![]() To reinforce this Adobe even give away PS with LR. I don't think that anyone could expect to sell a pixel editor for £600 in today's market. This is why Adobe had to move PS to a subscription model. Obviously, not everyone uses a raw converter but the majority do. When Serif decided to have a fresh look at pixel editors, vector graphics and DTP they started from scratch.Īt the time the market for photo editing software had moved to raw converters becoming the "normal" and pixel editors basically used for heavy duty pixel mangling like extensive cloning, compositing etc. Serif's original pixel editor PhotoPlus was a basic PS clone like PaintShop Pro. I think some history helps to put AP in perspective. Long post but you did ask Also largely cut and paste from another post That said, I never licensed Photoshop because I could never justify the cost for my uses and needs. I paid Adobe $75 or whatever to upgrade from LR 5 to LR 6, and I would have paid another $75 or so to upgrade from LR 6 to LR 7, possibly even up to now (LR 11), but Adobe decided not to let me do that, and I just refuse to go the subscription route. Years ago I licensed Adobe Lightroom, then e.g. * For my own reasons that I won't debate, I have a strong visceral reaction against subscription software-which is the only way to lawfully-license a non-ancient version of Photoshop. If Serif emails me tomorrow saying, 'Affinity Photo 2.0 is out, you can upgrade for $75,' I'll jump on it, sight unseen, out of trust in and gratitude toward Serif. This is very subjective, but considering that I paid $50 and what I've gotten, I think a fair price would have easily been $100 or $150. * Yes, the low price is a definite point in Affinity Photo's favor. * Serif has made a fan of me by providing in Affinity Photo an initially-good product, providing a range of helpful tutorial videos, fixing an annoying bug I found, and providing no-extra-cost updates for approaching four years. * I've been using Affinity Photo for approaching four years. Or put it another way: if one needs or wants a pixel editor, and for whatever reason one can't or won't subscribe to an Adobe plan that includes Photoshop, then what pixel editor should one choose? I think the most common and arguably most sensible answer is Affinity Photo. ![]() I suspect that Affinity Photo is so popular because it seems to be overall the best non-subscription pixel editor, and by any reasonable standard it's a quite good pixel editor. Is it only because of the very low price?
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |