# Best overall photo editing software?



## LovePhotography (Mar 7, 2015)

I've got DxO9. But my ages old PS crashed.
Interested in photoediting and stitching. 
What's best for me? PS? LR6? Something else?
Money not as much of an object as "time, frustration and intuitive-ness".


----------



## jdramirez (Mar 7, 2015)

I go to Lightroom first... then I use Photoshop if I need to take something to the next level.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Mar 7, 2015)

If you do a lot of editing, the Adobe Photoshop / Lightroom cc deal is hard to beat. $9.95 a month and you always have the latest.

You can no longer purchase a stand alone version of the latest Photoshop. LR 6 is a unknown, but it seems that it will have stitching support. LR6 can likely be purchased as a standalone or upgrade from ver 5. 

Its designed for photographers and has almost all the tools you need. It also is a organizer, you do not need to organize photos by folder on your computer to find them. Use keywords and its easy.


----------



## bitm2007 (Mar 7, 2015)

> What's best for me? PS? LR6? Something else?



LR5 does not include a stitching option. The spec of LR6 has yet to be confirmed , so the $9.99 PS/LR5 deal is currently the best Adobe option for you.


----------



## Zeidora (Mar 7, 2015)

*Non-subcription options?*

What are the non-subscription options? 

I have PS 5.5 extended and plan on using until it will no longer run on OSX. I will not pay for subscription. Already switched from InDesign to Quark, added DxO for lens correction on newer lenses (Adobe does not make lens files backwards available  ).
I mainly need a layers capable program with RGB, Lab, and CMYK support. For all the rest, there are third party options (HDR rendering, z-stacking [PS produced garbage the last time I tried it; Zerene and HeliconFocus are WAY better], text annotations, Bézier lines [both in Quark], sharpening [NikSharpener]).
I used to be an Adobe fan, but the CC model turned me off big time. I calculated it will be about 3x more than purchasing stand-alone.


----------



## bitm2007 (Mar 7, 2015)

> I used to be an Adobe fan, but the CC model turned me off big time. I calculated it will be about 3x more than purchasing stand-alone.



The viability of Adobe's subscriptions model is very much circumstance dependent. For photographers like the OP, who hasn't already invested substantially in Adobe perceptually licensed products, paying $9.99 a month for arguably the best photography software on the market (Lightroom and Photoshop CC) is probably a much more appealing prospect than paying a substantial sum of up front for out of date Photoshop CS software (plus Lightroom and upgrades). For me the choice was a one off payment of £800 ish (plus Lightroom upgrades) verses £8.57 a month.


----------



## slclick (Mar 7, 2015)

Easy!


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Mar 7, 2015)

*Re: Non-subcription options?*



Zeidora said:


> What are the non-subscription options?
> 
> I have PS 5.5 extended and plan on using until it will no longer run on OSX. I will not pay for subscription. Already switched from InDesign to Quark, added DxO for lens correction on newer lenses (Adobe does not make lens files backwards available  ).
> I mainly need a layers capable program with RGB, Lab, and CMYK support. For all the rest, there are third party options (HDR rendering, z-stacking [PS produced garbage the last time I tried it; Zerene and HeliconFocus are WAY better], text annotations, Bézier lines [both in Quark], sharpening [NikSharpener]).
> I used to be an Adobe fan, but the CC model turned me off big time. I calculated it will be about 3x more than purchasing stand-alone.




If you plan on keeping OSX, I think that you will find that newer software has or will cut the cord and no longer run on it.

New versions will likely not run on older operating systems, LR 6 is going to cut the cord to old OS. We'll find out on Monday, if the rumor is true.


At $10 a month for both LR and Photoshop CC, it might take many years to break even based on a new purchase. However, you can't purchase the latest Photoshop stand alone. You can purchase Photoshop CS6, on ebay it can run $1200 -1500, LR 6 will cost $200.

So, assuming you find CS6 for $800 + LR 6, that's 1000 and it will take 8 years to break even, and you will not receive any updates to CS6, so you will be using 8 year old software. You will also have to pay for LR updates, about $100 a pop, so if you want updates, you may not break even for 10 years or more.


----------



## CaiLeDao (Mar 7, 2015)

As someone who bought Photoshop and then several books and online courses to help me understand and manage its complexity, I am not a fan. I respect the people that master it and do some amazing work, but its not for me.

The then challenges is the point of lightroom for me, which could be a good option. As many others mention the subscription based model is unattractive, its a bit like Gym membership you pay it whether you attend it or not.

As a Mac user I went down the Aperture root, Aperture has been stagnant for some time but photo's which is replacing it, is not removing the great repository capabilities the tool provides and indeed is making it much easier to manage sources and location of images. I am quite happy with the "Photo" changes Apple announced, but I am in a minority. The limitations of Aperture and my lack of skill with PS made me look at alternates.

So for me the best Raw software is DXO and I use this increasingly, Capture One may be close.
I use the Nik Suite for B/W and HDR
I use Perfect Photo Suite for editing images
Aperture stores and handles the files so the workflow works. 

The alternatives to LR and PS are not necessarily less expensive, but I have managed to work with all these tools without needing a manual, which I think is how life should be.


----------



## privatebydesign (Mar 7, 2015)

*Re: Non-subcription options?*



Mt Spokane Photography said:


> Zeidora said:
> 
> 
> > What are the non-subscription options?
> ...



It will have to run on OSX, because that is all we have! Which versions it runs on is the more pertinent question, though as OS 'upgrades' are free there is no reason LR6 should 'break' anything.


----------



## dkaiser (Mar 7, 2015)

*Re: Non-subcription options?*



Zeidora said:


> What are the non-subscription options?
> 
> I have PS 5.5 extended and plan on using until it will no longer run on OSX. I will not pay for subscription. Already switched from InDesign to Quark, added DxO for lens correction on newer lenses (Adobe does not make lens files backwards available  ).
> I mainly need a layers capable program with RGB, Lab, and CMYK support. For all the rest, there are third party options (HDR rendering, z-stacking [PS produced garbage the last time I tried it; Zerene and HeliconFocus are WAY better], text annotations, Bézier lines [both in Quark], sharpening [NikSharpener]).
> I used to be an Adobe fan, but the CC model turned me off big time. I calculated it will be about 3x more than purchasing stand-alone.



Maybe Affinity Photo could be worth testing. It is currently available as a free public beta and will cost about 50$ in the final version. 

https://affinity.serif.com/blog/affinity-photo-beta-launches/


----------



## davidmurray (Mar 7, 2015)

So far I've been using digital Photo Professional that Canon supplied with my 5D. I'm curious regarding why so many use Light room instead of DPP.


----------



## LarryC1973 (Mar 7, 2015)

As a raw shooter since it was made available 2004-2005 I used ACR and Lightroom. I recently switched over to Capture One Pro and have not looked back. Better recovery tools, more detail and less noise. All of the pro shooters that I have encountered tether to capture One Pro.


----------



## bitm2007 (Mar 7, 2015)

> I used to be an Adobe fan, but the CC model turned me off big time. I calculated it will be about 3x more than purchasing stand-alone.
> 
> 
> 
> The viability of Adobe's subscriptions model is very much circumstance dependent. For photographers like the OP, who hasn't already invested substantially in Adobe perceptually licensed products, paying $9.99 a month for arguably the best photography software on the market (Lightroom and Photoshop CC) is probably a much more appealing prospect than paying a substantial sum of up front for out of date Photoshop CS software (plus Lightroom and upgrades). For me the choice was a one off payment of £800 ish (plus Lightroom upgrades) verses £8.57 a month.



Assuming that Lightroom upgrades costing £56 were purchased every 18 months on average, it would take me over 12 years of subscription payments to break even and more than a thousands years to pay 3 times more than purchasing stand-alone.


----------



## pwp (Mar 8, 2015)

davidmurray said:


> So far I've been using Digital Photo Professional that Canon supplied with my 5D. I'm curious regarding why so many use Light room instead of DPP.


DDP produces very respectable RAW conversions. No question. And for light users it's terrific. It has a very attractive looking GUI but the reality of a powerfully evolved workflow is nowhere to be seen. 

It's with good reason that busy photographers quickly move past DPP to the almost ubiquitous Lightroom & Photoshop duo. It's powerful, fast and feature rich. The Adobe Photoshop-Lightroom CC deal is hard to beat. $9.95 a month and you always have the latest. It's amazing value. 

-pw


----------



## candc (Mar 8, 2015)

I like dxo the best for converting but you can't make local adjustments so you need to pass off to lr or Ps for that. You can do everything with Ps but to me it is too cumbersome to use as standard workflow for conversions. If I had to use only one it would be lr. I have tried about all of the stitching programs and think ptgui is hands down the best.


----------



## Zeidora (Mar 8, 2015)

bitm2007 said:


> > I used to be an Adobe fan, but the CC model turned me off big time. I calculated it will be about 3x more than purchasing stand-alone.
> >
> >
> >
> ...



Exactly! If you already paid for PS previously (I've used PS from version 2 [not CS2] onwards), upgrades are cheap, and subscription is completely overpriced. 
Even if you start from scratch, with cheap upgrades, the subscription model will eventually also be more expensive. Haven't calculated it through, but the subscription is a huge turn off. DP review had some suggestions, and I hope some other developers will see an opportunity. Plenty of people are annoyed with Adobe's strategy. MS offers both options for Office, and that is fine.


----------



## pwp (Mar 8, 2015)

Zeidora said:


> bitm2007 said:
> 
> 
> > > The viability of Adobe's subscriptions model is very much circumstance dependent. For photographers like the OP, who hasn't already invested substantially in Adobe perceptually licensed products, paying $9.99 a month for arguably the best photography software on the market
> ...


True enough, but the reality of the subscription model is here to stay. Arguing against it is ultimately pointless.
In the interests of getting on with creative image making, maybe it's time just to suck it up and get on with making great photographs.

-pw


----------



## Zeidora (Mar 8, 2015)

pwp said:


> Zeidora said:
> 
> 
> > bitm2007 said:
> ...


Maybe for Adobe, but I don't know of any other software company that has subscription-only. A great chance for the marketplace to sort it out. Quark is making a strong come-back because of disgruntled InDesign users. I welcome others to fill the market niche. At any rate, very few people use all of PS functionality. A plurality of custom options is very attractive for some, may even be better than what PS offers (e.g. z-stacking: PS: useless, Zerene/HeliconFocus alternatives).
If you like the walled garden, then by all means pay Adobe for the privilege.
Also, if enough people jump ship, the market place could well re-introduce the stand-alone option with Adobe. They still need to satisfy shareholders.


----------



## zim (Mar 8, 2015)

Why no love for PSE ?


----------



## martti (Mar 8, 2015)

virtualbydesign: _"It will have to run on OSX, because that is all we have! Which versions it runs on is the more pertinent question, though as OS 'upgrades' are free there is no reason LR6 should 'break' anything._

Macs run Windows an Linux nicely if for some reason you want them to.
With a click they change from one OS to another. 
They have been doing so for decades. I had it in 1999 already.


----------



## Hillsilly (Mar 8, 2015)

I use Lightroom for cataloguing and basic adjustments and then Nik Collection and/or Photoshop for further adjustments. The "best" program really depends on what you are trying to do. But generally for post processing, I prefer Nik.


----------



## bitm2007 (Mar 8, 2015)

Zeidora said:


> bitm2007 said:
> 
> 
> > > I used to be an Adobe fan, but the CC model turned me off big time. I calculated it will be about 3x more than purchasing stand-alone.
> ...



Personally I view effectively being in profit for 12 years as a positive. Who knows where the industry will be by then, 12 years ago the first affordable DSLR (300D) hadn't been released and the majority of us were still using film.

If I had previously purchased perpetual licences for Adobe products, the financial implications change dramatically however. As previous stated the viability of the subscription model varies according to your circumstances. In the OP's case, the $9.99 LR/PS is a viable and arguably the best option.


----------



## bitm2007 (Mar 8, 2015)

zim said:


> Why no love for PSE ?



As a pro landscape photographer, I used the combination of Photoshop Elements and Lightroom for years. The main reason I switched to the $9.99 Photography Plan was PSE's limited 16 bit editing capability. If this isn't an issue for the OP, then I would recommend the PSE/LR combination wholeheartedly as a budget friendly option.


----------



## zim (Mar 8, 2015)

bitm2007 said:


> zim said:
> 
> 
> > Why no love for PSE ?
> ...



As a non-pro I whole heartedly agree 

16bit editing is the one thing I'd like. There are other really great editing features missing of course but for *me* most if not all of them take the process away from photography too much, but that's a whole other issue.

I use Dx0/PSE combo at the moment, that allows me to use icc profiles and trim/crop/resize some global adjustments tiffs in 16bit but any layer work spotting etc has to be 8bit.

My main (only  ) output is photo books and prints and I have two workflows set up for that,I'm happy with the results at the moment I have to admit I'm not sure that 16bit would give me any appreciable improvement ? 
I'm starting to get into larger stitched printing so maybe I need to re-visit this?
I readily admit my standards aren't as high as a pros (should be) though.


----------



## bitm2007 (Mar 8, 2015)

zim said:


> bitm2007 said:
> 
> 
> > zim said:
> ...



16 bit editing is more of a safe guard than a necessity for me, none of the publishers I currently deal with demand 16 bit files.

Photoshop Elements does a great job at automatically stitching images, switching to Photoshop CC would however provide more control over the final result.


----------



## scottkinfw (Mar 8, 2015)

How easy is it to use and transition from LR 5 Larry?

sek



LarryC1973 said:


> As a raw shooter since it was made available 2004-2005 I used ACR and Lightroom. I recently switched over to Capture One Pro and have not looked back. Better recovery tools, more detail and less noise. All of the pro shooters that I have encountered tether to capture One Pro.


----------



## bbreitenauer (Mar 8, 2015)

Have you ever searched the WWW for Open-Source programs? IMO, there is a rather good piece of software called "RawTherapee", which you can also use to treat JPG files, not only raw files.

Bernhard


----------



## DanielLee5 (Apr 7, 2015)

I like the idea of sharing favourite tools, but I am complete nube, I use free apps only: Picasa, Adobe Photoshop, my favourite pic collage maker http://ams-collage.com/ and I remember there was excellent online program Picnic, but it has ended up, unfortunately(


----------



## djack41 (Apr 7, 2015)

I laugh at these debates. CC is 33 pennies a day! Half the cost of a cup of coffee. CC gives you PS and LR with current updates. It is the photography deal of the decade!


----------



## bitm2007 (Apr 7, 2015)

djack41 said:


> I laugh at these debates. CC is 33 pennies a day! Half the cost of a cup of coffee. CC gives you PS and LR with current updates. It is the photography deal of the decade!



If your a pro, subscribing to the Adobe photography plans only need to gain you one half decent sale a year and your quids in.


----------



## zim (Jan 11, 2016)

slclick said:


> Easy!



Man you had a seat!!! that's one posh setup


----------



## benperrin (Jan 12, 2016)

CaiLeDao said:


> As someone who bought Photoshop and then several books and online courses to help me understand and manage its complexity, I am not a fan. I respect the people that master it and do some amazing work, but its not for me.
> 
> The then challenges is the point of lightroom for me, which could be a good option. As many others mention the subscription based model is unattractive, its a bit like Gym membership you pay it whether you attend it or not.



Sorry, but the gym membership analogy doesn't work. You still have to pay for photoshop/lightroom initially whether or not you decide to use it. The difference is that you can stop whenever you want with a subscription model. If you purchase a product outright, you want to keep using it to get value for your money. I understand people who purchased it outright already being uneasy, as it is harder to justify once a large purchase has already been made.


----------



## Zv (Jan 12, 2016)

I recently bought DxO Optics pro 10 during their winter sale. Been using it before importing to Lr then doing my local edits and maybe finishing up in PS if needed. What I noticed was I got an error when trying to pano stitch in Lr using the DxO DNG files. It did not like that at all. So, I had to import the CR2 files directly into Lr and pano stitch that way instead. Now, why would it do that you suppose? Weird. 

Anyway, I reckon the best overall editing software has to be Lr. One place to organize, edit and export images and arguably the only piece of software most photographers need. The other stuff like PS and DxO and Nik effects is nice and comes in handy but the one that brings them all together is Lightroom. 

Lightroom 6 does a pretty good job of pano stitching if you want something quick and easy. Photoshop is way more powerful but for simple stuff it's a bit overkill. Good thing is you get both with the CC pack. Sounds like the ideal solution for OP. Cost is negligible IMO compared with what we pay for our gear.


----------



## candc (Jan 12, 2016)

Lr is the best all in one solution for photographers. I like dxo but there are no local adjustments or masking. I spent a lot of time learning Ps but I always thought it was more for graphic artists. Its overly complicated for normal photo processing and touch ups.


----------



## benperrin (Jan 12, 2016)

For me if I could only choose one it would be lightroom, however my favourite is Photoshop. Photoshop is more for 1 or 2 images rather than a batch of images though. I've just purchased capture 1 pro but haven't had the chance to use it but I've heard good things.


----------



## TexPhoto (Jan 12, 2016)

For me it's Photoshop. I've used it for 20 years, I don't want to change, and I have not seen anything Lightroom or other that is better, just different.


----------



## scottkinfw (Jan 12, 2016)

*Re: Non-subcription options?*

I'm trying Affinity, and it isn't all that easy. To me it is a hybrid of Photoshop and Lightroom. To be honest, I went back to Lighroom 5 and am considering upgrading to LR 6. I hate the thought of a steep frustrating learning curve, though Affinity looks like it is powerful and good once mastered. I have a Mac.

sek



dkaiser said:


> Zeidora said:
> 
> 
> > What are the non-subscription options?
> ...


----------



## bluenoser1993 (Feb 11, 2016)

I'm in no position to say what is the best, but I've been using Aperture for 4 years and it was my entry into trying to organize and edit my photos. I just imported part of my Aperture library into Lightroom today after downloading the free trial. First photo on the development table and wow, I'm sold. I really like the overall feel of the software. Next challenge will be to take it into Ps and try moving some things around so I can get a feel for that.


----------



## 9VIII (Feb 11, 2016)

I rarely shoot enough to desire anything that Canon's DPP doesn't offer.
It's quite competent and it's free, on a value scale that's really hard to beat. I probably wouldn't look elsewhere until I was spending at least a few hours every week sorting photos, and right now that number is usually less than one hour a month.


----------



## nonac (Feb 11, 2016)

I shoot a lot of sports for two area newspapers. My workflow consists of initially pulling the pictures (average 400 for a basketball game, 500-600 for football) into photo mechanic for a quick edit and cull. Photo mechanic is basically just a photo browser but raw files are instantly loaded up for viewing, you don't have that lag like you do in LR. After the initial cull (usually lose 50%), then they are imported into LR for tweaking. I have never used anything else besides LR so I can only say that it works well for me. Five or six images per game go off to the paper, and the rest go to my website and MaxPreps.


----------

