bring up ACR as a filter later (especially for local edits with the brush) is killer. And if you apply it as a Smart Filter it's all non-destructive, although that's not a huge issue when you have layers at your disposal.
As far as Lightroom goes, you as a longtime PS user who likes Bridge will NOT do well with Lightroom IMO (LR users, hold your fire for a sec!). I think you and I work the same way, we have our files organized on our drives the way we like it and we use Bridge and all of it's hyper-amazing features to manage our world. You give that up in LR, because you have to import your images into Catalogs which is something I just can't stand. I know where my files are and I access them directly, so this import into catalog thing doesn't cut it for me personally. And Catalogs can go corrupt sometimes according to posts I've seen about that subject. But the bigger issue is giving up all of the Photoshop features. Lightroom is basically a supercharged ACR, and all of your edits are not applied to the image just like with ACR, which is nice. But your editing power is restrained to exactly that: non-destructive ACR-style edits. I think if you start with Lightroom as a photographer you'll love it immensely and many do. But if you've been entrenched in Photoshop's Layers and Blending Modes and working with Masks and Alpha Channels to hold selections, plus the obvious ability to use it as a graphics tool for text, art, video edits, not to mention all of the Actions & Plugins you may already have, switching off Photoshop and onto LR might not make you completely happy. Maybe there's something else I'm missing regarding LR, but to give up layers and masking and modes and paths and all of the other power just doesn't cut it for me. If you don't use any layers or any of that stuff and never do other types of artwork such as working with text and images, then LR may a better choice. It has arguably surpassed Photoshop in its printing capability, although Adobe closed the Gap with PS CC in that area.
Just some thoughts/$.02/etc... Please understand that I'm coming at this being a Photoshop Addict, even crazy enough to put myself through the certification exams for CS5, CS6 and CC, so I admit I am totally completely biased, lol! If you do the subscription model, you do get Lightroom too, and if you fall in love with it, you will have a year subscription to reorg your world with PS CC on hand along with LR so you can get all of your past work ready to do a full switch to LR from that point on.
Light Room is pretty decent for organizing and cataloging images, but I have an alternative that I've found to be very powerful. It's called PhotoSupreme from IDImager systems.
The program allows you to add labels, (which are compatible with Lightroom), allows some editing, you can create virtual 'portfolios' and manage all your image files and folders. It also has built-in support for uploading to Flickr, Facebook, etc.. The program is available for Mac and Windows, and there is a PostgreSQL and MSSQL version for multi-users on a network. It's well worth the money, and far more powerful than Bridge.
It's worth a look, and there is 30 day free trial.
EDIT: I was typing when Paul posted his ideas on the subject.
First, I am still using CS6. I don't use Lightroom. However, at some point I may go the subscription route for the reasons Paul indicated--updates and security fixes. I'm not happy that Adobe is not providing the same updates for CS6, though.
Second, if you are a inveterate Photoshop user (I am--I do all my processing in CS6, aside from using ACR to convert my NEF files) Lightroom may be a step backward for you: It is simply not powerful enough. Also, Lightroom does not support Tony Kuyper's Luminosity masks or his other actions. I find TK's actions to be indispensable.
---
I've heard good things about CrashPlan for cloud storage. I don't use it, but it appears to be pretty good.
--P
If you have all of your images organized in a directory structure on your hard drive the way you want them and have been using Bridge, you can import ALL of that structure directly into Lightroom using the Import function of LightRoom. The option you would choose is "Add" which simply Adds all of the information to the Lightroom catalog and DOES NOT move or change any of the physical image files on disk. Once that is completed, you should only use LightRoom for data management functions. That includes moving, renaming, deleting, copying files. LightRoom makes all of that easy with either simple commands to delete files, or drag and drop to move. Where people get into trouble with LightRoom is falling back to old habits and doing things outside of LightRoom. I could go on for a long time about the benefits of managing images in Lightroom versus a file management system only like Bridge. There IS a reason Lightroom has become so popular and powerful in the photographic community.
Lightroom's Develop module provides ALL of the functionality provided by Adobe Camera Raw. It is EXACTLY the same underlying code base. The difference is the user interface in LightRoom is different, and in my opinion, far superior to the user interface in Adobe Camera Raw. As far as LightRoom not supporting TK's masks, layers, etc, it was never intended to. That's why you have Photoshop. The interface/interaction between LightRoom and Photoshop is completely seemless. Once an image has been process in the Develop module, you simply choose the option to "Edit In Photoshop". All of the RAW processing instructions are passed to Photoshop (exactly the same thing that happens with ACR), the image opens in Photoshop, you do all of your layer work, TK masking, whatever you want, then simply choose File / Save. That creates a PSD (or Tiff based on preferences) that is physically saved in the same directory as the original RAW file. It is also added to the LightRoom catalog.
If I were you, I would NOT buy CS6. You are buying into a product that you are certain will see end of life sooner rather than later as Adobe is clearly moving to CC and the subscription model. For $10/month as a CS5 owner you will have access to Photoshop CC and LR.
A small caveat—it is possible to get a faulty upgrade through CC. Recently, the upgrade before this last one dropped the use of the backspace delete button to remove wandering points on the magnetic selection and polygonal selection. This was obviously a programming error. Much screaming by many people, including myself produced no Adobe action. They weathered the storm and corrected the error along with some upgrade improvements (including the ACR used as a filter). I can understand the action as a business decision, but they handled it poorly, turning a massive Adobe stonewall to the complaints. To my way of thinking, it could have been handled better and more honestly.
I understand Paul that LR just isn't for you which is certainly fine. I don't want people left with the impression that it is a choice between either LightRoom or Photoshop. It is clearly an "And/Both". LR brings it's strengths to the party and PS brings it strengths to the party. For me, both are an integral part of the workflow.
Same here. I hope my post didn't come off as 'either/or'. I don't use Lightroom because I use PhotoSupreme for image management and CS6 for processing. It's become a fairly seamless workflow for me.
I think what Keith is getting at is if a user has both Lightroom and Photoshop, they have a closely integrated pair of programs that makes their workflow fairly seamless. In the interest of efficiency when dealing with large numbers of images, this gives a nice return on investment.
--P
However, if you choose the CC package, then LR is included anyway so that comparison may be moot.
Adobe states that they will continue to sell CS6 on supported platforms indefinitely. See the FAQ:
http://www.adobe.com/products/cs6/faq.html
CC apparently is not available in some countries, so CS6 will continue.
Roger
While that statement is true, it is not useful because is is comparing the power of Photoshop with the power of Lightroom. Why do people continue comparing Lightroom to Photoshop? The product that Lightroom replaces in the workflow is Bridge. Feel free to google comparisons between Bridge and Lightroom. A more useful statement would be to compare what can be accomplished with CS6 and Bridge with what can be accomplished with CS6 and Lightroom. If folks are happy with bridge, that's great, but let's stop comparing Lightroom to Photoshop. They are not intended to fulfill the same needs any more than Bridge is intended to do the job Photoshop does.