« Blog Note: Adobe Don't Take My CS6 Away (Sung to the Tune of 'Kodachrome') | Main | Sunday Support Group: So Nice to See »

Thursday, 20 February 2020


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

I can recommend Affinity. Easy-ish to learn, and it doesn't cost an arm and a leg. There are numerous good tutorial videos. Spend an afternoon watching some to get a feel.

I get that many folks hate subscription plans. I'm one of them. That said, the Adobe Photographer's plan at $12 a month )taxes included, for PSCC, Lightroom (I don't use it), Adobe Bridge with ACR thrown in for good measure (I do use it big time), is incredibly fair in pricing for what it delivers.

If you use RAW image files, any non destructive edits you make with any proprietary or even open source processing methods record those edits in unique metadata tags that aren't recognized by other editing software. Thus, a future proofing argument can be made to stick with the most widely used and likely to be long-term supported RAW image editing software. I'd wager that it's Adobe Camera Raw (ACR). For less than $12 per month, I'd keep that Adobe Photography plan subscription even if I also used other RAW converters and image editing apps as well (and I do). Just sayin...

The latest Mac Book Pro (I bought mine few months ago) runs Mojave, and I run CS6 w/ Mojave just fine. So your computer may be able to run Mojave. I actually wanted to run (from an external SSD hard drive) the OS X just prior to Mojave (to run other software) and Apple said they would normally do it, except it was not compatible w/ my new MacBook Pro.

Funny, I bought CS5 on a student discount way back when and have never upgraded since. It's plenty good enough for photography uses. I had CS2 before that, and it too was good enough.

FWIW, I think this proves that Adobe was mostly right to turn to a subscription model for its software. It used to cost, what, $500 every few years for the new Photoshop? And by about CS6, it was plainly good enough to get off of the upgrade train.

Of course, I got the PC version, and for now it is supposed to muddle along. Of course, I have since switched to using Linux for my home machine and my work issued me a Mac... Anyway, all the photo processing I do, I can accomplish using GIMP (GIMP is pretty full-featured, and I have simple needs). Maybe I will pay the Adobe tax for a cloud version of lightroom.

My computers are mostly for software development, not photography. But if most of what I wanted from my computer was to support photography, I would stick with whatever OS supported the thing I wanted to do--the photography part. Everything else, what, email, using a web browser (that takes care of blogging, doing the taxes, banking, shopping, ordering food...).

If you are leaving Photoshop for any reason, you may want to try "Affinity Photo". It is said to be very similar to Photoshop in its user interface, and to be as capable in the area of photo editing.

I have never found Photoshop to be my soulmate, so I do not use either it or Affinity Photo and cannot provide personal knowledge of the degree of their interchangeability for users. However, I have seen so many positive comments on the web that in your shoes I would not hesitate to download the trial version. BTW, as a supplemental benefit, the price is amazingly low.

- Tom -

You could leave Apple, instead...

Source code for photoshop is available here for the curious -https://computerhistory.org/blog/adobe-photoshop-source-code/ I don't know what it takes to do a build.

I remember seeing version 0.86 several places in NYC - mission graphics and broadway video come to mind - but you had to buy a barnyscan to get it. Nobody could believe how cheap it was compared to a Scitex or Quantel Paintbox low end system that cost in the several hundred thousand dollar range. It was amazing how much you could make if you could read a manual and understand what the art director was talking about.

Once again, as JeffS points out, why doesn't every manufacturer provide raw files in DNG common form?

Have you tried Pixelmator Pro? Depending on what you used PS for, it could be an alternative. Also, it won't break your piggy bank.

Hmmm. Is buying a used Apple computer an option for staying with your photo software of choice? I have to say that the interconnected Vudoo of hardware and software is my LEAST favorite aspect of digital photography. I really dislike having to contemplate hardware upgrades because the magic-digi-whatsis under the hood won't work with the newest RAW format (which is all TIFF anyway). Arg! If they made me photo-Czar I'd send out some unkind edicts.

I had a bout of Photoshop/Lightroom separation anxiety when I retired and had to return my employer’s lap top. No longer on the employer’s Adobe license, I looked around a discovered the newest iteration of the image editing application I first learned on years ago: Paintshop Pro, now offered by Corel. It is inexpensive and nearly as powerful as Photoshop. It will cover just fine maybe 95% or more of all the average photographer needs to do, although some functions take a few more steps than Photoshop. Also get the Lightroom equivalent, Aftershot Pro. A limited version is included with Paintshop Pro. This is adequate for casual users and has powerful global editing and asset management capabilities. The full version is also reasonably priced.

Mike, you might want to try going back to High Sierra which if you do not have one of the newer iMacs or Mac Mini will be doable. When Mojave comes loaded in the Mini you can not go back. I am sticking with High Sierra as CS6 and even CS3 work. I am sure others with more computer brains will give you more advise but I am not a fan of things in the clouds as I like seeing them in my hands as I have the CDs of both PS systems.

Mike, you are usually more nuanced than that. Sure, Apple updated its operating system such that older apps would not work without an update. But almost every other developer has updated, so I assume it's not that hard. Adobe hasn't, not because they can't, but because they want everyone to pay a recurring fee for the newer version. I am in the same boat with Lightroom.

You don't need to forego PhotoShop. The subscription for current PS + LR is a meager $12 per month. Less than three fancy coffees per month! It's the standard of the industry. It's mature and feature rich. Skip one meal out per month and continue to live in modern times. At least where post processing is concerned.

And yes, I've tried DXO and Capture One and no, they are not the same...

At this time I won't upgrade to Catalina (10.15) until I resolve a lot of my 32bit app issues, Photoshop cs6 included. Catalina isn't a must have upgrade at this point and not being able to support 32 bit makes not upgrading a no brainer in my case. I will be curious to what you go forward with on Photoshop. I liked Aperture so much I never upgraded that because I didn't have to, now I will definitely need to look for a good alternative. As one gets older, I am 65 this year, having a bunch of software subscriptions is not an ideal way to budget financial resources.

Time to jump into Affinity Photo?

50 bucks once and you own it forever.

You can feed a horse oats and such to pull your wagon, slow but works. A Tesla will not run on oats, neither will any computer. its called 64 bit computing.Sorry

Not just Apple
CS6 and Earlier on Windows 10

Windows 10 is not a supported operating system for CS6 and earlier product versions. Limited testing with CS6 revealed no issues. Adobe recommends customers do their own testing on a non-production partition to ensure new OS'es work with their hardware, drivers, and workflows. Current support for CS6 is limited to up and running assistance (installation, deployment, downloading, and licensing) until discontinuation of support on May 31st, 2017. See Adobe Support Policy for full details.

YMMV, but I have never resented paying Adobe $10 per month for the package of Photoshop and Lightroom. We might want it to be otherwise, but the software world changes and knowing I can keep up and also get new function for the applications I use every day for this small amount is a good deal for me. I would not blame Apple too quickly, or let them off the hook right away either. CS6 is very long in the tooth. It appears that it will be an erratic performer at best with the new Mac OS. You can make these issues go away, get new function and new RAW support, among other things, for $10 per month.

Mike, you do not Have to upgrade to Catalina ‘ you can keep your current OS and your 32 bit Applications will continue to work.
I certainly understand the frustration, I’m a long time Aperture user and I have kept Aperture working by Freezing a MBP at the Sierra OS and it works fine. I’ve also purchased a new 16” MBP with. Catalina to run the latest version of Capture One so I can migrate at my own pace.
A true 64 bit OS does bring benefits to the hardware , 32 bit machines have been around for a long time.
Adobe chose not to upgrade existing products to 64 bit and Apple chose not to update Aperture as a way of encouraging users to go to their current offerings. Your current computer runs fine and does not Need Catalina.
Apple stopped supporting Aperture years ago ,and I’ve kept it going and it still works fine.
You can keep Photoshop for $120 bucks a year— I don’t like subscriptions either , but my last upgrade to C1 was $170 or so and they have one annually.... so there is not much difference
So the choice is either don’t upgrade to Catalina or do upgrade to PS cloud

Photographers such as myself were scanning and editing photos on their computers for at least a few years before Adobe released Photoshop.

At my college newspaper, we used LetraSet ImageStudio (greyscale only) on a Macintosh II to edit photos that were then imported into QuarkXPress page layout software (no paste-up!) and output to a Linotronic phototypesetter. This was in the late 1980's. Adobe didn't release Photoshop until 1990.

Apple has been shipping 64-bit Macs since about 2007. CS6 came out in 2012. While it's true that it's Apple's choice to finally turn off 32-bit support in Catalina, I want to point out that they've been *very* careful to give developers plenty of time to move to 64-bit.

Really, nothing is broken, just old.
Digital cameras didn't break my old darkroom, either. They just superseded it.

You could retain an eleven-year-old Mac to run eleven-year-old software.
But on the topic of own-versus-lease, Adobe is breaking my credit card and me!

No need to loose CS6, Parallels or the other one will allow to run OSX in a virtual machine. Pick the OsX version you wan’t, install Photoshop CS6 et voilà!

As time goes on, and as the stories about Apples' predatory business practices pile up (telling people equipment can't be fixed/data recovered when it is actually possible for example) I'm really pleased I left the Apple ecosystem a long while back.

Sorry to hear about you not being able to use CS6. You aren't the first person I have heard with a similar complaint recently. That sort of thing gets frustrating very fast.

After much deliberation, I recently made the switch to Capture One.

I've been holding on to Lightroom 6 since they moved to subscription-only. There have been quirks appear over the years, and the change to Catalina finally made me look seriously at what other options are out there.

For the record, Lightroom 6 should still work with Catalina—mind does. Lightroom 6 is 64-bit. However, the install program is only 32-bit. So, if something does go wrong and you need to reinstall, that's when you're in trouble. I wouldn't completely blame this on Apple as they gave several years' warning about the change. Adobe has just moved on from providing any kind of support for Lightroom 6. Sin of commission vs. sin of omission.

Even though I've downloaded Capture One a few times, I've always gotten scared and deleted it before giving it a chance. But I recently went all in with the one-month trial when I saw the astounding difference between how Lightroom and Capture One treat Fuji raw files. It honestly felt like I had new camera. It's been a pain trying to adjust to a new way of doing things, but it's coming. And I've been quite impressed with the results.

So now I'm working completely in Capture One hoping that Lightroom 6 holds on long enough for me eventually export all my files as final JPEGs since all the time I put into my raw files there don't translate. This has been a big lesson for me. Now I'm "editing-to-done" all my photos in the event that I need to move systems again one day. I'll always have the raw files, but as long as I have the final JPEGs, I shouldn't need them.

It's a six dozen of one and 12 of another situation in regards to software. In m opinion, the best option is to subscribe if you're a Photoshop/LR user and want to be compatible with your computer O/S, and also function at optimal levels of performance. It seems more efficient to do this, than scramble around with old O/S on new machine, or keep using old machine with old O/S.

I use DxO Photolab (not suitable for Fuji X-Trans however, I'm a Nikon guy and really like the DxO camera/lens modules for Nikon), I just happen to like it better than LR, and I don't need or desire the complexity of Photoshop. But, that's not really the point. The cost of subscription vs. purchasing software updates is pretty much a wash, the subscription might even be less costly over time depending on the cost and frequency of version updates on software like DxO or what not. I can see the advantage of a subscription in this regard to smooth costs over time and would probably opt for subscription if DxO offered it.

I've used Macs as long as you, and in current times I keep all my Apple devices on the most current O/S. Primarily to ensure that security features are always current and up to date, but also to get the maximum out of my devices. I've always been of the mind to keep my O/S current. I seem to get about 5 years out of a Mac before a current O/S starts impacting performance.

I'm using Catalina on a Mac Mini 2018 and was anticipating the 64-bit requirement best I could. But mostly, the applications I use all updated in plenty of time, the only one that came after the fact was Spyder for color calibration, but they did update and their software works fine.

At one time I thought all I needed was Photoshop Elements. Then I learned to do more things. I am constantly learning to do more things with the software. I agree with Kirk Tuck. While the subscription system annoys a lot of people, it is the future (actually, the present). And I suggest that you future-proof yourself, rather than trying to hang on with old tech. NOTE: this has nothing to do with returning to film. I'm all for that, as well!

In Jeff Schewes’ linked article, ‘Happy birthday digital imaging’ I came across the exact reason I sticked with (or returned to) Lightroom and Photoshop after a short flirt with Capture One and DXO. Jeff Schewes: ‘ Thomas decided early on that rather than try to optimize for each and every camera, he would endeavor to normalize raw file processing and let the photographer optimize to satisfy their own taste. Which is also one of the reasons that Camera Raw often lost out on certain raw processing shoot outs because rather that try to make an image look better pumping up saturation, contrast and sharpening, Camera Raw tended to put out softer less contrasty and desaturated color images. Personally I fully support Thomas’ original approach of normalizing rather than optimizing because I prefer to get in there and rub my own pixels together.’
Right! Same with the easy to find option to switch off automatic lens ‘corrections’. I am all for an editing program that not shouts, but whispers, gentilly.

It was suggested that you try the Lr/Ps CC trial version.

Be very careful and do a full backup of your system before you do this. Some folks have found that the CC version causes problems with the perpetual license and they can no longer run the old version without removing and then reinstalling all things Adobe.

Am looking at other solutions. Will never do a subscription program. My work computer, the one with images, never, ever goes online after the initial setup. That setup is before installing Photoshop (last disk version). Per Adobe, if you don't go online every 2-3 months the program will shut down. So, I'm checking on what I'll replace it with once mine no longer works.

Adobe reps tell us they went to a subscription model because "everybody steals" the program. The only folks who believe "everybody steals" are those who steal, or are criminally minded themselves. Another good reason to move on.

You need a computer to play pool? (Just kidding.)

Funny reading above how my CS2 won't run on the 64 bit Windows 10 computer I'm typing in right now. I better not tell it that it can't handle those DNG files any more or run the latest version of the Silverfast plugin.

If MS does decide to break CS2, I'll find something else. Adobe has gotten enough $ from me as it is.

Hello Mike. A suggestion - one of many possible ones. You can ignore, delete or consider it. You are one of the premier photography bloggers in, well, the universe. This is an endeavor that I suspect you treat as a business. In this business “owning” industry-standard photo processing software should be reasonable, if not practically required. So, spend the approximately $120 per year for the current version and expense it. A relatively inexpensive solution that, for the most part, is future-proof.

I use Lightroom 6.14 a lot and PS CS6 only when I really have to. These are the last paid versions. I am way to cheap to use Adobe CC anything and even though a lot of cool features have been added to LR I find that 6.14 really does everything that I need.

As an aside regarding the Knoll's/Lucas/ILM connection, John Knoll was credited for the story for the film Rogue One: A Star Wars Story.

I think the trapezoids will go away. I have astigmatism on both eyes, two different ones. When first I got glasses, they were majorly misaligned. Then they were misaligned whenever I took the glasses off or put them on again. The adjustment period got shorter and shorter, until it became instantaneous.


The comments to this entry are closed.



Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 06/2007