I've used Lightroom and may still have it. Mostly, I've used CaptureOne for the last few years. But with a Hybrid workflow, there are a number of plug-ins for Photoshop that I'll admit might be handy for converting scanned negatives. So I'm thinking about Photoshop. Thought I saw that CS3 was now available "free", and wondered whether this was really true? Bloated or worth it? Just curious. Love to hear your thoughts. Thanks!
Current plug-ins are probably designed for current versions of Photoshop, and may not even work with CS3.
CS3 may not like current versions of operating systems - or maybe the other way around.
Wait, I don't get it. You asked about a really old version of Photoshop, CS3. And you complained that GIMP years ago was hard to use. GIMP is free. Have you tried it today? Where are you going with this? Why are you asking us?
For several years now, I'm very happy with my Adobe subscription; always up-to-date and always working; I don't need to own it.I've used Lightroom and may still have it. Mostly, I've used CaptureOne for the last few years. But with a Hybrid workflow, there are a number of plug-ins for Photoshop that I'll admit might be handy for converting scanned negatives. So I'm thinking about Photoshop. Thought I saw that CS3 was now available "free", and wondered whether this was really true? Bloated or worth it? Just curious. Love to hear your thoughts. Thanks!
I've been using a 15 year old version of Paintshop Pro (pre Corel), however I also have Corel Photopaing and GIMP and am happy using either instead. For RAW files I jave Corel After Shot Pro.
Ian
Well, you need to give GIMP another look. I have been using it on and off since the beginning and I can say with confidence it is light-years above what it used to be. Easy, brainless Windows installer and decent interface with a good online community for help with problems.
Not perfect but neither is Adobe...
I'd agree, I've used Gimp quite a lot it's a very capable program, in recent years it's leapt way ahead of its early versions.
In the US, I pay $10 per month for Adobe's Photography Plan, which includes both Lightroom and Photoshop. For a while Adobe was experimenting with some (higher) pricing options by adding more cloud storage, but according to <this link> you can still get the Photography plan for $9.99/month.Adobe has a photography bundle that is just LR and PS that is ~$15-20 a month or something like that. LR is more of a image catalog manager with Adobe Camera Raw built in, and PS is for when you need it. I get that people can’t stand paying a subscription, but at the same time, for ~$15-20 a month you *always* have the latest version. That’s ~$200 a year to always have the latest version. Remember when PS wasn’t subscription? How much did it cost? And you still had to pay to upgrade it reasonably regularly to support newer OSes, etc. I’ll take the subscription any day over that. Best move Adobe ever made.
I've been using a 15 year old version of Paintshop Pro (pre Corel), however I also have Corel Photopaing and GIMP and am happy using either instead. For RAW files I jave Corel After Shot Pro.
Ian
PS is easier than playing with alternatives..and it's better. I'm a photographer, not a geek. $10/mo is nothing.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?