I hope this is ok to ask. I see a lot of people saying they are using Lightroom or Photoshop to edit their pictures, but I find it hard to believe that this many people are paying $300-$600 for editing software. Are people just pirating this, or getting it with academic discounts, either legitimately or not, or are you that dedicated to photography to drop that much money?
I personally can't spend that much money on a lens, much less for software.
I use GIMP, Windows Live Photo Gallery, and Helicon Filter 4.x which are all free and I can do most of what I need. It is a bit more work than what the alternatives sound like, but for me it isn't worth paying the money and I don't want to illegally use it.
a lot of those companies offer trials...i had a 30 day lightroom trial and then was offered a discount to purchase( i didn't as i already have a editing program i am comfortable with, but it was fun to try) maybe that is how some people are using certain programs...go to the website and download a trial...
I took two classes at our community college Photography 1 and Computers and design and got a student id when I did The id was good for two years. I purchased Photoshop and Lightroom during this period of time. I learned in the classes and having the id was a blessing also when I decided to buy these products since they are so expensive. I also do not have money to buy nice lens.
I wouldn't steal it; but I wouldn't spend EUR800 on Photoshop. Unless I were doing this for a living, which I'm not and therefore cannot justify such a purchase.
I have spent thousands of dollars on professional Nikon camera bodies and Nikkor pro glass .. Of course I'd spend a couple hundred bucks on software :)
@indiannie_jones A Photoshop costs 800E? Wow, that much! That's good enough for a zoom lens! I'm using free Picnik a the moment. Perhaps will pay the premium very soon to learm more of those tricks.
The complete PS bundle with video and flash is like $2500 so no I don't do photoshop... PSE came with my touch pad for free so I use that sometimes... LR3 is worth it's price any day.... bought and paid for that....
again spending $Xk dollars on camera bodies, lenses, film, chems, building a dark room... computer software is cheap!
I am building a 20x24 camera right now... where I am doing contact prints from the large negative to paper... 50 pack of negs is about $300 plus another $300 for paper... so suddenly software is not that much...
I wonder how many people in this thread saying "oh noes, stealing is bad!" has ever downloaded music or copied and pasted a photo from the internet for a presentation, school project, something, or made photocopies out of a book on a copier... just sayin', they're all "stealing" in essence.
With that said, I have CS2. Did I buy it? Nope, friend gave it to me.
I do understand that some people spend thousands of dollars on equipment so a few hundred on software may not seem much, but I probably have $1100 total in equipment so spending nearly that in software doesn't make sense.
The free stuff has been fine for me, and if I was a student and could get Lightroom for cheap I would be interested. I was just curious as to other people's experience and reasons.
dunno the conversion rates but paint shop pro x2 a couple of years back cost me about £70 (GBP) ..... i got lucky with X3 as my bro purchased it cheeply through his job and sent it to me as a birthday prezzie :)
Letterman did this little segment awhile back about state laws and how there is a law for everything. There is a law in some western state in the United States that says restaurants are not allowed to serve coffee within 5 minutes of brewing so people don't burn themselves. His conclusion: people are stupid.
People are often misled about Photoshop. CS5 hit the stores I think a few months ago. Is that the program you need? Nope. What about CS4, CS3, CS2? Nope. No. No you don't. Forget about it.
I work as a professional photographer, and I use good ole Photoshop CS. That's right...CS. No numbers, just CS.
I was given the program while working my first job in photography as a student photographer at UNC Wilmington. I needed to edit photos for work on the run, so Jamie installed the program on my laptop.
However, if I were to purchase an old copy on Amazon or eBay, it would probably cost $50. Well worth it.
No need to spend $600 on something that a $50 program can do as well. Don't buy the 2011 Honda Accord just because it has a few extra buttons and can parallel park for you. Save some money, get the 2000 model, and take your girlfriend out to dinner.
dont use Photoshop either I find that with a mixture of gimp, paintshop pro and other free stand alone software I can get the same effects that I can in Photoshop anyway, its not the programme you use at the end of the day its how you use it.
@jasonbarnette - Ha - me too! Bog standard CS, given to me by my father-in-law (who also didn't buy it, but let's not go there!). I do have Elements 8; again, got it for 'free' with a photo-class I did.
I also agree with the car analogy... if it has an engine and four wheels that's all that matters.
@hmgphotos@meggageg While I'm not going to argue against stealing being wrong (I've had my car broken into before, and items taken, so I know precisely how wrong actual stealing is), stealing is defined as depriving someone of the use of some item. Using software without paying for it isn't depriving anyone of anything, so is not stealing; it needs a separate word, which tends to be "piracy".
You might fancy that it's a moot point, but it matters - legal proceedings against thievery, where someone has been deprived of an item, would be excessive if applied in a scenario where one hadn't been, as in software piracy. I'm not excusing the practice, at all - and there are clearly other aspects to consider where some organised body are counterfeiting software for their own gain - but fundamentally there's a difference between acts of theft and (individual) acts of piracy.
Just wanted to throw that into the melting pot :)
Again to clarify: not defending software piracy, but it isn't theft.
I paid the $300 for Lightroom, and it was well worth it. And I'm not a professional. I've spent more than that on other hobbies for things that dont last nearly as long. :)
@mallocarray I am in art school and the Adobe Studio with lightroom and PS was part of my package...and it was discounted about 80% because I'm a student.
My copy, my husband bought for me for my birthday a few years ago since I use it all the time for digital painting and had a really old version that came with my tablet. I have more than made up for the money we spent on it in my use of it! It's actually funny - I'm only now using it for photo editing. Up til now, I'd just used it for art.
I'm a student - I probably would get a discount, but even with that I wouldn't buy expensive editing software. So adobe aren't getting any money out of me. If I then downloaded photoshop, (I haven't) it isn't like they are missing out on money I would have spent. In fact, if I downloaded photoshop and liked it, I would then tell all my friends about how great I thought it was and that they should get it, and maybe some of them would be more moral than I and pay the full amount. Have they lost something? No. Have they gained something? Maybe.
We have CS3 & Photo Mechanic at home which were both paid for and legitimate registered copies. My hubby does freelance sports photography & these programs facilitated editing at the home office and on location with the laptop. Simply for a hobby, it's hard to justify laying out that kind of money on software. However, to be taken seriously and compete with other freelancers you need to be astute with todays technology.
That being said, at my work I needed an editing program and opted for PS Elements. There was no reason to spend the big bucks for the full blown version when Elements would handle my needs. Plus, again as a business, I don't think it's wise to have pirated software on your system. I think it's a recipe for disaster. An individual can probably get away with it and never get caught, but a business shouldn't take such risks.
@eyebrows I was actually being a smart butt in my comment. I guess I should have added a few dots after the sentence. I have cs5 and I certainly didn't aquire it at full price.
It does matter in the end. If 50% of PS users pirate it, and 25% use student discounts, then Adobe is either going to charge more for those who pay full price to make their money, or they may lower the price to get more people to actually pay (although unlikely)
In regards to piracy not being theft, I see your point, but there are also people who would pay for it, but since they got it for free won't, and that is lost revenue for the company. It is all about what a product is worth, and if people are using it, then it has some value to that person (or they wouldn't use it) and therefor that person is saying that they see value in this product, but not what the company is asking. They put their value over the company and choose to not reimburse the company for their hard work.
There are lots of other aspects to this as well, such as having a legit copy, but under unauthorized terms, such as a student copy when not a student, but that is a whole other ball of wax.
Most of what I post is either SOOC or was taken and edited with my iPhone. When I do need to edit I use GIMP (free) or Picnik (also free though you can upgrade for more premium content at 24.95/yr). I don't have the money to buy expensive editing software and if I did, I would rather put it into a macro lens. I want to be known for my photography, not for my editing anyway. =)
If I wanted it, I know someone who could get me Photoshop/Lightroom cheap, legitimately through his business, but at the moment I'm happy using Gimp and UFRaw (freebie for editing raw files).
I have cs4 through work, and wouldn't be able to afford it otherwise, but I do have fun using it. I tried an aperture trial and it was ok, but I did not end up purchasing, and that was only 89 dollars.
I use an old version of photoshop that I got through uni at discount years ago - I have a newer pse that came with a laptop but I hate the interface compared to the full photoshop. I agree with the people that have mentioned the price of their kit, if we spend such money on lenses etc then many people will not hesitate to spend on a piece of high quality software that can be used for a very very long time without failing, getting clunky or breaking :)
I think a lot of Photoshop people are using Elements...a scaled down, cheaper version. It came with my printer (the printer was an expensive gift I got for my birthday from my husband). I purchased Lightroom for $79 through Amazon but was able to get the Teacher/Student discount because I teach.
@mallocarray well, the truth is that professionals think that grand cash are really worth to make excellent photos, especially when you are running photography business. But personally I think photo editing newbies don't need to invest such a grand money on that, all they need is a user friendly photography editing software that does what they need.
Write a Reply
Sign up for a free account or Sign in to post a comment.
Tweets ahoy!
Join the Group
Pin With Me
I wouldn't steal it; but I wouldn't spend EUR800 on Photoshop. Unless I were doing this for a living, which I'm not and therefore cannot justify such a purchase.
again spending $Xk dollars on camera bodies, lenses, film, chems, building a dark room... computer software is cheap!
I am building a 20x24 camera right now... where I am doing contact prints from the large negative to paper... 50 pack of negs is about $300 plus another $300 for paper... so suddenly software is not that much...
With that said, I have CS2. Did I buy it? Nope, friend gave it to me.
Retail Full Version
Lightroom - $300 - http://www.adobe.com/products/photoshoplightroom/
Photoshop CS5 - $700 http://www.adobe.com/products/photoshop.html
I do understand that some people spend thousands of dollars on equipment so a few hundred on software may not seem much, but I probably have $1100 total in equipment so spending nearly that in software doesn't make sense.
The free stuff has been fine for me, and if I was a student and could get Lightroom for cheap I would be interested. I was just curious as to other people's experience and reasons.
People are often misled about Photoshop. CS5 hit the stores I think a few months ago. Is that the program you need? Nope. What about CS4, CS3, CS2? Nope. No. No you don't. Forget about it.
I work as a professional photographer, and I use good ole Photoshop CS. That's right...CS. No numbers, just CS.
I was given the program while working my first job in photography as a student photographer at UNC Wilmington. I needed to edit photos for work on the run, so Jamie installed the program on my laptop.
However, if I were to purchase an old copy on Amazon or eBay, it would probably cost $50. Well worth it.
No need to spend $600 on something that a $50 program can do as well. Don't buy the 2011 Honda Accord just because it has a few extra buttons and can parallel park for you. Save some money, get the 2000 model, and take your girlfriend out to dinner.
I also agree with the car analogy... if it has an engine and four wheels that's all that matters.
You might fancy that it's a moot point, but it matters - legal proceedings against thievery, where someone has been deprived of an item, would be excessive if applied in a scenario where one hadn't been, as in software piracy. I'm not excusing the practice, at all - and there are clearly other aspects to consider where some organised body are counterfeiting software for their own gain - but fundamentally there's a difference between acts of theft and (individual) acts of piracy.
Just wanted to throw that into the melting pot :)
Again to clarify: not defending software piracy, but it isn't theft.
</pedantry> :P
Not being funny tho, does it really matter who uses what and if they paid for it or not, it's their business isn't it??
That being said, at my work I needed an editing program and opted for PS Elements. There was no reason to spend the big bucks for the full blown version when Elements would handle my needs. Plus, again as a business, I don't think it's wise to have pirated software on your system. I think it's a recipe for disaster. An individual can probably get away with it and never get caught, but a business shouldn't take such risks.
In regards to piracy not being theft, I see your point, but there are also people who would pay for it, but since they got it for free won't, and that is lost revenue for the company. It is all about what a product is worth, and if people are using it, then it has some value to that person (or they wouldn't use it) and therefor that person is saying that they see value in this product, but not what the company is asking. They put their value over the company and choose to not reimburse the company for their hard work.
There are lots of other aspects to this as well, such as having a legit copy, but under unauthorized terms, such as a student copy when not a student, but that is a whole other ball of wax.