So what photo editing programs do you have on your computer?

[ACEkin]

Basically everything but DxO and On1.

I use LR plenty, and occasionally PS. Even more occasionally Premiere Pro. Sometimes Topaz products.

Worst bad purchase was Luminar AI. Lot of great sales speech but the product is garbage. Well at least was when I tried it, haven't touched in long time so I don't know if they got it better. Pretty much the LR "auto" button did better job.

I fully agree with your thoughts on Luminar. I bought a copy when they first issued it as a potential Lightroom replacement. Far from it, they kept jumping from one idea to another and nothing worked as promised. At least for me. I even got a copy of Photo Lemure which was acquired by Luminar and dropped from the line.

 

[pcassel]

DxO PL6 (w/FilmPack & Viewpoint) & Topaz Sharpen AI. That's all...well, Apple Photos.

I regularly gets email from DxO offering me a free trial of its Pure Raw software. Years ago I used PL as my raw processor but gave it up about version 3 due to my acquisition of a camera system incompatible with that program.

I'm curious to hear from a user (as opposed to the company) as to if PL is a superset of Pure Raw today? Apparently my license from way back offers me an attractive bargain for PL today but not the Pure Raw. Thanks.

 

[RedCobra]

PL6 includes everything in PR3 plus a ton of other stuff. A really great program.

 

[MikeZ]

PL6 includes everything in PR3 plus a ton of other stuff. A really great program.

I absolutely agree and use little else, unless I need to stitch a panorama (LR Classic/non-subscription version installed on my PC). I really wish that DxO would include a stitching tool.

 

[Only RF]

As of last week. LrC, PS, Canon's DPP and Topaz Sharpen AI. I always use DPP's Quick Check - Full Screen to delete unwanted files before importing to LrC.

Actually I use DPP to view my final exported Jpeg. Mac's Preview is terrible at scaling. At one time I used PS but while it scales correctly it is half the size on a 27" 5K screen and is useless to judge anything.

 

[Only RF]

Gosh, mine is pretty limited and simplistic. DPP, CC Lightroom and photoshop, and IPhoto.

I download my files to canon’s free DPP for initial viewing and culling.
Then I use CC Lightroom for some basic adjustments. My acceptables are moved to CC photoshop to be cleaned up a bit when needed (I am finding that with my R7 I am better exposing my initial images making for less processing time), and then exported. For some reason the latest version of DPP imports very clean Jpeg files (raw files still look the same and need work).

As ridiculous as it sounds with the R7 I often now just shoot jpeg (I used to always shoot raw on one card and jpeg on the other) download to DPP, import to Photos on my 27” IMac and then make a few adjustments. I know some of you are cringing right now, but it’s pretty fast, inexpensive, and seems to satisfy most people. This seems to work for wildlife and people, but not for landscapes when blown highlights and shadow recovery are necessary.

To me the $9.99 monthly for CC lightroom And photoshop is a bargain and I am not bothered by subscriptions.

Nothing wrong with simple. Sometimes I find all that is out there overwhelming. I was so happy to dump a bunch of 3rd party NR apps recently. Don't forget to add for that price you get a personal website that is integrated with LrC.

Me neither. I pay annually and don't worry about. Before subscription I upgraded at every new release anyway. Even I was using perpetual licensing knowing myself I'd be upgrading every fall as well. There have been a few complaints about Adobe not releasing anything signification every fall even though the version number changes. However as we just seen Adobe has released major new feature mid year.

 

[AKVet]

I am a pretty simple guy so I use LR and Topaz Sharpen AI. LR's new Denoise AI is surprisingly good. Well, at least, for me.

 

[Only RF]

I am a pretty simple guy so I use LR and Topaz Sharpen AI. LR's new Denoise AI is surprisingly good. Well, at least, for me.

I like simple. That is exactly where I am now. I also use Canon’s DPP to cull files before importing to LrC and after export to view the final file. DPP’s scaling is very good.

Sharpen AI is the only 3rd party app I have now and I don’t use it very much. It would be nice if Adobe released Sharpen AI to make it complete.

 

[Photofarmer]

Gosh you can waste time looking at editing programmes during trial period. Im a rank beginner and not ultra computer savvy, but found DXO reasonably easy to use. Better than LR who knows as good as i reckon its but im a learner. Most of my photos are weather related lightning etc you guys reccomend one over another for my type of photography?

 

[pcassel]

IMO, it's more a matter of using one of the many excellent editing programs well than spending time and energy deciding which is best. It may not be possible to pick any winner because our needs/desires differ and the programs are regularly updated.

For example, I use Photoshop but do not recommend it. I withhold recommending it because I can't possibly know what's best for anybody aside from me. I was a beta tester for PS 3.0 which, IIRC, wasn't the first Windows version but was stable and had layers - which turned out to be a game changer. I just happened to be in a certain place at a certain time which led me to be an early adopter.

Curiously, I also used PaintShop during this period. I purchased a retail license and several upgrades until, IMO, JASC sold it and it lost its way. By then I'd grown so used to the often baffling UI of PS that I was more comfortable there than anything else.

I'll add that I was infuriated at Adobe's move to the subscription model and fought against it by purchasing licenses for several competitors but I always came back because it worked for me without me thinking less about 'how to' and more about 'what I wish to do'.

I will say that Adobe has, IMO, played fair with its users. I dutifully hand over my U$10/month and in return, it has regularly upgraded the program in ways that are meaningful to me. It did not, as I feared, rest having captured its audience failing to improve the program once it had so many of us hooked.

Based on *my* experience, if I was to give up PS, I'd likely move to DxO.