Anyone Still Use PS CS6?

[russellsnr]

Hi, My quandary is this. I became a software junkie and bought On1 Photo RAW, Syklum Luminar and Affinity Photo, I did away with PS CS6 but kept Lightroom perpetual 6 and it seems to me that these newer softwares use up a lot more computer resources and my bug bare is that I use the Clolourchecker Passport to make camera profiles (DCP's) I have tried them in one software that you can actually use them in, Skylum Luminar, but there is something just about the software and the company that I don't like (can't put a finger on it) I do like On1 2019 software but as I say you cannot put DCP's into it, I also have a few 3rd party plug-ins for CS6 so do I put CS6 back on the computer or do I plod on? Yes I can attach a DCP to an image in Lightroom then open it in On1 not difficult and On1 2019 is a more up to date software than CS6.
Just a nag in my head that I can't shake off. Russ.

[pnodrog]

I will confess to using PS CS6 with LR6. Until I get a situation where I can't manage to achieve what I want to do with a photograph using this software I see no need to upgrade. I am well aware there are some new and improved tools that may make the PP work easier and quicker however I am so familiar with the software I have I don't care if the occasional photo takes a bit more time to adjust.

My dilemma will start on my next camera upgrade as it will probably be unsupported by my current software.

[Manfred M]

Two photographers I have studied under / am studying under use CS6. Based on the type of photography that they do and their workflow, they are unlikely to ever need anything else. Both are nationally / internationally recognized photographers, but they shoot subjects in a way that the "major surgery" capabilities that have been added to the newer versions are not something that either will ever use or need.

In the studio work I do, I would never need some of the features in CC, but as I also do a lot of travel, landscape and street photography, they make my life a lot easier, so working in CC was the right choice for me.

The one thing I would question is why you are flitting around and using so many different pieces of software? Most "expert" users stick with a select few products and get to know them really well. I'm a bit of an exception here, but that is more related to the role I play at the photo club I am a member of. I'm the main instructor for post-processing tools outside of Lightroom, so I tend to get questions on other software, so I try to stay up to date on some of the more widely used packages. For my personal use (and workflow) I have been using ACR / Photoshop since 2003, so I know it quite well. I do use both DxO PhotoLab 2 and Phase One Capture One for very specific purposes. That being said, I am learning Capture One as I really like the output that product produces and in my view it is better than Lightroom / Adobe Camera Raw. I hope to make a switch over to it as my main raw convertor some time this year.

When it comes to ICC / DCP profiles, unless you are doing a lot of high end printing, don't worry about it. No one will notice the difference with images you post on the net. My experience is that custom profiles made a difference when I was shooting with the D800, especially in the red channel. With the D810, the default profile is so good, most people would not notice the difference. Unless you have a high-end Adobe RGB compatible screen, chances are you are not going to gain anything.

[Cantab]

I will confess to using PS CS6 with LR6. Until I get a situation where I can't manage to achieve what I want to do with a photograph using this software I see no need to upgrade. I am well aware there are some new and improved tools that may make the PP work easier and quicker however I am so familiar with the software I have I don't care if the occasional photo takes a bit more time to adjust.

My dilemma will start on my next camera upgrade as it will probably be unsupported by my current software.

Paul's situation is identical to mine: CS6 and LR6.

[russellsnr]

The one thing I would question is why you are flitting around and using so many different pieces of software? Hype, I got caught up in all the hype surronding these and the cost was compaired to CC very low and a one off payment, it has cost me a small ammount of £/$ to learn a mistake but learnt I have so anyone else think before you leap. Russ.

[Codebreaker]

I guess I'm still in the dark ages then because I use LR5 about 95% of the time and CS4 for the remainder.

[Acorn]

I guess I'm still in the dark ages then because I use LR5 about 95% of the time and CS4 for the remainder.

I guess, judging by the responses to this topic, there are still many of us living in the so-called "dark ages." PS6 and LR6 remain my essential work horses and perform perfectly for my requirements. I refuse to get caught up in the latest money-making racket from the house of Adobe which is geared to businesses. The latest software output from the Affinity stable offers good value for money as witnessed by Affinity Photo and more recently in the field of publishing with Affinity Publisher. The latter is a high end software programme that can be currently purchased for less than £50. It's getting a lot of thumbs-up from people who have hitherto been hooked on Adobe's high, three-figure offering, InDesign.

[bambleweeney]

Still using PS6 and Lightroom 3.4 (!!!) neither support my camera so I'm using DXO Photolab2 to do a little pre processing and convert the RAW images to DNGs, maybe in the future I'll look at Capture One for RAW conversion. Lightroom has never been more than a catalogue for me, I use none of its processing tools so I'm happy with the set up. If I need whatever bells and whistles come with CC in order to make something of a photo then I'm guessing that I made some kind of mistake when I took the photo, it's no good and destined for the bin. Plus I prefer a one off payment to a monthly one with the possibility of price increases, dependency on the internet and of course good old Adobe.

[DanK]

Although I use LR and Photoshop as my core software and have had a subscription for a long time, I certainly don't want to advocate for that. The more vibrant the competition, the better off we will all be. And if what people has works for them, there is no reason to buy something new.

However, it is definitely not the case that the features that have been added since CS6 and LR 6 are just more ways to fix mistakes. To pick one example, I personally think the new "texture" slider recently added to LR is a big improvement--for my uses--to the clarity slider, which I relied on a great deal before. It gives a finer local contrast adjustment without much mid-tone contrast adjustment--essentially, making it easier to separate those two adjustments.

I personally don't like the subscription model, but I have to admit that I am finding it very convenient. I just don't have to think about software as much any more. I get a popup saying that there is an update available, and I either simply hit Update or let it sit for a few weeks in case there are initial problems. Some years ago, we instituted a virtual network computing system for statistical computing, which gives the user a virtual linux desktop from anywhere. I never had to worry about updates to statistical software; someone in the background handled it, and I was only aware of it in the rare cases when they had to take down an implementation to install the new one. This is similar. So, I mind the subscription model a lot less now than I did before I signed up. But again, I'm not advocating for it, just describing my own reactions.

[Manfred M]

I'd like to add one other point to the argument on the "improvements" made to Photoshop with the introduction of CC about six years ago. (Hint: CS6 is a very old piece of software).

If one does not need or use the enhancements, then I see no real issue with sticking with that package. On the other hand, that also suggests to me that the incremental improvements in the technology are not something that would be important to your post-processing workflow. There are some additions that I never use; the video editing ones,as I use Adobe's full blown non-linear editor and the 3D ones.

On the other hand here are the ones that I use a lot, based on the type of photography that I do and the fact that I print a lot of larger format images.

Simple tools like the Dehaze and Texture tools (also found in Lightroom), some of the tools that apply machine learning like the upsampling algorithms, improvements in the content aware tool set, the face aware features in the liquifiy tool, etc, etc. Some of these I use pretty well daily and others more occasionally. In some cases they speed up my workflow and in others they let me do things that were more difficult if not impossible in previous versions of Photoshop.

[GrahamS]

I bottomed out at LR5 and PSCS5 due to financial constraints. I am not prepared to go the Adobe monthly subscription route. Now, due to the fiasco regarding LR5 and LR6 not being compatible with Mac OS 10.13.6 and the seeming obstinate refusal by Adobe to make a simple patch available to fix the problem, I have moved on - to ON1 Photo Raw 2019.5. I am so delighted that I am kicking myself for not doing it sooner. Bye-bye Adobe, and good riddance.

[DanK]

obstinate refusal by Adobe to make a simple patch available to fix the problem

Would it be a simple patch? I did a little reading out of curiosity and didn't find anything that explains the incompatibility. Apple was the company that made the change without considering backward compatibility, not Adobe. Moreover, from what I have read, the change affected more than just Adobe products.

I have had very few problems with Windows updates making things obsolete. One problem that did arise is that Windows 10 wouldn't support the older xRite calibration puck I had, so I had to buy a new one. In that case, it was hard to imagine that Microsoft would worry about the tiny fraction of its user base that uses xRite hardware. Adobe is a bigger fish, however.

In any event, if you are happier with ON1, that's great. The more competition in the field, the better off we will all be. Personally, I'm happy with the Adobe software. I'm annoyed by the subscription model, but I am not convinced it is costing me more than it used to cost me to keep up to date with updates.

[russellsnr]

I bottomed out at LR5 and PSCS5 due to financial constraints. I am not prepared to go the Adobe monthly subscription route. Now, due to the fiasco regarding LR5 and LR6 not being compatible with Mac OS 10.13.6 and the seeming obstinate refusal by Adobe to make a simple patch available to fix the problem, I have moved on - to ON1 Photo Raw 2019.5. I am so delighted that I am kicking myself for not doing it sooner. Bye-bye Adobe, and good riddance.

Hi, I also have On1 but they like Adobe in the past do not offer upgrades to the next release, I would not go back to Adobe because I thought there attitude to people who had been customers for many years was 'go down the sub route or you do not get anymore support for software you already purchased at a considrable cost' On1 will update your software but again at a cost, also the On1 attitude on there facebook page is like a regimental regime, write something they do not like and it is removed no matter that it not in any way rude or disrespectful. Trouble today is there are IMO far to many softwares out there all wanting your cash. Me, I will not now and beleive do not need to upgrade any more the software I have does the job. Russ.

[Manfred M]

Hi, I also have On1 but they like Adobe in the past do not offer upgrades to the next release, I would not go back to Adobe because I thought there attitude to people who had been customers for many years was 'go down the sub route or you do not get anymore support for software you already purchased at a considrable cost' On1 will update your software but again at a cost, also the On1 attitude on there facebook page is like a regimental regime, write something they do not like and it is removed no matter that it not in any way rude or disrespectful. Trouble today is there are IMO far to many softwares out there all wanting your cash. Me, I will not now and beleive do not need to upgrade any more the software I have does the job. Russ.

Russell - Adobe, OnOne, Apple, Microsoft, etc. are all businesses and their main job is to earn money, just like any other business. The way they do that is delivering products or services someone is willing to pay for. If you don't like the product or the price, it is 100% your decision as to whether or not you buy from them.

Product support is no different in other industries. I had a motherboard fail in my computer after 3 years. Could I replace it with the same product? No, I had to buy a different model. I was unable to buy a replacement part for a lighting system over my kitchen island that was about 7 years old (i.e. the same age as PS6) and ended up having to replace the whole system which cost me much more than PS6 cost me because parts were no longer available. Car manufacturers do not stock car parts for older models, so one has to buy parts from scrapped cars to keep them going. Not supporting a product for as long as one owns it is a very common practice throughout many industries. Getting support for "obsolete" products is challenging across the board and there really are no good options, not just with software.

When it comes to the subscription model for software, that is one that has been in place for a very long time and only disappeared when personal computers came out. Mainframe software has always been handled that way. If one thinks about it, anti-virus software (need to renew license for specific periods), tax preparation software (that has to be updated annually) are defacto subscription models, even though they are are not called that.

[Acorn]

I use CS6 and LR6 as they still fulfil my post-processing needs. I know several people who have gone over to Affinity Photo who claim it will do what PS will do. And slightly off topic, Affinity's latest software release, Affinity Publisher is acclaimed to do all that Adobe In-Design will do at a fraction of the cost.

[Manfred M]

I know several people who have gone over to Affinity Photo who claim it will do what PS will do. And slightly off topic.

I have both and I find that Affinity is about an 80% solution versus what I use in Photoshop and if I were to. For my workflow, it has two fatal flaws; neither SmartObjects nor the Lab colour space are supported (I use both in almost all my work). Some of the content aware and selection tools are a bit less refined than in Photoshop. The Liquify functionality is not nearly as refined either and is something I use a lot in portraiture.