If you are on a budget, and don’t need Photoshop CC, then it is definitely less expensive to buy the standalone version of Lightroom.
These users may be wondering whether to continue using the standalone version of the software or to subscribe. For tasks Lightroom can’t handle, they may use an older version of Photoshop, a less powerful program like Photoshop Elements, or a plug-in such as the Nik Collection or Perfect Photo Suite 9. The second type of user carries out the bulk of their image processing in Lightroom. Alternatively, if you own a version of Photoshop CS and are not bothered about upgrading to Photoshop CC, you can buy the standalone version of Lightroom and use them together. For this user, the Creative Cloud option is the only choice if you want the latest version of Photoshop CC. The first uses Lightroom in conjunction with Photoshop and wants access to both programs. To start, we have to acknowledge that there are two types of Lightroom users. But today, I aim to cut through this negativity and take an objective look at the differences between the two options. Read about this on forums and photography websites and you will still come across a lot of negativity towards the Creative Cloud subscription model, especially from Photoshop users upset at the loss of a perpetual licence. There’s little doubt this was a raw deal, but Adobe listened and introduced a new package for photographers – a subscription to both Lightroom and Photoshop CC for $9.99 a month (or $119.88 per year). Not only was subscribing more expensive in the long run, compared to upgrading Photoshop regularly, but the license to use the software expired once monthly payments stopped.
For photographers who had already purchased the full version of Photoshop this represented a significant price increase. Creative Cloud is announcedĪdobe’s initial announcement of the Creative Cloud licensing concept was somewhat controversial as the price for a subscription to Photoshop ran at $20 a month (all prices in this article are in US dollars). But how do you know which is the best option for you? Read on to find out. You can still go for the standalone version, or you can buy Lightroom as part of a Creative Cloud monthly membership.
But ever since Adobe announced the Creative Cloud subscription service, photographers have been faced with two choices.
All you had to do was buy the full version of the program, and upgrade (if you wished) every time a new version came out. All of these have some system like this except PS, PSP and CorelDRAW.Buying Lightroom used to be simple. Even Google's free Picasa has this feature. Just be sure to get an app that has some built-in system to automatically protect your original images from edits you make, unless of course, you know for sure you won't need to go back later on. Lightroom, for example, has better digital noise cleanup and chromatic distortion (commonly known as purple fringe repair, which Lightroom lets you select directly from the image) than Dx0 Optics, so you have to read reviews or try most of these before you buy. I assume that most folks will find some features of one or another of these apps preferable. It is very fast and I think some of the functions are less complicated, plus it has lots more features. Of all of these, for quick and dirty editing and 'downsizing' the results for web submission, I'm beginning to prefer ACDSee.
No other major photo editor has a problem like this in my experience (and I'm still going back and forth between these apps as new versions come out), including ACDSee, Corel PSP, Dx0 Optics, CorelDRAW, Zoner Pro and even Photoshop itself. That's right, sometimes it chokes on one photo. It will choke when exporting one or more photos with an error stating there's 'insufficient memory'. In recent years I've been using this a lot with my state-of-the-art win7 32-bit system with 4GB RAM, which should be sufficient for viewing/editing at most around 15 or 20 pics no larger than 4.5MB ea (while not running any other software), but Lightroom continues to have some kind of memory issues that I'm sure they would prefer to associate with 'deficiencies' in my computer, even though it has all new hardware less than 2 years old.